I am listing here the usual sh*t that Gloria Arroyo apologists/fans/supporters mouth when the topic of her removal/resignation comes up. I am including my sh*ttake on these lines, of course.

There is no alternative.

The problem with people mouthing this argument is that if you say a name, they will say that person is not an alternative. They will mouth everything negative about the person, even if they don’t have an iota of knowledge about that person’s competence. Heck, push for their moms and they will say their moms are not good alternatives. In short, there is no alternative, period.

Aside: I don’t know if Noli de Castro is being stupid or what. Fidel Ramos usually mouths “there is no alternative” when the topic of Arroyo’s removal comes up (because he thinks he is the alternative). That was an insult, and de Castro takes it in stride. What he doesn’t know is that he was chosen as Arroyo’s running mate precisely for that reason: so that people will have second thoughts removing Arroyo. Effective, no?

This excuse is very convenient. It allows a person to move on, as if nothing happened, as if nothing is happening. Apathy is just a form of laziness, a failure of one’s power of imagination.

Let the courts decide.

Those who are mouthing this statement – a known Fortress propaganda line – have little knowledge about how our justice system works. Before you can even get to the courts, you have to pass by Arroyo’s gatekeepers – the Department of Justice, headed by Raul Gonzalez; and the Office of the Ombudsman, headed by Merceditas Gutierrez. Just look at how these two organizations work. Heck, just look at how the two think.

The courts can only decide if these two organizations want them to. Good luck.

And when some people took the propaganda line and filed cases at the Ombudsman, the Fortress cried harassment, that they should let the Senate finish its hearings first – the very same investigation that they had successfully sabotaged and clamped down, no thanks to 9-6.

Which leads us to the next.

Let the institutions do their job.

A variation of the previous statement, people mouthing this line assumes that our institutions work.

Just look at the impeachment process. Speaker Prospero Nograles once claimed that an impeachment is a numbers game. Meaning, however substantial your complaint is, even if you have truckloads of evidence, you lose if you do not have the numbers. Yes, there is a semblance that the impeachment process works, and if the complaint is shot down, sorry, don’t be a sore loser. But given that case, does it really work?

The Constitution gives the power of initiating impeachment – a legal proceeding – to the House of Representatives, a political organization. The Charter assumes that congressmen can discern the grain from the chaff, to vote based on evidence instead of affiliation. For the past three impeachment attempts, do you think those congressmen voted according to their consciences?

No, they have not, because they have allowed the process to be mutilated by the Lozanos and the Pulidos of the world. By allowing so, they can assuage their consciences because they knew the Lozanos and the Pulidos filed weak complaints. And that is precisely why the process was mutilated.

And that is just the impeachment process. Don’t get me started on the Ombudsman, who sat on complaints against Mike Arroyo and Ben Abalos, re: NBN-ZTE; whose deputy made hysterics on an official hearing, all because he lied; who decided not to investigate Gloria Arroyo.

Yes, let us allow the institutions to do their thing – if they actually work as specified. I contend that they are not – they are all damaged institutions.

Her term is until 2010, let her finish her term.

The most recent mouthing of this line is from a bishop of Tarlac. My question is: so what? Joseph Estrada’s term was until 2004, but you bishops did not think about that. Instead, you called on him to resign, and when he did not, you called on people to go to EDSA.

How time flies. Now we see bishops calling on people to let Gloria Arroyo finish her term, even with all the coverups. What had happened to “the truth shall set you free” maxim?

And this is what galls me regarding these bishops. In 2005, when Hello, Garci erupted, Arroyo said sorry for calling an unnamed election official, and Virgilio Garcillano ran away and hid, the bishops called for a truth commission. Arroyo did not indulge them, and the bishops DID NOTHING. Not only that. They claimed that the impeachment is not the proper forum in searching for the truth. They also supported the calibrated pre-emptive response.

The coverups are blatant, and these bishops chose to look the other way. (I am hesitant to say that their eyes are covered by cash-filled envelops, lest I be accused of being holier-than-thou.)

All of us are corrupt.

This is one argument coming from the mouths of bishops. I thought seminarians were being taught logic in the seminaries. I am mistaken.

If everyone is corrupt, then these bishops are corrupt, too (and no, don’t ask me to use Venn diagrams). And to remind these bishops, you have a teaching, right? Judge not, and the mote in the eye thing?

And this goes for those who are now lambasting Oscar Cruz. All I can say is: look who’s talking?

Going back, if everyone is corrupt, it does not follow that we just allow Arroyo to continue doing crimes and covering them up. We might just as well dispense with our laws.

Our economy will take a hit if she resigns/removed.

This is the favorite bogey by her businessmen-fans. Their argument is that our economy will be affected if she resigns or is removed. They mouth the Fortress’ magic number 7.3%, and that we cannot afford to jeopardize our economic growth.

This is the easiest argument to debunk. On separate instances, I challenged Donald Dee and Jesus Arranza (known Gloria Arroyo supporters) and their organizations to unilaterally increase the minimum wage by Php 200 – not that Php 60 that the Arroyo-supporting TUCP is proposing. Of course, they won’t. So much for economic growth.

And their refusal belies the economic growth propaganda line. For if the economy is really growing, surely companies can afford to increase the minimum wage? Either they are too greedy, or the supposed economic growth is a sham.

—

If you have/know more excuses, please leave them at the comments.

(PS: This post should clear up doubts about my stand caused by the previous one.)