1. Time to stock up on some tissues

    Honor even in defeat - COMMONSENSE By Marichu A. Villanueva | The Philippine Star News Opinion

    They may be vanquished, ran over and turned bloodied by the mean campaign machinery of their rivals. But they kept their honor even as they bowed out from the just concluded presidential race with their heads held up high. 

    *whine whine whine* *whine whine* Boo-fucking-hoo.

    Wait, let me play your the world’s smallest violin. Tell me another sad sob story.

    Noynoy is soooo meeeeaaaaan.

    Of all the nine presidential candidates, Villar got the most of the muckraking and black propaganda in media to text blasts where he was tagged as “Villa-rroyo” or administration-backed candidate. Legarda likewise suffered the brunt of nasty text blasts and other sludge that came out during the 90-day campaign period. Following the lead of Villar, Legarda formally accepted her defeat to Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay who is leading in the partial official results of the vice presidential contest.

    Some of the chief muck-rakers in this campaign were not pro-Aquino, suffice it to say (Pedrosa and Cunanan come to mind). And, other than Senator Gordon who was continually called an asshole, none were attacked as personally as Noynoy (retarded/autistic/mentally deficient/depressed/suicidal).

    Most of the contentions against Villar were  not personal (although there were some and I do not condone them and I am on record as criticizing Esposo), but related to his claims of poverty and wealth accumulation. By running on a platform of anti-poverty and his chief message being, “I was poor look at what I did”, with his roots figuring prominently in his advertisements, it became an issue. Because he made it so.

    And with regards to Legarda, I distinctly remember her saying she’ll never run with Villar. Oops.

    So come on, quite whining. Show the same kind of grace that your candidates did and stop making excuses.


  2. "

    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?


  3. 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.


  4. 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?

  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.