Many people didn’t know what to think when Norberto Gonzales, the national security adviser of Mrs. Gloria
Arroyo, first broached the idea of a constitutional commission (con-com) as an alternative mode of changing the Charter. Maybe it’s because he didn’t say much, other than it was doable.
“The key is for the heads of our three branches of government to agree among themselves to undertake Charter change. To Secretary Gonzales’s mind, this is not a complicated thing,” said a press release from Gonzales’s political party, PDSP (Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas).
Well, it’s not that simple. Con-com is not included in the present Constitution, so a Charter amendment has to happen first before one can even consider a con-com. Now, if there’s going to be a constitutional convention or a constituent assembly, anyway, what’s the need for a con-com? Why even bother thinking about it?
Most people will move on. But Gonzales is not like most people. Instead of dropping the idea, he went on to propose a revolutionary government, to get around the fact that the con-com cannot be done except in the manner prescribed by the Constitution. That—advocating the overthrow of the present government—opens him to charges of sedition and fomenting revolution.
Fortunately for Gonzales, he is a protegé of Fr. Romeo Intengan, the guru of applied jesuitics. He can contradict himself without contradicting himself.
Gonzales can agree with Chief Justice Reynato Puno; that is, his analysis that the country is “like a volcano that is about to erupt” and still claim that the Arroyo administration has substantially improved the lives of the people. He can characterize the need to reform our electoral system as a matter of life and death without criticizing the massive cheating that happened in the 2004 presidential poll and, to a lesser degree, in the 2007 senatorial election. He can call for a revolutionary government because he’s really just asking the leaders of the present government to overthrow themselves so they can reconstitute as a transition government.
“The call of the times [is] for the three major branches of government, supported by key pillars of our society like the churches, civil society and mass movements, to agree to a transitional government respected by the armed forces.”
“GMA should be part of the revolutionary government that should also include the leadership of the two houses of Congress, the Judiciary and the Church.”
Gonzales does not say much except that his patrona should be a member of the junta. He does not say how the junta will function, how its members will be chosen, and whether the junta operates on unanimity or majority rule. He does not say who will be the commander in chief. He does not say if Congress will be abolished during the transition because if it will be abolished, then what’s the point of including the leaders of a nonexistent body?
Gonzalez has not revealed any details about his junta because the only thing that matters to him is Gloria Arroyo’s continued leadership. Never mind that she turned the country into a “volcano that is about to erupt,” she can undo what she has done. She, at the head of a transition government, can “truly empower the people to choose their leaders and shift in the system of governance to free the nation from very costly elections and from paralyzing stalemates among institutions and political forces.” I know it sounds insane, but that’s applied jesuitics.
That’s why Gonzales reminds me of an American pundit’s description of Sarah Palin, “She is like an especially ambitious dung beetle trying to push a turd up and over a hill; even if she gets it where she wants it, in the end, she’s still just been rolling shit.”
Popularity: 1% [?]
National Security Adviser Gonzales just does not know what he is
talking about. We wonder why he got the job of National Security
Adviser. NPA , MILF, bombers of all kinds, etc…are still here.
And, he talks about Revolutionary Government? The fellow cannot
do his job well. He must have other outlets for his frustrations.
We recommend he should be fired. The faster we get rid of him, the
better. The fellow cannot even understand himself.
now, buencamino, i know where you get your guttermouth – from american far-left pundits who think with their anus, instead of brain which they don’t have in the first place.
Bencard,
Actually I also hear it from Limbaugh, Fox News commentators, and wingnuts. But I prefer the lefty pundits because their speech is fueled more by wit than by ideology.
The Lee Papa quotation I used captured Palin’s character in a few sharp words. Compare that to Peggy Noonan’s verbiage. I grant that her put-down is more elegant but, at the end of the day, one wonders if a dung beetle deserves such high-minded language.
“The party rallied round, as a party should. She went on the trail a sensation but demonstrated in the ensuing months that she was not ready to go national and in fact never would be. She was hungry, loved politics, had charm and energy, loved walking onto the stage, waving and doing the stump speech. All good. But she was not thoughtful. She was a gifted retail politician who displayed the disadvantages of being born into a point of view (in her case a form of conservatism; elsewhere and in other circumstances, it could have been a form of liberalism) and swallowing it whole: She never learned how the other sides think, or why.
“In television interviews she was out of her depth in a shallow pool. She was limited in her ability to explain and defend her positions, and sometimes in knowing them. She couldn’t say what she read because she didn’t read anything. She was utterly unconcerned by all this and seemed in fact rather proud of it: It was evidence of her authenticity. She experienced criticism as both partisan and cruel because she could see no truth in any of it. She wasn’t thoughtful enough to know she wasn’t thoughtful enough. Her presentation up to the end has been scattered, illogical, manipulative and self-referential to the point of self-reverence. “I’m not wired that way,” “I’m not a quitter,” “I’m standing up for our values.” I’m, I’m, I’m. ”
Don’t you think “overly ambitious dung beetle” hits the mark and saves precious bandwidth to boot?
in his case, he doesn’t know what he is talking about. what he knows is to how will he convinced the house of the representatives in pursuing con-com in the Philippines.
i’ve already read the propose amendment constitution when i was in 4th year.so it means it was almost 4 years that i was thinking that they wanted Gloria to be in the position, so how it is?that not before of Rep. norberto Gonzales they want to have the change.but that change is not the change i want to have, it is the fool change.
so i dont want to have charter change because it will make a burden for me and to other people that will suffer in this kind of constitution…
we are not american citizens that we want to have constitution like this that they want to implement and develop that they are the ones who need and help them to have corruption in their hands.
Nice piece, mb, at least the satirical menu tastes complete. Do you have the resume of this Gonzales as a diagnostic tool whether he deserves to get paid from taxpayers money?
Bencard,
Ahhh, the old fair and balanced right wing reactionary, totalitarian point of view, name calling instead of addressing issues. It is easy, eh?
Manuel,
I am reminded of the Jesuit priest who was my guidance counselor on my Master’s thesis, so absolutely, profoundly intelligent that his intellect outran his rationality, going evermore in circles of unattached brilliance . . .
Kafka lives . . . in Manila . . .
Along with Murphy, I might add . . .
Joe
joe,
that’s why Filipinos coined the term “switik”, short for “jesuitic” to describe the logic of that priestly order.
I too suffered my education in their hands so I can spot their ruse quite easily.
who’s name-calling, joe? you’re barking at the wrong tree again. look at this post, but then again what can i expect from a jaundiced eye? want name-calling? just keep reading buencamino”s alleged “satires”.
Bows once again to the most brilliant pundit on FV when it comes to satire…
So much for the cosmetic strong republic….
Bencard reminds one of Jabba the hut.
is that why you can’t even show your face here, mr/ms fuzzy brain? satire, my foot!
your pundit “hero”, the obscure papa whose only claim to fame is his own self assessment as “the rudest blogger in the world”, fits you caliber. noonan? she’s one jealous ghostwriter who never impressed me one bit. she’s no feminist conservative. she’s just an over rated personality of the old bush era who is largely ignored in the true conservative circles.
who may I ask are in the “true conservative circles?
the ones that are in harmony with sarah palin’s values, e.g., anti-abortion, rule of law (as ordained by the constitution), traditional family values, less government and less taxes, energy independence through wise utilization of natural resources, strong defense and national security, ethics in government, among other things. that is the kind of conservatism that i can believe in.
By the way, Noonan made her name as Reagan’s speechwriter. But I agree with you, she’s over-rated. She’s Peggy the speechwriter.