I write better when I smoke. Don’t ask me to reduce it to a science.


Here’s an interesting thing. Erwin Santos goes on air and starts tearfully – yep, tearfully, just like his former boss Lozada – recounting all the corruption Lozada instigated or was party to during his stint at Philforest.

Even more interesting are the reactions of senators who are supposedly objective in their treatment of Lozada:

Pimentel –

Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. also found Santos, a former community organizer and now officer-in-charge of PFC, a “paid” witness and a  “lousy actor obviously unleashed as an attack dog by the Palace.”

“I don’t think Lozada was paid but this one, my God. Even if he (Santos) did not accept money but he is occupying a public position in place of Lozada, that makes him a paid witness to some extent,” Pimentel said.

“I don’t think (his performance) will win an Oscar,” Pimentel said, adding Santos’ testimony was “stage-managed.”

And he hasn’t even had a chance to actually grill the man. On what basis is he dismissing Santos?

Cayetano (the much much lesser) –

Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, chairman of the Senate Blue Ribbon committee, said there is no reason to invite Santos to testify at the Senate.

Cayetano and Pimentel expressed belief that Santos’ statements would not discredit Lozada.

Pimentel noted that Santos’ “emotional” testimony was aired only on government television stations, a big sign of desperation on the part of the administration.

“Lozada never said he was a saint. He said he could and was willing to answer charges of wrongdoing. But so far his testimony was consistent,” Cayetano said.

Cayetano said Santos’ coming out was “an obvious move to distract the Senate.”

Right. And I suppose Cayetano has greater basis than Pimentel did.  There is a word to describe the way these gentlemen play fast and loose with bestowing credibility on a person: cavalier.

Pimentel adds:

“You can see it right away, if it was an honest-to-goodness exposé, there should have been a lot of media people like a regular press conference,” Pimentel said.

What bullshit.  Since when has the number of media people covering the event ever been a gauge of the authenticity of an expose.

Pimentel then wraps up:

“If he has a case to file against Lozada, then just do it. But don’t tell me that only because he is saying Lozada also has many sins he (Santos) is entitled to be heard, I don’t think so. He has to show that the (pieces of) evidence given by Lozada were not true,” Pimentel said.

Ehrm. Isn’t that the challenge against Lozada from day one? And yet it has taken that joker (no relation, I’m sure) more than a week to actually man up and file his case. As for the evidence given by Lozada? What evidence. To date, Lozada has given only stories of what he says happened. That’s not evidence. Yet when someone opposed also gives stories (that isn’t evidence either), he suddenly has to “show” something to back his statements up? Crap!

As Shakespeare said, “o judgement, thou art fled to brutish beasts.”


Filed under: politics, , , , ,

4 Responses

  1. Mike says:

    This is an interesting article for more articles like this check out E Advice Me

  2. puk3mabaho says:


  3. thewordwarlock says:

    this only goes to show that senators are still politicians. the senate hearing after all is a political exercise. but we can’t do anything about it because the law mandates the senate to practice its oversight powers over the ZTE deal. this is where congress practices its “check-and-balance” function as opposed to the executive branch. Santos should take his testimonies to court if he wants a non-political forum.

  4. martin says:

    All these political circus makes the whole world laugh on us!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

RSS Short Puffs

  • Re-election 31 December 2008
    Maceda sez Erap consulted Narvasa and others, and they told him that the 1987 Consti prohibits only the INCUMBENT prez from re-election. Former prezzies, by their definition, face no such prohibition. But in the same breath, Maceda also sez that they know an Erap candidacy will be the subject of a disqual case – but […]
  • Escalation 30 December 2008
    I still think the Pangandaman’s shouldn’t have retaliated even if dela Paz threw the first punch. But is anyone really surprised at the escalation in the story-telling on both sides? BTW, I think we can dispense with the age angle nao.
  • Etiquette 29 December 2008
    Unless you’re spoiling for a fight, assume that the writer has some basis for what she writes. Don’t make like a lawyer and ask retarded questions in an attempt to lay the foundation for whatever point you’re trying to make.
  • Anne 28 December 2008
    Anne Curtis won best actress? Against the likes of Marian Rivera and Diana Zubiri? So what?
  • Baler 28 December 2008
    Watching Baler tomorrow. Will it be worth it?

Locations of visitors to this page

Archived Maps:
Politics & Government - Top Blogs Philippines

My site is worth $119.
How much is yours worth?

%d bloggers like this: