A call to President Noynoy Aquino to ditch the color yellow

555 Shares

Tired, old, and quite frankly embarrassing. That’s what’s become of the whole yellow motif of the Aquino clan and its circle of business cronies, relatives, “shooting buddies”, lackeys, Media outlets, and cadre of bloggers, publicists, and “social media activists”. It was the primary colour of a successful propaganda campaign that started in 1983, peaked in the mid- to late-1980s, then settled into a slow decline that lasted over much of the 1990s and the early 2000s and then got a brief burst of a boost when presidential son, now Philippine President Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III, was, as state mythology would now have us believe, given a mandate by God himself to be leader of the Filipino people.

Tyler Durden of Fight Club

Yellow has thus become the colour of the Filipino “Laban” (“fight”) movement over the last 28 years. This “Fight” Movement has since become more of a “Fight” Club (or, more appropriately, “Fight” Club Inc) under the campaign and now the administration of President Aquino for reasons that are now quite evident to the average Filipino.

Unfortunately the Philippines’ Fight Club does not conjure images of Tyler Durden in the Fight Club of Hollywood. Brad Pitt who played the iconic character wouldn’t come across as a convincing prize fighter in a yellow outfit, for starters. And in Durden’s line of work in the movie, waving around a hand gesture that, to the rest of the non-Filipino world, stands for Loser is likely to be a career-limiting thematic choice.

Noynoy makes Tyler Durden look even tougher

So 28 years is an astounding amount of time for a large chunk of the Philippines’ “politically passionate” classes to be sporting a yellow motif and dancing around waving a set of fingers shaped in the likeness of the letter “L”. For those of us who were teenagers in the 1980’s that amount of time offers us a useful perspective. That perspective, tragically, is not accessible to the average 20- to 30-year old Filipino today. I’m talking about a whole generation of young Filipinos who had a first experience of awakening to political awareness that involved jumping into a bandwagon for an 18-month ride over much of 2009 and 2010 campaigning and sloganeering under the yellow colour while sporting the Loser salute. It’s the political equivalent of a sexual awakening in the expert hands of professional sex worker.

Bono of U2 in the 1980s

That’s a national tragedy to the tune of 40 percent of the electorate who (according to “surveys”) supposedly voted an unqualified, unmotivated, and now uninspiring man into the highest office of the land. The 2009 to 2010 Presidential campaign gave witness to stupidity on a scale that is unprecedented (well, maybe if we discount the ascent to power of former President Joseph “Erap” Estrada). Young Filipinos today are likely to later on look back to 2009 and 2010 and shudder while thinking “What was I thinking?” Simple, my young compatriots. Perhaps you weren’t thinking at the time. But that can be forgiven. My generation, after all, sported mullet and cobra hair do’s and wore stone-washed jeans in our youth. Now that is what is unforgivable.

I therefore support a movement initiated by Definitely Filipino called “Pilipino ang kulay ko” (“Filipino is my colour”) to call on President Noynoy Aquino to ditch the colour yellow. The real national colours after all are Captain America’s red, white, and blue, if I recall right so re-visiting our country’s true colours is a worthwhile initiative to take if we are sincere in aspiring for real unity. Twenty eight years is a long enough time to forget your primary colours. But it is never too late to remember.

print

66 Comments on “A call to President Noynoy Aquino to ditch the color yellow”

  1. Time, Change of Thinking and Advances in Technology …can make your political tactics obsolete. We have now the Information Technology…the internet; social networking; BlogSites; texting; etc…that can make information available to the grass root level. The Yellow Horde Nazi KALIBAPI Media, used the Oligarch’s Media, to promote its own political agendas…they monopolized the information…twisted the truth, to their own advantages; and spread widespread disinformatiuons against their political enemies…What will people feel and think, if they’ve discovered you’re a god-damned liar, fake, and a political opportunist?

  2. “That’s a national tragedy to the tune of 40 percent of the electorate who (according to “surveys”) supposedly voted an unqualified, unmotivated, and now uninspiring man into the highest office of the land”

    Could this survey be related to the other survey in our country that 40% of Filipino adults (voters?) believed in Cupid?

    http://www.newsflash.org/2004/02/tl/tl013126.htmhttp://www.newsflash.org/2004/02/tl/tl013126.htm

    “Belief in Cupid is similar among men, with 40 percent, and women, with 41 percent. It is higher among those with at most some high school education (43 percent), some college education (41 percent), and at least a college degree (40 percent), compared to those with at most some elementary education (33 percent).”

  3. I believe PNoy was going for the “solid foundation” which his parents built. Symbolism is a very powerful tool, used by many leaders and conquerors in the past (The Cross, swastika and the sun, to name a few).
    It is a valid course of action for PNoy, but he has to make some miracles of his own ASAP. His reliance on the memory of his parents to move the populace and his kiddie antics(smoking, buying hella expensive cars and wife-browsing) isnt helping his standing with the Pilipino peoples.
    Really, politics is a fickle thing. You have to be perfect on your quaint little stage and at the same time meet your dues and your promises. PNoy SUCKS at this both. I should refrain from ranting as I did not vote(if i did, id vote Gibo as he was the most rational choice) but this must be said.
    I hate how society runs especially ours. There are to much padrinos which is really just bribery with a glorified name. And I hate PNoy, because his reign is a monarchy and because he is bad at what he does.

    (Comparing to Erap though, he is a Godsend. An actor? Really? Ugh)

    1. Sure. How can we win the election? We all know that most voters are anti-intellectual. Plus we don’t have a lot of friends who would throw their money around to use for the campaign. We don’t have a chance of winning. Remember Perlas and Gordon? Both are intellectuals and both have a vision for the country. They lost partly because the voters didn’t care about what they had to say and those two didn’t have the Cojuangcos backing their campaign.

  4. Si Perlas papansin lang. Si Gordon masungit. Si PNoy malinis. Hindi naman magkakamali ang mga bumoto sa kanya

    1. See what I mean? You simply dismiss Perlas as “papansin”. You probably didn’t understand the issues he was advocating for. You cruelly label Gordon as “masungit” most likely because you can’t handle the “truth”. And worse, after a year of mediocrity, you still think that you didn’t make a mistake in voting for PNoy.

    2. I see your problem. You can’t handle harsh criticism. You just want someone who is so soft to the people which is why you voted Pnoy. You don’t have discipline and action that you always think that it’ll be a-okay all the time even if a tragedy strikes to this country in which you’ll just leave it to your precious president.

    3. ows?

      anyway, when he was running, he said he was the country’s salvation, like he holds the key to our nation’s ills. now he tells us that it’s just been a year and to cut him some slack. i don’t remember any president in the past who ever used this excuse. if you tell me he is a “reluctant” candidate, that’s a load of bull mainly because i don’t think he was ever reluctant. if he really were, then he really did a disservice to our country. he should have foreseen this dilemma (unless he is really that, well, nearsighted) and just threw his support for mar (though i would not vote for this guy too).

    4. Ang sarap maging TANGA, right?

      You can’t accept that fact that the likes of you are the cancer killing the Philippines. Incompetence is also “karumihan”. Makes sense?

  5. Tapos na eleksyon mga —–, wag na pag usapan yang si Perlas at Gordon. Nasaan na ba sila ngayon? Suportahan na lang natin si PNoy. Problema kasi yang crab mentality nyo mga —-. One year pa lang siya, may 5 years pa. Eto oh ,,/,,

    1. Yeah, the 2010 presidential election is over but how come PNoy is still on a campaign mode? One year later, you are still turning a blind eye to his incompetence.

      One year pa lang siya, may 5 years pa

      If you still can’t accept that he doesn’t have what it takes to lead the Philippines a year after being in office, I don’t think you would be able to accept it even after 5 years.

    2. spoken like a true noytard. Yung idol mo, parang nabasted ni GMA kung umasta. Pati yung zaldy ampatuan, gagawin yatang state witness dahil tetestigo raw laban kay gma. Lmao.

    3. Yeah right 5 more years…of hell. If the Filipino people and your precious president doesn’t change for real, can you imagine what problems will this country gonna face once again? Hell this country will be as equal as North Korea or worse Somalia if it continues. If that happens then I’ll blame you for your stupidity. And you pointing us with crab mentality? Look who’s talking.

  6. Hindi siguro tatagal iyang si Abnoy sa puwesto due to his incompetence. His senseless Gloria bashing is a proof of it.

  7. Tignan natin ang sample uli ng kabobohan ni Penoy in an interview:

    http://www.gov.ph/2011/07/15/ambush-interview-with-president-aquino-on-july-15-2011/

    “Q: Hindi na po tayo talagang magde-dredge ng lawa ng Laguna?

    PRESIDENT AQUINO: Pinaaral ko iyong previous projects ng same firm sa Pasig River. Ang contract is six meters depth. So, kakatapos ng DPWH to check iyong ruta kung saan ginawa iyong dredging nasa 0.78 na po iyong—kung one—baka magka-confusion ha. So, simpleng sagot na lang, after one year—natapos kasi iyong proyekto 2010 supposed to be—after one year, halos bumalik na po lahat ng drinedge [dredge] nila. Ngayon, iyon ang claim nila, bumalik iyong drinedge [dredge]. Pero ako napapag-isip iyong build up over decades or centuries, one year lang mababalik. Six meters po iyong lalim. That’s 18 feet na tinaggal iyong siltation on average. One year naibalik na. Kung 0.78, mga 14 meters ang naibalik. Sorry, mga six meters pala. Mga 14 feet in one year of siltation ang naibalik. Kayo ho ba naniniwala kayong ganoon ang nangyari? Sagutin po niyo?

    Q: Sa akin po, kasi po nakita ko po iyong dredging barge na naglalaman ng a million tons na iyon ang ipinakita nila sa amin that time—parang kaya po, for a million tons na made-dredge na natin ang lawa.

    PRESIDENT AQUINO: The whole project is four million tons ang siltation every year. The entire project is moving 12 million cubic meters. Hindi mo in-address iyong problema ng deforestation. Hindi mo in-address iyong problema ng informal settlers. So, anong silbi ng kinuha mong iyon? Hindi ako nakikipagdebate sa iyo ha. Every time akong pumupunta sa Laguna, itatanong iyan at parang kausap ko iyong Belgian company na magpatunay munang ginawa nila ang kanilang dapat gawin.

    Uulitin ko lang ho, ginawa sa Pasig River at mayroon ho bang million-ton barge? Wala ho yata eh … Huwag na natin pagdebatehan. Pasig River na lang, uulitin ko sa inyo, ang commitment nila, six meters mas kaunti kaysa diyan. Six meters ang depth, puwera pa iyong four meters sa side. Ni-review iyong buong supposed-to-be ruta na kung saan sila naghukay at iyong naghukay nga ho hanggang ngayon parang, more or less—utak ko lang po ang ginagamit sa pag-calculate—pero 80 percent of what they removed is already back. So, iyong—at best—iyong tatanggalin nilang 12 million cubic meters, tatlong taon lang isasalba kayo. After three years pa. So, ang bayad niyo bawat year six billion more, 6.2 billion; payag kayo?

    Q: Hindi. Maraming salamat po, kagalang-galang.”

    Sa nakinikinita ko, walang naintindihan yung nagtanong. Sana nagtanong na lang ng tungkol sa love life ni Penoy…

      1. if its truly, stupid. yes. i’ll admit he did something stupid. thats the right thing to do.

        so, what did he do?

      2. @GabbyD

        How about his Memorandum Circular No.1 which would have paralyzed the government once implemented?

        His first official act was to paralyzed the government?

        Pang student council talage heh…

        This bobo is signing papers without comprehending what he is signing.

        You want some more?

      3. So as not to shortchanged the comment readers as to why I have claimed his ambush interview’s kabobohan:

        “Q: Hindi na po tayo talagang magde-dredge ng lawa ng Laguna?”

        For me, the best answer would be:

        “Penoy: Ide-dredge pa rin. Pero hindi na yung dating approach. Pinapa-review ko sa DPWH kung papaano ang best. Yung dati kasi na ginawa sa Pasig, nareplaced agad yung na-dredged na silt. I want them to use a different approach for a different result. In a month time, I’ll release an update on this issue in my weekly press briefing.”

        What do you think is left unanswered?

        What happened was, instead of just closing the issue, he has invited an additional question.

        At sinamahan pa ng magulong lecture.

        “…Ngayon, iyon ang claim nila, bumalik iyong drinedge [dredge]. Pero ako napapag-isip iyong build up over decades or centuries, one year lang mababalik. Six meters po iyong lalim. That’s 18 feet na tinaggal iyong siltation on average. One year naibalik na. Kung 0.78, mga 14 meters ang naibalik. Sorry, mga six meters pala. Mga 14 feet in one year of siltation ang naibalik. Kayo ho ba naniniwala kayong ganoon ang nangyari? Sagutin po niyo?”

        Ang sagot ko:

        •Hindi yung centuries build-up ang problema. Na-accelerate ang build-up nang sinimulan ni Macoy ang land reclamation during the late 70s.

        •Ano ba ang naibalik talaga, 14 meters o 6 meters then go back ka uli sa 14 feet. Which is which? What have you been smoking lately? Are you on drugs?

        •Hindi po kami naniniwala na ganoon ang nangyari dahil magulo ang paliwanag nyo.

        Hindi nakasingit yung TV personality nya, instead yung normal personality nya ang naka-default during that interview.

        There will be no more ambush interview in the future, I would suppose.

      4. “•Ano ba ang naibalik talaga, 14 meters o 6 meters then go back ka uli sa 14 feet. Which is which? What have you been smoking lately? Are you on drugs?”

        clearly, u didnt understand. you are so judgemental, you didnt even do the math yourself. and u feel comfortable accusing people him of being on drugs?

        its pretty clear. if u THINK FIRST, you should be able to get it.

      5. @GabbyD

        “clearly, u didnt understand. you are so judgemental, you didnt even do the math yourself. and u feel comfortable accusing people him of being on drugs?

        its pretty clear. if u THINK FIRST, you should be able to get it.”

        I think first and I did my math. How about refuting my math?

        Since I have proved Penoy’s stupidity as complying with what you have asked me, how about recipcrocating it? Prove my math is wrong or you’re just like Penoy, all hot air.

        Read my comments a little slower. You’re reading it so fast or maybe a problem with your comprehension. Have I accused him on being on drugs?

        You have a queer way of putting up an argument.

      6. ok. you SAID:

        “•Ano ba ang naibalik talaga, 14 meters o 6 meters then go back ka uli sa 14 feet.”

        if u read what he says…

        “Ang contract is six meters depth” — 6m is approx 18 feet.

        “natapos kasi iyong proyekto 2010 supposed to be—after one year, halos bumalik na po lahat ng drinedge [dredge] nila. ” so after 1 year, what was dredged came back.

        “Six meters po iyong lalim. That’s 18 feet na tinaggal iyong siltation on average. One year naibalik na.” again, he repeats, in case anyone missed it.

        “Kung 0.78, mga 14 meters ang naibalik. Sorry, mga six meters pala. Mga 14 feet in one year of siltation ang naibalik.”

        he makes a mistake and corrects himself. he first says 14 meters — clearly wrong. so, he says 6 .meters, and further says, IF .78 returned, NOT 1, but .78, that would be:
        0.78*18 == 14 feet approx.

        sigh…

        SO…to answer your question, ”
        “•Ano ba ang naibalik talaga, 14 meters o 6 meters then go back ka uli sa 14 feet.” ”

        its very clear.

      7. @GabbyD

        Actually, there is no math involved in my comment except the word count of what Penoy could have answered if it’s done the way I suggested.

        What I was emphasizing is his ambivalence which I think is something beyond your capability to analyze. You think what I have claimed has something to do with math. Sigh. Read again AND SLOWLY –

        “•Ano ba ang naibalik talaga, 14 meters o 6 meters then go back ka uli sa 14 feet.”

        Am I questioning his math? If I’m going to question his math, I could have asked what is that 0.78 factor? I have an idea what that is, just for both of us to be calibrated, what is that 0.78?

        You still didn’t answer where in my comment that I have accused him of using drugs.

        You’ve taunted me to prove Penoy is bobo –

        “if its truly, stupid. yes. i’ll admit he did something stupid. thats the right thing to do.

        so, what did he do?”

        I’ve proven it, so where is your admittance?

        To prove you’ve limited capability to analyze (or maybe you’re just unwilling to accept facts that will not suit your agenda or you’re just a plain fact-challenged dude):

        You’ve commented – “cmon guys, bobo is, sarah palin’s mistake on paul revere!”

        According to Boston Herald

        Experts back Sarah Palin’s historical account
        You betcha she was right!

        By Chris Cassidy
        Monday, June 6, 2011 – Updated 17 hours ago

        Sarah Palin yesterday insisted her claim at the Old North Church last week that Paul Revere “warned the British” during his famed 1775 ride — remarks that Democrats and the media roundly ridiculed — is actually historically accurate. And local historians are backing her up.

        Palin prompted howls of partisan derision when she said on Boston’s Freedom Trail that Revere “warned the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells and making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free.”

        Palin insisted yesterday on Fox News Sunday she was right: “Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there. That, hey, you’re not going to succeed. You’re not going to take American arms.”

        In fact, Revere’s own account of the ride in a 1798 letter seems to back up Palin’s claim. Revere describes how after his capture by British officers, he warned them “there would be five hundred Americans there in a short time for I had alarmed the Country all the way up.”

        Boston University history professor Brendan McConville said, “Basically when Paul Revere was stopped by the British, he did say to them, ‘Look, there is a mobilization going on that you’ll be confronting,’ and the British are aware as they’re marching down the countryside, they hear church bells ringing — she was right about that — and warning shots being fired. That’s accurate.”

        Patrick Leehey of the Paul Revere House said Revere was probably bluffing his British captors, but reluctantly conceded that it could be construed as Revere warning the British.

        “I suppose you could say that,” Leehey said. “But I don’t know if that’s really what Mrs. Palin was referring to.”

        McConville said he also is not convinced that Palin’s remarks reflect scholarship.

        “I would call her lucky in her comments,” McConville said.”

        Another question question to you –

        Which is worse: purveying misinformation out of ignorance or incompetence, or deliberately and maliciously twisting the facts just to satisfy an agenda?

      8. “Actually, there is no math involved in my comment except the word count of what Penoy could have answered if it’s done the way I suggested.”

        no math? i’d hesitate to even call it math. its grade school algebra. haha…. i just quoted your own confusion about the measurements… no math?

        ang tanong mo:”•Ano ba ang naibalik talaga, 14 meters o 6 meters then go back ka uli sa 14 feet. Which is which? What have you been smoking lately? Are you on drugs?”

        NO MATH?

        di bale na lang.

      9. @GabbyD

        He he he, once they’re numbers, it’s math or this time algebra to you. WTF, I don’t wonder anymore…

        Read again this time, MUCH MUCH SLOWER THAN BEFORE AND ASK SOMEBODY TO HELP YOU INTERPRET THEM WORD BY WORD:

        “Ano ba ang naibalik talaga, 14 meters o 6 meters then go back ka uli sa 14 feet. Which is which? …?”

        My question is “ano ba ang naibalik talaga…?” Somewhat like Penoy to identify which is the real item.

        My queston is not “ilan ba talaga ang naibalik” Or something that one other than Penoy has to make any calculations.

        What is in the wordings of my question that you don’t understand?

        Sigh…

        Better ask a full refund of your matriculation to the school where you have studied. They have conned you.

      10. hahaha… please stop. its too funny. you stopped being intelligible a while back.

        the sentence — “My queston is not “ilan ba talaga ang naibalik” Or something that one other than Penoy has to make any calculations.””

        … doesnt even make sense. relax ka muna. and explain as simply as possible.

        take note: –“•Ano ba ang naibalik talaga, 14 meters o 6 meters then go back ka uli sa 14 feet. Which is which? What have you been smoking lately? Are you on drugs?”

        ano ba ang naibalik talaga? not “how much”, but “what”/ano?

        hehehe…. whatever. if the questions “WHAT”, the answer is beyond obvious.

        i dont wanna to type it — nakakabobo ang conversation na ito.

        but i’ll do it anyway…

        HINT: its mud from the bottom of the lake. its always been mud. the issue isnt WHAT, its always been “HOW MUCH” COMES BACK…

      11. @Gabbyd

        According to you:

        “take note: –“•Ano ba ang naibalik talaga, 14 meters o 6 meters then go back ka uli sa 14 feet. Which is which? What have you been smoking lately? Are you on drugs?”

        ano ba ang naibalik talaga? not “how much”, but “what”/ano?

        hehehe…. whatever. if the questions “WHAT”, the answer is beyond obvious.”

        According to me:

        No wonder. You did not know that in a sentence, there is a qualifier or a modifier – a word, phrase, or clause that limits or qualifies the sense of another word or word group.

        In my question, take note MY OWN QUESTION – 14 meters,6 meters,and 14 feet are the qualifiers that limit or qualify the “ano ba ang naibalik talaga” phrase. I even follow it up with an auxiliary question “which is which?” to make it sure for people like you to understand that I’m only referring to those three items.

        Out of nowhere you add another qualifier which is not in my question. Not unless of course you’ll claim that you’ve read in my mind that I was referring to other things in my own question.

        The school where you’ve studied will disown you with the way you defend an indefensible.

        Just to highlight some items that we have discussed from the start:

        Me: (I put up a comment presenting a repeat sample of Penoy’s kabobohan.)

        You: where is the evidence of kabobohan? can u be more precise?

        Me: If I can put up those kabobohan, what will I get from you?

        Will you admit he’s bobo?

        You:if its truly, stupid. yes. i’ll admit he did something stupid. thats the right thing to do.

        so, what did he do?

        Me:How about his Memorandum Circular No.1 which would have paralyzed the government once implemented?

        His first official act was to paralyzed the government?

        You: –

        (That’s a fact and still you can’t admit he’s that stupid. You still want to defend an indefensible.)

        Me: Am I questioning his math? If I’m going to question his math, I could have asked what is that 0.78 factor? I have an idea what that is, just for both of us to be calibrated, what is that 0.78?

        You:-

        (What happened with math or algebra? It’s mud and not math or algebra anymore on your later comment.)

        You: “cmon guys, bobo is, sarah palin’s mistake on paul revere!”“cmon guys, bobo is, sarah palin’s mistake on paul revere!”

        (Just like Penoy, heh, finger pointing just to deflect the issue.)

        Me: (I have shown you a news release that Palin was correct in Paul Revere issue. Historians backed her claim.)

        You: –

        See you next time. Thanks for my enjoying a dull day.

      12. Quote #1″In my question, take note MY OWN QUESTION – 14 meters,6 meters,and 14 feet are the qualifiers that limit or qualify the “ano ba ang naibalik talaga” phrase. I even follow it up with an auxiliary question “which is which?” to make it sure for people like you to understand that I’m only referring to those three items.”

        EXACTLY! those 3 items are measurements. its about numbers “ILAN” not “ANO”.

        yet…YOU were the one that said its not about measurement:
        quote#2 — >”What I was emphasizing is his ambivalence which I think is something beyond your capability to analyze. You think what I have claimed has something to do with math. Sigh. Read again AND SLOWLY –”

        ambivlance? ano? ha?

        you have just contradicted yourself time and again!
        first quote — its about math.
        second quote — nothing to do with math

        how can we talk about other things (memo 1, sarah palin), when you cannot discuss about your original comment on the dredging coherently…

        to be honest, i desperately want to talk about something else. but we cant coz you keep changing the reasons why its “bobo”.

    1. Correction:

      “Better ask a full refund of your matriculation to the school where you have studied. They have conned you.”

      Should be:

      “Better ask a full refund of your matriculation from the school where you have studied. They have conned you.

  8. Kita nyo yan. May sense sinabi ni PNoy sa mga interviews. Kayo lang nagsasabi ng hindi

    ,,/,, (o_o) ,,\,,

    1. oo nga eh. di naman BOBO SI PNOY eh diba vincenzo? di naman KABOBOHAN yung sabihin niyang “baka magka-confusion ha. So, simpleng sagot na lang” then actually taking a total of 328 words to STILL fail to communicate clearly, diba enteng?

      what if he decides na hindi “simpleng sagot” ang ibigay? ay we’ll need vincenzo as interpreter. yellow minds think alike.

      1. hmmm… so bobo sya coz you didnt understand it?

        is 328 words the line between simple and complex? i guess when you explain things, you count your words before answering a question eh?

      2. i’m trying to understand what you mean by kabobohan?
        cmon guys, bobo is, sarah palin’s mistake on paul revere! bachman’s error on john way gacy….

        he is unclear? its pretty clear? he’s wordy?

        perhaps bobo== i dont like his answer? thats not bobo, thats “disagreement”.

        whats his mistake?

      3. alam mo gabbyd, i never said i didn’t understand what he said. i may have wasted a couple minutes of my life i’ll never get back because your idol’s brain is all over the place (your oversimplification of calling it “wordy” is an understatement), but i never said i didn’t understand, did i, smartypants? o, ano napala mo?

        pare, saang grade school ba galing yang “i guess when you explain things, you count your words before answering a question” pilosopo style na yan? trying to be witty? you can’t use what you don’t have. practice pa ha.

        for the clueless (i mean YOU gabbyd, in case you didn’t know, which usually is the case) (and we’re so used to that because you were toefed as a child), pnoy’s kabobohan is accurately described in this situation as being quite the opposite of SUCCINCT (and it all happens when he said “baka magka-confusion ha. So, simpleng sagot na lang”; gosh what a simpleton your president).

        that should free you from your paralysis by analysis kesyo 328 words is what separates simple and complex ek-ek. magtatanga-tangahan lang mali pa. practice pa ha.

      4. i wish i was trying to be witty.

        i legitimately dont know what you mean. you speak of not being clear? what u wrote isnt clear.

        it was you that raised 328 words. what is the relevance of that?

        why is he bobo? it should be clear, yah? where?

      5. ah, so that simpleng sagot na lang, he was speaking of simplifying the math.

        whatever the correct context –>

        who ever said that “not succinct” == “bobo”?

      6. explaining to a brick is a thankless job. unfortunately, some bricks appear to be even dumber than others.

        go figure, einstein. pareho lang kayo ni idol mo. you should pull your lips away from his bum once-in-a-while.

      7. paralax,

        its a simple question. if its an accepted definition of bobo, then it ought to be simplicity itself to come up with an example!

        cmon, mr. brick. surely u can back up your original comment with some evidence eh?

        but maybe not huh?

        if he did something trully stupid, i’ll call it stupid. hasnt happened yet.

      8. gabbyd, it was a far simpler answer, and some rudimentary form of intelligence would have gotten it.

        unfortunately, you really can’t use what you don’t have. sad. huhuhu

  9. From my FB noteS:

    “President Aquino’s Obama-esque

    It’s been for quite some time when I’ve noticed President Aquino is complaining about the negative media coverage he is getting lately. To the point that he’s blaming it (blame game again, heh…) as the cause of his declining popularity. President Aquino believed that there is failure in delivering his supposed achievements to public notice, resulting in the drastic fall in his recent performance surveys.

    President Obama has the same problem with his popularity decline. In last year’s November midterm election rout, Obama acknowledged his failure to communicate his economic-rescue message to anxious Americans. He did not blame his policies for the loss, but rather the lack of communication with the American people.

    Is it just a coincidence that President Aquino has the same excuse as Obama in making a way out of his evident poor performance (or the lack of it) as president of a republic?

    (This might be a case of cherry picking on my part but read on nevertheless…)

    Let me start with their similarities:

    Aquino is 51 and Obama is 49 years old. Both lacked executive experiences. During their election campaigns, both were the darling of the media and the movie industries. Both smoke heavily.

    Actually, it’s not their similarities per se that I’m curious about. It’s on how far President Aquino is similar with President Obama – by design or is it by coincidence?

    (The joke around in the US is if Al Qaeda wants to destroy US, they must hurry because Obama is almost beating them to it).

    o Is it by coincidence that President Aquino’s election campaign is also about hope and change, Obama’s patented campaign battle cry? (He he he, the Obama effect.)

    o President Obama’s first meeting with his cabinet was after 3 months of his being elected. Vice Pres Binay was quoted that there has been no full Cabinet meeting in three months in one news article dated Jan. 2, 2011.

    o The mastery of the art of blame game. He inherited the problem from previous administration if he can’t go any forward in resolving an issue.

    o There is this eventuality that President Aquino will tell the people that the rise in unemployment rate in our country under his watch is not abnormal since the same is also true in US under Obama’s watch.

    o Feigning coughing in between speeches. Check that one with Obama’s ah…uh… style while delivering a speech without a teleprompter. (The Obama after-effect.)

    o President Aquino (Statement of President Aquino on the SC’s Issuance of a Status Quo Ante Order Regarding EO No. 2): “While this Status Quo Ante Order applies only to one of four petitioners, LET ME BE CLEAR about its far-reaching consequences.” (His Obama moment.)

    o President Aquino (Speech of President Aquino during the 75th Anniversary of Proctor & Gamble Philippines): “MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT, this administration is serious in efforts to create a strong, competitive”. (His another Obama moment.)

    Take note of this.

    The top five Obama catchphrases and the times mentioned were gathered by The Global Language Monitor and dated March 25, 2011:

    “MAKE NO MISTAKE” 2,924 times

    “Win the future” 1,861 times

    “Here’s the deal” 1,450 times

    “LET ME BE CLEAR” 1,066 times

    “It will not be easy” 1,059

    No originality heh… There is this certainty on my part that one can find those catchphrases in President Aquino’s previous and future speeches.

  10. hehehe.. love this site.. recently discovered this site.. Open your mind people on so many things left undone by our supposed Savior.. Mr. POP superstar Pnoy..!!! Hate the BIR and there examiners.

  11. In the United States, the yellow ribbon sticker represents the family members who are serving in the Armed forces deployed into the combat zones. The Filipino yellow ribbon is the political gladiatorial arena of a particular party. What an irony!!!

  12. It’s all that “Tita Cory” nonsense. All about a do nothing woman president and her do nothing mamma’s boy.

  13. PNoy is really pathetic ! He’s asking people wearing a yellow to support his corrupt administration ? No way ! You better step down from your position! Calling for snap election !

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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