Archive for January, 2009

This week, Congress has voted – for itself – P9.665 billion in pork funds.  That is almost a two billion peso increase from last year’s pork allocations, at around P7.9 billion.  Which makes for a lot of bollocks, really; today’s Inquirer editorial makes a rather poignant point about how “heartless and callous” this act is, especially at a time of global crisis.

If you say “pork” to someone in Congress, you’ll get a patriotic, impassioned tirade against graft and corruption that would have come from the throat of Raul Manglapus and the diaphragm of Camilo Osias.  Yet if you say “Priority Development Assistance Fund,” you’ll get a long-winded explanation of why it’s needed, why it’s necessary, and why the two billion peso increase is justified.

I am sure that a million-peso waiting shed is in order, or that a side street near the school must be renamed (heck, why not the entire school), a scholarship has to be named after one’s self to establish one’s place in history.  Everyone in Congress is mandated to give away overpriced relief goods to the “indigent,” as well as have a convenient source of money to perpetuate patronage and power.  Everyone in Congress has to have a “pro-poor” program.  Every member of the House is entitled to messages of progress in giant lengths of tarpaulin, or the long side-walls of pedestrian overpasses.

That is PDAF, that is the pork barrel.  Everything including the squeal.

“The tears of the world are a constant quantity.  For each one who begins to weep, somewhere else another stops.  The same is true of the laugh.  Let us not then speak ill of our generation, it is not any unhappier than its predecessors.  Let us not speak well of it either.  Let us not speak of it at all.”

- Samuel Beckett, “Waiting for Godot”

I left the apartment to hear the neighbor boy call out, “Barack!  Obama!”

I glanced out to the side-street, wondering if this boy had seen Barack Obama, or saw a Barack Obama look-alike.  The thought of this boy having a message of hope and change was something I set aside for now.

Out from the corner, I saw a dog.  The dog barked, the boy called out “Barack!”  The dog then entered the house’s gate with the boy, and the gate was bolted shut.  The name of the dog was Barack Obama.

For someone who has been President of the United States of America for the better part of two days, many politicians seem to be keen on riding the Barack Obama bandwagon.  You have folks like Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay, who has been alluded to as “JoBama.” You have Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, who yet again committed an act of hubris by saying that it is Gloria Arroyo who can teach a lot to a neophyte world leader like Obama.  Now you have Margaux Salcedo, spokeswoman of former President Joseph Estrada, who says that if we’ll put charisma into the equation, it is Erap who should rightfully be called the Philippine Obama.

I can’t help but think of the whole hullaballoo in terms of dog’s names; when I was a kid, the most feared dogs were named “Bush,” and its rival was called “Saddam.”  I kind of wonder how many Filipinos have named the loyal house pet “Barack,” but I hope you get my point.  If a dog in this country can be named after the seated President of the United States of America, then what is the bone of contention?  What is the squabbling all about?

What is so important about President Barack Obama that many of us look – or proclaim ourselves to be – the “Pinoy version” of Obama?

I was watching TV when I came across this interesting clip by Senator Mar Roxas:

Yeah, I’m not that updated with TV anymore.

That’s right, folks: Mar Roxas is inviting you to do the one thing you’re expected to do as a taxpayer: “Kulitin ang Gobyerno.” I’d like to think of that along the lines of “bug the Government” or “pester the Government,” but for all intents and purposes, let’s call it “kulitization.”

In order to get cheaper medicines, let’s “kulitize” the Government.