[Bodymind] Oh dear Cristina Enrile
Dear Mrs Enrile:
This is one of the most difficult letters I have written in my life. First, because no one likes to kick a woman when she’s down; and IMHO, nothing can make a person more down than being the wife of JPE and the mother of Jackie.
Second, because no one likes to be played. And by writing about your interview, I am being played as much as anyone else who has stopped writing about JPE’s alleged theft and is now writing about his infidelities.
And while many say (and rightly so) that you are as much victim as any person who has repeatedly been abused, you are, after all, a grown woman. I have no doubt that JPE could do worse things than be unfaithful to you, as when he responded about your wanting a divorce, with the words: “Over my dead body will I give you a divorce.”
I can imagine, as you too probably can, how the word my could so easily be replaced by the word your. But you have an ally in your son who said, "I'll take care of it, Ma." Jackie…and unless JPE’s spawn is as “pragmatic” as he, you will be physically safe.
As for emotionally, well, some people might say there are very few positions as bad as the one you’re in now. Frankly I’m not sure I’d say that myself. Because try as I might – and even if one cannot separate the personal from the political – I am doing my best to make the political ascendant in this article. In other words, while I do grieve over what I perceive as your plight (which, admittedly, you may not), I grieve for my country more.
Still – sigh – I am as confused as ever.
Hypothesizing on the reasons you agreed to (perhaps even suggested) an interview on Mareng Winnie’s show, I came up with several:
Were you “copping a plea” on your husband’s behalf, admitting to his “lesser crime” of womanizing, so that his bigger one of plunder would be pardoned and/or swept under the carpet?
Did you agree this was a good PR stunt, the last refuge of alleged thieves once they feel the noose tightening around their necks?
If the latter, I admit I was surprised JPE could really ask you, an already long suffering wife, to suffer even more by making a laughing stock of yourself.
But there seems to be no limit to his using other people for his survival.
Perhaps he or his handlers miscalculated how fed up people are with his shenanigans. I think they felt that if you “humbled yourself” by agreeing to an interview on national TV, people would be mollified and overlook his alleged theft. Happily though, many have seen the light. Even more happily, more will continue to do so as JPE, by his hubris, continues to dig his own grave.
Why do I think this interview was a mere cog in Project Save JPE?
Because you cherry picked, Mrs Enrile. You chose to comment on issues you hoped would present JPE in a good light, but chose to remain silent on issues which did the exact opposite.
Examples of the former:
On accusations about his smuggling: “No, no, that I can vouch for it. From the very beginning, he said – I was present in the meeting – 'I don’t want to know that anybody tries to smuggle anything, even toothpick.’”
Rather ironic, considering that he is also suspected of illegal logging, wooden toothpicks being preferable to plastic ones.
On allegations that he is the mastermind of the pork scam, you said: "I don't believe that. I don't think that Johnny is that stupid."
Examples of the latter:
Your saying, without a trace of irony in your voice or face, you are not “involved in (your) husband's political career.” In fact, you don’t “even read the newspapers anymore except for the headlines.”
Please believe me, Mrs Enrile. The last thing I want is to be bitchy towards you.
I’ve already defended you in my heart on numerous occasions. There were so many times I wish you had at least questioned (if to dispute was beyond you) one of your husband’s preposterous claims.
An example? His arguments against the RH Bill, especially during the RH debates on Sept 21, 2011, and I quote: "(The RH Bill), in promoting sex without fear of pregnancy, opens the country to sexual promiscuity…and it would remove the fear of pregnancy for married and unmarried women, which could lead to the prevalence of infidelity on the part of some married women…"
If JPE truly believes that fear of pregnancy is what prevents married Filipinas from being unfaithful, didn’t that amount to his insulting you?
You too are a married woman, and by his logic, presumably could only be faithful if you had no easy access to birth control.
Unless, of course, with his typical sense-of-entitlement-bias, JPE believes your libido is different from everybody else’s?
And did your refraining from comment mean you believe him too?
I refrained from commenting then because I felt I should respect your wanting to maintain a dignified silence. But since your GMA interview last week, when you yourself made such preposterous claims which you apparently expected us to believe, well, all bets are off.
There was a time Edu Manzano used to ask me questions about relationships once a week, on ABS-CBN’s Umagang Kay Ganda. Once, when people were speculating whether he would run for office, I told him before our interview: “OK. Tables turned. Ako naman ang magtatanong, ok? (Now it’s my turn to ask the questions, ok?) Edu, is it really true that you’re gonna run for senator in the next election?”
“Don’t know yet, Dra. What do you think?”
“Pleeeease don’t, Edu. Please don’t be a politician. I think you’re a terrific guy, but you will change when you get elected. You know what they say, ‘If you sleep with dogs, you'll get fleas.’"
I congratulated myself on having made an impact. Edu merely nodded, seriously considering my – ahem – sage advice. At least that’s what I thought, until he promptly ran for vice president later in the week.
But I digress.
In your husband’s case, the fleas won’t be the cute ones that ask their fellow fleas: "Should we walk or should we take a dog?”
In fact, rather than fleas, he would have garapatas which, like other ticks, suck the life blood out of everything they come in contact with…as he has already done perhaps with you, and indubitably and, alas, not only figuratively, with the nationalists and poets and artists who were killed during martial law, and with people who wouldn’t have died had PDAF funds gone where they should have, instead of to the countless houses, the countless jewelry, the countless designer shoes you and his countless mistresses (past, present, future) live in, wear and totter in.
I still don’t know where your head is at. So please forgive me if I give you some unsolicited advice about a matter that I hope will be a moot point during our next national election.
I feel I must, especially because it is about yet another member of your immediate family. So while copping a plea or cherry picking may also be involved where your son, Jackie, is concerned, it might be a good idea not to use the following sound bite, (whether true or not), no matter who tries to convince you: “Bully yes; murderer, no.” – Rappler.com