It is a sad, sad day for the country when we are laying to rest a good man, a public servant who truly cared for the public; mourning the loss of a man who was taken too soon. And on the same day, we are made to suffer the indignity and humiliation of being represented to the international arena by a rambling, rumbling, filibustering politico of the lowest degree, who is the complete apotheosis of the former.
It started with a speech that rang the wrong bells and left a bad taste at the mouth, what with its outdated studies, unscientific claims and crocodile tears, truly anyone with enough sense would find it laughable. If only the topic weren't so serious and all-encompassing. And to find out that parts of the speech, which was punctuated by hysterical emotions, was copied verbatim online, now that takes the cake.
It should have been a simple case of non-attribution, quickly remedied by an apology and a correction. But Philippine politics being the circus that it is, and a clown at the helm, mustering the bravado of a hundred bigoted chauvinists, everything has gone to hell, leaving the true topic for discussion all but forgotten.
Three speeches hence, wasting the people's time and tax money, we are no closer to a resolution, but more focused now on this idiotic source of world-wide humiliation.
And the temerity of someone in power to claim to be bullied. Mr Sotto, the bullied does not have a voice, and you, as majority floor leader have it. Lots of it. Kill the messenger, indeed. From the very beginning, your arguments have been met one by one with cold, hard facts and valid, up-to-date science, but like a mule with blinders (and seeming like one too) you refuse to listen and see their counterpoints. Just because you refuse to see logic doesn't mean your points were not addressed. Because they were.
It was you who, like a drowning man grasping for flotsam, focused on the controversy. Point in fact, even now, you're delaying the conclusion to your turno en contra, just to abuse you position and give a privilege speech against your detractors.
And there's a fine line, no, a definite demarcation, nay, a whole universe of a difference between parody and satire and impersonation versus plagiarism. On one hand, you're alluding to the person, intimating to your audience the perverse humor derived from a person, while on the other, you're easing out the source and intimating that the thoughts are your own. Willie Nepomuceno impersonating Vilma is that, impersonation; he knows who Vilma is; he knows the audience knows who Vilma is, and in that lies the humor of his art. There is no plagiarism there.
Maybe your teachers at Wanbol University forgot to mention it, or most likely you were out playing hookie, but there is this tiny little concept in leadership called Command Responsibility, where the boss is bound and is accountable for the actions of his subordinates. So your staff's non-attribution becomes your own. By voicing that speech in the hallowed halls of the Senate, you, Mr Sotto, make it your own. It will forever be etched in the annals of the Senate that you, Mr Sotto, not your clown of a Chief of Staff, certainly not your ghost writers, uttered those words. And it should be you, Mr Sotto, not your whipping boy attorney, nor your underlings, who will be held responsible for those words. You are the majority leader, you should know that, right?
And how magnanimous of you to shell out your own money and clothes and food to those helped by your show. Or are they? But wait, you just failed to attribute the hundreds of sponsors and donors and writers and staff, who did shell out those cash, did all the legwork and marketing and collection so you can show up on cam and dole out your generous, generous help. After they sing and dance and generally debase themselves on nation-wide tv, of course. It was once rumored that Willie was paid a million per episode on his noontime show, maybe you were paid below or at par, but I wonder, did you ever shell out a week's talent fee in all those years of clowning on air?
You say we social media people have not done anything to our society and therefore need not be taken seriously. But we are, Mr Sotto, by exposing how frivolous you and your ilk are, and how unfit you are to rule over Philippine society, that is our contribution, and no amount of corny bulagaan skit you write can match that.
A powerful business tycoon was caught plagiarizing his speech, he apologized and offered to resign his post and return his honoris causa to rectify the damage. The President of Hungary resigned his post when it was found out he plagiarized his Phd. Germany's Minister of Defense resigned, too, over a plagiarism scandal. You see, greater men than you have shown humility over the same infringement.
Of course we do not expect you to resign, you're too simple to even contemplate that form of sophistication; but an apology would have sufficed. We are a forgiving lot, after all. But no, you couldn't even give us that. Instead you belittle us bloggers, especially those whom you stole ideas from, and attack us via a privilege speech. And like poisoned icing on maggoty cake, you threaten us with the curtailment of our right to free speech via a law to regulate our blogs?! Who died and made you dictator?
True, plagiarism is not a crime. But as one of the land's drafters of laws, at least a little iota of decency is needed, but you can't even give us that. And as one of the highest elected officers of the land, you, Mr Sotto, represent us -- represent me -- to the rest of the world. How utterly humiliating to be represented by a bigoted, crass, unapologetic trapo with no sense of delicadeza. How mortifying!
But then, again, blogger lang ako, so what do I know, right?
And so, Mr Sotto, I dedicate this Lily Allen song to you. I hope you like it.
photcredits: thief blogger henyo
