• Those whom hypocrisy wishes to destroy, first become President Duterte’s critics



    CRITICS of the President are at the forefront of projecting themselves as authentic servants of justice and equality, the rule of law and decency. They have deployed icons in this regard, faces that they keep on posting as role models antithetical to the allegedly unjust, illegal and vulgar excesses of the President.
    One of their favorites is Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales.

    Ombudsman Carpio-Morales may not have directly confronted the President, perhaps due to some filial relationship emanating from the marriage of Duterte’sdaughter and Davao City Mayor Inday Sara to her nephew. But it seems that the Ombudsman is fighting Duterte through a proxy war by turning her attention to General Bato dela Rosa, whom she ordered investigated for accepting a free travel package from Senator Manny Pacquiao, his longtime friend, to enable him and his family to watch the senator’s latest boxing bout in the United States.

    This is the same Ombudsman who refused to investigate Senator Leila de Lima, who has been accused of having had a role in the drug trade inside the National Penitentiary. She is quick to order a motupropio investigation of General Bato for allegedly violating the code of ethical conduct of government employees when he accepted the free trip offer from Senator Pacquiao, yet did not lift a finger when Leni Robredo used a private airplane rented by a private individual for a trip to Bicol.

    The critics of the President do not see this patent selectivity and continue to deify Carpio-Morales.

    These are the same critics who bannered the battlecry of human rights, accused the President of violating these, and called on him to respect the rule of law and rein in extrajudicial killings.

    They likened President Duterte to former President Marcos, the dictator they love to hate, and such association they painted as vividly manifested when Duterte ordered the burial of Marcos at the Libingan ng mgaBayani, which they vehemently opposed. They ran to the Supreme Court to seek a ruling based on law, and challenged President Duterte’s discretion, hoping that the high court would find the President guilty of gravely abusing such.

    But when the court upheld the rule of law and allowed the burial, they refused to accept it, heaping insults on the nine majority justices,even as they continue to criticize the President for allegedly undermining the rule of law in his war on drugs.

    Former President Fidel Ramos, who has turned somewhat critical of the President, joined the condemnation of the court’s decision, and had the audacity to say that the Marcosesshould apologize to the people. This, even as Ramos who was one of the chief enforcers of martial law, under whose direct supervision the arrests and torture of dissidents were implemented, has yet to apologize himself. In fact, I also do not remember him apologizing to the late Miriam Defensor-Santiago.

    The critics of the President thought that they have already acquired proprietary rights on decency, until Leila de Lima came.

    De Lima brazenly appropriated the struggle of women against misogyny. She used this as her main platform when she went to the Supreme Court to file a petition for a writ of habeas data against the President. She used #everywoman as her hashtag in her attempt to paint her battles as a battle for all women. She tried to appropriate for herself the role of the new face of feminist struggle in the country. She gained the support of many women activists and feminists. But such support was blindsided when she admitted that she indeed had a relationship with her married driver, a subordinate.

    The women were blindsided not because she admitted to the affair, for many sexual agency feminists will not have a problem with women who are sexually empowered. The blindside was when she justified such relationship by pleading her case as emanating from the frailties of being a woman, despite the fact that she was the one who held the position of power and authority over her driver-lover. Decency flew out the window when she betrayed everywoman. She portrayed women as weaklings who are not in control of their own sexualities and bodies, which can only but horrify sexual agency feminists. Her excuse legitimized the victimization of the legal wife, and would make frailty of women as a convenient justification for philandering husbands and their mistresses.

    Conchita Carpio-Morales, the rabidly anti-Marcos burial crowd, Fidel Ramos and Leila de Lima are the faces that are now being deployed by critics of the President to represent the fair and just, the protector of human rights and the rule of law, and the decent.

    Yet they have also been revealed as clearly representing injustice, lack of respect for fairness and the rule of law, and brazen vulgarity.

    And critics of the President appear to ignore these even as they continue to assail him for committing the same sins.

    To paraphrase the Greek adage, those whom hypocrisy wishes to destroy, first become President Duterte’s critics.



    Please follow our commenting guidelines.


    1. Excellent piece of writing, I quote a saying, THEY CAN FALL SOME OF THE PEOPLE, BUT THEY CAN`T FALL ALL OF THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME.’
      I march too during my college days, but what happen after the EDSA 1 , nothing ,nada zest ,zero, sinong sumikat at nakinabang, to name a few of cory lapdogs though so many of them this lapdogs alive and dead.(e.g.Pimentel, Guingona, lopez, Diokno,Tanada,Binay,Cojunagcos/Aquino clan, Osmena, Sagiusag,) and so many others who enriched themselves with their new possed powers while the poor was wallowing with no dignity at all, the poor triple in numbers while the price of galongong the main stiple food of the poor doubled.
      This yellowtards/self righteous hypocrites, they can all cry like a crocodile or better yet they can all jump in the river.

    2. I think President Duterte is only concentrating with his fight against illegal drugs, the President does not see who is performing and/or against him with his cabinet members. Let alone that some his cabinet official are criticizing him openly. The sad part of it is that these cabinet officials can not perform/do their job as cabinet officials but only working against him.

    3. Ryan the Great on

      Very Well said Sir Antonio Contreras. Whatever the noise that these Yellow Bleeding Hearts has amplified to the public, they also knew that their MELTDOWN is already looming over the horizon. Cheers!!!

    4. Leodegardo Pruna on

      Leni should be included in your list. She was the biggest spender among all of the candidates in the local and national election. She claims to have no money but where on earth did she get the money to propel her campaign. Instead of keeping quiet every time an issue appears, she projects herself as protector and supporter of the disadvantage. What a hypocrite? Leni should use her office to find out the reason for her husband’s death. She should not allow herself to be used by the yellows especially P-Noy. God bless the Philippines.

    5. Lea Hetherington on

      Mr. Contreras, can you please write a Philippine history book that is fairly accurate about the Martial Law years? I believe that you are one of the only few who can write about those days long ago.
      Thank you for being truthful on writing. I am very saddened that most journalist in this day age are selling their own soul for a few pennies.

    6. indeed…how could PDI and abs-cbn pain a different picture…unfortunately yellow university also like ateneo is plainly jaundiced…

    7. Thank you Mr Contreras for this fearless assertion in your column. Very well said indeed. These frigging sanctimonious yellow hypocrites had it so good that they thought their fillies would never end. These hepatics are the bane of the Filipino nation.

    8. Another well written piece. Keep preaching the truth Mr. Contreras, the youth so badly need it.

    9. Excellent piece Mr. Contreras. I reckon you were one of the first ones who exposed the VP election fraud (via the under-votes cheating route) after the infamous “script” was inserted into a running system counting the votes a few hours after the polls closed on May 9, 2016. The impossible near figure “1” regression factor of the vote trend you showed can only be fraudulent. Kudos to you and the rest of other members of our anti-election fraud tribe. Your expose follows in a sense Benford’s second-digit law which reveals fraud from a set of numbers which are supposed to be resulting from a natural process such as fair and accurately tallied voting. The Leni numbers massively defied this second-digit law so her supposed win was a result of nothing else but cheating and and not by the natural occurrence of the digits of the true votes.