Escudero calls Lacson a "spoiler"

Ahh... spoiling the Villar Senate Presidency?

From the tribune:

With Sen. Panfilo Lacson drawing first blood calling “political mongrels” with no “political pedigree” the senators who ran under the Genuine Opposition (GO) ticket and won but who are now backing for the Senate presidency of Manuel Villar Jr., along with the bulk of the administration and indepen-dent senators, Senators Francis “Chiz” Escudero and Jinggoy Estrada shot back.

Escudero lashed back at Senator Lacson saying the latter is merely being true to form as a spoiler “very much like what he did to FPJ (Fernando Poe Jr.) and the opposition in 2004” when Lacson mounted his own presidential bid and ran against FPJ.

Uhmmm... hindi naman si Lacson ang dahilan kung bakit split ang opposition.

Fact one: Nakipag-collaborate ang Villar camp para makuha lang ang Senate presidency. Fact two: Mas marami ang boto ng admin kay Villar kaysa sa non-admin senators. So MALAKI talaga ang utang ng loob ni Villar sa admin. Mas malaki ang sway ng admin kay villar kaysa sa opposition.

So let's not be naive here. expected na may quid pro quo diyan. The admin is a BIG part of the majority.

As for lacson being a "spoiler"... I blame the LDP dictator and palace mole Angara for creating the mess. more later.

UPDATE: It was Angara the dictator who screwed Ping by rigging the nomination process for the LDP's presidential bet. If Angara believed in democracy, then he should have respected the will of the LDP majority and accepted Lacson as LDP's nominee instead of unilaterally selecting FPJ (who is not a member of LDP)

And now, Angara is with the administration. How fucked up is that.

And although Ducky Paredes thought FPJ had a better chance of winning vs. GMA than Lacson, he agreed that Angara double crossed Ping.

Sabi ni Ducky:

You are right to point out that Ping Lacson did not get a
fair shake from Angara. That is Angara's failure as a human
being and he ought to be condemned for that as he is being
roundly condemned by just about everyone. But, again, the
decision on who to field comes down to who can more easily
win. Angara is a politician first before he is a great human
being.

So Lacson had every right to be angry. Ginago ni Angara si Lacson, so he did an FVR (bolting from LDP), and ran a separate campaign from Angara's bet.

I was never a supporter of FPJ, but I believe he won the last prez election anyway.

and here's some criticism of Escudero's explanation of his vote yesterday from John Nery.

Another first-time senator quoted from the Bible, too. Unfortunately for the many who reposed their trust in him last May 14, the young Sen. Francis Escudero (“Chiz” to everyone) not only failed to satisfactorily explain why he broke ranks with the opposition; he also betrayed his ignorance of the spirit of scripture.

Escudero was the last of five senators to stand and explain their choice for Senate president, after Jinggoy Estrada, Ping Lacson, Kiko Pangilinan and Jamby Madrigal. He started off well: “It is written in the Good Book,” he said, that we should not judge lest we be judged. He went on to paraphrase the rest of the passage (from Matthew 7). In the New American Standard Version, the passage reads: “For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.”

It quickly became clear, however, that Escudero had merely used scripture for rhetorical purposes; he defended his vote for Sen. Manuel Villar, not by discoursing on Villar’s merits, but by arguing that no one had the right to say who was truly opposition and who was not. In the mellifluous monotone (a contradiction, I know, but let it pass) that he has made famous, he said no one could claim the crown (“walang sinuman ang puwedeng umangkin ng korona”), the right, that is, to judge whether a senator was oppositionist or not.

This is a breathtaking claim. Does Escudero mean he cannot be classified as pro-administration, simply on his say-so? Does he mean his actions, his votes in the Senate, for example, really do not matter, because he is an oppositionist at heart?

* * *

Here’s the problem: Chiz thought the biblical passage he quoted meant no one can act as judge, no one can sit in judgment.

This is a misunderstanding. The passage does not seek to stop men and women from judging other men and women. How else can we distinguish between the good and the wicked? Instead, it seeks to reintroduce integrity into the act of judging. In the way we judge, we shall be judged. By our own measure, we shall be measured.

But really, all this is beside the point. Escudero’s appropriation of scripture was merely meant to bolster his argument -- it was a personal decision to support Villar, he said -- with the weight it did not have.

We recommend another scriptural passage for him: Mene mene tekel upharsin.