I am ‘pussyfooting’: Belated (but still tentative) thoughts on SONA 2009

(This is a 'shorter version' of the earlier entry and more focused on SONA 2009. Let me give a caveat. In this piece, I do not intend to validate what the president said against what was done in actuality as that will probably be best pursued by economists, public administration scholars, and even people from the media. My goal is to examine the SONA as a rhetorical artifact, highlight significant conceptualizations that are realized/ expressed in the address, and present possible implications of such conceptualizations on present and future public policies. Photos that appear in this note are courtesy of the Associated Press available at Yahoo News)



The SONA of 2009 appears consistent with the persona-centric approach of the SONA in 2003 (what should/could have been Ms. Arroyo’s valedictory address). Considering that Ms. Arroyo’s presidency has been hounded with questions of legitimacy since she assumed power in 2001, it is not surprising that such is the case. While in 2003 she carved a combative modern leader under the frame of a ‘strong republic’ that complemented the ‘global war on terror,’ in 2009 Ms. Arroyo casts herself as a consistently persistent ‘working president’ while lacing her talk with arguably her most combative rhetoric before the Philippine Congress (yet).

Interesting is how such casting is realized in the national address.

At the onset, Ms. Arroyo boasted of ‘economic resilience.’ The term is an interesting evidence of lexical shift in post-Marcos Philippine presidential rhetoric. In the SONA, Ms. Arroyo sustained a discourse on ‘economic resilience’ (‘the story of the Philippines in 2008 is that the country weathered a succession of global crises in fuel, in food, then in finance and finally, economy in a global recession’; ‘Nakinabang ang sandaan libo sa emergency employment ng ating economic resiliency plan .’; ‘We have a strong economy and a strong fiscal position to withstand global shocks ’; ‘Today the Philippines is weathering well the storm that is raging around the world.’), a curious lexical as well as conceptual variation from the more familiar ‘economic recovery’ very much employed during the time of her predecessors. This, I hypothesize, is due to changes in context/s (national and global), how the national leader views herself as well as changing ways of constructing the national situation. In other words, as in any speech or written discourse, there is proof of the complex interplay of texts and contexts in this year’s President’s Report to the Nation.

It appears though that image building, specifically, the restoration of a perennially challenged presidency, is what instigates this lexical and conceptual shift. The incumbency, after all, has to carve an image distinct from its predecessors and that would help establish – at least discursively – its place in history. Considered the most unpopular president since the dictator Ferdinand Marcos, Ms. Arroyo appears resolved to redeem her presidency by bolstering her image on the one hand, and denigrating her critics on the other.

Ms. Arroyo’s 2009 address employed very pronounced strategies of othering by lashing out at her critics – vilifying them, rendering them as delusional (‘And I have never done any of the things that have scared my worst critics so much. They are frightened by their own shadows.’), power hungry (‘Many of those who accuse me of it tried to cling like nails to their posts’), hypocritical (‘Many who accuse me have lifestyles and spending habits that make them walking proofs of that crime’), and failures (‘They had the chance to serve this good country and they blew it by serving themselves.), on the one hand, while bolstering her image as a working president who has achieved what her predecessors had failed to do (‘Those in the past administrations conjured the demon of foreign debt. We exorcised it’; ‘The average GDP growth from 2001 to the first quarter of 2009 is the highest in 43 years’), on the other.

She reinforced the rhetoric or should I say the political myth of ‘the working president’ (‘I did not become President to be popular. To work, to lead, to protect and preserve our country, our people, that is why I became President.’) by casting herself as governance-driven (‘Some say that after this SONA, it will be all politics. Sorry, but there’s more work.’), as a national interest-oriented adviser (‘As the campaign unfolds and the candidates take to the airwaves, I ask them to talk more about how they will build up the nation rather than tear down their opponents. Give the electorate real choices and not just sweet talk.’), as the captain of the ‘ship of state’ or direction setter (‘Meanwhile, I will keep a steady hand on the tiller, keeping the ship of state away from the shallows some prefer, and steering it straight on the course we set in 2001.’), as having exemplary work ethics (‘There isn’t a day I do not work at my job or a waking moment when I do not think through a work-related problem. Even my critics cannot begrudge the long hours I put in. Our people deserve-a-government that works just as hard as they do.’), and by denying that she is a lame duck president (‘At the end of this speech I shall step down from this stage, but not from the Presidency. My term does not end until next year. Until then, I will fight for the ordinary Filipino. The nation comes first. There is much to do as head of state—to the very last day.’).

She did the same by rendering her presidency as a do-gooder (‘Had we listened to the critics of those policies, had we not braced ourselves for the crisis that came, had we taken the easy road much preferred by politicians eyeing elections, this country would be flat on its back. It would take twice the effort just to get it back again on its feet—to where we are now because we took the responsibility and paid the political price of doing the right thing.’); a facilitator of development (‘Real government is about looking beyond the vested to the national interest, setting up the necessary conditions to enable the next, more enabled and more empowered generation to achieve a country as prosperous, a people as content, as ours deserve to be.’); and a resources generator/problem solver (‘We only know that we have generated more resources on which to draw, and thereby created options we could take.’), among others.

Quite notable in her strategy of othering is emphasizing certain national values while de-emphasizing others. For instance, she talked of defending democracy by strength (‘arms,’ ‘firmness,’ ‘law and order,’ ‘wise policies of economic progress’) which somehow contrasts with Ms. Aquino’s emphasis on strengthening democracy through ‘organized participation’ (1991). From the following extract, Ms. Arroyo appears to dismiss such rendering (democracy as participation) as nothing but ‘empty liberty’ as opposed to her definition of democracy as ‘a full life for all’ achieved in a ‘strong republic’: ‘As I have shown, I will defend democracy with arms when it is threatened by violence; with firmness when it is weakened by division; with law and order when it is subverted by anarchy; and always, I will try to sustain it by wise policies of economic progress, so that a democracy means not just an empty liberty but a full life for all.’

There is definitely more to the SONA than the formulaic responses we normally get from both the president’s staunch admirers and regular critics. What is crucial for those who dare listen/read the SONA is to tease out and make evident the often ‘naturalized’ conceptualizations that may or perhaps, will be transformed into such ‘non-negotiable materialities,’ into more ‘authoritative contexts,’ into what would later be long-standing public policies that have definite impact, positive or otherwise, on people’s lives.