Janet Lim-Napoles hospital arrest: Guide for male reporters

Janet Lim-Napoles hospital arrest: Guide for male reporters

News directors should inform their male reporters that the uterus (in Filipino: matris or matres) is different from the ovaries so that they would not cause confusion when they are covering the impending temporary hospital arrest of pork barrel queen Janet Lim-Napoles. Magkaiba po ang uterus sa ovaries. Women who have access to health care and get annual diagnostics know this.  Apparently, male reporters think those are all one bunch or one basket.  The distinction is significant because uterine tumors, called myomas, if non-symptomatic, are benign in 99 out of 100 cases; symptomatic ovarian cysts on the other hand raise some concern from your ob-gynecologist. “Symptomatic” means there is bleeding outside of the menstrual days, another is abdominal pain, and still another is a dramatic increase in the size of the cyst or tumor – dramatic increase is 50% or more increase in size in three months or so.  GMA 7 news anchor Kara David asked the right question when she posed this to the spot reporter (another male reporter): “Ngayon lang ba nakita na may cyst siya o noon pa niya iniinda iyan” (translation: “Has she had the cyst for quite sometime or was it discovered only recently?”). As I said, women who have access to health care know these things. Of course, as expected, none of the male reporters who were there in Camp Crame covering Janet Lim-Napoles knew the right questions to ask of the attending physician and the ob-gynecologists even if they had a chance during the medical briefing. The question from Kara David is significant — if the cyst has been there for a  year or more and it is the same in size or with only an insignificant increase in size, it is what doctors call “not remarkable”. In all your medical diagnostics, if you get a  “not remarkable”, it doesn’t mean you’re in poor health; on the contrary, it means “normal” or good — everytime you get a “not remarkable” in your medical exam, you should jump for joy then put your palms together in thankful prayer  that you’re always in the clear. Compared to most women in this country who do not have access to health care and who are so marginalized that they are not even able to buy a toothbrush for themselves because they use the few pesos they have to buy noodles for their children, Janet Lim-Napoles should consider herself fortunate that she has access to world-class medical care. We all wish her to be in the best of health so that justice, not just poetic justice,  could be served. 

Why PNoy has to put up a fight for DAP from a legal point of view

I’ve nothing to write about today — What is the difference between the PDAF being struck down  as unconstitutional and the DAP being dealt a legal  fatal blow?

  

    PDAF is an act of Congress; DAP was

created by the hand of the President.    

      From where the President sits, a lethal attack on the DAP has more serious legal consequences on the presidency – maybe not political because his people keep reminding  us  he still has the numbers —

    but who is to say what outcomes  legal blows may bring.

   

      Therefore, from this point of view, he had to, and has to put up a fight for DAP — from where he sits, he cannot have it undone, having it undone wholesale might weaken the case of Malacañang before the Supreme Court.

      It’s almost like…i hate to say this… being indicted in a criminal case or being an accused in a criminal case — legally, your only options are to stay silent —  or to fight back (actively present defenses). You cannot do any act that would be construed as admissions that you were wrong — you cannot confess. It’s almost like … i’m sorry i’m going to say this… it’s almost like — ikaw ang nasasakdal. Sorry i had to say that; but this allows an understanding of why he has to do what he is doing. 

     That’s the  difference between the attack on the PDAF and the onslaught on the DAP.  DAP is made up of his overt acts. 

     

     His “advisers” thought the best form was the unprecedented primetime all- TV -network -broadcast. And since his trust rating was slipping as well, instead of confining themselves to legal  arguments, they thought they might as well throw in the “i-am-not-a-thief” theme. 

     There are however some questions about the logic displayed in the speech itself or the content,  in the context of the “scrap-pork” calls.

     The call, supported by overwhelming numbers according to the empirical data of the social scientists, is:

     “scrap the pork barrel”.

     His answer is: “i am not a thief”.  

     Check the logic of this :

     “i am not a thief =

       therefore

      we will not scrap the the pork barrel system”

     (DAP and other pork forms)