People don’t trust the yellows because of Kris, Sharon, and Korina

Sharon Cuneta with friend President Duterte [Photo source: Inquirer]

By JoeAm

The Liberal Party (LP) forms the core of what many people term the ‘yellows’, or advocates of democracy, the Constitution, civility, and human rights. The class has been broadened by the trolls to include anyone who criticizes the Duterte Administration.

One reason the yellows have trouble at the polls and in surveys is that most Filipinos think “all politicians are the same” and the yellows are the worst because they PRETEND that they have higher values. But they don’t. Plus they are intellectually arrogant, always speaking as if their way were high and mighty and anyone thinking otherwise is stupid.

Yet the yellow advocates I know do sincerely believe law and order, civility, and compassion are the best way to a prosperous First World Philippines.

Kris Aquino with friend Rody Duterte [Photo source: INquirere]

Why do people not trust them? Why do some even hate them bitterly?

Well, they are undone by malicious propaganda, by the corrupt and incompetent in their own ranks, and they are undermined by people like Kris, Sharon, and Korina. The LP relatives.

  • Kris Aquino is the sister of former President Noynoy Aquino and a daughter of former President Cory Aquino. She considers President Duterte her friend.
  • Sharon Cuneta is the wife of Senator Kiko Pangilinan, the President of the Liberal Party. She admires and dines with President Duterte.
  • Korina Sanchez-Roxas is the wife of former Senator, Cabinet Secretary, and Presidential candidate Mar Roxas. She recently featured Mocha Uson, the queen of vicious, divisive trolls, on her program “Rated K”.

The three popularize the notion that President Duterte is a lovable guy, a kind fellow to them. And they reinforce the idea that yellows don’t really ‘walk their talk’. I mean, even family members don’t listen to them or buy into their principles.

How is anyone supposed to take LP seriously?

The conclusion that some have drawn, and I agree it is easy to draw, is that the nation is run by one big happy class of powerful and rich players, and they are all out conniving and gaming the system to their advantage. And making the little guy carry the burdens.

Korina Sanchez-Roxas interviews troll queen Mocha Uson [Photo source: Inquirer]

Well, in opposition to that thinking, the rationalists argue “it is a free country”. These people are not politicians and are entitled to have their own lives and friends. Besides, Korina Sanchez is a journalist. She can’t just interview yellows if she is to be true to her profession.

And the people who can’t sleep at night because of what the Philippines has become, a corrupt, murderous, incompetent place favoring the entitled . . . and who work diligently for a better way . . . become dismayed.

“How can these smart, charming, popular people aid and abet the horrors in the streets? How can they sleep at night when 40,000 kids no longer have a father? How can they accept the gift of their nation to China? How can they laugh and party when millions of people can’t afford vegetables or the rice to put them on?”

What kind of people are these, anyway?

The answer is, of course:

They are the product of a nation that prizes power and favor, not equality and justice.

They are the product of a nation without conscience, or a very small wee one that is mainly used to one’s own advantage.

They are the product of a nation that does not grasp institutional ethics or develop personal principles or dedicate themselves to the idea that a nation will be the best it can be when individuals willingly give a part of themselves to the building of their nation.

They are the product of a self-indulgent class of impunity and good living. Where it is more fun in the Philippines. Where they have no responsibility for the well-being of other Filipinos.

They are the product of a mindset that there is always an excuse or blame for every self-indulgent act, and damn the consequences.

They are not the only three. There is an entire superstructure of public figures . . . entertainers, boxers, journalists, businessmen, legislators, and preachers . . . who frame public values. Values that exclaim, loud and clear:

“Let them eat weevils.”

The three highly popular showpeople just help paint the values yellow.


180 Responses to “People don’t trust the yellows because of Kris, Sharon, and Korina”
  1. andrewlim8 says:

    In intelligence circles, there is a loaded term for it, ” useful idiots” .

    Blissfully unaware that it is a dogfight, they are used effectively and unwittingly by one side; in this case, they are useful in ” humanizing” Duterte et al while minimizing their transgressions.

    Sorry, Mar, Pnoy and Kiko but they are useful idiots.

    • They may even be aware but can’t risk being considered anti-, for the health of their popularity. I find it rather tragic that principles mean so little to them, and the direction of the nation means so little.

      • andrewlim8 says:

        Filipino culture is really so different – Here, there will be no Taylor Swifts or Robert de Niros or those siblings of a Republican candidate who took out ads against their brother because he’s racist.

        It’s a terrible culture, it buries principles in favor of tribe and family. And we still wonder why it is so poor.

        • andrewlim8 says:

          I’ve stated this some time ago in a blog: do Filipinos understand that ” honor thy father and mother” does not take priority over ” thou shalt not kill (EJKs) “, ” thou shalt not steal (obvious amongst his tribe)” , ” thou shalt not bear false witness (De Lima and Trillanes) ” and ” thou shalt not take the name of God in vain (God is stupid)” ?

          Has the Catholic church taught this properly?

          • Yes, the disattachment from meanings is stunning.

          • edgar lores says:

            This topic was the one I was developing, but I couldn’t progress.

            It wasn’t a block, but more a failure to understand the issue.

            What makes people react the way they do?

            I think the first thing to understand is that Duterte is a murderer. He has admitted being so. In the case of EJKs, he may not be the one pulling the trigger, but he is the one giving the order. And the order is to kill.

            This being so, what is the responsibility of the people who accept these killings — tacitly? What about the people who support Duterte and his killing ways — vocally? Or in non-condemning ways such as being friendly with the murderer?

            There are so many terms — enabler, abettor, collaborator, accomplice, accessory, helper, aide, partner, ally, backer, adherent, etc.

            We need a taxonomy like Monday’s categorization of angels, satanic heroes, players, punishers, and dark angels.

            At one end of the spectrum are the accomplices — those who participate in the planning and the doing. At the other end are the lambs — those who stay silent and not raise a cry, not even a whispered baa. In between are various degrees of consent and participation.

            What is clear is that those who do not protest are… complicit. Even if by omission.

            They share the guilt and the blame. And blood is on their hands.

    • popoy says:

      Pray tell the people, USEFUL TO WHOM? Not to the people but to themselves Eh?

  2. arlene says:

    So in the end, it is still power that speaks. Good morning Joeam.

  3. andrewlim8 says:

    Here’s another terrible news resulting from this regime’s terrible economic policies:

    You still think inflation can be brought back to the target range of 2 to 4%?

    • Yes, which reminds me that JC Punongbayan in Rappler explained the concentrations of Chinese workers in Manila. They are serving the online gambling addiction of Chinese nationals. Gambling is not allowed in China, so the offshore outlets have sprung up in the Philippines and elsewhere. This clarifies that these workers are not taking jobs that could be done by Filipinos, and are a net add-on to the Philippine economy. However, it seems to me that the risk is substantial that, when China cracks down on such outlets, there will be a huge hole left in the Philippine real estate market, and that this industry works much the same as a debt trap. Only it is a bankruptcy trap.

    • caliphman says:

      I have been busy and not been here in a while. I did notice there has been much concern in the Philippine media and public about the current inflation rate of 6.5 pct per year. This rate is certainly higher than the baseline rate during the Aquino and previous administrations. It may even be indicative of an unmanaged or mismanaged economy by the Duterte regime.

      But it’s necessary to view inflation rates from a global perspective. Even at 6.5 pct, Philippine inflation is neither in crisis and certainly not in runaway or panic mode. It may be true that the price of rice, gasoline, and other vital items included in the common inflation index are spiking in the country because of bad policy decisions, but overall from a macroecomic standpoint, its not at financial crisis levels.

      • For a nation with 40 million living in or on the edge of poverty, the recent price increases have been material. Economists regularly cite your view and are regularly ridiculed for the ‘let them eat weevils’ attitude. So there is macro economics, micro economics, and kitchen table economics.

        • NHerrera says:

          I picture the following: father, mother, and four children dining on a “table” of newspaper spread on soil for a floor. A can of six small pieces of sardines and weeviled. rice for food. And they are the lucky ones among the poorest.

        • caliphman says:

          Well if one’s preference is ridiculing established economic science and statistics because it offers an alternate and objective view of your so-called popular and political “reality” , then have at it. I am not a fan of neither Duterte nor Trump, but I cringe even more when alternate truth or reality are presented as unbiased fact. Perhaps that’s best left to Trump or this regime’s spokesmen and not to serious media or blogs offering opinions based on unbiased and more objective .perspectives.

          • Reality is not ‘so called’, it is reality, and very clearly the new tax policy is flawed if one has compassion for the tens of millions of poor and struggling Filipinos. If one does not, one argues the esoterics of policy that build wealth on the suffering of souls, and bear the prospect of high NPA recruitment and other fall-out, like the sacrifice of Filipino rice farmers to the panic-driven need to get rice into the nation. Reality bites, in the Philippines.

            • caliphman says:

              Your version of inflation reality is rooted not in economic theory but rooted in emotional arguments that those who are poor will suffer from the increased prices of basic necessities due to elevated inflation and higher taxes. If anything, that line of argument is directed more to income and wealth inequality and not to economic notions of what an inflationary crisis means. By that measure, any economy and any country would be in economic crisis because there there will always be inequality and those with limited fixed or no incomes tend to suffer from even moderate increases in prices or taxes. Emotional arguments aside, that type of reality bites not only in the Philippines but most countries with pronounced income inequality.

              • Emotions are the foundation of all that we do, a reality that economists at your level may not attend to, but political leaders must. The Philippines, in the lower tier of wealth, has the highest inflation rate in Asia and worst performing stock market. I’d say ignoring the emotions of the constituents and pragmatics of political leadership is pretty poor economics. The Philippines may not be in a crisis, but it is certainly at the edge of one. To normalize this as if it were what every nation is dealing with doesn’t do much to bring the nation back to better economics and leadership, I think.

              • caliphman says:

                It’s hard to reason rationally when the other person thinks with his emotions.

              • Agree, it is harder, but emotions are conveying a factual truth, and denying that particular truth is not rational.

      • chemrock says:

        In US an increase of 1% inflation is almost panic mode as financial markets are affected seriously. In Philippines 6.7% is business as usual — cos Philippines is more resilient?

        6.7% is obviously not much concern to those living in gated villages and the aristocrats from Davao. But it is huge for the poor as all essential goods and services have soared. We have said here in TSOH a long time ago, the cheers of OFWs to see their foreign remittances turning into more pesos for their families are shortlived when inflation kicks in. Viola, the reality is here. The increase of their remittances in peso terms is now negated by home inflation. Many OFWs are now finding their dependants back home are complaining it’s not enough. This report from Hongkong is examplary of the mood …

        • caliphman says:

          There is a stark difference between the US and the Philippines economies that make a 3 pct inflation rate alarming in the former and a 6 pct rate in the latter less so. That difference is the US economy at it’s best is averaging 2-3 pct annually while the Philippines at 6 or more is among the fastest growing economies in the world. As in the US, the issue of inflation in the Philippines has to be considered in relation to economic growth rates. To those who are not students of macroeconomic theory, rapid growth fuels demand for capital goods and labor which leads to corresponding price level increases.

        • caliphman says:

          If there is anyone interested in getting a better understanding of why inflation is higher in the Philippines than before, rather than having to crack open a Samuelson primer on economics or suffer through my rambling legal or macroeconomic discourses, here is a simple alternative. The above article by Mr. Punongbayan is a must read. Yes, indeed, inflation in the Philippines is higher compared to other Asean countries and prior administrations but it is not at crisis levels and has to do a lot with external and perhaps temporary factors.,

          • It is an excellent article. I read JC Punongbayan’s works regularly. He does report on the realities, from the standpoint of economists. He points out the weaknesses in the Philippine economy as well. He also warns of the danger of the forthcoming tax hikes. And he closes with exactly my point:

            “More importantly, however, the economic managers must rein in people’s expectations about future inflation. They can do this by regaining the people’s trust and showing us all they’re on top of the economic situation.

            They can’t do this by continuing to deny there’s a problem. In the wake of the 6.4% inflation announcement, for example, Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto Pernia said it’s “not alarming” and “quite normal in a fast-growing economy.”

            It’s one thing to remain calm in the face of a crisis. It’s another to flatly deny there’s a problem, even if it’s already staring you in the face.”

            • caliphman says:

              I believe Punongbayan was referring to cases of panic inflation such as exists now in Venezuela and Germany after WW I where people expected prices to double or triple daily and so bid prices even higher by spending all their cash and funds to buy goods today instead of tomorrow. In no way did he assert that the Philippines was facing runaway inflation right now. That was not the point intended in the article unless this was what one wanted to read in it.

              • His point was on honesty and trust and the importance of that to economic health. His words say clearly what he meant. Yes, the article had many good facts and lessons in it. That does not mean this one was not highly relevant. Denial of important points can also be what someone takes away from the article if one wants to.

              • caliphman says:

                Well one of these day when I have more time, I must read up on my journal of economics and theory of political economics for any new peer reviewed research on how government honesty and credibility, politics, and popularity are key factors in driving inflation and determining the validity and value of any economic theory. To date, I have not come across any in these reference journals nor do I recall any in my graduate studies in economics here in the US. Then again I no longer work as an economist but practice law instead. But if indeed this is Punongbayan’s or anyone else’s main point which I would dispute, I would be very much surprised.

              • It may not be his main point, but it is a valid point. It is very easy to simplify the analysis. Would you invest your real savings dollars in a market where economists were not dealing candidly? The flight of foreign investors from Philippine stocks says a lot. The economic situation here is not normal, I think. To be frank, I am amazed that someone of your background, intellect, and interest in the well-being of the nation would argue that it is.

              • caliphman says:

                Suffice it to say that economists and fund managers are professional managers and should be judged more by their competence and less by their candidness. And to be able to fairly and fully evaluate their performance requires a modicum of understanding and expertise of either field. That I agree with their conclusions that Philippine inflation is not currently out of control and that the economy continues to be strong is based on financial fundamentals, regardless of my dislike of the Duterte regime. For the most part, the international rating agencies like Moody’s, S&P, etc. espouse my view inspite of the regime’s questionable reputation internationally. For me to view otherwise would compromise my intellectual and professional integrity, having the requisite training and knowledge to render an independent and objective opinion. Obviously, for your own reasons, you have reached differing conclusions.

              • From JC Punongbayan today in response to President Duterte’s comment at an ASEAN meeting about “an upward trajectory of GDP growth.” Note the adjustments to targets, GDP down and inflation up. Inflation targets have been adjusted three or four times so far.

              • caliphman says:

                Permit me not to mince words in your blog but Duterte is a cretin where macroeconomic is concerned and those who prepare his statements have a career gun pointed at their heads. Having said that, I believe all my points on candidness, credibility, competence, economic and inflation still stand. No grasshoppers, the economic sky is not falling…just yet.

              • Right. Okay, on that ‘just yet’ we can each decide whether it is best to relax and watch or wave red flags of warning or even use the red flags to poke people in the eye to try to get non-cretins into office next election.

              • caliphman says:

                Ahaha..that we can partner on, old friend 🙂

              • Always good to argue with you (and a great intellectual challenge). 🙂 Enjoy the weekend.

    • Andres 2018. says:

      Yes, possible. Wayback in 2008, inflation rate was reaching at 10%. In early 2009, it was at 7%, six month after it went back to 2% and then stabilized at 3-4% on periods after that. Now, we are at 6.7%, inflation is much worst way back 2008 yet PH recovered.

      • I detest rationalizations that miss the point, or intentionally blur the fact that hunger in the Philippines is INCREASING, not going down, even as more money flies around than ever before. Almost P4 billion, and the price of Philippine fish imported from China is not helping any.

        • I remember reading that hunger also increased in Gloria’s time.

          Seems it was – like today – a good place to be for carpetbaggers, to hell with the rest. Wonderful.

        • Andres 2018. says:

          Well, the question “You still think inflation can be brought back to the target range of 2 to 4%?” is a closed question. I bet my answer “Yes, possible.” was right on point. Since the question raised involves numbers, i rationalized my answer with numbers too, historical numbers to be exact. Without going into details, a 7-10% inflation rate was brought down to 2% and stabilized to 3-4%, it is very much possible that a 6.7% can still be brought down.

          In the slightest chance, it never pops in my mind that the point here is not the economic figures but the “fact that hunger in the Philippines is INCREASING.” Granting that hunger in the Philippines is increasing is a fact, i would like to rebut that fact with figures. According to latest SWS surveys conducted in 2018, hunger in the Philippines is DECREASING. Link for your reference:

          Will, this is just a survey, i would not say that this is absolute.

          I will not also say that your statement of hunger is increasing is purely speculation if you could suggest some sources, economic measures or surveys or the likes to support such. If your basis are isolated incidence like hunger here and there id like to say that it is not reflective of the whole scenario since it is isolated in the first place.

          On another note, base on the SWS data, hunger was at its peak at the time of Arroyo and Aquino.

          • Thanks for the reference. It may have been this article that shaped my impression ( or it may have been the poverty statistics ( At any rate, based on the survey data you reference, indeed, hunger trends are down, continuing the trend established during the Aquino years. Your reference that hunger was at its peak under Arroyo and Aquino is the troll’s sly casting of aspersions onto the administration that actually laid the groundwork for the economy that the Duterte administration was gifted, and the downward trending of hunger that accompanied it. It is these manipulations that keep you in moderation because my patience for your avoidance of sincere discussion wears thin.

          • chemrock says:

            Thanks for info on high inflation from which Philippines eventually recovered from. It’s conspicuous you don’t mention some names and good policies that helped brought inflation down.

            Cory Aquino and FVR brought Marcos inflation of 50% down to manageable levels. Pnoy brought inflation down to 2-3% levels. Filipinos are never thankful to the presidents that stabilise prices for them.

            • That last statement is true, but it is not assured that Andres, who will not be able to respond to your remark, is Filipino. He may be an instigator of the anti-Aquino, anti-civility emotionalism that underpins the Marcos/Arroyo/Duterte/China gameplan.

      • karlgarcia says:

        Supply shocks caused the inflation to spike.
        Looking back, it was hiking the rates by the BSP which lowered or tamed inflation.

        Food and energy prices caused the spike in headline inflation and for vote inflation, it was the tuition fee hikes and the rest of the so-called service index was responsible for core inflation.

        We barely escaped recession.
        Take note dutring that time we still manufacture shoes in Marikina, now we do not even manufacture our own ball pens.
        During those times our tuna goes to the EU, thanks to Duterte that will be nada,
        We have not even touched galungong yet.

        Back in 2008, there was no train to talk about, now suspension or repealing Train is being considered.
        And we already hiked rates twice in one quarter.

  4. mcgll says:

    There is another one to add to the 3 “useful idiots”, Vilma Santos, but then again her current husband was never a yellow.

    • edgar lores says:

      Lea Salonga? Although she seems to be more allied with the Marcoses.

      She did profess ignorance of the cause of inflation, whether it is attributable to the Duterte regime.

      • I read that she was conflicted about being given the chance to shine by Marcos. She felt a loyalty. But how far can you take that rationale? I think of Leah Navarro, who also got her start and visibility thanks to the Marcos family. But she has a brain and developed principles of her own. She didn’t sell them for favors and popularity.

      • andrewlim8 says:

        ” She sang for all her suppers, but she thinks the bill was footed by the Marcoses.”

        I’m trying to do a piece on her, so reserve that topic for me.

    • Thanks, mcgll. I recall she declined the LP offer to be VP? I haven’t followed her since but rather had the idea at the time she was perhaps a bit of an unreliable ally. What’s she up to.

      • mcgll says:

        They were allies of Binay wearing red at a rally for Aquino and Roxas during the campaign of 2010.Never doubted they’d shake off allegiance to the corrupt and self-serving, self-promoting former mayor, former vice-president who failed to honor his word to support the cause of Trillanes to rid government of the corrupt during the term of the malevolent, former vp, former president, former Nora Aunor look alike.etc etc.

    • Wasn’t there this obnoxious picture of Vilma Santos and others as peasants which the Pope refused to accept? No big loss.

  5. Joe, many thanks. It is true that many people see the elites as interchangeable. Some points:

    1) Quezon was aide-de-camp of Aguinaldo in 1899, they went against each other in 1935.

    2) Roxas I was originally Quezon’s protege, but he established the Liberal Party in 1946.

    3) Japanese collaboration and the disadvantageous Bell Trade Act marred Roxas I’s reputation.

    4) Someone tried to kill Roxas I for Bell Trade; Magsaysay fixed Bell Trade with Laurel-Langley.

    5) Marcos started his national career working for Roxas I, just like Gloria started working for Cory.

    6) Local Government Code and IRA were instituted by Cory to buy mayor loyalty; OICs Binay, Duts.

    Second part of three parts follows..

    • Thanks. Straight from Wiki:

      The Bell Trade Act of 1946, also known as the Philippine Trade Act, was an act passed by the United States Congress specifying policy governing trade between the Philippines and the United States following independence of the Philippines from the United States. The United States Congress offered $800 million for post World War II rebuilding funds if the Bell Trade Act was ratified by the Philippine Congress. The specifics of the act required the 1935 Constitution of the Philippines be amended. The Philippine Congress approved the measure on July 2, two days before independence from the United States of America, and on September 18, 1946 approved a plebiscite to amend the Constitution of the Philippines.

      Authored by Missouri Congressman C. Jasper Bell, the Bell Trade Act required:

      -Preferential tariffs on US products imported into the Philippines;
      -A 2:1 fixed exchange rate between the Philippine peso and the United States dollar;
      -No restrictions on currency transfers from the Philippines to the United States;
      -“Parity rights” granting U.S. citizens and corporations rights to Philippine natural resources equal to (in parity with) those of Philippine citizens, contrary to Article XIII in the 1935 Philippine Constitution, necessitating a constitutional amendment.

      • Seems (but this needs some verification) that preferential rates for Philippine sugar imports were the tit-for-tat of the Bell Trade Act. Sugar planter Roxas was accused of selling out.

        The end of the story is that this was amended by Magsaysay who drove a tougher bargain, possibly in exchange for his doing a good job against Communists, and ended in the 90s.

        The 1995 Philippine Mining Act was about Filipinos taking control of mining by themselves, but with the possibility to give licenses to multinationals. Before that, Marcos cronies had taken over a lot of formerly American mines (like the gold mines in Benguet). The one who seems to be behind a lot of the rapacious mining of today (yes, Filipinos managed that worse than US firms did) is Arroyo. Water gets poisoned, people killed, hills destroyed.

    • There are some differences though:

      A) The yellows are traditionally associated with the Catholic Church and Ateneo.

      B) Marcosians (Marcos, Enrile), leftists and opportunists (Roque) will often be from UP.

      C) Ateneans used to go to Makati to work, UP grads to government – this has blurred a bit.

      D) Recently found out from a statement by Tony La Vina that Ateneo refused sanctuary for student activists during Martial Law (unlike UP) for fear of being used by the left. UP of course is known for a lot of anti-clerical nationalists, used to be Ateneo was suspect.

      E) Mila Aguilar (former Communist turned born again Christian, now a friend of fellow born again Sereno) observed that prison and being out of power changed the original LP people. Especially Ninoy Aquino, who may have been more of a vain opportunist like so many.

      There is another fault line I have not looked into that much, but I suspect it also partly plays a role: the fault line between the mestizo, trader and plantation owner elite, formerly really big in wealth; and the local politician, principalia/trapo elite. Aquino and Roxas vs. Marcos. Then you have the old urban middle class, the employees of “Makati” which no longer is what it was, as now other players brought in in Marcos times and after dominate – but many of those are yellows (Leah Navarro and Jim Paredes, for example) versus the new middle class.

      That the new lower middle class, the “katas ng..” (fruits of.. Saudi, HK, whatever) money will tend to associate more easily with those who speak like them is a given. Besides, principles are not so clear yet among all. Only those who actually suffered directly were changed. Or indirectly like PNoy. I don’t really take Mar Roxas’ word for him being any diffferent. Cory also played a number of trapo games, out of necessity or naivete like her daughter is doing now. The LP left Leila de Lima pretty much alone when she went to jail. Her investigation against Duterte was “paused” when Duterte supported PNoy in power. The old game of investigate and stop investigating when the other guy cooperates, which we have seen a lot recently?How much is the difference between yellow and others just one of degree.. or packaging??

      (Third and final part follows)

      • So is the Philippines just “An Anarchy of Families” (book by Prof. Alfred McCoy, a Southerner, I wonder if he is related to the McCoys of the Hatfield/McCoy feud of yore)?

        Not really. I think 1986 and after it created some people with real values and beliefs.

        In fact, the practice of democracy, flawed as it was, created democrats. Even parts of the Left were civilized by taking part – I am thinking in particular of Colmenares and Elago. The civilized right is Magdalo as opposed to Palaparan, of course.

        VP Leni has the advantage that she is trusted even by some Duterte supporters. But I do see that she was originally a third choice – after Poe who refused and Trillanes who had already committed, by all accounts. She now has her own power base and position though She is Chairperson of LP after all and Kiko Pangilinan is President. LP has also recruited a lot of non-politicians as members, on the way to a modern political party – who knows?

        I also think of the likes of Sereno and Hilbay, real thinkers and proponents of democracy and rule of law, not only in a symbolic sense, flashing the L sign and wearing yellow, but truly defending principles. Because democracy and rule of law is not Aquino property. Probably not even Aquino’s fault, but the Filipinos like “Lodis”, Edgar has identified idolatry as an illness. Even Rizal was cemented into a statue and put on a pedestal in Luneta, his writings hardly read. In that sense, idols are interchangeable. More substance is needed.

        .. back to Southerners.. I remember an American film, don’t remember which one, in which a man says to another: “in Texas we call a woman who doesn’t stand by her man a bitch”..

        ..the Philippines is still very traditional in that a woman can undermine men similarly.. QED.

        • Of course rule of law, the “yellow” way, is preferable to Lex Calidae.

          But one is still tempted to think that very few people have any real principles over there.

          Just parrot whatever will please their patron: Spanish, American, Japanese, Chinese..

          True believers do at least have something respectable about them, unlike turncoats.

          But how many oaths are recited without meaning them, how many principles not meant?

      • sonny says:

        This completes the analogy of the Philippine societal DNA/gene. Health, Education, Welfare (HEW) learning & training happens either at the Ateneo half-helix or at the UP half-helix and connected horizontally by the various rungs of Philippine society in the middle. (Can’t resist the metaphor, my background and timeline).

  6. In the United States, an entertainer found her voice. It proved to matter as voter registrations shot up.

    “In her post Sunday, [Taylor] Swift broke a long and conspicuous silence on political issues, writing that she felt compelled to speak out “due to several events in my life and in the world the past two years.”

  7. Andres 2018. says:

    Originally, its Yellows = LP.

    PNoy = haciendero.

    Roxas = haciendero.

    Haciendero = oppressor

    PNoy, Roxas = oppressor

    The equation above explain why many still dislike PNoy and Roxas, no matter how good they perform in their own capacity. Lucky enough, PNoy is an “Aquino” and it was established 30 years ago that:

    Aquino = democracy

    PNoy = Aquino

    PNoy = democracy

    The same concept was develop by LP way back in 2010 election, they opted for PNoy instead of Roxas as the president. And LP was successful. 2016 election, LP fails.

    In this coming 2019 election, LP strategy is getting neophytes as its bearers. This strategy was conceived when Robredo, a neophyte of national election, and Duterte, also a neophyte, won the 2016 polls.

    Next time, we will look into the campaign strategy of the reds and the orange.

    • Neophyte requires definition, I think. “New to a subject, skill, or belief” is what google says. LP’s strategy is indeed to find people who are unspoiled by partisan politics and corruption, so to include Duterte as an example of the strategy reflects a bizarre misapplication of the idea. LP got burned by the gadflies of no principle who switched to the majority to gain political favors after the 2016 election. The “neophytes” LP is proposing to field are people of principle rather than trapo politics. I think new, in that regard, is a strength and they hope voters will see it that way, after the demolition job being done under President Duterte’s unprincipled leadership.

      • popoy says:

        I failed to buy and read the books of Mario Puzo’s THE GODFATHER but I saw the composting (into humus) of Marlon Brando and germination and flowering (into a bent tree) of Al Pacino as hoods of celluloid. I surmised from the movies that a Godfather is a user. Once one had been used and DISCARDED, one is FINISHED even if one establishes his own territory. Worse if one becomes a stone in the Godfather’s shoes, one must be removed. Samuel Butler wrote THE WAY OF ALL FLESH. Mario Puzo’s fiction based on real life events I think should be titled: THE WAY OF ALL LIES.

        What’s the point? In real life those who allowed themselves to be used, despite their wide smiles in photos should know they are FINISHED.

      • Andres 2018. says:

        PDuterte is a neophyte in national election, like VPRobredo.

        • If that comparison means anything, I am at a loss to understand what it is.

        • karlgarcia says:

          Granted they are both neophytes, would that be an excuse for Duterte to poopoo the UN, the EU, the US, the ICC etc.
          No good president would do what he did.

          Meanwhile, in Makati the councilors want Abigail Binay out because they did not feel loved unlike the love they felt with Jejomar and Junjun.

          Sorry to be harsh, maybe Abigail did not give them cake during their birthdays.(hit by inflation?)

          • Andres 2018. says:

            Haha, i did not expect this reply since what in my mind is about election strategy and not about someones demeanor on UN, EU, US and ICC.

            But to answer your question, anyone could poopoo on anyone. So, Duterte did not need any excuse to poopoo the UN, EU, etc. However, poopooing anyone is not an absolute right, you may crossed the line and there maybe some laws you violated like libel, slander or whatever. With respect to Duterte, i believe there are no law or regulation that restrict him to do such. Well, maybe good manners and right conduct? But we all know that GMRC have no fangs and claws, unlike real laws that when you violate it you go to jail. On another hand, UN, EU,etc can hate on Duterte and do some sanctions like not giving him deals or something like that.

            • karlgarcia says:

              You had me at GMRC have no fangs and claws, is that what you tell your kids?

            • “However, poopooing anyone is not an absolute right, you may crossed the line and there maybe some laws you violated like libel, slander or whatever.”

              Excuse me, is that meant as a threat aimed at silencing people’s opinions here? An opinion that ‘no good president would threaten the UN’ is libelous? I’d guess in most academic institutions, people would agree with the statement and be more inclined to find Duterte’s bluster libelous.

              Anyway, we are all issuing personal opinions here, and your remark casting personal aspersions is way out of bounds and violates the terms of participation in the blog’s discussions. In other words, you are a goner from this forum.

              • This is Andres’ response:

                It is NOT a threat aimed at silencing people here. I don’t think criticizing a president is libelous, whatever the degree of the criticism. My self even believes that you can through any statement at the president without the fear of libel suit since he is a public figure. Libel is more appropriate against private individual vs private individual. I have yet to hear that incriminating remarks between leaders of nation could be libelous. There are so many factors to consider like situs or jurisdiction of the law.

              • karlgarcia says:

                When Andres said you were crossing the line, it never occurred to me that it was directed at me.
                But his answer was weird that we fear being sued for libel by the president, I fail to grasp that, and would not want to bother.

                I did not want to tell you what to do in terms of your prerogative, but I felt guilty that I partially caused the moderation of LCX and Andres, but this is your house and we are just housemates.

              • Oh, you had absolutely nothing to do with either case, so no worries. By the way, one of the issues Andres and I debated was hunger trends, and the third quarter poll information says hunger went up. If you look at the graph in the article, the downward momentum begun late under the Aquino term (which built the CCT program up to 4 million recipients) has clearly flattened under Duterte, and may be edging up. Assuming it is a lag indicator, we can expect a further climb in the fourth quarter.


              • No hard feelings, karl. (At least this way I know Joe’s reading my comments. Carefully. j/k, Joe 😉 )

              • karlgarcia says:

                When I was watching the news last night about the topic, I actually was thinking of Andres and his comments about hunger, he showed a link and asked you where you were coming from.

                ps, I also think he is a troll, but I think he is Filipino and not Chinese, NH and I talked to him in the vernacular on moves on women and he schooled us that it is called hokage moves, he said Hokage moves ang tawag dyan ng kabataan.( the youth call that hokage moves)

          • The EU for the most part did not notice Duterte, any more than most of us will notice a drug addict or drunkard in Caloocan cursing around.

            True that the Philippines recovered under Aquino, but that was because trust was tentatively regained after the Arroyo times when many investors lost trust.

            This time, regaining trust may take some decades, meanwhile good luck with the new Chinese friends who will screw you.

            • karlgarcia says:

              Have you read to POGO links, Duterte issued EO 13, but what he is doing is laying down the welcome mat instead of a crackdown on illegal gambling. The Bangladshi heist was just the tip of the iceberg?

              • Even the Swiss have given up bank secrecy.

                Philippines can now be the modern Tortuga, haven of crookery.

              • sonny says:

                Tortuga, hmmm … just been watching Errol Flynn in CAPTAIN BLOOD. 🙂 and Jean Peters in ANNE OF THE INDIES.

              • Hehe, those are the kinds of movies my father also liked to watch, sometimes even singing with the music when the swashbuckling started. But I mean Tortuga in the sense of a pirate haven, which it is also portrayed as in Pirates of the Carribean – fun but watch your back always.

       – this article, written as follow-up research to Chemrocks Bangladesh Bank heist article, is about how Philippine laws make it practically impossible to find out who has black money over there, even encourage it I think. “Advantage” or liability in a world of increasing transparency? Depends on what you want. Tax havens of old like Monaco, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, yes even Luxemburg and Austria built a foundation of capital. Movies like “Blow” with Johnny Depp show how unreliable black money havens can mean your money is gone in the worst case – this is what happens to the drug lord played by Johnny who trusts a Central American country to hide his earnings. Difficult topic.In the Philippine context, who ever knows who has how much in his local $$ accounts and from where?

              • sonny says:

                The irony of it, nestled in the middle of Clark Air Base are the remnants of US military infra (13th Air Force) with well-laid out roads. Side by side are the would-be attempts at Philippine commerce & industry, structures and facilities. And a fully outfitted R & R casino, park and vacation residence complex occupied by mostly Chinese nationals and central offices staffed by Filipinos. We were part of this “oddity” as vacationing expats (via time-sharing arrangements from US-based contractors). Time was when we as Philippine civilians were just outsiders looking in. Pre-Pinatubo times that is, and surely a-changing – Tortuga, East and Tortuga West.

  8. popoy says:

    In my PG Studies on Community Power Structure (mentor: Dean LV Carino) I read this but now have hazy memories of it:

    We studied San Juan when the Mayor was Erap which turned out that the real power behind progressive San Juan WASN’T Erap.

    C. Wright Mills book identified the factors and actors behind USA’s take off after WWII.

  9. popoy says:

    Call it Pinoy’s congenital bias or respect for their women, mahaba ang pisi ko para kay Vilma, Lea, Korina, De Lima, Sereno, Robredo, etc. Did these women kill bad people, did they plunder people’s money, when in power did they go after patriots, radicalized students, did they muzzle the free press?

    We are not ZERO when it comes to BAD women to their country and people and who should be institutionalized or COULD be languishing in death row. But we follow the world having MUCH LESS women than men in penitentiaries.

    Mahaba ang pisi ko sa mga Pinays. But I know the waknakataws and waknakatans.

    • popoy says:

      Our women If I may, are mere water in a dirty swamp, to drain the swamp of its water is THE WRONG WAY to clean it. TSoH with modern technology certainly knows how to do it. A caveman’s way is to diligently pluck out the solid garbage, dry it, then burn it into nitrogen and hydrogen. I know the caveman hasn’t even heard of chemistry 101.

      POTUS Trump is saying he’s draining the American swamp of what? Solids (according to hydrology) can’t be drained.

      If a hubby of a Pinay housewife even just whisper ill of Pinays, the hubby will be outside the kulambo for many a cold night.

    • As with economics, we must distinguish between ideals or macro, and pragmatic or where the rubber meets the road. The Philippines is what it is for a reason, and justifying the reason won’t change things. Ethical awareness and patriotism are weak here. Yes, individuals have freedom of choice. If more individuals chose better, the nation would be better off.

    • Actually I had the impression that among the traditional trapos, the women were most prayerful. Therefore I concluded that the men sinned so that there was money in the house and the women prayed to make sure everybody still somehow went to heaven. But I was a child then, remember.

      Among Dilawan who are such good boys, it seems the men do good things and the women like Kris, Korina and Sharon have to negotiate with the bad boys to leave their men alone. Seriously, there are some who think they are doing what they do to keep PNoy, Mar and Kiko out of jail.

  10. F Perez says:

    These are brats bereft of responsibility to their country; who think the world revolves around them; who are popular for their real-life drama and cute bungling lapses. They are no different to the mayor – a fake, manufactured symbol of hope for their fans.

  11. karlgarcia says:

    Kris made statements saying that she now understood why Duterte won.
    After that she got “welcome on board” statements from the palace.
    That is all because of her beef with Korina who just featured her ex in her Rated K program.

    Korina interviewing Mocha is a non issue as far as I am concerned, unlike Kris she did not get the Welcome aboard from the palace, instead they fired Mocha even if Mocha told the public that they begged her to stay.Let Mocha have her few minutes of relevancy, because I do not think that her 5 million followers even if they are human read her articles.

    Regarding Sharon, some people forget that she is the niece of Helen Gamboa and Tito Sotto.All Kiko Pangilinan could say is trabaho lang at walang personalan. Kiko Pangilinan was called Mr. Duly noted by the pro-FPJ and anti-Arroyo forces because of he just kept saying noted during that PET event deciding on who won the elections.

    Nobody is perfect, it is unfortunate that people have short memories is a fallacy.
    I just hope that memory is put to good use like during elections.

    • Thanks for elaborating on the profiles.

      • popoy says:

        Thanks God and TSoH guys
        my feet quite a number of times
        had been pulled back to the ground
        and my neurons stopped
        on tracks from soaring high
        up the clouds of the unrealities.

        Here in TSoH everyone
        of us in the near or distant past
        will remember believing
        and doing what
        we think is right

        begot cold shoulders and disdain
        from different others, but we persevered
        against blatant and subtle
        and slow corruption
        of the human appetites.

  12. Off topic but clearly of interest to the Philippines, the stress between the US and China was kicked up a notch when the US arrested a Chinese spy and will hold him for trial:

    So it is clear that the US has had it up to the eyeballs with China’s rise on the back of theft of American corporate and government technology and secrets, and unfair trading practices. Throw in as well the conflict in the Western Pacific where China has staked a claim to international waters. China is apparently deeply engaged in influencing the upcoming US election, so it is probably a given that incidents of malicious fake news in the Philippines will also increase as the election in 2019 approaches.

    • NHerrera says:

      I will do an Andres. Russia and the US have spies in the other’s country — spying for secrets, including military and weapons design and manufacture. So why not China on the US? Why not indeed. The problem for China is the US will now and in the future tighten the screws so China will not reap what it does not sow.

      • A legitimate question. I suspect American security people would answer that “we spy to protect our interests, not reach out to steal intellectual and technology goods for resale into the global market.” The Trump phenomenon sees America as a victim of China and people breaking the law to come to America and be supported by earnest, hardworking Americans. Well, there are holes in the argument, for sure, but I do believe it is the scale of the thefts that have hurt American companies and that is the tipping point. American companies are a force in politics. Their money is.

          “It’s different. It has the same objectives because they all go back to Sun Tzu in one form or another, or the fifth century B.C., who had the five kinds of spies. He wrote the book on spying. The Chinese have done espionage, spying, and intelligence work very well since the beginning. It’s all through the romance of the Three Kingdoms. It’s been a central part of their work.

          They use different techniques. You don’t find the case officer in a trench coat on the corner making a pass with an agent or laying down a dead drop, necessarily. What you find is the massive collection technique, the vacuum cleaner. Somebody once said — I think this is in Nick [Eftimiades]’s book — “If the Russians want to get certain sand from a beach that’s special, they’ll have a submarine come in at night. They’ll put a crew infiltration. They’ll get a bucket full of sand, and they’ll take it back to the submarine, and leave.” The Chinese will have 500 people having picnics on the beach, each picking up the sand in a small can, and bringing it back.

          It’s a different technique. They rely much more on contacts, persuasion. Only a small percentage is for actually clandestine work. They do that, but a very small percentage. It’s very frustrating for people like the FBI who are looking for the classical intelligence man.”

          NH and Joe,

          I think the recent case is more for our side, than it is targeting China specifically. Deterrence. At least that’s my reading of it (from spy novels). As for imprisonment, if you ‘ve seen “Bridge of Spies” , he’ll just be traded.

      • chemrock says:

        The Chinese had their closely guarded silk worms smuggled out of China sometime in the 6AD which led to the emergence of the Byzantine silk industry. Ever since then, they have felt theft of technology is not a one-way street.

        Just food for thought, not by a long short is this a justification for theft of any kind

  13. Francis says:

    I have mixed feelings on the article.

    I agree with the sentiment—but have reservations with the direction and details.

    There are flaws with how the “yellows” appear to people—and those flaws should be given some serious thought and reflection. However, I found the article’s approach to this a bit odd.

    “People don’t trust the yellows because of Kris, Sharon, and Korina”

    The logic of the article is that “people” don’t trust the “yellows” because of the way certain individuals with personal ties to the “yellows” have been humanizing the administration, i.e. giving people from the administration air-time Which I found a very strange argument to highlight. I do not think that the “distrust” for the yellows among a significant proportion of Filipinos is merely or primarily rooted in this “softness” towards the administration.

    Maybe—if we were to re-define “people” as fellow persons who disagree with the current direction of the nation—this line of argument would make sense. I don’t think the average Filipino would be angry at these people for “humanizing” the administration; on the contrary—as we have all witnessed with the national obession on this notion of ‘biased’ news—NOT giving the administration air-time will only feed conspiracy theories and god-knows-what from the socmed pundits.

    If Kris, Sharon and Korina have “hurt” the yellows, I think that it is not their personal fault but the fault of the circumstances/context and structures in which they just so happen to be located in. In short, it is not so much what they have personally done—but rather what they represent which many Filipinos quite dislike (@Irineo sheds some light on that).

    Whatever detrimental effect that Kris, Sharon and Korina have on the opposition is—for the most part—merely a symptom of wider weaknesses in the opposition, of broader factors in society.

    @Irineo has already very comprehensively explained the latter, e.g. the broader factors in society—in the form of the heavy distrust for elites that has erupted in the form of support for “outsider” Duterte, a distrust which has arisen from a historical context where elites have always dominated, have always been interchangeable with peers and rivals.

    But I wish to draw more attention to internal factors rather than external—and one internal flaw of the opposition that I think should highlighted is that it has failed to transcend personality.

    I don’t mean to offend. I say this in good faith.

    However—this would sound completely wrong to most people here. A slap in the face. Am I saying that the figures in the opposition are “just as dirty” as those in the administration?


    They are fairly principled people. They are good people who have firm convictions—convictions that value the importance of freedom, of liberty and of the notion of liberal democracy. What I am saying is that it is not enough to have principled leaders and call that a movement which has transcended personality politics, a movement grounded on principles and not personality.

    The descriptive part of the concept that is “personality politics” should be divorced from its emotional, pejorative part; “personality politics,” as a neutral term, can refer to ALL forms of politics reliant on personality—including both the bad and good.

    The opposition is still driven by personality politics. Of a sort. The good kind, most likely—but it is still personality politics nonetheless.

    How should I put this? In the Philippines, a “war” is waged between followers clutching “demonic” idols and followers clutching “angelic” idols.

    We are inspired and awed by the principled oppositionists we see on the teleivision and the internet—yet, how much of that adulation is due to shared principles between the normal supporter and the leader and how much of that adulation is just plain awe of the preferred flavor?

    What do I mean by flavor? Well—people tend to prefer different flavors of awe; in short, there are many different kinds of awesome with people preferring some kinds over others. I suppose that there are Filipinos who prefer being in “awe” of principled liberals and I am sure that there are conversely Filipinos who prefer being in “awe” of strong authoritarians.

    However—preference is not equivalent to principle.

    One’s preference may eventually lead someone to a certain set of principles: an intuitive love for freedom may lead one to delight in liberalism, an intuitive extreme fear of the “Other” may incline one towards fascism.

    Yet—preferences are not principles. A preference is a “gut feel,” something that is still unclear. You can be wishy-washy with preferences; you can choose to compromise your preferences. You sometimes don’t know what exactly your preferences mean to you; the only thing you do know is that it is there. A principle, on the other hand, is as clear as mountain freshwater—you know what you are fighting for, that is why you cling to it so much.

    (This parallels, I think, the distinction between Plato’s mere “opinion” and genuine “knowledge;” one is circumstantial, the other is eternal.)

    Another way of describing the difference between “preference” and “principle” is to put it alongside Aristotle’s notion of goodwill and friendship. For Aristotle, goodwill is not equivalent to friendship, but they are nonetheless closely related. Of the relationship between the two, Aristotle noted that “goodwill” was like feeling when you knew that he or she was someone who you felt could be a good friend. A “friendship” at first sight. In short, good will could lead you to friendship. Not automatically—but if you choose.

    In the same way, your preference could lead you to this or that set of principles.

    Still—that begs the question. What exactly is a movement of principles? What exactly is a movement of mere preference—in other words, a movement of mere circumstance?

    The former lasts—it may ebb and it may rise from time to time, but it will always remain. The latter is just a “flash in the frying pan,” a fad.

    I think about two “institutions” — the Filipino Left and the Catholic Church. They are both examples of movements of principle. They are not fads. How so?

    For me—the test is simple.

    You could reveal their leadership to be caught up in all sorts of scandals, but that will not automatically make these movements disappear. Pope Francis could be hypothetically revealed as a fraud one day—and while it is true that many Catholics would probably leave the Church as a result, at the end of the day the Church will still stand. Or a good number of those Catholics who leave will remain Christians, just of a different denomination. Because the Catholic Church is not built on the personality of its leaders (however charismatic) but is built on the fact that its followers share a common set of principles, namely the Catholic interpretation of Jesus’ teachings, a Catholic interpretation of Christianity.

    The Filipino Left has lived and died several times. The PKP before WW2. The Huks. The CPP. Why does it still remain? Why has it re-invented itself over the century? I am no revolutionary. I am a firm pacifist, I believe in democracy, and I staunchly disagree with the communists in their violent methods—but I do wish that reformists could do more to emulate this sort of persistence, this sort of capability for reinvention within the broad space of peaceful, democratic system.

    A typical follower from a movement of principle would say—in response to those saying that their movement’s leadership are very flawed—that, if the accusations are true, then bring on new leadership. The fundamentals of the movement are now what is wrong, only the leadership. People can separately identify leadership from the abstract principles.The errors of the leadership do not invalidate the principles; the leadership are not equal and do not eternally represent my principles. The follower of a movement of principle sticks to his principle for the most part—and demands leadership which coincides with principle.

    A prominent leader of a “movement of principle” could fade away—and that “movement of principle” will still stand for decades, for centuries. To the point where even the most prominent leaders will just be distinguished for leaving the biggest accretion to a continunal slab of progress.

    Think of the layers of tree bark. The most prominent leaders will just ultimately end up being the thickest rings.

    (Pardon any biological inaccuracies with that metaphor.)

    I will rest easy with the opposition when it becomes a true movement of principle, not just at the top—but in the rank-and-file bottom.

    You will know that point has been reached when the political discussion will be about principles and not about the personal fobbies of so-and-so. When—even if the leadership is revealed to have significant flaws—those sharing said common principles will not waver, but will just rather call for new leadership in the worst case scanario.

    • Francis says:


      This might seem trivial—but I feel it should be really emphasized that the current incarnation of the Filipino Left is not just the communists. The Filipino Left is not a homogenous group but a heterogeneous variety of different groups—including some principled groups and individuals who sincerely disagree with their more extreme counterparts and try their best to radically reform the system via peaceful, democratic means.

    • “How should I put this? In the Philippines, a “war” is waged between followers clutching “demonic” idols and followers clutching “angelic” idols.”

      The Constitution seems to be the angelic idol, so it is hard to see them on the same plane. It is also hard to see Noynoy Aquino as any kind of showman. He was rather the reluctant candidate that people who idolize hope elected. They were turned negative by the demons who kept ragging on a few human failures, thus making people believe hope, who evidently is a very slow lady hereabouts, could be sped up with a dictatorial showman.

      All this slips away from the point, though, that teaching comes in many forms, and the three women featured in the blog do little to teach people that their relatives are offering the real hope, the one that follows their idol of laws. Rather, they teach that demons are perfectly fine to hobnob with.

      • Francis says:

        “The Constitution seems to be the angelic idol…”

        This did not occur to me. What I originally meant was that Filipino politics (whether the good reformist types or the incorrigible trapos) revolved around personality, just different kinds; some like their idols “clean and competent” while others like their idols…cussing.

        It’s all about the person, not so much the policies, the platforms, the principles…

        Which (as I point out in my earlier addendum comment below) is just an inherent feature in politics everywhere but again—the fact that this is the only kind of politics in the Philippines for the most part, is something that I find…disappointing.

        But you did point out the constitution as an “angelic idol,” which I would disagree with—because the constitution is not a person, but an abstract set of norms. Perhaps, I am wrong to describe reformist politics as “entirely” personality-oriented. There is some principle (in the descriptive sense) suffused throughout the whole of reformist politics, and not just in some prominent individuals.

        But I think I am still inclined to think that “personality politics” (in the descriptive sense) is the dominant style of politics for all sides in the Philippines.

        But I suppose those who want to defend the constitution, those who hold the defense of that constitution as a principle, who stand behind the principles of the constitution, of the post-1986 status quo—that may represent a set of proto-principles, principles in the womb…implicit and not yet explicit…unnamed…more intuititve than consciously held…a reflex

        And my personal comment regarding the opposition’s “proto-principle” of “defending the constitution” is that not only is it not sophisticated enough (see abovr), but that it may not be enough to solve the roots of the societal issues which led us to get us Duterte in the first place.

        “…making people believe hope, who evidently is a very slow lady hereabouts, could be sped up with a dictatorial showman.”

        I know (and believe me, I agree) that people were too impatient and wanted change right away. But I have come to the conclusion that Filipino Democracy is in the emergency room, and in the future it will need quick, rapid and bold measures (not the stupid DDS dictatorial understanding of it, but more along the lines of…a New Deal or Great Society) to just…staunch the sheer cynicism in the citizenry (and make the Marcos nostalgiacs shut up).

        But I am digressing a lot.

        • If there seems no practical way to implement bold ‘new deal’ reconstruction, and principles are recognized as stabilizing and helpful in setting political direction, then one can argue that personalities who hold to principle are the preferred idol, and one can move stepwise in that direction by supporting them and teaching, encouraging, or badgering other intelligent people to put a little principle into their lives. One can discuss it forever, but it behooves people to claim a stake in the well-being of the nation and speak up for principles. That’s all the article is. Me making an effort to badger readers toward principle. If you find a ‘new deal’ movement taking shape anywhere, let me know. I’ll likely climb aboard.

    • Francis says:

      Addendum 2:

      Am I arguing that “personality” does not (descriptive) and/or should not (normative/moral) play a role in politics?

      On both counts—no.

      Personality is an inevitable and eternal part of politics—it was, is and will be always there to account for; it is an always-present fact of politics to deal with (descriptive). Personality (when we define “personality” as not charm but moral character) is also an important factor (but not the ONLY) to consider in choosing a candidate to vote for (normative/moral).

      All societies have personality politics of some sort in their politics—but mature democracies have politics of principle to accompany that and to ensure that the political systems as a whole have the capacity to tackle complez issues, while mediocre democracies are stuck repeating mistakes again and again because all they can talk about is the chismis of which candidate is just sooo charming.

    • Micha says:

      Excellent post Francis. The Liberal Party is of course, for the most part, a centrist party. The problem with centrism is that it is neither here nor there when it comes to political ideology. It’s a safe spot for political cowards although they would always sell themselves as somebody who have attained certain degree of political maturity and has sympathies for both those on the left and those on the right. It gives them an excuse to vacillate on any commitment to policies or principles of either side.

      On the surface, it seems to be a politically tenable position. Trouble is, while you may not necessarily offend or create fierce enemies from both sides of the political spectrum, you won’t have enough committed friends too. This is what happened to centrist Hillary when even labor union members in Ohio and Pennsylvania refused to support her. The same can be said of the Liberal Party.

      • Interesting argument for extremism. I always viewed centrality as the rational balancing point that arises as reasonable people try to carve progress out of extremes that, if pronounced, would lead the nation to destruction. To think of that as cowardly is hard for me to understand.

        • Micha says:

          “I always viewed centrality as the rational balancing point that arises as reasonable people try to carve progress out of extremes…”

          In theory, that’s the supposed role of centrists. Until it isn’t. There are centrists who lean left and centrists who lean right. Hillary and husband Bill veered hard right, attracted by the luster of Wall Street money. And when they did so, they failed on their mediating role.

          The same can be said of our own Liberal Party under Pnoy who embraced the neo-liberal bunk Their failure to mediate is what made Trump and Duterte possible.

          • The neo-liberal bunk that President Aquino embraced stabilized the economy and raised debt to investment grade, deployed technocrats as department heads, built roads, classrooms, and trust, substantially eliminated corruption, modernized the military, won the West Philippine Seas arbitration and raised the Philippines into leadership and respect across Southeast Asia. The failure, recognized and stated by President Aquino himself, was that they spoke concepts to the people when the people wanted something more tangible . . . which was not possible to deliver. Whom would you have preferred as President?

            Centrists do wobble and play their best bets. You preferred Sanders over the Clintons?

            • By the way, I’ve noted in my various debates with idealists here and there that it is difficult for them to actually make decisions that are attached to risk, because risks generate failures and their penchant for perfection does not allow that in the calculus. It also opens them to criticism because everyone is flawed in some significant respect, and that is hard for them to calculate as well.

              • In other words, can we please get beyond the easy criticisms like “neo-liberal bunk” and figure out how the Philippines can thrive?

              • Besides, there is nothing more neoliberal than the TRAIN and TRABAHO laws of this admin. Raising VAT and other excise taxes while lowering taxes for one’s own clientele which already earns well is neoliberal and populist, Schröder did that for us (IT pros) too in the late 1990s in Germany, we felt richer for a while but rising prices of consumer goods due to other taxes made that an illusion we enjoyed only for a while. If I am not mistaken, TRABAHO even flattens taxes to 20% for everybody, classic neoliberal tax policy, no more progressive taxation at all, which is something Romania did long ago – even with exactly 20%, so which consultants came up with that recipe? – and made life even harder for the poor, driving them into massive migration.

                At the same time, the present policies of Duterte do away with the advantages of neoliberalism, which was meant to attract capital and promote growth. Favoring only certain cronies foreign and local is like Marcos’ economics, except the foreigners now have smaller eyes and darker hair.

              • I’ve learned that such labels (neoliberal) are always wrong because they confine that which cannot be confined, the right of someone to make up his own mind. “Jingoism” is extreme patriotism. I propose to define “lingoism” to mean extreme use of language to stamp tattoos on people’s foreheads. It’s not nice. If we just look at outcomes, preferably benchmarked against a prior set of standards (or promises), then we can simply say someone did “very well, well, so-so, poor, or very poor” without demeaning them with labels that invariably over-simplify and mislead.

            • Micha says:

              The neo-liberal bunk that President Aquino embraced delivered prosperity to a very select few and consigning nearly half of Philippine population to live in poverty.That the hoped for trickle down effect did not trickle is borne by the fact that those at the top do not want it to trickle at all.

              No corruption and no privileged wang-wangs is a noble goal but we were so down on that index that instead of making that as a default state of a progressive economy it has seemed to become the end goal in itself, instead of just a way to creating a more just and fair society.

              Would we have succeeded in crafting a more inclusive society if there was continuity in President Aquino’s agenda and his embrace of the neo-liberal bunk?

              No, no, no, and no.

              Neo-liberalism will always and forever enrich and empower the corporate mafia. Somewhere along the way you have to expect social and political spasm.

              • An idealist’s lament. You would have selected Miriam Santiago, Jojo Binay, Grace Poe, or Rody Duterte, I guess. Okay. Good luck with that.

              • I laugh because I think of all the multiple choice test questions in high school and you would probably be the person at the back of the room insisting on answering with an essay. Life is forced choice, now and then.

              • Micha says:

                Manong Joe that’s a complete non-sequitur.

                Where did that came from?

                Santiago, Binay,Poe, Rodrigo?

                You ain’t even guessing right Manong Joe.

              • Those were the candidates for the presidency other than Roxas. Our difference in perspectives, and I find it is similar to my discussions with Francis and Caliphman, is that there is the idealized world of concepts and impractical goals, and the real world of poverty and elections and a government that actually determines the welfare of people, and even if they live or die. So for me, the ideals are fruitless as goals unless they can be translated into pragmatic acts, within the realm of reason and possibility. If the election system is presenting five candidates, none of whom will better distribute income, of what good is it to condemn a decent candidate because he is not the ideal? Or President Aquino on the same basis. It is such a negative framework, much akin to the framework of Get Real Post that relentlessly condemns any government and Filipinos in general. Pardon me for getting exasperated, but I’d like to better understand the pragmatics, and the choices in 2016 were what they were.

              • Micha says:

                I did vote and campaigned for President Aquino in 2010 but was totally turned off by the Roxas run in 2016. Would have preferred Jesse Robredo if his helicopter did not malfunction somewhere in Mindoro.

                The 2016 presidential hopefuls were a gallery of misfits.

                Would Roxas have made a good president? Maybe, maybe not. Most likely not, imo.

                But that’s not the point.

                The point is that if he did not run on the platform of neo-liberalism masked by anti corruption crusade, then he would have been an attractive candidate for the disenfranchised to root for and Rodrigo would not have stood a chance.

                Anyway, this is pretty much a digression of the original subject which is that the present opposition represented by the Liberal Party, being a centrist, is devoid of clear cut governing principles that people could rally behind and is instead still more focused on cultivating stars and charms of personalities.

              • Here is the LP Values Charter. I don’t see how you get to your assessment from here.


              • By the way, here is an interesting development. Roxas is expected to run for Senate as an independent, not as an LP candidate “for strategic reasons”. LP is holding a slot for him if he wants it.


                There will also be some decent candidates to pick from among the opposition parties and I hope voters can distinguish between Gadon and Hilbay.

              • Micha says:

                Right off the bat one could see the glaring contradiction. Abot kaya at abot kamay na pag-aaral at pag-papagamot. Affordable education and affordable health care.

                In the latter part of President Aquino’s term he vetoed the proposed legislation for free college education in state universities.

                He also vetoed the proposal to increase the monthly benefits of Social Security pensioners.

                Two crucial progressive proposals which would have turned the tables in favor of his anointed successor.

                Exhibit “A” on why the LP values charter is nothing but a piece of paper strewn with words that mean nothing.

                I rest my case.

              • You are penalizing LP for two decisions President Aquino made that conflict with your idealistic (extremist) views even though they were financially prudent. Any candidate in your eyes would be bunk, even the new LP under Robredo who I suspect crafted the values statement (not former President Aquino) and who is about as pro-poor as they come. The party is even reaching outside of politics to find fresh, untainted people, but your demands are that a successful president will be a clone of Micha’s thinking, or you will slander him, or her. Cool. I understand where you are coming from now and why we will always not see things the same.

              • Francis says:


                I don’t like neoliberalism too—but I admit the political facts on the ground is that the state of “liberal democracy” in the Philippines was—even at its best—extremely (in the descriptive sense—NOT pejoratively) immature and the state of the social democracy and any other peaceful electoral Left just as immature.

                It is not the most productive course of action at this moment to shout at the liberals for not understanding what “neoliberalism” is—particularly, for two reasons.

                First—it is simply not the right time to do so. Democracy in the Philippines is on the verge of slipping towards authoritarianism; it is imperative right now that any force favoring democracy—whether right, left, center, liberal or whatever—should stand together to peacefully ensure that our democratic institutions do not fall. I have my own deep reservations and my critiques, but those personal reservations and critiques of mine are not the main priority now—our democracy is.

                Second—there are better ways of engaging genuine productive dialogue with the liberals and centrists (even conservatives) in the Philippines. @Micha, I can assure you that the liberals, centrists and even the conservatives here are not the same as their (no offense to @Joeam) American counterparts. The excessive—almost obsessive—love for the free market and the almost cultish worship of the individual is mainly an American condition, not a Filipino one.

                Filipinos are a really conservative bunch—that is true. But Filipinos are also a more collective and more social bunch as well—and I think that opens up quite a bit of space for guys on the center-left like you and me to open dialogue towards a more emphatic, more humane, more democratic economy and society. If you told Filipino Conservatives (who would probably be closer to the Christian Democrats in Europe than the rabidly free-market-at-all-costs Republicans) that welfare, for instance, if implemented in a certain way could build social ties and solidarity—I think they would be open to hearing out some ideas on how to make the economy, how to make society more inclusive. If you told Filipino Liberals—instead of immediately lambasting them with bombastic rhetoric—that maybe the answer to the rabid authoritarian populism eating away at our liberal democracy is a more equitable society, that maybe a democratic economy is necessary for the celebration and preservation of liberty, I think they too would be also open to hearing out ideas on how to make the economy and society more inclusive.

                It annoys and saddens me at times that democracy in the Philippines is still nascent, is still immature in many ways. But there is a silver lining: democracy in the Philippines is still malleable. We can still aim for a European-style consensus where Filipinos from across the political spectrum—right, left and center—can agree, at a minimum, on the necessity of prioritizing society above the market when necessary and of maintaining the right balance between regulation and markets to ensure a humane, loving society.

                I mean, I know even that isn’t perfect. As a left-leaning guy—I have many, many, many reservations even with that. But—for most Filipinos, for the entire nation—such a consensus, even if farily moderate, would make such a big difference. And more importantly—such a consensus will make the fascist and authoritarian currents fade away for good (hopefully).

                There are better and more effective ways to argue for a more inclusive society.



                “Our difference in perspectives, and I find it is similar to my discussions with Francis and Caliphman, is that there is the idealized world of concepts and impractical goals, and the real world of poverty and elections and a government that actually determines the welfare of people, and even if they live or die. So for me, the ideals are fruitless as goals unless they can be translated into pragmatic acts, within the realm of reason and possibility.“

                I know that I look obsessed with abstractions—and I don’t deny that at all. On the contrary—I can completely argue thay my obession with abstractions is rooted in very pragmatic, very empirical reasons. To cut straight to the chase: I am worried about repeating the mistakes and flaws of 1986, of EDSA. I absolutely don’t want—in 40s and 50s—to see presidential campaign ads for Sandro Marcos.

                I am aware that I am quite bookish and lack a lot of experience. I know that, and I try my best to compensate for that by often assuming the worst, by always assuming the dominance of self-interest in most situations. I am aware that ideals don’t work one hundred percent in practice, that often ideals are driven by self-interest or merely serve to mask self-interest, that what works on paper does not exactly capture the ground reality.

                When I talk about abstractions, theories, ideas—I don’t mean the intellectual masturbation that takes place among some groups of scholars, that manifests in isolated arcane debates on minute details in academic ivory towers. What I mean is abstractions, theories and ideas meant to reinforce and refine practical action and make the results of practical action last and endure.

                Like maps. No one says that maps—which are abstractions of a place, of a series of locations in a certain area—are impractical. A map helps me abstract space in a given area to allow me to navigate that space more effectively. What I am merely suggesting with all my comments on the need for more abstraction, more reflection and (I know) more theorizing—is merely the creation of more mental maps.

                A “mental map” (abstraction) which I think should recieve more attention is—and which I’ve been emphasizing—the “mental map/s” on what are the best things to do to prevent or minimize stuff like nostalgia for Marcos, authoritarian policies from happening again. Another one (related in a way) that should get more eyeballs is the “mental-map” regarding what constructive vision the opposition has, what alternative vision of government does the opposition have to offer.

                Is it too earlier to think about these questions? Is it impractical to think about these questions right now?

                I would strongly beg to disagree. It is never too earlier to think about these questions. It is never impractical to think about these questions. I am reminded of one of my mom’s constant nags towards me, “Maagap ang masipag!” Better to work hard early on. Better to talk about and tackle these questions now—and not cram them later and go all-in without a plan or with only an awfully fuzzy map in one’s head, with sorry results for the nation in the decades afterwards.

                I suppose that my comments would imply that I blame the reformists for failing to anticipate Duterte, for creating the conditions for Duterte. I don’t entirely blame them. For starters—when EDSA came along, the activists and civil society types were still complete greenhorns who didn’t know yet the difference between the parliament of the streets and government bureaucracy. One can’t blame them for getting blind-sided by the oligarchs, for simply not having enough influence. I also don’t blame the reformists entirely for being overly cautious with reforming the system—they knew there were strong limits: they knew we had a weak party system, an overly strong executive, a ton of political dynasties.

                That’s in the past. We are (with Duterte) starting to exit the immediate post-EDSA era, the EDSA consensus. My main concern—and expectation now—is that reformists learn from their mistakes, ask themselves where they can do better, and apply insights from both of those towards ensuring that, the next time decent people come into power and have the opportunity to shape a new status quo, that the status quo they shape will not only be more humane but also be more enduring—more lasting. That’s all.

              • Thanks, Francis. I agree with you that abstractions and mapping are crucially important. I also like the tag ‘reformist’ in place of ‘yellows’, for that is what they are considering the deeply held values of favor and power that dominate Philippine governance and popular ideas. Being a reformist aiming to intellectually reconfigure the way things work is a less arrogant posture than the elitist view that the ‘tards’ are holding us back. My frustration with a lot of idealized opinions is that they are themselves elitist and, beyond that, totally impractical at dealing with today’s issues. To hold that a leader is shit because he makes a decision I don’t like leads to guaranteed failure and back to power politics. And to remove the compassions needed to cure poverty from high-minded economic decisions makes those decisions punishing of the poor. Somewhere in the ‘how to’ part of the mapping there can be room for a progression from real to ideal that is constructive rather than destructive or punishing, I think.

              • Micha says:


                Yes, the Liberal Party in this country is part of the problem so long as they pay lip service to their own values charter, whatever that is (do they have to keep on revising it or what?).

                But let’s not be kidding ourselves here, the liberal movement have, for all intents and purposes, acquiesced to the overall design of corporate fascism. That decision to veto free college education and increase the monthly stipends of pensioners fits right in to neo-liberalists’ design to keep the populace as ignorant and as poor as possible. The liberals are so soaked into the system that they are complicit in perpetuating malignant inequality though they may in public profess to end it. Liberals are allowed to critique the excesses of the oligarchy but they are not allowed to criticize the system that enables the perpetuation of oligarchical rule.

                That Robredo is described as pro-poor is revealing. It suggests pro-forma inutile proposals and superficial remedies like charity but no major policy shift to actually reverse poverty. The poor will be left gasping, di baleng mahirap pa rin kami, at least andyan si Ma’m Leni na may kalinga samin, mamimigay ng libreng tsinelas. The cycle of economic enslavement will continue.

              • Good lord it must be emotionally exhausting to live in a world of committed belief in the bad faith of others.

              • Leni’s Angat Buhay is about establishing livelihoods, not giving dole-outs. She is NOT Imelda.

                And what would she do if she had access to the national budget, which she does not? Anyway the reality is that life under Aquino was most probably still better for the poor. Even 4Ps with its incentive to make poor kids study – now seemingly mired in patronage. Whatever one may call the corporate and capitalist world, is a country run by gangsters like Duterte and his crowd better than that? And if both are equally bad, what is the real-world alternative and how to get there?

              • Micha says:


                I wish I could share your faith in the good naturedness of the Philippine economic elite but I don’t. They are, I believe, as nasty and socially malignant as their American counterparts.

                Plutocracy behaves the same everywhere.

              • Micha says:


                Take away Rodrigo’s crude and foul-mouthing ways and he will fit right in to the centrist liberal crowd. His approach is both centrist and pacifist.

                Had he taken on the Binondo rice cartel?


                Had he taken on Joma’s ragtag guerrilla army?


                Had he taken on the corporate and business establishment?


                Had he taken on the political dynasties and provincial warlords?


                Don’t be fooled by his swashbuckling berdugo facade, he’s just as rabid status quo advocate as anybody in the liberal establishment.

              • The EJKs, all just facade?

                Even delenda Marawi?

              • Micha says:


                Had he taken on the drug cartel syndicates?


                He takes on the petty tambays and users from Pasay and Caloocan shantytowns because they are the easiest to mow down without much protestation from anybody else. I could almost hear Sharon mutter, buti nga sa kanila.

                May narinig ka na bang na EJK na taga San Lorenzo Village?

                EJK is where Rodrigo gets his political high. He gets passive approval even from the likes of Kris, Sharon, and Korina.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Marawi Delenda est.

                Too bad like the all out war of Erap, too many soldiers and civilians have to die just to satisfy a few people.

                Delenda est was turned into a short story were time travelers changed history.
                Maybe that is what is needed, time travelers who would tamper with events, butterfly effect be damned.

  14. andrewlim8 says:


    1. You cannot see his eyes. He even wears shades indoors frequently, a very Orwellian look. How can people trust someone whose eyes you cannot see? Filipinos like looking into people’s eyes to gauge sincerity.

    2. He is forever associated with the Mamasapano massacre.

    3. He is an avowed Marcos loyalist, and that means questionable integrity. Anti-corruption? Come on.

    4. Instead of just delivering the news, he becomes the news due to his sartorial choices. hi hi hi

  15. Kris, Korina and Sharon. What is the common denominator among them? Talent, Power and Money. All were born with silver spoon in their mouths from pedigreed ancestry. All are talented in their own right. They leveraged their talent to bring them (more?) money and influence/power. All are at the top of their game. All are no longer “spring chicken.”

    I would like to hear about their fear, values, motivation and personal philosophy. Why? Some people see them as haughty, arrogant, self-absorbed and out-of-touch individuals.

    I would like Mrs. Solita Monsod to have them all in a no-holds-barred “Walang Pasaway” show.

    • That would be a good show.

      • I know who Kris Aquino is (daughter of Ninoy & Cory) and who Korina is (wife of Mar Roxas), but have no idea who Sharon is and why she’s as important.

        But I do remember in the mid-2000s , when Korina Sanchez came on and folks (mostly Visayans) were literally grossed out, almost puking at hearing her voice. That, coupled with Wil’s interview with her and her “my dogs think their humans” quip, I feel as though I know this person already— and no that’s no compliment.

        Kris Aquino I know had some talk show program , and it was her laughter and drawl (like twangy , ‘waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa…’ ) that struck me (foreign ear) as annoying even amongst her countrymen. Akin to how we over here probably find the voices of Paris Hilton and the Kardashian sisters an earful (i suppose).

        But not Ivanka, she has a jawwy-ness to her that I’ve become very accustom to. It’s hard to describe.

        • karlgarcia says:

          Sharon Cuneta
          -Daughter of the late longtime Pasay Cit’y Mayor: Oablo Cuneta
          -Niece of Tito Sotto because the wife of Sotto is the sister of Sharon’s mom.

          She was part of the love team Sharon- Gabby you can search on YouTube.

          Maybe comparable to Sonny and Cher or than Elvis and Priscilla.

          She was given the monicker of Mega Star.

          Now she is married to senator Francis Pangilinan.

          Maybe she has a wiki page.

          • Ah, thanks. Which begs the question do all starlets there (young and old) eventually marry politicians? One of those Wowoweee girl (i believe Janelle was her name) I really enjoyed looking at, what ever happened to her? To all the wowowee girls for that matter.

            • karlgarcia says:

              I do not know but I tried googling “where are they now wowowee girls “and got a number of results.

              I won’t drop links because you never read my links. 😉

              • You are a generous soul, Karl. I generally don’t do research at the request of others. I expect them to do the research and report the information they discover, if it is that important. The Wowwowee girls are about the last group of people I’d have an interest in knowing more about, frankly. I know the idiot host is still around demeaning the humanity of Filipinos on some other station.

              • Thanks, karl. I thought maybe anyone here had some personal info on said girls. But I did Google, and it wasn’t Janelle but Iya I was very found of. Janelle too was peppy & pretty, but Iya just had a certain je ne sais quoi about her.


                Wowowee defined the Philippines for me. No other show captured the Philippines better— half naked girls gyrate, as poor street kids cry, whilst fat rich kids danced, as the crowd guffaws uncontrollably , money thrown about, the list goes on.

                Kinda like the beginning of “the Running Man” w/ Schwarzenegger,

                Wowowee was a great crash course on the Philippines, Joe. I hope they do some sort of reunion. That show was perfect. The stuff of anthropology.

              • karlgarcia says:

                No prob LCX.
                I know them only as a group.
                That is the only common knowledge here. Not everyone knows them individually.If I was smitten by her, I could have easilly recalled her, but she does not ring a bell.

              • karlgarcia says:

                I haven’t read your comment clearly earlier because I was using my phone. It appeared as one vertical line.

                Two things:

                Iya was not a wowowee girl.
                And I resent the starlet label on Sharon Cuneta, she is the mega-star, there is a mega difference.

                I would suggest next time that you go ahead and google it yourself, you are good at googling.

              • Sharon Cuneta is the youngest daughter of former Pasay Mayor Pablo Cuneta.

                Pablo Cuneta was (I quote from memory, corrections are welcome) a jeepney driver who became Pasay mayor just after the war and stayed mayor until the late 1970s / early 1980s (!)

                His daughter inherited his common touch but not his roughness (Cuneta was like Lacson of Manila and many other Filipino mayors the tough guy type) plus she has singing talent.

                She first came up as a teen during the Martial law period with some songs, then developed into the megastar by doing a lot of acting as well in addition to the music.

                KC Concepcion, her daughter by Gabby Concepcion, is a (smaller) star in her own right.

                @Karl: it is true that politicians often marry megastar, stars and starlets. Chiz even has a Heart.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Irineo, I just me read the Wikipedia article of Pablo Cuneta
                Gosh! He almost became mayor for life.
                He was first vice governor of Rizal after the war, and was appointed mayor 1951 with some gaps in between he served until 1998.

                I took the word starlet as condescending, so I read several dictionaries and found nothing wrong with it, so it was my problem. ( problem was on my end)
                And of course I was partly joking about the mega-star and starlet difference.

              • Sorry, karl.

                Yeah there were the dancers and there were the co-hosts , I did lump them together as all Wowowee girls — since the dude seemed to have ran the show and the girls both dancers and co-hosts mere appendages. Sorry.

                The dancers struck me as less educated , hence every time the mic was thrust towards them they simply giggled , whilst the 2 iya and janelle were starlets (in the making?) , there was a 3rd too but am less familiar with kat. And another as clown.

                As someone who’s just watched (not a regular) the Price is Right and Let’s make a Deal (a.m. shows) and Jeopardy/Wheel of Fortune (p.m. shows here). Wowowee was indeed a culture shock. But it was the Philippines in a nutshell.

                And its popularity at the time, meant the show struck a nerve— which is both sad and prophetic.

                Sorry also for demoting your Sharon, i’ve never heard of mega star, lol. 😉 Though I believe in the 50s in Hollywood , i’m sure the studios had ’em here too. Not as popular a concept as then.

              • karlgarcia says:

                Part joking on the Sharon part, but I do watch her movies and I love to watch her sing.

Check out what others are saying...
  1. […] And here at the Society of Honor, we badgered a few entertainers about their lack of loyalty and voice for civility and democracy: “People don’t trust the yellows because of Kris, Sharon, and Korina” […]

  2. […] recent post here that criticized three entertainers for aiding and abetting the incivility, killings, and destruction of democracy in the Philippines […]

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: