TIT FOR TAT

Hopping from one blog to another, I visited MLQ3’s blog and participated in the lively exchange of ideas among bloggers and commenters alike.  As expected, the discussion centered on GMA with the usual pro and anti sentiments being displayed in the comment threads. 

To cut the story short, there is one commenter who goes by the alias Bencard.  He stirs up my adrenalin (or quite frankly, he really gets my goat) whenever I get to read his favorable observations on GMA and her policies.  Now, there’s basically nothing wrong with siding for or against a particular issue but when it comes to the illegal occupant in Malacañang, I could not help but be extremely passionate about it.  The injustice this administration has inflicted upon us is simply too much to bear and to read an insensitive comment from a “dual citizen residing in the U.S. but keeping himself abreast of what is happening in the land of his birth” is plainly adding insult to injury.  You may not agree with me but praising and defending a bogus President means that you are tolerating all the lying, cheating and stealing she has been known to commit since coming to power in 2001. 

Bencard started his rant with this entry: 

So what else is new MLQ3? Since when have you been “optimistic” about the President? I don’t think it is necessary time and again for her to assure you , or anyone, that her term expires in 2010. It is in the Constitution, ain’t it? Why is it always an issue with you people? Is it all up to her? I think we should cease acting like juveniles and grow up for our own sake. 

Beancurd (a sarcastic sounding namesake of Bencard) reacted: 

I believe Bencard also said those lines (It is in the Constitution, isn’t it?) back in the 70’s and when Marcos chagned the constitution, well Bencard can always say “it is in the Constitution, isn’t it?”.
And he (or she?) is right, mlq3. From his excellent reasoning, Gloria is the President, therefore she respects the constitution and the rule of law. Thus, everything she does is constitutional and legal. Man, you are awesome! 

Bencard replied, saying: 

Beancurd, the Constitution does not say that Justice Reynato Puno is the Chief Justice, Manuel Villar is the Senate President or Jose de Venecia is the Speaker of the House of Representatives either, does it?

No, Beancurd, I am not an ofw. I am a dual citizen residing in the U.S. but keeping myself abreast of what is happening in the land of my birth. 

To which I, with the use of sarcasm, interrupted: 

“I think we should cease acting like juveniles and grow up for our own sake.”

-EHEM.. 

“I don’t think it is necessary time and again for her to assure you , or anyone, that her term expires in 2010. It is in the Constitution, ain’t it? Why is it always an issue with you people? Is it all up to her?”

-COUGH. COUGH. 

“She is our President because our laws and the Constitution say she is, not you, mlq3 or cvj.”

-She is our president because first, Garci and the Abalos Comelec said so; second, because the house of representathieves said so; and third, because esperon said so.

The Constitution and the laws apply only to legitimately elected presidents. It does not legitimize a bogus presidency. 

Supremo, another commenter, inserted this bit of advice on how to make the most of our celebration of Independence Day: 

I suggest instead giving GMA a 21 middle finger salute on every national occasion like Independence Day. She might get the drift after a while. 

Bencard, probably pissed off by the onslaught of negative feedback resulting from his defense of GMA, turned his ire on me by posting this: 

the problem, bystander, is that you are not a duly-constituted judge with real power to give effect to your anti-GMA judgment. You are just a puny blogger like everyone else here. There is a process - either follow it or just shut up. Otherwise you can take the law into your own hands at your peril. 

Take note that he was the first one to name-call and make insulting remarks against people who stubbornly refuse to believe his antics.  And in response to his belittling my persona, I answered back with equal intensity, again using sarcasm as my weapon of choice: 

“the problem, bystander, is that you are not a duly-constituted judge with…”

-i’d rather be a puny blogger than a puny apologist whose puny defense for a puny president is full of puny arguments. 

“There is a process - either follow it or just shut up. Otherwise you can take the law into your own hands at your peril.”

-I won’t shut up for so long as there are people like you who won’t. 

“I suggest instead giving GMA a 21 middle finger salute on every national occasion like Independence Day. She might get the drift after a while.”

-The suggestion is well-taken. The apologist equally deserves to be given a 21 middle finger salute.

“I am a dual citizen residing in the U.S. but keeping myself abreast of what is happening in the land of my birth.”

-To keep himself abreast with what is happening in the land of his birth, he watches news aired by sequestered TV stations like NBN4 and RPN9 and reads online news from the manila standard and the manila bulletin. Afterwards, he visits manolo’s blog and spreads the lies he himself has come to believe as gospel truth. 

Supremo, on the other hand, was on the offensive and said rather bluntly: 

My puny middle finger goes to bencard for this statement. 

Bencard further heats up.  He said: 

you know what i think guys? i think the single reason the hate- Gloria club cannot muster enough support for its cause (to get PGMA by means fair or foul)is that it cannot try to make a point without being obnoxious. it has the annoying habit of shooting the messenger for the message he bears, obviously unsure of its capacity to challenge the message.

no wonder the GMA haters always had to resort to name calling, insults, derision (sheepish laughter as from someone who slipped on a banana peel), mockery, gloating, attempted satire that doesn’t and cannot work, fighting words, and, sometimes, obscenities that could only result from ill-breeding. 

But I’m not the type of guy who easily backs down especially from someone who cannot live up to his moral standards.  So I answered back, thus: 

again, look who’s talking. this dual citizen sounds as if he is the aggrieved party, yet he was the first one to resort to insult anti-gma commenters as puny bloggers. look at the old man in the mirror.

and as to his conceited claim that those who contradict his views “are unsure of their capacity to challenge his message”, the comment threads speak for themselves. take that from someone who merely parrots what abalos et. al have in mind with respect to the “failure of elections” in maguindanao. motherhood statements are not enough to defend the indefensible. 

MLQ3 did not join the fray.  He however reminded everyone to go easy on Bencard through this statement: 

a note on bencard: we should give him his due as a faithful reader and participant in this blog, no matter the odds. the same way i asked for consideration for cat, bencard deserves ours. i’m sure he’s a man of personal integrity. 

Wait.  MLQ3 failed to observe that what earned Bencard a lot of flak was his arrogance and high-handedness in dealing with other people’s views and opinions.  In response, I said: 

Tit for tat lang manolo. No one ever deprived him of his due as a participant in your blog. We were merely reacting to what we think are fallacious statements in his rabid defense of GMA. The use of sarcasm is one. Your “note on bencard” is quite unfair to begin with. You’re trying to imply that we are the ones bullying him. 

Ay Naku has a similar take on the issue:    

Of course. But he should be able to take as much as he gives. He calls people here puny and idiots and tells them to shut up all the time, especially when he’s losing an argument. The man from the US of A is not above name-calling himself; in fact a lot of times he starts it. 

Yes, Ay naku.  You hit the nail right on its head.