Revisiting those ‘critics'

IAM amused by the critics of President Noynoy Aquino. By “critics” I mean those people who, in 2010, supported another presidential candidate and were vociferous in their attack of Aquino, who was the leading bet.

Calling Aquino “abnoy” (a take on his nickname) or an abnormal or mentally challenged person was first done in the 2010 presidential campaign. It was a variation of “autistic,” a mental illness that the p.r. machinery of his opponents attempted to attach to him but failed. The attacks were belowthe-belt and relentless, but the overwhelming majority of voters refused to listen to them.

It wasn't only Aquino who was the subject of the attacks. Those who supported his candidacy were also derided for siding with a “mentally challenged” candidate. Yellow, the color used by Aquino and his Liberal Party was given a derisive meaning. An air of arrogance floated around the supporters of the other “superior” bets. But they lost big time.

Those critics didn't go away after Noynoy assumed the presidency in June of 2010. They lurked like predators following their prey. They waited for every moment of weakness and for every misstep from PNoy and his government so they could pounce on them and magnify them while resuming their vicious assault on the President's person.

They had their first chance in August of that year when PNoy bungled the handling of the hostage-taking incident at the Luneta that involved tourists from Hong Kong. The critics erupted in a frenzy us- ing mostly social networking sites. Slanderous comments became regular fare.

But one can magnify a controversy only to a certain extent. Or should I say there is a limit to the size of the mountain one can make from a molehill. The assault eventually petered out as new, though lesser, controversies surfaced as the inexperienced PNoy meandered on.

The next missteps came years later, in the latter part of 2013 and in 2014. After super typhoon Yolanda battered portions of the Visayas, the critics pounced on the government's failure to provide adequate and immediate response to the tragedy. This was followed by the shooting down by the Supreme Court of the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).

The critics obviously felt this was the time to move in for the kill. Together with the vicious attack on the President re: Yolanda and the DAP, some groups acquired the daring to file an impeachment complaint against PNoy last year. The impeachment complaint failed to fly because the pro-administration coalition controls the House of Representatives.

Then came the Mamasapano clash last Jan. 25 that resulted to the death of 44 members of the Special Action Force (SAF) of the Philippine National Police, 18 fighters of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF and five civilians. The critics pounced on the mourning people's anger like never before and used it to bash PNoy again and push their agenda.

But anger subsides, no matter how much propagandists fire it up. As passions ebb, what remains is the sober analysis of the situation—no matter how much propagandists would spread half-truths and lies. I am sure that in the coming weeks, the critics will once more go back to looking for the next controversy to ride on.

If one is not wearing spectacles made of bias and prejudice, one can readily see that ousting PNoy is next to impossible because he still retains the support of a big chunk of the populace. That has been shown time and again by the results of the surveys conducted by Pulse Asia and the Social Weather Station the past several months.

By the way, didn't I say these critics also attack those who say something or write articles favorable to Aquino? So I am “yellow” and a “lapdog.” Coming from the prejudiced and the scheming, any attack is proof I am on the correct path.