From Paul Cruz of San Francisco: “ Are we going to burn down our whole house to kill a fly? If Ms Arroyo did cheat, so what? Are we going to get a million pesos because we were right? In the end, all we want is to live a decent life. All this political bickering will win us nothing -- just an unstable country with lost investments.”
This reminds me of the comment of slyder. Bahala daw kung naay corruption basta ang importante he has a decent life. Why bother daw of corruption tutal di man daw ta masakitan.
Basin si slyder ning tawhana.
And here is a response to that letter of Paul Cruz
I don’t know if it’s the water or Arnold Schwarzenegger, there must be something addling the brain in today’s California. Frankly, I don’t know how the authors of these letters got there. Isn’t there a test about the American Constitution, or the principles of democracy, that aliens have to go through before they are given a green card? I’m presuming that the authors of these letters are more or less permanent residents there, a presumption that comes with Arambulo’s advice, “Magkaisa naman kayo” [Please unite]. That sounds just like what a Filipino with a green card or US citizenship would say.
To see how inane Cruz’s proposition is, imagine him saying that in the United States. Not that he will be listened to -- they are a marginalized lot out there -- which is why they prefer to lecture the yokels back home on the path to advancement. But imagine him saying that, if George W had cheated massively barefacedly in the last elections, and the fact was being protested bitterly by the Democrats, the press, and the public: “So he cheated, so what? Are we going to get through the winter knowing he did?” He might find himself deported back home where he will find himself just as marginalized.
As I said in a column last week, that is the new element, or nuance, that has crept into the pro-Arroyo argument today. The tack now is not to argue that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo did not cheat in the election, it is in fact to grant it. But to minimize, or even trivialize, its significance. As Cruz puts it, so what? Cheating in elections is nothing to be strenuously exercised about, correcting it is in the order of killing a fly. You do not burn a house down to kill a fly.
Have we reached a point where we are now free to postulate that stealing the vote has become a minor inconvenience to us, the voters, protesting it angrily is just overreacting to a, well, “lapse in judgment”? In fact, if Cruz’s metaphor makes any sense, it is only in that the current squatter of Malacañang is truly a pest that will not go away. But stealing an election may be compared to an annoying fly only in the sense that the annoying fly carries the annoying—and deadly—sleeping sickness virus and is sticking it to the children while they sleep. You harbor a virulent fly like that, you fumigate your house, if not burn it. Better a burnt house than dead children.
The proper perspective in fact is: Are we going to flit around like flies while our house burns down? Are we going to sleep comfortably in our house knowing a wrecking ball is swinging in its direction? Stealing an election is setting fire to a house, it is swinging a wrecking ball at it. It demolishes the foundations of democracy. Filipinos in the United States may wish to ask their American neighbors what they feel about being governed by a president they did not vote for.
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer News Service