Was Neal Cruz’s play on words in his March 25 column, which referred to Bam Aquino as “Bum” Aquino 14 times—even calling Bam a collaborator of Arroyo—intended to denigrate or ridicule Bam’s achievements? Cruz reasoned that Bam accepted an extension of his term as chair of the National Youth Commission from then President Gloria Arroyo despite the fact that the Philippines was teetering on the brink of political upheaval.
Further, he pointed out that Bam tenaciously clung to his position even when the so-called “Hello Garci” scandal had caused an exodus of some of Arroyo’s Cabinet members and ranking government officials from Malacañang. That Bam did not withdraw his support for the Arroyo administration, which Cruz believed he should have done, was a sin for which Bam should ask for God’s forgiveness, Cruz further pontificated.
Based on the facts presented, I can’t for the life of me fully understand what would drive Cruz to malign Bam so savagely he had to refer to him as Bum 14 times. Granting that Bam accepted the term extension and did not withdraw his support for the Arroyo administration at the time when all hell had broken loose (Bam was even said to have declared he was proud of his time working for Arroyo), would that justify calling him Bum ad nauseam?
On that premise, where then would that leave those honest, hardworking public servants who stayed on and continued serving the public during those critical moments when Cruz thought jumping ship was the decent way out? Where would that leave columnists like him who, for reasons of their own, preferred not to use the power of the pen to campaign vigorously for civil disobedience or denounce the excesses of the previous administration, yes, every chance they got?
Further, where would that leave the taxpayers like him and all law-abiding Filipinos who did not abandon the sinking ship but stayed around doing their bit to keep the boat afloat, albeit in the face of an onrushing tsunami? And last but not the least, going by Cruz’s logic, where would it have left the ship of the state if every crew member on board had deserted it for the reason that the captain was perceived to be too drunk and unfit to manage its operation safely and efficiently?
In closing, I must state categorically that I don’t know Bam from Adam. If it appears that I am taking up the cudgels for him, it is not so much to come to his rescue as to add my voice to the increasingly popular clamor for balanced and fair reporting. Going by Bam’s track record and judging from his outstanding performance in the campaign trail, he is, in my opinion, the absolute antithesis of what Cruz would have his readers believe Bam is.
Personally, I don’t find this name calling the least bit amusing, let alone endearing. On the contrary, it is demeaning and offensive. Surely, Cruz will do everyone, himself included, a lot of good if he just leave the man alone.
—PETE R. DE LOS SANTOS,
fredrod1181@yahoo.com