1. "

    The wife of the late Boston psychiatrist Steve Agular denied that her husband ever treated Liberal Party presidential bet Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III.

    In a short statement, Dr. Rosario Agular said there is “absolutely no truth” to the claim that Aquino consulted her husband.

    “Aquino was not even a patient of my husband. I condemn the use of my late husband’s name in these attempts to smear the reputation of Aquino,” Agular said in her statement…

    Represented by Philippine Star Columnist Chit Pedrosa, the group, which called themselves the Citizens for their Right to Information, claimed that Agular served as Aquino’s neurologist and psychiatrist sometime between 1981 to 1983 while the Aquino family was still living in Boston.

    Pedrosa said she learned about this from a former official of the Philippine Fund.


    Strike 3 on psycho issue: Wife denies Boston psychiatrist treated Noynoy

    Ooooh. Tough blow. Wonder what the next tactic will be? Or, the next psychiatrist they try and drag into this story. First and second attempts were the Ateneo, this last attempt involved Boston…were the Aquinos ever in Spain? May San Francisco, I remember the Aquinos used to meet with people there.

    Anyway, on another subject, I wonder if Ms. Pedrosa will apologize for falsifying information and passing it along as truth?


  2. On Pedrosa again

    In light of her ranty crazy press con today, I just thought it would be fun to exhume this little tidbit:

    “A clincher” April 24, 2010:

    “I did not want to write about Noynoy’s mental sickness. In a political campaign season, it looked like black propaganda from rival politicians

    Nope, it makes you look like you’re spouting of black propaganda; which you are.

    I actually had a whole blog post of ‘em.

    Really, I don’t think I can be more clear about how crazy I think this woman is.


  3. A face palm moment…

    I always thought GMA defenders and admirers are a bit like a duck-billed platypus: You’ve seen pictures of them, you’ve heard about them, but you can’t believe something like it could actually exist until you see it in person. And when you do see it, you wonder how it could survive in the real world; I mean, there has to be something physically or mentally wrong with it.

    My theory helps explain writers like Carmen Pedrosa or Marichu Villanueva or even Alex Magno. You read their columns and their thinking clearly exhibits a disconnect from reality. In fairness to Magno though, he is a free trade advocate and GMA has been a free trade supporter, so from that perspective it does make some sense (even if I think free traders with regards to the Philippines have a screw or two loose). But the other two? Screws. Loose. All of ‘em.

    Moving on, with that in mind I read a comment on Magno’s column today (a curious column by the way, where he continues to try and deflect attention away from corruption. Obviously, since by all corruption measures GMA fails and fails hard):

    to gloria haters, look at where the philippines is, economically that is. two years after the 2008 disaster, we are still afloat. the economy had been churning out positive numbers for over 30 quarters successively. very few countries in the world managed to do that. regarding the poor? they will be the last to feel the resurgence of the economy, that is if it doesn’t get derailed by the policies to be implemented by the incoming adminstration.

    THEY EXIST! Hot damn.

    Key points:

    1. OFW remittances have been one of the primary economic factors keeping us afloat;
    2. Our banks have the lowest loan to asset base ratio in the region (and in the world). Thus, our banks were not over-leveraged and, thus, were protected from the fall out in the banking sector;
    3. Our private sector was already highly consolidated because of the 1997, 2001, 2003 economic crashes. We were already at rock bottom;
    4. Our investment outlets, internally, are extremely vanilla. Our capital markets cannot support derivatives yet, we do not have the market expertise or infrastructure to properly value and sell them;
    5. Our capital markets are very very shallow; mostly invested in fixed deposits, basic stocks and bonds;
    6. What were the roots of the crash? Over-leveraged banks, unwinding derivatives, over-borrowed and extended consumers. None of which exist in this market.

    So, regarding the poor.  That’s ludicrous. The growth of our economy has been based on OFW remittances and outsourcing. The industries in which our poor are mostly located is farming and fishing: where a whopping 37% of our impoverished (those living below the national poverty line) are. Even more, those living under the $2.00 per day mark is 45% (according to the World Bank).

    We have been pursuing a policy of free trade and open markets, two policies that limit development of those core industries (along with manufacturing). Since 1990, levels of poverty have almost stayed the same! Since 2003, levels of poverty have increased! That is a case of serious structural inefficiencies in our economic policies.

    • How can there be a trickle down effect to the poor when asset inequalities are expanding? Want to know a key part of why our economy growth, on paper, looks good? Take a look at the expansion and diversification of our major companies. They’ve been (through misguided privatization of government asset policies) accumulating high value assets (such as power and water).
    • How can there be a trickle down effect when our banks are holding onto credit?
    • How can there be a trick down effect when most of the remittances go to consumption, as opposed to reinvestment and expansion of existing micro-entrepreneurial businesses?
    • How can there be a trick down effect when eco and cultural tourism has taken a backseat to casinos and other exploitive tourism policies?
    • How can there be a trickle down effect when pork barrel does not end up capital infrastructure projects, but in the pockets of politicians to be used during election?
    • How can there be a trick down effect when education (liberal arts, technical, vocational and so forth) spending is the lowest in the region per GDP?

    The mythical trickle down effect that the GMA administration and defenders have been touting does not and will not exist. The reason is simple: corruption, selfishness and shortsideness among our technocrats and politicians. Policies that could help the poor remain unimplemented; while pursuit of misguided policies for external (international) adulation from the G7 instead is paramount.

    With regards to more protectionist policies to allow internal development, even the World Bank and the IMF are starting to change their stances. A solid model is what Japan did. They shepherded the development of their internal industries while putting in place the foundation for an eventual marketing of their goods and services internationally. What becomes key here is identifying those areas where we can excel and developing them. Eco-tourism, cultural tourism, agriculture, high value manufacturing, knowledge-based services, research and development and so forth.

    The ultimate victims are the impoverished. This is why I absolutely cannot abide by those who defend the GMA administration and tout her so-called fiscal and economic gains.

    And by the way, the actual question here is: If economic improvements have been so wonderful, how is possible that our poverty situation has not, at the very least, plateaued? Why, instead, has the situation worsened?


  4. Contemptible + A Discourse on Parliamentary Systems

    My candidate is Mr. Constitutional Reform - FROM A DISTANCE By Carmen N. Pedrosa | The Philippine Star News Opinion

    My position that this election should not be taking place leads me no alternative but to have no candidate to endorse. It would be contradictory if I did. If I am against presidential elections then I should have no candidate. I will vote because it is a citizen’s duty. But who I will vote for is a private matter.

    I did not think my contempt for this woman could reach any lower levels; until today.

    She has just declared that she supports overturning our constitution and favors keeping GMA in power.

    Even within her columns she does not make any sense. I have no candidate, I do not think there should be elections, but I am voting anyway.

    If she truly did not believe these elections were warranted she would not be voting. But, I find it curious that she says she will be voting for someone, but refuses to divulge who. Obviously, in doing so we will fully understand the extent of her bias.

    I am highly entertained by her martyr like need to set herself as some sort of paragon of democracy.  Even though, it is obvious that she is instead agitating to subvert our democratic institutions.

    By the way, from what transcription did she pull the interview? She already is a known plagiarist, I would not put it past her to doctor the transcription of an interview to fit her personal bias.

    The Philippines also has such projects but we are immobilized by constant bickering and carping dedicated to presidential elections for the sake of the oligarchy and not the people. He talked about “the casinos and integrated resort from which they hope to create some 20,000, 30,000 jobs for us”.

    These lines right here as helped crystallize perfectly why I consider her an idiot.

    1. Our version of democracy is actually one of the most direct of all democracies in the world. It is a mix of representative and national; with our president, vice president and senators being directly elected by the people.  In the US, for example, the president and vice president are elected via the electoral college.  Senators represent states, not the nation.  The issue is not the type of democracy that we have, but the level of the education of our electorate. And by the way, isn’t it curious that the make up of our oligarchs has shifted dramatically?  Now they are Martial Law and post-Martial Law figures.  GMA (her patron) is one of the new breed of oligarchs.  The concept of the Spanish oligarchy is dead.
    2. One of the chief issues in the country are warlords and regionalism. This has not changed. A parliamentary system will further strengthen existing regional oligarchies and power structures; I do not think she realizes this. And if she actually does, then she is even more dangerous and contemptible than I originally thought. Imagine a people like the Ampatuans being able to actively participate in national politics and government.  Imagine that.  Parliamentary systems work when there exists an educated and ruling class that looks after the well-being of the state.  This does not exist in the Philippines to a large extent. And quite honestly, with our predilection for regionalism, it will not for many years.
    3. Further, putting parliamentary system, which she clearly favors, puts the power to elect the leader of a government in the hands of the parliament. This means that legislative and executive powers rest in the hands of a corrupt ruling class.  Again, consider the current make-up of the political powers.  Consider the Arroyos, the Garcias, the Dumpits, the Ortegas, the Estradas, the Marcoses, the Osmenas and so forth. Highly corrupt political families that have continually used and abused the trust of the Filipinos. Then understand that in a parliamentary system, even more power will be put in their hands.  I do not know, but why am I the only one who seems to see that this would be a horrible horrible reality for the Philippines? Can you imagine if FDR was able to put himself in position as prime minister? Or if GMA is able to put herself in position as prime minister? They could conceivably control the country for decades - dictatorship via parliamentary system.
    4. The argument for a parliamentary system rests with the idea that the prime minister rules only because of consensus among parliament parties.  Again, do we not see the problem here? If our government, as is presently constituted, is open to gross corruption and graft via the pork barrel mechanism, could we imagine if they also have the opportunity to elect the ruling figure of the government? The same people in power today, would constitute the parliament; except they would have even more power. The ability to select the leader of a country is taken from the hands of the people and placed in the hands of the new oligarchy. If they abuse the rule of law and the powers they have today, imagine if they had an even broader mandate. Look at the House of Representatives and the Senate and well-understand:  Those will be the people in charge under a parliamentary system. Those people would have more power than they do today, more control of the government and its functions.  The Filipino people would have even less power.
    5. Her continued argument that presidential elections are a waste of time is a farce. Imagine this:  Ramos could still be in power and his policies destroyed our economy. In a parliamentary system, we would not have a recourse for removing him. At this very moment, through all of the scandals of GMA, the Filipino people would have no recourse to remove her from power.  Pedrosa is effectively advocating for removing the voting power of the Filipinos and placing it in the hands of the current oligarchy.  She is an elitist masquerading as pro-Filipino. A hypocrite who does not think the Filipino is capable of being a functioning member of a democracy.
    6. If it is not obvious by now, changing our form of government is a panacea; it does nothing to fix the underlying ills that exist in this country. Nothing at all. If anything it will only exacerbate the problems that exist.
    7. Good to know, also, that she favors building casinos.  By extension then, she believes that the continued exploitation of the Filipino in terms of vice trade and the sex trade is a good thing.  The Philippines is in clear and present danger of becoming the red light district of Asia. She is clearly advocating for this. More than 300,000 Filipinas and children are forcibly trafficked into the sex trade each year.  There are over 100,000 child prostitutes in the country today. By supporting building more casinos, she is favoring continuing this trend. And do not be naive, more casinos equals more prostitution and sex trafficking.  For an example, look to Olongapo City.

    If it has not become clear, it should be by now. I absolutely think that Carmen Pedrosa, as a so-called journalist, is a danger to the Philippines. She is nothing less than the worst example of a political paid hack.

    Let me be clear, our constitution is flawed in many ways and requires amending. But our system of government as is currently constituted (democracy) is the best chance to fix the Philippines today. The reason is simple: the power to chart the course of the country rests with the people. I will always, always be against any move to abrogate the power and influence of the people.

    The laws and the structure of the government is not the problem. The root cause is not corruption or graft or the oligarchy or anything else. The problem is, we as a voting public continue be mired in things like politics of personality, not issue-based discourse. Once the education level of the country increases, and Filipinos become more politically and socially aware, there will be a change in the quality of our elected politicians.

    A democracy is what our Founding Fathers believed was the best possible solution to create a modern-nation state in the Philippines; I tend to agree with them.

  5. Why Carmen Pedrosa is a compromised columnist:

    “Another president who became congressman” April 4,  2010:

    She will not be alone in pushing for those reforms. She is no longer president and all the fear that she can make it possible to shift to parliamentary government once she becomes congresswoman is ill founded. There are enough lawmakers in the House of Representatives who favor constitutional reform but they cannot do anything about the flawed provisions on revision in the 1987 Constitution. The Constitution will have to be amended before it can be amended. How that can be overcome remains to be seen.

    But if she does lead Congress to push for constitutional reform she would have served the Filipino nation far greater than any infrastructure she has built or a stable economy that she nurtured as President.

    It has been fairly clear that she is a pro-parliamentary advocate. Some may confuse this with her desire to ‘fix’ the political system here. Maybe at one point it was. But this desire has been seriously compromised by her close contact with GMA. At certain points in her columns she has even tried to apologize on behalf of the GMA administration.

    As we know, the culture community was wiped out, the boards of the CCP, NHI and National Museum unilaterally removed. Those who supported GMA and Cecile Alvarez by extension were placed in positions of authority:

    “A sentimental journey” April 11, 2010:

    “…I received word from co-trustees of the Board of the Cultural Center of the Philippines that they have nominated and voted me in as Chairman. “ 

    Throughout her recent columns, the anti-Noynoy rhetoric, spurred and linked to her anger and hatred of Cory’s administration, has risen to higher and higher levels of hysterical ranting. The entertaining part is when she has begun to weave unsubstantiated stories of US intervention and propping up of Noynoy-Mar tandem. Completely ignoring the continual US support of GMA as she pushed anti-Filipino free trade policies. She has become inconsistent even in this. On the one hand praising the US as a country, on the other lambasting them. Curious, that it was to the US where she fled during Martial Law exile; the same US that supported Marcos.

    Curious then that she lambasts the US for expressing a desire to see elections run smoothly in May. I guess her does not want them to run smoothly.

    While I am no Noynoy apologist, and have serious reservations about his educational policies, her nonsensical rantings are damaging in a broad sense; they (like Esposo) do nothing to further voter education.

    “The Issue is still Noynoys cluelessness” April 10, 2010:

    “Therefore Filipinos who value the country’s independence must close ranks to stop the perfidy. Let us not be misled into electing an “incompetent little boy” in the name of good governance.”

    “Dangerous games” March 20, 2010:

    “It is time we stop the charade. Noynoy was put up to frustrate constitutional reform, a regularly recurring phenomenon throughout our postcolonial history. I am less against Noynoy as I am against the people who have set him up for May 2010. Noynoy’s candidacy symbolizes unconscionable interference in our national life. We must resist it.”

    Here then we know what she fears. Someone being in power to prevent her patron from pushing for a parliamentary system. I wonder though: What does Pedrosa really think a parliamentary system will do? How will it help the Philippines? She does not make this case, instead of devolving further and further into black propaganda and hate-filled mudslinging.

    “A clincher” April 24, 2010:

    “I did not want to write about Noynoy’s mental sickness. In a political campaign season, it looked like black propaganda from rival politicians

    "The Issue is still Noynoys cluelessness" April 10, 2010:

    For this reason alone, it is anybody but Noynoy. (And for the sake of accuracy also Erap, although he is not a threat).

    Whenever Pedrosa cries about bias in media, keep in mind her agenda. She is one of the worst of the worst in terms of bias and hypocrisy. To her credit though, she has been blatant about it.

    By the way, in reviewing her recent columns I came across this:

    (It is my opinion that the psychiatric report on Noynoy was unnecessary; more of an overkill. He is not qualified nor deserving to be president of this country period, period, period.)

    In light of that, don’t forget her comments from today:

    Noynoy’s mental illness was a recurring problem, exploding in bouts while a student in Ateneo and again when they lived in exile in Boston. That belies claims he has been cured.

    (Aquino’s household help have said he regularly takes seroquel and abilify, both medicines for mental illness. It is alleged that he is suffering a variant of labile disorder. Dr. SamVaknin writes that the “main dynamic in the Borderline Personality Disorder is abandonment anxiety.”

    I love watching people hang themselves. Obviously, she’s having to ramp up the black propaganda and rhetoric, the more criticisms her patron (GMA) receives.

    Her inability to substantiate her innuendos, relying on things like,  ”I heard” or “Someone told me” or “Someone in the future will make the connections” speak to someone who is spinning fairy-tales and fantastical scenarios. 

    I hate to call someone a liar. But in her case it is, among other things, an apt description.