VILLAR VS. LACSON
I have watched part of Senator Ping Lacson’s privilege speech yesterday on tv. (Full text of Lacson’s privilege speech).The bandaged cut near his right brow as he sat there uneasily on his perch is metaphoric of the damage Senate President Manny Villar was dealt with through the pummeling of his fellow presumed candidate for the Philippine presidency.
But the Senate president has only himself to blame. He should have immediately ordered an investigation into the funding controversy and refrained from insinuating malice on the inquirers. Or, he could have gone on tv explaining how the error, if error indeed it is, happened. Problem was he became too defensive and acted like a criminal who went rushing back to the scene of the crime to wipe out any evidence left. Wrong accusations always elevate the accused and mock the accuser– if indeed the accusations are wrong. Had Villar kept himself composed with the unaffected bearing of a cool old dude, he would have come out of this an innocent man unjustly being pilloried for malicious reasons— to Senator Ping Lacson’s utter disgrace. All he needed to show was that the accusations were wrong and unfounded and he would have exposed his accusers as being too rash and vicious. Should have scored a knock down on Lacson instead, not the other way around.
Wonder how Villar could rise up from this terrible blow.
Still, which is which: an additional fund it was or a double entry or insertion? How come to this hour I am still wondering about the conflicting statements? You leave us people wondering this long, huh, you make us suspect the worst.