A letter to President Aquino, and his response

[Photo source: CNN Philippines]

Note from editor:

I thank Rachel Peralta for sharing her correspondence with former President of the Philippines, Benigno S. Aquino III, and thank President Aquino for his graciousness in allowing her to handle the correspondence as she wishes. Many of us wonder what the President thinks about things, and here we have new insights. I imagine that critics will criticize. And others will find inspiration. In that regard, we are allowed to define ourselves. JA


199 Responses to “A letter to President Aquino, and his response”
  1. “We sought to demonstrate to Filipinos that they deserved.. a better state in life”.

    Seems most Filipinos don’t believe they deserve better – and worse, even hate those who do.

    Are they carabaos who seek the mud as a matter of course, just because it is usually cool there?

    • karlgarcia says:

      @Irineo, we have talked anout this more than once.

      If I do not know you Irineo, I would think that your comnents are anti-pinoyish and getrealistish.

      But I do know that you care maybe they (the ones mentioned) think what they are doing is tough love, but they crossed the as far as I am concerned.

      Bottom line is there are no longer just 16 million maybe add defectors and supporters of defectors ( I think Sabtang Basco gave me that idea)

      I think JP said PdP may be wanting a one party rule ala Communist party in China.

      • True, my comments sometimes are negative. The question is, how many people belong to the group that has crossed the line, how many are just conforming outwardly and how many are back in the fold or never went beyond the pale? I really don’t know.

        The nationwide matter of wearing red vs. wearing uniform (or white) for court employees is one such very significant “choose your side” moment. The other one I think is how many still see De Lima as a drug queen inspite of sufficient indications to the contrary like a) the drug trade in Bilibid is alive without her and b) those who testified against her have been set free by the DOJ. A person not bent on useless vengeance will let her go just like Espinosa et al.

        I don’t even expect too much like people really going by “innocent until proven guilty” as the traditional Filipino mindset DOES go more towards “guilt until proven innocent”, like Roque telling Tauli-Corpuz she can “prove her innocence in court” as if she had to do that at all..

        • Of course Tokhang and PNP subpoena go in the direction of the Chinese principle of “Leniency to those who confess, Severity to those who resist”.

          The assumption being that the authorities are by default right and the citizen is lying. Therefore it still can amount to a Borg-like destruction of individuality (resistance is futile), or like in Invasion of the Bodysnatchers where you don’t know who is still on the human side.

          • karlgarcia says:

            Again thanks for your insights.
            I too want to say this too shall pass.

            On another note,
            I told myself that I am not an activist because all I do is comment on blogs, then I watched a CNN ad about activism, and small steps or acts do matter, so I guess we are all activists in our own way.

            • Philip Jr. Lustre wrote something about social media being the street of modern times. Meaning that you need to develop and distill ideas properly first before bringing them out into the street or into action. Of course real face-to-face dialog or community action is a nice thing as well. To each his own contribution, I remember someone telling me once at CPM. And Manong Sonny said that each seed (idea) that falls on fertile ground is not wasted – this is of course very much the Catholic analogy of the mustard seed of faith (Matthew 17:20)..

  2. We miss the President. It is hard to muster enthusiasm in these dark times. The anti dilawan narrative has effectively neutered his influence in mainstream media. The whataboutism that comprises most of the discourse in social media and mainstream media places the pressure on all of us including him to go to the front lines, the battlegrounds and inform, teach people one pair of ears at a time if need be. We have lousy civics/Government subjects in highschool and it has become the bane of intelligent discourse. In form teach convert dutertard and yellowtards to Filipinos. I pray he still has it in him to do the teaching. I am sure there are a sizeable number wanting to be taught.

    • Discourse in the Philippines has degraded to the point that it is mostly angry babble going absolutely nowhere. President Aquino’s letter is a welcome, refreshing calm, a chance to pause and be thankful for the intelligence and good values that remain in many people, under the patina of angry discourse.

      • Yes it seems out of place in the Philippines we are currently living in.

      • .This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper.

        So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life, a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.

        from FDR inauguration.

        Hope we as a people can read this and honestly believe it is referring to us.

        • It is a time to speak the truth. People who promote lies are not defending the Constitution or exercising free speech. They are maliciously attacking what the Constitution stands for. In that context, they are an enemy.

  3. edgar lores says:

    1. Hmm. The letter is from RP, Rachel Peralta, but it could very well come from the Republic of the Philippines.

    2. Rachel says, ”Fighting for the country is like unrequited love.” How true! And yet… and yet the motherland is our grounding. Our likes and dislikes, our hatreds and loves – of the beauty of nature, of the fruits of the land, of the bounty of the harvest, of the affinity with our kinfolk – are the boundaries, the spectrum, of our native existence.

    3. PNoy, in his reply, touches on both ends of the spectrum. But he does not utter one negative word as Rachel does with her heartache of “sakit,” “crumbling,” “depressed,” and, yes, “unrequited.”

    3.1. I look for negative feeling words such as “despair,” “anger,” and “hate.” And I look for words of condemnation like “bloodthirsty,” “violent,” and “insane.” But I cannot find any.

    3.2. Oh, there are terms like “solitary confinement” and “isolation” but these are factually stated and not denunciatory in tone.

    3.3. Instead, I find “opposite,” “challenge,” “hope,” and, above all, “faith.”

    3.4. And not one cuss word!

    4. PNoy’s entire message is one of upliftment. It is the message that his administration delivered. And it is a message the country should take to heart.

    5. This, too, shall pass.

    P.S. Thanks, Rachel. Thanks, PNoy.

    • “4. PNoy’s entire message is one of upliftment. It is the message that his administration delivered. And it is a message the country should take to heart.” The EDSA message.

      Unfortunately that message got caught in traffic or fainted on the stairs going the MRT.. for many a Filipino, just like a romantic feeling can die in all the challenges of married life..

      winging it is good but a some point you need a plan for at least a few things, otherwise the dream has no basis.. in 2010 there was indeed this attempt to return to the dream of 1986 – except that the overwhelming reality 24 years later was too different to allow that to happen.

      so a part of the Filipino public shifted from the old dream to dreamlessness, i.e. cynicism.

      “Disappointed love is the wellspring of hatred” I have heard. Tokhang and anti-yellow comes from the disappointment at a dream not realized. Maybe that dream’s time is up, forever. Maybe a more pragmatic and measurable plan beyond dream and nightmare is needed?

      • President Aquino was the most popular President at the time he left office, even subsequent to the bashing’s from INC and his uncle, the Arroyo forces, the Marcos forces, the leftists, and Poe’s (Mamasapano). The Tordesillas, Dados, Changcos, Wallace’s, and anyone else with an agenda to push. I think it had less to do with dreams than crabs and vengeance from opportunistic, wholly unpatriotic elites.

        • And yet 80% of the same Filipino people who give high ratings to Aquino also trust Duterte.

          Something doesn’t quite add up there. Or is there a bit of schizophrenia in Filipinos?

          • I’ll provide an insight in my next article, probably Monday. It’s simple, really. And the discovery opens up a path to SUCCESSFUL opposition.

            Chemrock is running Friday.

            • If you need a better tease, think about why Aquino was popular in spite of the political bashing’s, and why Duterte is popular in spite of horrific leadership. The answer is not in Aquino or Duterte, but in what people with little hope of betterment need.

              • NHerrera says:


                Whether in private or in government, there is a group who believe themselves to be Elite. Consciously, unconsciously or affectedly, the people who populate this group believe themselves to possess the elements of the definition:

                Elite = a person considered superior by others or by themselves, as in intellect, talent, power, wealth, or position in society.

                The problem, I believe, and this applies in great measures to the Philippines is that the elite — wrongly — believes in addition that they are also superior in morals and character. And this they are able to communicate to the non-elite lacking the tools to distinguish the genuine from the bullshit, aided moreover by favors or money. This explains, in my opinion, why Aquino during his time, and Duterte during the present time are popular. This seems to be the “mathematical” constant in the Philippines.

              • I suppose perceived superiority could be involved. It always amazed me how I am given such special consideration as a white man. I don’t want to give away my upcoming blog, but I would say we need to look for something within the masses rather than a characteristic of the leaders or elite class. I hope that is coy enough to start some head scratching.

              • NHerrera says:

                Yes, the other side of the coin is as important. I am looking forward to that blog. It will most probably look at the matter afresh beyond the conditioned cultural or related thing we have discussed here in previous blog articles.

            • karlgarcia says:

              @ Irineo,
              I have no idea what year you have started following benignzero but “its simple really” is a reference to benignzero.(in case you don’t know)

          • andrewlim8 says:


            The puzzlement is similar to the Filipino who jaywalks and is nearly sideswiped but is smiling all the time, the disaster victim still all smiles waving to the camera.

            One theory? Brutal one: there’s nothing much in there, so no judgments, no introspection, no remembering, no learning. No values, no knowledge. Not much.

            Just reacting to what’s in front of you. Island party mentality.

            Which could explain the perpetual smile, the hospitality.

      • edgar lores says:

        I have heard “Unrequited love makes the heart grow stronger and wiser.”

        Actually, I didn’t hear it. I made it up.

        But I think it’s true for many people… as it was for me.

        I agree EDSA is our Boulevard of Broken Dreams and that we should maintain and repair it with our eyes wide open.

        I take PNoy’s message in the context of Rachel’s letter. What do you say to a heartbroken girl?

        Outside of that context, I would take PNoy’s message of faith to be… somewhat fatalistic. On FB, the desperation is such that believers are invoking the Imprecatory Psalms on Duterte’s head.

        But PNoy is entitled to his faith and his message of faith… as everyone is. In Pnoy’s case, he has known the jagged edges of tragedy and the stuff of real nightmares. He lived through it. He struggled against it. And he took a bullet from it. He has known disaster and triumph and has come to some sort of calm reconciliation.

        What did he say? He said, “Each challenge that we had to face basically prepared us for the greater challenge that would follow, and that in turn prepared us for the next challenge down the line.”

        So preparation is key. But even the most rational of planning requires faith in fair outcomes.

        I would prefer a faith and reliance on human goodness — on the divine within — but that’s just me.

    • Hi Edgar,

      Thank you for your comment. It makes me not regret sharing our correspondence 🙂 Honestly, I didn’t expect that he’d want to reply, I just wrote him out of depression and getting burnt out. I’m glad he did. It was perfect timing too. His reply came when Chief Justice Sereno was forced to take a leave. I would’ve been so depressed again to even get off my feet, if not for his encouraging words. I decided to share it because I see there are people like me who are already getting tired and burnt out.


      • I forgot to mention, a friend also told me that RP can also mean Republic of the Philippines. 🙂 I’m glad there’s that coincidence.

        • edgar lores says:

          Hi Rachel,

          It’s the first thing that struck me. The coincidence, the synchronicity, is serendipitous. (I like 5-syllable words.)

          I know the feeling of not wanting to get back on one’s feet. At times, I don’t even want to open my eyes. 😉

          You got hugged by PNoy. And you are sharing that hug with us. That’s a wonderful and generous — and warm — gesture. Thanks.

          From the Land Down Under,

  4. NHerrera says:

    In the previous blog article (Doberman), JP posted the late Senator Miriam’s praises on CJ Sereno. I reacted by writing that the post made my day.

    The current blog article is beyond making my day — it is somewhat overwhelming to me, especially when one reads from the Ex-President something inspirational, something not laced with vulgar language that the current Administration makes as a matter of routine and seems to want the Filipinos to accept vulgarity as something to be proud of.

    There is a natural cycle in events contained in the oft-quoted,

    This too, shall pass,

    referring to both the good and the bad. I hope that more items like the one in the blog hasten the passage of the present — undoubtedly to my mind — bad, emotionally-draining, distorting-Filipino-value part of the cycle.

    Thanks for sharing.

  5. arlene says:

    PNoy’s letter is so uplifting and inspiring. It gives me more hope that what is happening now in our land would come to pass. Good afternoon Joeam. Thank you for publishing these two letters. RP is a representation of mostly frustrated Filipinos like me.

  6. NHerrera says:


    Columnist Rina Jimenez-David writes about Monday’s supposed call by Judges and Court Employees for the resignation of CJ Sereno by wearing Red. Here are items from her column:

    * 20 of 1200 members of the Philippine Judges Association called for CJ Sereno to resign.

    * 4 of 15 court employees association called for Sereno to resign.

    * Court employees in Mandaue and Cebu agreed to report for work wearing their uniforms [instead of wearing Red to support the call for Sereno to resign]. One of them said: “We’re public servants, not puppets.”

    * Supreme Court administrator Midas Marquez, [who even] sent word to some courts that he would be visiting them that day, perhaps as a way of pressuring judges and employees to obey the “red summons.”

    * [Former SC CJ] Davide said, [the call to resign is]“far worse than the impeachment and quo warranto.” It is, he said, “condemning without the evidence, judging before hearing, applying additional political pressure on the Chief Magistrate, rather than according her the rights to a fair trial, to substantive and procedural due process, and even to the rule of law.” In other words, exactly what judges are supposed to do.

    (Bolding, mine.)


  7. Thank you RP and PNoy for a glimpse of your personal communication. Joe, thank you for sharing this with us.

    I can relate to RP’s frustration and I am soothed by PNoy’s calmness and his answers that are devoid of malice and negativity.

    If only we could have a do over so we can all wake up tomorrow in a civil and compassionate world…

  8. I do agree with Pinoy that in God’s time everything will come to order, but sometimes I feel hopeless and not seeing even a flicker of light with what’s going on.

  9. Herman says:

    why do i share the same sentiments as that of RP? then PNoy’s reply of “having to undergo the complete opposite to…” sounds quite damning. but we pray. but we believe, but we strive.

  10. “Perhaps we really have to undergo the complete opposite”… IF that opposite is still reversible..

    I did mention at times that those who say NOTHING was achieved in 30 years since EDSA should just look at how THIN the people were then, in their white shirts and jeans, even middle class folks.

    No Philhealth then, no 4Ps. 50% poverty incidence as opposed to around 25% today. Of course a society that was much less free. Nobody would have dared tell cops “please stop, i have exams” – which is why Kian’s killing was such an unpleasant flashback, in those days you didn’t “complain” because any “counter” was potentially fatal. Plus it was rare for people to travel, even to the near abroad like HK, Singapore, Japan – you either had work there or a conference or were nearly “rich”. But those who forget to count their blessings sometimes really lose even what they took for granted.

  11. Popoy Del R. Cartanio says:

    As I search my old file, let us listen to a classic artist singing a classic song:


    • Popoy Del R. Cartanio says:

      Says a simple song: Let’s start from the very beginning of a probable book THE SON OF ICONS, a wannabe Shakespearean long monologue but not like the Greece’s oracle. Read on because Joe Am says TSoH has lots of bytes for common sense, otherwise let it be deleted if it turned out as prescience of nonsense.

      From the beginning Noynoy was not even dressed in track field sando and jersey and rubber shoes to run the dirty race . .
      After the death in 2009 of his mother, an Icon of Philippine democracy . . .

      Noynoy’s To Be or Not To Be

      The cacophony of noises increases in decibels as hacks and followers of varied interests position themselves on both sides of the starting line for the 2010 presidential race. A quiet onlooker Senator Benigno “Noynoy” C. Aquino Jr. III is being pushed to the line to contest the race.

      To be a presidential candidate or not to be a candidate at all should not be Noynoy’s dilemma in next year’s presidential election. In Philippine politics what will be will be. Dirt can flood the landscape. But there was that slim chance like that which unexpectedly materialized when a fresh clean flower like his Mom Cory appeared and floated among the political debris. That time nobody was powerful enough to stop that.

      To let the mind ascends even farther, for those who failed to have learned its lessons, history tends to repeat itself even under different circumstances by different actors. Like a flood of political dregs and trivia, there is no stopping the march of history. If Noynoy is in it, then so be it. But no one knew –and should claim to know—like during the time when Noynoy’s dad was shot dead at the tarmac that his Mom will turn clean president and be part of proud history.

      Regardless of who Noynoy is, what he can do, no one can really know. What anyone will profess to know, speaks in relation to himself. Anyone’s self-interest, and the limits of his knowledge and experience defines the worth of his opinion. It’s like saying Noynoy will be good President to me and therefore for the country too. If he is bad for me, then it is bad for the country too. Arguments for or against Noynoy becoming a good president shall only travel in that natural free way of self interest and prejudice. Quite distant to national or public interest.

      In their young life, when they were at the gates of a hall of fame and greatness, nobody really knew who they really were; what they will become. Magsaysay the mechanic, Gandhi the weaver, Lincoln the woodsman, or Mandela the political prisoner. They led their countrymen by deed and example. No signs at all of what they can become when they heeded the call to ride the flow of events. These men seemingly appeared from nowhere during troubled times. And the Philippines is in trouble now. Deep trouble than any Filipino will accept. The Filipinos were categorical and resounding during Cory’s funeral. The sycophants who before were shouting there’s no one, no leader to take the helm of the nation SHOULD SHUT UP NOW. The others who were not there should listen to the multitudes who braved the rains.

      On the contrary in much the same way, family and neighbours will say: He was such a good boy. Won’t hurt a fly. So intelligent and thoughtful. no one not even his teachers knew before hand he can kill 30 people just like that. Who will say that many had incorrectly predicted that some leaders will order to start a war, bomb cities, gassed millions, steal billions? Indeed, no one. Only hindsight can. Retrospectively.

      The point hammered at this point is we can say something. Hoping that by so doing, we can diminish subjective forecasts and misleads about speculations on Noynoy’s to be or not to be president.

      There are some things, pros and cons to go by Noynoy’s fitness to be president. He is qualified if he qualifies as required by law. If he is physically and mentally healthy then he is fit. The integrity and honesty of the members of his immediate family contributes positively. If a parent was once an honest president, then he can be too. This is as credible as that example of a bad president whose parent may have been also a bad president bested only by his offspring. Just as a mango tree will bear only mango fruits, so is a snake will give birth to only a snake, a saying that is gospel to Filipinos. It can be said too, that many beliefs had been modified or rendered irrelevant by technology. Fruits had been made rotten by chemicals just as politicians sired by good ones had been corrupted by his polluted environment.

      The cons are factual and not a mere invention. Noynoy is not presidentiable. Doesn’t look one and never was a presidentiable even in the tabloids. And that tells it all. A judgment of the times.

      But really, who can really know? Even Noynoy doesn’t seemed to know. He was reported to have asked in effect: “Will my candidacy really result in positive change for the country?” He probably meant if he wins, he is not even sure his presidency will produce positive change for the country. He seemed unconvinced. Will he also get the same support he got for the presidency when he try to institute change for the country?

      He was not even thinking like a politician like Barack Obama. Unlike Obama he doesn’t want to ran just to raise the hopes of the people when nothing really will happen. Obama is widely known as superior in rhetoric, as the apostle and bearer of hope and was believed and embraced by the multitudes with the shouts of: WE CAN. WE CAN. Nothing of that sort inhabits Noynoy’s imagination.

      Those who experienced it, especially the humble and self confident can believe that position makes the man (but not the hopeless or useless man). Even the uniform or the attire makes the man. In the same manner that a position or a uniform or attire can be soiled and made disgraceful by its wearer. A man denied a brush, paints and canvass will never have a chance to prove he can be a good painter. Monching Magsaysay and Nelson Mandela will never know the limits of the good they can do without the bestowed mantle of presidency. They became presidents without being considered presidentiables (a polluted concoction in media traposphere).

      The fact is, no one had imagined Noynoy to be a senator until he became one. That he can do a clean job without photo-ops and media build up. To many politicians his image of young congressman remains indelible. Now it’s being a senator’s image that tends to persist. The presidency and the senate are poles apart. The roles are oil and water. The presidency commands and leads while the senate backups and supports. There is no reliable predictive indicators on positive congruence of senator to president. An experienced and skill full senator doesn’t mean a good president. Ditto for a slow performing senator. A senator may turn out to be a good president when he becomes one. The senate contrary to popular opinion is not necessarily a reliable training center for future presidents. The senate can, even in the absence of intent and purpose train good senators to become bad presidents.

      To digress, to be flippant: so what if the guy is only a paramedic, not a doctor. Why not if he can stop the haemorrhage, if he can re start the heart with a defibrillator. Then you can give the patient a chance to heal himself. Likewise, even a buffoon will know that in a community of the blind a one-eyed man will be a better leader if two-eyed men are abusive. But that’s neither here nor there.

      It is in Noynoy’s genes, in his blood and veins to do good for his fellowmen. There’s nothing antecedent that will prove otherwise. It’s only up to him. To fail. The nation is aware of his capital: the life of his dad, the clean service to the nation by his mom, his sisters rare and incredible disinterest of the awesome opportunities to be rich via government. Indeed, not much non-monetary capital but enough to give him a good start.

      But there’s one caveat Noynoy must bear in mind. One that is theoretical and at the same time very real. Theoretically, democratic politics has a built-in obstruction to good leadership. A Canadian philosopher recently said: “The basic tenet of all democratic politics is a fiction.” To paraphrase him: The fact that you are born in a democratic country gives you power on how it will be ruled when you become part of the majority. Moreover, because it is the rule of the majority, a rule by numbers, then numbers can be taken to mean quality. This will suggest that majoritarian choices and decisions are assumed by democratic tenet to be quality choices and decisions. This is fiction because this never happens. Majority rule is curtailed if not hijacked by minority or elite rule. The powerful few rules the large but weak majority.

      A national leader put into power by an overwhelming majority should be wide awake to this fiction lest he suffered the fate of Erap who seemed not to know it even now. The obstacle to successful national leadership can be very real. Death may cut leadership in midstream—as what happened to Abraham Lincoln, Jack Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Mahatma Gandhi and possibly Magsaysay—though it may had hastened attainment of their revered place in history.

      That probably was the unsaid point of Noynoy. An inner voice that says no leader even if overwhelmingly supported by a majority can guarantee social and political change because of a fiction in the tenet of democratic politics.

      This piece is neither a vote for Noynoy nor a diatribe against all other aspirants. It’s a get well wish for the country.
      Published sometime in August 2009 in BALITA , Toronto’s largest circulating Filipino Community Newspaper.

      • edgar lores says:

        “It is in Noynoy’s genes, in his blood and veins to do good for his fellowmen.

        That was a statement of fact and, probably, of faith. And faith was rewarded.

      • sonny says:

        From metaphors of Dobermans & Rotweillers to a direct analysis of what is the nature of what makes the stuff of messiahship one can add the rare occurrence of materials whose discovered function is to catalyze difficult situations. The role of catalyst is of two kinds: the kind that is consumed in the change and the kind that is not. The latter kind can be found maybe only in the chemical world, such as the noble metals, e.g. Palladium and Gold. Political change such as mixing of poverty, social justice, power and opulence requires immolation of some kind of the catalytic agent: Magsaysay, Ghandi on a local scale and Jesus Christ on the universal scale.

        (Joe, Pls. delete if “cryptic,”) 🙂

  12. Sup says:

    1 Dutere withdraw from Rome Statute
    2 Gordon Blue Ribbon file criminal case against Aquino over Dengvaxia…
    It is never boring in the Philippines……

    • chemrock says:

      Meanwhile Vietnam surpasses Philippines in econmic performance. Cambodia n Myanmar catching up.

    • edgar lores says:

      I read the news of Duterte’s ICC withdrawal from the Inquirer.

      Immediately, the question arose: Can Duterte withdraw unilaterally?

      • edgar lores says:

        Sorry, for the incomplete comment. To continue…

        At the back of my mind was the constitutional provision that treaties require the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate.

        I turned to Rappler and, indeed, there was a reference to the possibility of the Senate’s participation. It said that the Senate had a resolution requiring its participation in the termination of any treaty, but that the resolution had not been adopted.

        Nevertheless, I am of the opinion that Duterte cannot act unilaterally on this matter.

  13. Alice Lim says:

    Thanks PNoy. You are really inspiring. You honor your mother and your father’s legacy. There are many Filipinos who are intelligent, and do care. They are busier with life, actually living so they don’t spend as much time on social media. There are also paid trolls. Sadly, there’s a lot of #illgottenwealth and a group that didn’t learn to make money from legitimate business. Instead seeking TRaPo as the easiest means to keep up with a certain lifestyle they have accustomed to. We should learn to ” live simply so that others may simply live “.

  14. karlgarcia says:

    Swimming sideways when there is a rip tide and not struggling when trapped in a quicksand.
    It may sound not fighting just to survive, but it is really surviving to continue to fight.

    On depression, I have ldealt with depression, i have learned how to deal with it with the help of doctors, friends and family.

    One suggestion was staying away from online discussions and that was befiore nor during the fb and twitter, but fb and twitter is already part of our lives, you can not just shun it (maybe Bill can) if it is not fb or twitter is would be forums ( Bill has not completely shunned it afterall).


    RP or YP many thanks for sharing your correspondence.
    You are not alone.

    • NHerrera says:


      It is at times like this, that Rudyard Kipling’s “IF” poem makes a lot of sense. (I believe edgar quoted a few lines earlier.)

      If you can keep your head when all about you
      Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
      If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
      But make allowance for their doubting too.
      If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
      Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
      Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
      And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:

      If you can dream—and not make dreams your master;
      If you can think—and not make thoughts your aim;
      If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster,
      And treat those two impostors just the same;
      If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
      Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
      Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
      And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:

      If you can make a heap of all your winnings
      And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
      And lose, and start again at your beginnings
      And never breathe a word about your loss;
      If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
      To serve your turn long after they are gone,
      And so hold on when there is nothing in you
      Except the Will which says to them: “Hold on!”

      If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
      Or walk with Kings—nor lose the common touch,
      If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
      If all men count with you, but none too much;
      If you can fill the unforgiving minute
      With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
      Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
      And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!

    • “..but it is really surviving to continue to fight.”

      yes! i want myself and others to not give up.

      it was tempting to just let the country learn on its own when I was in another country for a few days. I was stress-free, I was too busy having fun to even read tweets. But whenever I see something admirable in that country, like more than decent public restrooms, free fast wifi anywhere, very nice airport, I couldn’t help but feel bad for my own country. How much I want it to be that way, and how the previous admin envisioned it, and how we’re back to scratch (or even less than scratch), except for the ongoing and just completed infrastructure. i guess I just don’t want their effort go to waste so I’m trying to help save whatever’s left. plus probably unreal and cheesy for some, but I think of all the people who don’t have a voice and can’t even afford to get tired.

      i tried to deactivate twitter once, and i only lasted overnight without it. haha.

      you can call me Rachel. thanks too. 🙂

      • karlgarcia says:

        Thanks again and you are welcome, Rachel. 🙂
        With regards I have not tried twitter my self, but I read some tweets once in a while.
        With fb, I set a time limt.
        Best regards to you, Rachel.

      • sonny says:

        Sad to say,the year was 1969 for me, newly credentialed educationally but sorely lacking in social conscience of things beyond self and family;untrained in and detached from political citizenship; didn’t find anything terribly wrong with guys urinating outside of designated sanitary stations nor affected by the ubiquity of beggars in the streets. Sad, really sad.

    • I find Facebook is an exercise ground where one can practice not falling for emotional traps. Parekoy taught me a lot about that, too.

      • karlgarcia says:

        Parekoy has indeed taught us a lesson or two in ….. many things.

        • Sup says:

          parekoy is ”ready” to step in anytime….. 😉

          From Raissa

          Parekoy says

          March 12, 2018 at 11:09 PM


          Thank you for your concern but I’m still alive and kicking!

          I’m quite busy that is why I seldom post here in Raissa’s blog. Also Raissa seems not putting any effort to make this site as interesting as it was before.

          I usually go to Pinoy Ako Blog for Jover is really putting her heart out to combat the propaganda and fake news that Duterte Admin are propagating and Jover keeps the torch alight, while Raissa’s seems neglecting hers, per my humble observation.

          Joeam, though I usually butt heads with him, seems keeping his regulars participating though he seems struggling on how to reach a wider readership outside the erudite class. Though my name pops up occasionally when mentioned by Sup, Karl, or Ireneo, Joeam tried his best to avoid even acknowledging my name and just took the usually lame swipe to hurl insult on someone who really beat his ass, called out his arrogance and put him on his place. Joeam’s reverence of Aquino and LP largely affected his authenticity as an impartial blogger and that will be an albatross that he needs to wear for the rest of his blogosphere existence.

          • karlgarcia says:

            Not quite regading Joe,Joe said parekoy has a right to his own personalty.

            plus Joe acknowledging parekoy one way or the other in this thread did not happen just once.

            I don’t have to find the particular comment or comments, so I ask parekoy to trust me on this.

            • I find the “struggling on how to reach a wider readership” amusing, when the more frequent thought is, well, “I should get out of this writing business now”, but too many people have asked me to persist. I already reach more people than a foreigner ought to have to reach, for the absence of compelling Filipino discussion blogs. His personal competitiveness, expressed in rude terms, shows that he is still a legend in his own mind and has no idea how to build things that are inclusive of different people. I agree, Pinoy Ako is compelling, and I am proud to consider Jover a friend as well as blogging colleague. As for the burden of the Aquino defense, I am happy to carry it. Smallness is found in those who still do not quite get what President Aquino did for the nation.

              • karlgarcia says:

                His “competitive nature” seems out of touch. Is it really about ” beating up someone’s butt”? I guess if you say touché to him, he will keep score. I don’t know really, when Irineo told him that it is all a game to him, he got mad, maybe he is serious.

            • NHerrera says:

              We can’t be perfect. In the end — re Parekoy and Joe — to my mind, the preponderance of factual items cited by both should be considered.

  15. NHerrera says:

    Reading through a CNN article on the Democrat win over Republican House seat for the 18th District of Pennsylvania, a steel state, I note the item which said “don’t nationalize the race” [use local issues, local language]. Perhaps that is something to keep in mind in the PH in the fight to preserve our democratic way of life — considering, for example, that gut issues in Metro Manila are not the ones in other provinces or towns.

    • I’m not sure I agree with the argument. In California, national policies are threatening to constrain the state’s economy by clamping down on immigration. If the governor does not oppose national policies, he is not doing his job. If people don’t consider national policies on who they select for state offices, they are not doing their job.

    • karlgarcia says:

      They call it their new book, NH.


      Regarding your Metro Manila example, isn’t that the Federalist mega manila argument.
      Like why will our taxes pay for MRT we ate not even using, etc.

      Please do correct me, if I misundestand.

    • NHerrera says:

      Joe, karl: good points both. I suppose, I had in mind when I posted the quote, the discussions we have had in the blog on framing the talk to the locals using gut local issues and in the language they can connect — meaning talk national issues framed in those latter aspects. I agree with your comment: there has to be a balance — nimble is the word that comes to my mind.

  16. LG says:

    PNoy is Presidential in perspective for life. Thanks Rachel for writing to him. Best to all.

  17. Maria Cristina C. Santos says:

    So touching, and yet so inspiring. Nabuhayan ako ng loob, kasi nawawalan na din po ako ng pagasa. Dapat po ay total “surrender” ang lahat ng ito kay God, and on His time (the right time) things will change. Like what had happened in EDSA. Should I ask, “how soon?” oh, God please forgive me. I love you PNoy. You will always be my President.

  18. NHerrera says:

    Thoughts of Stephen Hawking — one of science greats — who just passed away, in a nutshell. I note one item in the video link below that relates to the current blog topic.

    If one is disabled, one should concentrate on things one can do, and not regret the things one can’t do.


    • karlgarcia says:

      RIP Hawking.

    • edgar lores says:

      From Wikipedia:

      In 2006 Hawking posed an open question on the Internet: ‘In a world that is in chaos politically, socially and environmentally, how can the human race sustain another 100 years?’, later clarifying: ‘I don’t know the answer. That is why I asked the question, to get people to think about it, and to be aware of the dangers we now face.’

      “Hawking expressed concern that life on Earth is at risk from a sudden nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus, global warming, or other dangers we have not yet thought of. Such a planet-wide disaster need not result in human extinction if the human race were to be able to colonize additional planets before the disaster. Hawking viewed spaceflight and the colonization of space as necessary for the future of humanity.”

  19. NHerrera says:


    The Political Gospel according to DFA’s Cayetano:

    Presidents, being sovereigns, could be excused for making disrespectful statements but ranking officials of international human rights bodies cannot.

    • NHerrera says:


      Commenters here being just commenters could be excused for making disrespectful statements to the Editor, but the Editor cannot. Somehow, there is something deeply wrong with that math.

      • The denial of accountability is downright artistic these days. Unfortunately, suffering that inevitably results is real.

        • Sup says:

          Good time to type instead of watching tv…… 🙂

          • Sup says:

            Ok, back to TV…….”He” is gone… 🙂

            • karlgarcia says:

              Imagine Roque saying that it is the beginning of the end for ICC.
              Then somewhere there he also said that he was the most active in its ratification.

              • karlgarcia says:

                What happened in the fake news hearing with FB staff as resource persons?

              • I watched for a short time but it was not very compelling. Everybody justifying themselves and not really solving the problem of government issued slander of people like the VP. I wanted to see what Senator Aquino had to say, but Poe was the only one talking. I switched to basketball.

              • NHerrera says:

                Roque’s “beginning of the end for ICC” is exaggerated, to say the least.

                Here are some more nuances from our “respected” Senators — Pacquiao included — on the subject of withdrawal from ICC:


              • karlgarcia says:

                @Joe thanks for that.
                @ NH, I am glad abd relieved that Paquiao will be training in a few weeks.
                @I wish Sotto went back to bowling, and stayed active till forever.

              • When Sotto is in the room, I fall asleep as soon as he starts speaking. If that could be bottled, he’d make millions.

                Speaking of old and forever, I’m looking forward to the Senate Impeachment trial because I think the Gadon/Enrile duo is so full of itself that their chairs will collapse under the extraordinary weight. I’m remembering the last time Enrile promised to ‘reveal the goods’ about Aquino regarding Mamasapano, all the media showed up, and he had absolutely nothing to say, but kept saying it anyway. This is extraordinary stuff, as Chemrock will explain to us in tomorrow morning’s blog.

              • NHerrera says:

                chemrock writing on Gadon/ Enrile at the Senate Impeachment Trial of Sereno — can’t be anything but delicious. As my granddaughter years ago used to say, Now, na!

              • Ah, he is not writing specifically about Gadon/Enrile, he is writing about the craziness of what is transpiring, and to me, Gadon/Enrile personifies it.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Whoa boy NH! haha
                I can’t wait too.
                Enrile’s miracle treatment must have worked. He kept visible after he was out of jail thanks to the SC.

                As for Gadon, never heard of him until he replaced Oliver Lozano as the new impeachment king wannabe.

  20. Popoy Del R. Cartanio says:

    I am searching, I am looking for old files about Noynoy in my old files. What else can an old man DO to keep trolling este blogging? ABANGAN.

    • Popoy Del R. Cartanio says:

      Here’s a SCATTER (not of my brain hopefully) I have surely written but not very sure the essays were published pieces about Noynoy (I consider The Son of Icons) but could be of salience to the present blog. It is my TIME TRAVEL of the improbable one because the body and mind rewind not to a distant past but goes tipsy (not drunkenly) into the future. In the essays, the mental canvass attempts to depict Philippines in the year 2030 as imagined in 2015. It is a SCATTER really and should be taken as such with Noynoy as its molecular variable. There you go!

      “By 2030 the country would have undergone national parliamentary elections held every four years simultaneously with the twelve regional parliaments; massive no nonsense nation building have involved the more than and still growing 121.4 million citizenry from the Barangays to towns, cities and provinces under regional governance. Each region is developing strength like a country by itself. The world led by the United Nations, WB, the IMF, the EEC, the NATO are all increasing their support in this novel cosmic experiment in human rehabilitation and draconian socio-cultural transformation.

      The Filipino diaspora in every nook and corner of the globe are giving more than all out support to this unexpected and unparalleled experiment. This is the resurgence of the interrupted, patented Filipino People’s Bloodless Revolt in EDSA in 1986 . From 1986 to 2030 is 44 years. It’s a long wait for this CHANGE to happen. If PH 2030 will not happen as written here, then condolence and sympathy from the rest of the world may be the unintended expected.

      FAST FORWARD TO THE YEAR 2030: The nation’s political will having hurdled the insurmountable financial impossibility of mind boggling large scale financial outlays for the required social and physical infrastructure and after the new political leaders courageously accepted to start from almost nothing while avoiding extravagant and ostentatious governance, successful governance has gained a foothold and continue to dominate the fabric of the Philippine Society.

      The head of State a non politician outstanding citizen president (Noynoy?) appointed by the Prime Minister with concurrence of the National Parliament is serving the last year of his six-year term. POLITICAL decentralization and devolution are gaining strength in lagging regions. . . . BLAH. BLAH. BLAH.

      The horsemen of the four cultural apocalypse of impunity, corruption, lawlessness, and poverty are all on the ground with their horses ready to be put down.
      The PNOY model of Executive Administration combining lawmaking and development administration assisted by a supportive judiciary has gained recognition from ASEAN. The constitutional tripartite equal powers of the three branches to govern and loot the treasury and natural resources are waters under the bridge.

      Known political family dynasties are mostly recent history losing elections consistently; vote buying had been severely punished for ward leaders and candidates; extreme limitations on campaign contribution and spending had been enforced; Massive decentralization in the COMELEC led to the dismissal of corrupt personnel.

      There was a rebirth in the moral fabric of the members of the two ancient political parties: The Liberal and the Nationalista Parties. All the opportunist political parties and the party lists politicians are just becoming memories.
      The national budget in Trillions of Pesos has been broken down into billions and sent to the regional treasuries. Regional Government budgets are resource seeking assisted by strengthened decentralized (decriminalized?) Regional Bureau of Internal Revenue and Bureau of Customs.

      By 2030 some politicians in the news today may already be retired or just out of the scene. J.P. Enrile will be 106; J. erap Estrada 93; J.C. Binay, 88; Mirriam Santiago , like Rodrigo Duterte will both be 85; G.M. Arroyo, 83; Panfilo Lacson, will be 82.

      After fifteen years the young leaders in 2015 may likely have already assumed the mantle of mature parliamentary leadership in the national scene or the many regional governments. If still alive and active like vintage wine in 2030 they are: Antonio Trillanes IV, 59; Alan Peter Cayetano, 60; Grace Poe, 62; Koko Pimentel III, 66; Leni Robredo, 69; Kim Henares, 70; Noynoy Aquino III, also 70; L D Lima and T. Guingona both 71; lastly the old man of group Mar Roxas at 73. Noynoy Aquino and Mar Roxas could be the stirling figures straddling two decades as Prime Ministers and later appointed as Presidents, the ceremonial Heads of State.

      Over the centuries the physical land area of the Philippines have remained more or less the same at 300,000 square kilometers (115,831 square miles). But its population has been ever growing from about 21 million in 1950 multiplying after 40 years 3 times to 61 million in 1990–that was an increase of 40 million. Moreover, it is projected that in another forty years (from 1990 to 2030) 60 million (much more than 40 million) will be added to make Philippines population into 121.4 million people. In simple words, it means that somehow the Filipinos in a projected span of 80 years had increased their number almost six times. The population in 1990 will double in 2030, in just 40 years. There were only 70 Filipinos per square kilometer in 1950; it will increase into 403 Filipinos per square kilometer by 2030. Filipinos are not rabbits which multiply more.

      Bad or good or no change in PH2030 is the result of the seeds planted by Ninoy and Cory’s only son in a land in dire need of social, political and ecological upheaval. How the Aquinos son’s governance mocked skills, battered by orchestrated criticisms by his detractors who are scared white to be disenfranchised or imprisoned, plus the nonchalant support to defend his administration by his own cabinet secretaries is President Noynoy’s personal tragedy as he goes limping along his tuwid na daan. ”

      So, there you go from a large old file worthy of a book bio. The unnoticed emails (about 100) before oath taking suggested stoppage of detestable, tyrannical Wang-wang, ambush interviews; avoiding (stop working after 5PM Fridays) micromanaging and overworking as indicators of incompetence and vulnerability to corruption. Some items in the emails, might have led the WAKARANGS to coin the idiotmatic word: “Noynoying”.

      More? Abangan baka maging libro.

      • Popoy Del R. Cartanio says:

        Look, LOOK what I found in the old files:

        My Take on PNoy Inaugural Speech

        In literature, in style, grammar and content
        it is world class. Almost Churchill-like.
        Every paragraph was a slap or caress to
        the thick faces of immediate past presidents;
        every most line a combination of
        stinging Pacquiao straights, left and right hooks
        to the jaw shaking the boots of his predecessor’ s soul.
        But presidents are like boxers, they endure the blows
        like fleeting pain of conscience to rise and fight
        again after every knock down.

        The speech is every government cynics’
        dream of a magnum opus minus the
        sure chance of being jailed or disappeared.
        It was a courageous hope for unheard of change
        that a prostitute can change to what she is not
        and a thief to what he is not.

        It is PNoy’s yellow booklet
        that every cabinet member, every AFP General
        and every bishop can and should make sure
        is in his person 24/7.

        It is Noynoy’s ticket to the gate of golden history
        in the annals of mocked underachievers.
        Striving hard and failing so, this speech could be
        (if he is not careful) his boarding pass
        to the resort island of martyrs in the great beyond.

        February 7, 2010
        Constant Winds page 87

        Sorry Guys, when I saw the picture in this blog, I thought IT IS NOT about Wakarangs, Wakatans, Waknakataws, and Wakawakwaks. In the Philippines it may be said with lots of disagreements that to ZOOM in on the ugly boils of the polity will decloud the hidden beauty of the society.

  21. Sup says:


    ”Pasay prosecutor approves inciting to sedition rap vs Trillanes”

  22. Gemino H. Abad says:

    YES! The Society of Honor — the Philippines! as all the comments demonstrate.

  23. Micha says:

    I would grant that Pnoy is a good man, an honest man who wants nothing more than the betterment of the country and its people. But on matters of official policies in the 6 years he’s been in office there’s very little of import that can be cited; so much good intentions, very little tangible results.

    Six years would have been enough to really make a mark and prevented the disillusionment of millions who, out of desperation, went for Duterte in 2016.

    • Sup says:

      He spend the first 3 years cancelling the fraude contract from Gloria…recalculate, re bidding etc etc….After 3 years rhe contracts did start with almost no corruption..Now the Duterte gov.claims all those projects…..It will take at least 25 years to get rid of dynasties, bank secrecy FOI…Pnoy did what was possible in those years..Look at the respect abroad after 6 years, the credit ratings…..Unfortunately the lazy guy in the street corner want to have all for free without contributing and that’s impossible…..Also Duterte can not do that…..

    • Have you done an economic analysis of what it will take to dig the Philippines out of poverty? 110 million people, versus 65 million in Great Britain. No material manufacturing industry, just piecemeal, low-margin stuff. Consumer and construction economy, with OFW’s as a ‘product’. I once calculated that getting poverty down materially was a 20-year project at 7% annual growth. President Aquino built roads galore (as we who travel them can see), built 60,000 new classrooms, modernized the military with new arms and armaments, won title to the West Philippine Sea in court, raised the CCT payout by millions, had peace in Mindanao within reaching distance until Marcos inserted himself, ran a technocratic, MBO style of government, substantially not corrupt, and permitted the free speech that attacked him relentlessly. So I think “little of import” is not how I would characterize it.

      • Micha says:

        Hahaha, that’s just the problem I am seeing with Pnoy, Joe. When it comes to economic policies there really was nothing substantial, let alone important or revolutionary. It’s more of the same neo-liberal stuff, protecting the interests of the oligarchs and ignoring the suffering of the rest of the population.

        • Disagree entirely. And the unfortunate thing it is this same kind of relentless need for perfection “the way I see it” that forms the gap that blocks any kind of patriotic positivism from emerging in the Philippines. And it is the unrealistic demanding that is the gap into which Duterte is moving to take the nation apart. President Aquino did not do it the way I would, or you would, but his achievements were remarkable. It would be better to stretch ourselves a bit, praise the Philippines, and President Aquino, and build a national spirit that would stand in opposition to division and destruction.

          • expecting quick solutions to longterm problems was what got us in this mess we’re in. we wanted someone to fix criminality in 3-6 months, never mind that he doesn’t know a thing about economics.

            • Yes, indeed. Such grand promises, jetskis and crime over with in six months. Amazing that people don’t get that they were played.

              • i feel bad for the person who will have to do the cleaning again and will have to bear the impatience of people. it’s been less than two years and there’s already so much damage. another year of this will set us back to God-knows-how-long. not only economics-wise, but cleaning up government from top to bottom, those policies they implemented that have to be undone, to clean up our image internationally etc.

              • Yes, indeed. He should start with schools and development of thoughts about ethics and patriotism, and carry that into a public relations campaign.

            • Micha says:

              Yes yellowpadawan, you don’t have the urgency to fix the economic condition of the country and you are bound to get a populist maniac like Duterte.

          • Micha says:


            We try to pretend we’re a democracy but there can be no real democracy unless you democratize the wealth.

            Our GINI coefficient is hovering in the 40’s. What was Pnoy’s vision on matters of inequality? What is his ideological leanings? What is his view of capitalism?

            • As with the MMT discussion, we find that idealism and pragmatism, when forming the foundations of two separate arguments, lead to irreconcilable differences. Those are good questions, and if Will interviews President Aquino, perhaps he’ll ask them.

    • Francis says:

      “I would grant that Pnoy is a good man, an honest man who wants nothing more than the betterment of the country and its people. But on matters of official policies in the 6 years he’s been in office there’s very little of import that can be cited; so much good intentions, very little tangible results.”

      “Six years would have been enough to really make a mark and prevented the disillusionment of millions who, out of desperation, went for Duterte in 2016.“

      To a certain extent, I have to agree with Micha here.

      PNoy was an okay President. By the usual standards of our country—a good President. He presided over a booming economy and was personally himself not a sketchy guy. A good and personally honest man.

      I applaud the previous administration for taking tremendous strides in improving the efficiency of our government through various reforms—i.e. as evident in our rise in competitiveness indexes and increases in quality of budgeting, their willingness to take a leap of faith with the 4Ps program, the moderate and continued increases in spending, all under a generally fiscally responsible regime.

      PNoy would have been a brilliant “consolidation” President—the sort of guy you’d elect to keep the changes in place, to “let the cement dry” so to speak; the previous administration was good at keeping an overall steady hand on the wheel, while inserting a few modest reforms here and there.

      But as the “transformative” President to establish a rupture—between a past of chains and a future of hope by dismantling the corrupt system of before and building a new lasting consensus? Not enough—and it is that failure to be that “transformative” President, that one can argue has led the Filipino people to seek the “transformation” elsewhere from dubious snake-oil vendors: i.e. populist Duterte.

      The previous administration was good at running government; compared to Arroyo’s “Strong Republic” administration, they might as well have been saints—in all six years, not a single “re-enacted” budget has occurred under the Aquino administration. It was fiscally responsible—while dramatically boosting PhilHealth and 4Ps, to create what is arguably a proto-welfare state.

      PhilHealth and 4Ps make my heart flutter with joy—the statistics speak for themselves, when reviewed. When you look at this stuff—this is the stuff that makes the previous administration closer to being “transformative” in a genuine sense. Shame the previous administration didn’t do enough PR to drive that point home; if we can give credit to Marcos for “infrastructure,” we can also give credit to PNoy for “social infrastructure” of PhilHealth and 4Ps.


      Barely anything was put in place to keep this momentum going forward. Freedom of Information—a complete no-brainer for a presidency so associated with our vibrant civil society—was not passed; this is a very, very big oversight. Similar legislation for budget reform didn’t even attract much attention. Heck—we didn’t even pass legislation on political party reform. On the topic of political parties: it is worth noting that changes in the LP (Liberal Party) to make it less a typical Filipino political party (a legal vehicle for trapo interests) and more grassroots have only taken place due to the rise of Duterte necessitating such things.

      The previous administration got the credit rating increases. The previous administration passed the budgets on time. This is all stuff that normal, mature governments do without thinking—but I get it, that this is in itself, a big thing for Filipinos.

      Unfortunately, the previous administration has failed to be “transformative” in that it dropped the ball on institutionalizing the changes that it had started, the momentum that it had begun.

      The previous administration chose to govern as the “good” trapos, rather than the first generation of “new” modern politicians—initiating small and moderate reforms, while trying to do good via “old-school” institutions of patronage and connection, for better or for worse. I reckon (and I think it is a fair assessment) to assume that all flaws and controversies of the previous administration stem from this simple fact.

      Which is partially the reason why we got Duterte, and why possibly in the future we will get Marcos.

      I don’t mean this as an insult to PNoy or to anyone else. I recognise what the previous administration has done, and what it has contributed to the “wider” project of Filipino Liberalism. I am frankly disgusted when I hear certain people who lean toward the current administration dismiss activists, professionals and reformists who’ve worked for decades without much praise (and probably much backhanded compliments about how much they’re “foolish saints” for choosing to work in civil society or government rather than big business) in building our fragile democracy, pebble by pebble as stupid DILAWANS. It galls me, that there are people who think some populist faux nationalist magic fairy sparkles of Duterte can bring in a few months and years what decades of incremental progress has tried to do.

      • that dilawan narrative is part of their propaganda, in case you haven’t noticed. meant to divide us all. if you’re disgusted, then you’re buying their propaganda.

        as for being transformative, PNoy himself said that six years is not enough. also why we campaigned for continuity.

        • Francis says:


          “as for being transformative, PNoy himself said that six years is not enough. also why we campaigned for continuity.“

          My comment above differs from @Micha’s comment. Micha’s critique of the previous administration is that it failed to address economic inequality sufficiently; it was a primarily social democratic critique.

          Which I understand might not be as acceptable to those who might have more favourable views of the free market, not sympathetic to center-left views, i.e. those on the centre and center-right who identify as “libertarian” or “classical liberal” right-wing liberals or “technocratic/third way” centrist liberals.

          Which is why my comment on the performance of the previous administration focused on it’s track record on political reforms rather than economic. I think that political reforms (i.e. budget process, freedom of information, dynasty regulations, etc.) are things that ALL liberals and reformists (regardless of economic views—whether center-right, centrist or center-left) can agree to.

          And sadly—it is clear that the previous administration did not pass freedom of information, did not pass budget reform (to my knowledge) to support administrative reforms, and did not pass political party reform.

          The LP did not also experience reforms until Duterte.

          These aren’t things that take decades. These aren’t things that fundamentally alter the system i.e. the capitalist underpinnings of our society. These are relatively uncontroversial things that, with reasonable support and backed by a broad consensus, could have been implemented well within the term of one President—and upon implementation, these all could have served as bulwarks against populists like Duterte and opportunists like Arroyo and Marcos.

          • “My comment above differs from @Micha’s comment. Micha’s critique of the previous administration is that it failed to address economic inequality sufficiently; it was a primarily social democratic critique.”

            yes, i appreciate your comment why i kept it short.😊

            as for reforms in budget and FOI, IIRC, there was this website about budget transparency which even had a tutorial on how to navigate. they also launched Open Data PH. I think these were among reasons why we got high investor confidence back then. as for political reform, well yeah, that takes a lot of muscle flexing.

          • Micha says:

            Hello Francis,

            I think our friend here, yellowpadawan, is representative of the personality based Philippine politics as opposed to idea based or ideology based party system.

            We of course oftentimes bemoan this kind of development in politics as it will hinder the creation of political parties that thrives on distinct ideological differences, one that will transcend the personalities involved.

            In social media these days, there’s an ongoing war between the yellowtards and Dutertards – a hilarious if not depressing state of affairs.

            • YP is a sincere young woman who, if she were replicated millions of times over, would have the Philippines on a straight, productive course. There is no need to talk ‘about her’ or to try to pigeon-hole her. She responded to both your and Francis’ comments directly and respectfully. You can, I am sure, speak on the issues to her in the same manner.

            • uhm so you accused me of being a representative of “personality based Philippine politics” but you’re the one who divided people into yellowtards and dutertards.


          • The Aquino government lived by transparency and declined to pass a law that was (to them) unnecessary and bind them to revealing information they believed should be held quiet. The budget was exercised meticulously on a promise not to raise taxes, so you’d have to delineate the reforms you believe were missed. It indeed did not pass political party reform, which would be like asking a burro to become a horse. They are controversial subjects, for sure, so I don’t buy your arguments.

            • Francis says:


              I am afraid that I must sincerely and strongly disagree with you.

              I am not saying (nor am I ignoring) that the previous administration has passed budgets on time and in a transparent fashion or that it has sincerely tried to bring about more open and transparent state via initiatives like Open Data PH. It is absolutely safe to say that, in this sense, the previous administration has used its power over the executive branch in a manner that is effective and fair.

              There is a certain parallel to Obama in this regard. Obama was confronted with a intransigent congress controlled by the opposition—to go around this, Obama used his “Executive Orders” to the hilt. Reform under PNoy has been of a similar character; a flurry of initiatives emerging from the executive branch via memoranda and regulation.

              Of course, I do not mean to make absolute comparisons; the PH and US case is like comparing Mansanas and Oranges.

              Yet—witness how easy it is for Trump to roll back “executive” reforms dating from Obama’s time, i.e. the sad tale of the Dreamers. What can be issued in one EO by a President, can be retracted by another in a quick flash.

              Yes, the previous administration was excellent at handling our budgets. Yes, the previous administration was excellent at being open and accountable to the citizenry. Yet, what is our guarantee that this would have continued beyond the time of the administration.

              Maybe—one possible line of response to my argument would be: “We should have elected Mar. It was a relay race.”

              Which, I am sorry to say, is complacent and naive. This is politics—and in politics, reformists have to be calculating and Machiavellian like their opportunist peers, if only to allow themselves and their noble ideals some breathing room to survive in the harsh landscape of modern politics. It is imperative for reformists to design reforms that are are not only idealistic and virtuous, but resilient and steet-smart as well.


              Regarding FOI—how the administration simply saw it as unnecessary. I am reminded of reading this conversation on a forum; the thread was about Indian Politics. There was this guy who was complaining about Nehru, about how Nehru didn’t reshape the India during the moment when he could have become a dictator, how Nehru naively insisted on following democratic procedure. Yet—another replied that if it were not for Nehru’s personal restraint, India would have all ended up like many other post-colonial states rather than what it is now: a (pardon my language) middle finger to the political science thesis that democracy can only thrive in rich nations.

              The previous administration could have chosen to implement FOI and perhaps it may come at the cost of efficiency at that time i.e. some sensationalism, but it would have sacrificed short-term gains for long-term advantage.

              I guess this comment of mine is quite contradictory. I am preaching realism in one breath, and idealism in another. Yet, that is what reformist politics truly entails: a tightrope balance between realistic perspective and an idealistic journey. I suppose that overall, my critique of the previous administration can be summed up as not being realistic in situations where it had to be realistic (conceiving of reform as a slow, multi-administration process rather than preparing to quickly institutionalise via legislation said reforms to “compartmentalise” them in case of…unsavoury actors winning the proceeding elections) and not being idealistic enough in situations where idealism was called for (choosing and being willing to undertake broad reforms i.e. political party reform, reforming the LP itself into a genuine party of the citizens, Freedom of Information, etc.).

              Yes—political party reform and Freedom of Information are controversial in a sense. Yet, when I say that they are “uncontroversial” I only mean that they are completely within the liberal democratic ideological paradigm of the administration.

              The issue with Micha’s critique is that it’s from a social democratic standpoint, a perspective that is a bit more leftwards from where the previous administration stood. It is unfair to judge the previous administration by standards that are not its own. Therefore—in my initial comment and in this entire thread—I have to gauge the previous administration within its own standards: how much it has furthered just plain vanilla liberal democracy in the Philippines.

              My verdict is that it could have done more to institutionalise.

              It has done waaaaaaay better than other administrations. Yet, it is not without its flaws. It has been an excellent administrator of liberalism, but not as good of an ”institutionaliser” of liberalism.

              They say that the value of friendship is that it allows for frankness to be exchanged; one is free to point out to one’s friend his or her shortcomings for his or her own’s sake. I speak as a fellow traveler of liberalism in this country—one who is sympathetic though not entirely in agreement with the centrist brand of liberalism in this country—and only wish that liberalism in this country flourish, as it takes note of where it has been effective and where it has not been as effective as it should been.

              • I don’t think you are disagreeing with me as much as disagreeing with what you think the Aquino people thought. For example, I never said “We should have elected Mar”, but you argue the point. To me, you are going in circles covering all perspectives and pop out concluding that the Aquino Administration “is not without flaws”. Of course it is not without flaws, but the question remains, is more gained by picking on the flaws, as political opponents do, and strengthening their cause, or praising the achievements, and building a unity for reform and ethics and productivity that is binding so that we don’t have to ask about Mar? All candidates aspire to raise the Philippines rather than go against the previous administration through countless cycles of bitterness and division.

              • chemrock says:

                I think the Pnoy admin did much much more in 6 years than most people give them credit for.

                Your point is that for what a govt is expected to do in terms of governance, Pnoy did well. I think to bring Philippines out of “Sick man’ to ‘Tiger’ status within 6 years is not just ‘well’ but a sterling performance.

                Your point also that he did’nt take the opportunity of the political capital he had (with good numbers in Congress and Senate on his side) to be more transformative. I have to disagree with that for reasons I can quickly think of now :-
                1.. 6 years isn’t a long time as far as politics is concerned. Pnoy had priorities which obviously did’nt concur with yours,
                2. First priority was to restore the judiciary, Had Corona and Gutierez remained, I leave it to you to guess how much legal road blocks the Pnoy admin would have faced, especially in regards to (3).
                3. Second priority was to untangle all those corrupt deals done by the previous admin, Micha commented it does’nt take 6 years to resolve a contract. As I wrote in the blog out today, judication in Philippines takes an extraordinarily long time — it’s a process of till death do we resolve. Can’t blame this on the admin. It’s the legal system. How long was the Piatco case in the courts? Just to resolve the last hurdle of the question of compensation — from 2004 to 2015 is how long.
                4. Your point again is that he should institutionalise reforms and ensure its permanence. But this was exactly what they sat out to do. I’m not sure of other depts, but for Budget and DILG, both Abad and Mar mentioned this several times. Institutionalising and making sure of reform permanannce were their objectives. Abad revised many processes in Budget dept,eg Saro is no more. PPP frameworks. Mar revamped police reporting systems. Alas as for permanence, one succeeding admin can EO them out the window. PPP does’nt sync with BBB (buildx3), Hell even ICC enactmnents can be thrown out the window.
                5. Regarding FOI, Libertarians will list this #1 in priority. A practical president will accord more practical issues higher priority. For a coountry that was trying to get out of the ICU. there were lots of other more practical matters. Like the Reproductive Health Bill. Filipinos are reproducing at a furious pace and this is not addressed. poverty can never be addressed. Not only was Pnoy practical. he was far-sighted and had great political courage to pressed for the RH Bill in a predominantly Roman Catholic country.
                6. Talk about making reforms permanent. Pnoy had to weed out corruption of previous admin. Most said he was vengeful to go after officials of the opposition. What he tried, and failed miserably, was not to repeat Cory’s failure. Which was to permit elements of the previous corrupt admin embed itself in the government. Pnoy did’nt employ the guillotine, but due process. The consequences of his failure to weed out Arroyo and Marcos corrupt elements is now playing out for all to see. This is the reason why 6 years is not enough for a good president to do much more than he could have.

                I’m going for my morning cuppa. Somebody please add more reasons,

              • This article from the World Economic Forum is fascinating. It shows that, while many countries were moving TOWARD popular, autocratic leaders from 2010 to 2014, the Philippines was actually going against the grain and moving TOWARD DEMOCRATIC preferences. This suggests President Aquino was indeed moving the Philippines in a material way.


              • edgar lores says:

                I think the second sentence of your second paragraph says most of it. From “Sick Man of Asia” to “Tiger” status. To me, however, the significance of PNoy’s administration was the moral aspect. He walked the talk.

                People did not truly appreciate this, and they have allowed a sick man to free plunderers and build, build, build a mountain of corpses.

          • @chemrock:

            “I think to bring Philippines out of “Sick man’ to ‘Tiger’ status within 6 years is not just ‘well’ but a sterling performance.”

            Unfortunately, people forget that the important aspect of the house is its foundation more than its aesthetics. Although, I saw some of the changes myself, like more cars on the road, more construction projects, offices, stores around those construction and offices. More people travelling.

            @edgar lores:

            “To me, however, the significance of PNoy’s administration was the moral aspect. He walked the talk.”

            agree, i immediately saw (heard) the literal contrast when PNoy stepped down from office. i was on my way home from Times St. when I heard wang wang.

            • chemrock says:

              Agreed, Yellowpadawan. When I mentioned sterling performance, I do not pander to all those international accolades nor statistics of economic measurements. Pnoy admin tried to focus on strengthening the foundations. They went into professionalising the military, reforming the budgetary process, concentrating on the educational system, improving the fiscal situation by stamping leakages. There was no populist move to build ostentatious glittering infras through increaed tax revenue. Projects were pursued only when the financial house was in order. Funds for infras came from savings in the refinancing of national debt under better terms.

              • sigh.. if people only saw it the way we did, we wouldn’t be going back to scratch. or worse.

                meanwhile, pork barrel queen Janet Napoles has just been given provisional Witness Protection Program status.

                yay for change!

      • Sup says:

        You have to get rid of the political dynasties first before you can change the Philippines….This goes for all wannawee presidents…
        Pnoy could not get it done in 6 years

        President Benigno S. Aquino III, Philippine Senators and Congressmen: SCRAP THE PORK BARREL, NOW…JAIL ALL THE PLUNDERERS..!!!

    • NHerrera says:

      @Micha, @Sup, @The Society of Honor:

      Re your comments and subsequent elaborations from,

      Micha says:
      March 15, 2018 at 6:37 pm

      Sup says:
      March 15, 2018 at 6:46 pm

      The Society of Honor says:
      March 15, 2018 at 7:20 pm,

      from an academic viewpoint for possible future use, it may be a useful food for thought discussing events after the fact, from the standpoint of “the way I see it” or “it should have been done this way.” However, as a mere engineer rather than an economist or a political scientist, I lean on the thoughts of Sup and Joe, especially on the reality and time-related items associated with pursuing various projects that the Pnoy Admin finished or accomplished in 6 years.

      I find Sup’s reference to the Bataan Nuclear Project willed and pursued by strongman Marcos as a good metaphor for strongly pursuing a reformist agenda that went awry.

  24. Sup says:

    I think Pnoy was the best President ever as of now…….Disagree? I don’t care !! 🙂

  25. edgar lores says:

    I don’t get it.

    Why are we so dependent on leaders?

    PNoy did not fail us. We failed him. Or, rather, we failed ourselves.

    PNoy showed us a way out of our problems. We did not take his lesson to heart.

    And what’s this about the poor?

    Why blame leaders for entirely failing to alleviate poverty? The operative word in the question is “entirely.”

    Like everyone else, the poor have choices to make. Certainly, their choices are more limited than the non-poor. But they can choose to live simple and honest lives. And they can lift themselves up… with help from the government and the community.

    For ourselves, we can choose to live not-so-simple and honest lives.

    The basic principle is that we are responsible for ourselves… and then for others. But the primary responsibility for ourselves rests on our shoulders.

    And if we can help it, we help others.

    Why is our primary view of life one of anger and finger-pointing?

    Again, we are responsible for our choices. And if we choose out of anger or ignorance, then the onus is on us.

    Life is a blessing. Be grateful that you are here. Treat others with kindness.

    Treat yourself with kindness.

    • “Why is our primary view of life one of anger and finger-pointing?”

      That is a good question for the educated and moral. For most of the rest, the answer would be . . . . if we could get to their emotional core . . . “because life is hard and unfair.”

    • there’s always this question on social media – who will lead us?

      people always look for heroes to save them but when someone takes the reins, he’s expected to be perfect, something doesn’t work as planned and he gets all the blame, he gets equated to all the bad people. no wonder there’s not a lot of decent people who want to enter government.

    • Micha says:

      1.“Why are we so dependent on leaders?”

      Because it’s a representative democracy, edgar, We elect leaders who will then set policies attuned to the interest of the constituency who elected him. And those policies have, oftentimes, far reaching and long-lasting consequences. There are of course instances when an elected leader betrays his campaign promise(s) but that’s another story.

      2. “PNoy did not fail us. We failed him. Or, rather, we failed ourselves.”

      I am not going to include myself in your “we” edgar. It’s a nebulous contestable pronoun at this point and certainly in the political dynamics we are far from exercising a direct form of democracy to be able to allocate the blame on the people for the failures of running an efficient responsive government.

      3. “PNoy showed us a way out of our problems. We did not take his lesson to heart.”

      Perhaps you are alluding to his slogan of “daang matuwid”. But in the complex business of governance, who or what defines “matuwid” is not as straightforward as it would seem. One man’s definition of matuwid might be for another actually a zig-zaggy path.

      4. “And what’s this about the poor? Like everyone else, the poor have choices to make. Certainly, their choices are more limited than the non-poor. But they can choose to live simple and honest lives. And they can lift themselves up… with help from the government and the community.”

      I cringed when I read this section of your post edgar. I could not believe it’s coming from you. More of this unsympathetic elitist condescending attitude towards the poor and we are inviting the perpetuation of populist ire or, heaven forbid, a Marcos Junior or a President Sarah in 2022.

      • edgar lores says:

        To each his own, Micha. It is not condescending to believe in the innate dignity of man.

        • Micha says:

          In our current extremely materialist economic system, to be poor is to be without dignity.

          • chemrock says:

            Micha. whilst that may be a common perception. I disagree with the view, To say that dignity is the special preserve of the wealthy is intrinsically and ethically wrong. It boils down to how one explains dignity.

            Dignity is often times associated with respect but the same they are not. Respect is earned. Dignity has to do with a sense of self-worth. Dignity is what everyone is entitled to. a shoe-shine boy does not loose his dignity if he goes about his job professionally — polite to his customers, does a good job making the shoes shine, does not cheat, etc. Mocha Uson earns big bucks but lets her body be physically groped, there’s no dignity. Does Roque have dignity flip flopping form human rights champion to a sychopatic apologist for a thug ?

  26. karlgarcia says:

    About Micha’s peeve with neo-lib.

    We could have done more with manufacturing if we used our minerals for domestic purpose coupled with constant innovation and reivention.

    The US was the giant in the steel industry, but it got stuck with its old ways that when Europe started making steel with oxygenated iron and scrap iron, they found a way to more and make it cheap.

    We could catch up with wise use of our minerals without forgetting to clean up the mess created like bioremediation and land reclamation and plug up those open pits if not with soil we can do it with sludge.(there is a way).

    Once the Belgians convince fellow Belgians of tne pros of landfill mining will off aet the cons ,I guess a chain reaction will follow and we should go with the flow and fibd ways to source raw materials in our land fills and dumps.

    One last, imports are cheaper aside from the incentives of trade agreements, because our aupply chain is not efficient.
    Build program has good effects not withstanding fund source, it can improve the value chain by leaps and bounds.

    We can dream big, but start small or else nothing ever will take off.

    • sonny says:

      “… wise use of our minerals without forgetting to clean up the mess created like bioremediation and land reclamation and plug up those open pits if not with soil we can do it with sludge.(there is a way).”

      I was thinking of burying the sludge into the bowels of the Philippine Deep. Maybe.

    • chemrock says:

      Print yourself out of poverty, simple lang. MMT anyone? Just fo;;ow South African proposal.


      • Micha says:


        If that is how you understand MMT you are certainly failing, assuming you even tried.

        • chemrock says:

          Micha I don’t assume to know, in fact I’ve stated I don’t understand. I know you have your own understanding which is fine. I grant you may be right afterall since these are theoretical.

          • Micha says:

            If you don’t fully understand MMT then stop posting links or comments that inaccurately depicts what MMT is all about.

            • chemrock says:

              Was I dumping my ignorance on Karl?
              Come on, I was just throwing an interesting article to Karl, knowing he is enthusiastic about such info.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Thanks chemrock, I hope there would not be another misunderstanding and irreconcilable differences between you and Micha.

              • Wonderful, wonderful article covering the history and fundamentals. The illustration is great, too. I wondered which is Micha. I also enjoyed the remark at the end that advocates push MMT with religious fervor. Snorted my coffee.

              • Sup says:

                Philippine style MMT
                Marcos Monetary Treasure

              • NHerrera says:

                Hahaha. MMT, the social media, and the new economic religion. I write thus probably because after scan-reading the link karl posted, I am still at base zero, although the author of the article says, it is simply explained. One thing I promise myself is to reread the article slowly and read some more on MMT from other sources.

                There must be some gold in Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) because, among others, of the last paragraph referring to Galbraith [a guru to my unsophisticated mind on the subject of economics]:

                “The contribution of MMT is not the discovery of new facts,” Galbraith says. “It’s a teaching core of things which are factually uncontroversial.” But its implications can be radically humane. What’s threatening to the establishment, Galbraith adds, “is that the narrative is very compelling.”

                Also, the proponent, Warren Mosler, a successful and wealthy financier, expresses himself this way:

                Still, he [Mosler] insists that he is simply opening the public’s eyes to basic math. “It’s a theory insofar as arithmetic is a theory.”

                Then I said to myself, arithmetic is a math theory indeed — but a well-founded and useful one. If Mosler’s gut feel about MMT is at least half-right, then WOW, what a theory it is. Hail MMT!

              • “Money for nothing, chicks for free!”

              • edgar lores says:

                MMT will free women from the need for a male provider.

                It will mean Momentous Matriarchal Transition.

              • NHerrera says:

                Hahaha! Regarding chicks, both are two-legged, but I believe you meant the kind that goes with potato fries. 🙂

                Good morning to you, Joe.

              • Yes, yes, of course. Good morning, NH. I agree with you that the simplicity of MMT is elusive. I also find amusing that very bright and capable economists argue about it, and Micha expects us to agree only with the ones who agree with Micha. On faith, I guess.

              • Micha says:


                I don’t expect you to agree with me or with what MMT is. You could learn the facts if you are interested, diverse materials are available online.

              • That’s good to know. I register no opinion, and am happy to let people who are more informed argue the matter.

              • chemrock says:

                Maybe MMT is right ?

                Sir Winston Churchill once derided current economic principle thus :
                “I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.”

                But then again, he also said of democracy :
                “Democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…”

        • sonny says:

          For everyone’s benefit, I suggest these two links for self-study on MMT. I have no economics background to write home about. Listening to the youtube and reading the PDF seem comprehensible to me, viz. MMT.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bnf53cnThHk (MMT lecture-1)

          http://moslereconomics.com/wp-content/powerpoints/7DIF.pdf (MMT-pdf)

          • chemrock says:

            Try pondering international trade under MMT.

            • sonny says:

              Thank you, chempo. 🙂

              I will pay more attention to the subject as you suggest. (I used most of my memory addresses learning Chem & Philosophy. I hope there are enough leftover cells to use; I’ll also look for ECONOMICS FOR DUMMIES, 2nd hand bookseller, of course)

              BTW, I visited Spore for the first time in my life – very very impressive! Only en route, though. I ‘saw’ Sihanoukville, Pattaya, port of Ho Chi Minh city, and promptly caught pneumonia and stayed at Ha Long.on Christmas holidays. Bummer,.but lucky to be alive. Deo gratias, really.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Sorry to hear about your health issues, Unc.
                Glad that you are Okay.

              • sonny says:

                Thank you, Karl. I was providentially in the care of a most capable North Vietnamese ER doctor and no-speak-English ICU staff. Along the way (coz I was in Buddhist land) I learned of 4 positions of the statues of the Buddha. 🙂 I missed a visit to Angkor Vat.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Next time you come to Manila, I hope we could finally meet.
                Btw, I still have not forgotten the blog article you promised, I hope you will have time for that.

              • sonny says:

                I didn’t forget, Karl. 🙂 Thanks for the patience.

          • NHerrera says:

            Sonny: thanks for the links (video and Mosler’s pdf).

            • sonny says:

              Thanks, Micha. Every bit helps.

            • It reads like a guy in pain who came to Jesus, but it never explains the gospels. 🙂 I suppose the US could implement MMT but what would the Philippines be, in relation to the US? Fodder . . . or brought to Jesus, too?

              I ponder the idea that taxes have nothing to do with spending and it is rather like trying to comprehend the end of the universe. I have a brain failure.

              I need a ‘See Dick Run’ level of tutorial, or ‘MMT for idiots who have paid taxes for decades’.

              • sonny says:

                Joe, If the moral of the story is, understand MMT or not, feeling like Churchill’s man and his bootstrap is definitely not a good feeling. 🙂 What we need is a solid rote formula like the solution to x in the quadratic equation. Feels like you done something productive. Yes?

              • Exactly. I know ignorance, and the MMT advocates seem unable to comprehend it, or figure out how to take it down. It has to start with simple, not challenge us personally for not being able to grasp it. Hell, I want free money, too, I just don’t know where the ATM is.

              • NHerrera says:

                That sounds like my kind of thing, sonny. 🙂

                After the scientists — physicists, chemists, etc. — have done and refined their stuff, we engineers, then see if we can find the Xs and Ys.

              • karlgarcia says:

                A not so wise man once said:
                ” We can dream big, but start small or else nothing ever will take off.”

              • Sup says:

                hahahaha ….The real MMT

                If you have nothing to do this Sunday……Google HRH TVM-LSM-666

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s