The most shocking thing about yesterday's headline was how little it shocked me.Summary: One of our country's most prominent senators has fled the country to escape charges of murder.
You can't make this stuff up. Read that sentence a few more times to let the gravity of it sink in. And yet, while the rational part of the brain urges you to take it seriously, the impulses just shrug and say "Whelp, there he goes".
Some part of us, I think, knew all along that Ping Lacson was kind of a weirdo. Even the people who supported him for president in 2004 did so seemingly more with tepid applause than eager sabre rattling. There's just something about those eyebrows.
And now we're seeing Ping at his nuttiest, practically a fugitive from the law, ranting on about an "evil conspiracy", throwing the blame on, who else, the president. And it was nearly a whole month before anyone started to wonder what happened to him.
Oh, and apparently there is still one person on his side. Someone who says she'd do the exact same thing in his position. Who else, but Miriam Defensor-Santiago.
These punchlines, they write themselves.
Ping is quoted in that article as saying "this is one case where I will dispute the argument that flight is admission of guilt," which is a hilarious thing to say when you're the accused party. A little bit like a burglar saying "yes, I know it's wrong to flee the scene of the crime but it's completely justified because all the cops are after me." Or like someone saying "this is normally the wrong thing to do but in my case I'll make an exception."
ReplyDeleteAlso I think your comment system is broken when you try to use a Google account.