How Some Senators See Us is Reflected on How They Chose Matobato

dreamstime.com

I'm not a Duterte fan or die-hard. I think the Senate investigations should go on finding out who is behind the extrajudicial killings. If Duterte is guilty, he should answer for it.

But presenting Matobato as "witness" by some senators in a Senate hearing is an example of how these lawmakers see us. They think we are all idiots. They just pull someone (or anyone) in the streets into the senate inquiry as "witness" to say a bunch of silly nonsense and expect us to believe him.

They should have at least concocted an ingenious plot that showed impressive logic and lead us to really believe something without a shadow of a doubt---like the way an Agatha Christie detective fiction would so convincingly show you false leads and you'd be shocked in the end how a seemingly innocent character would end up the culprit.

At least, that way, you'd see that taxes are spent by lawmakers with real talent. But as it is, who knows what kind of laws these guys are making in Congress at the expense of the taxes we pay when they can't even create a good murder plot free of obvious loopholes? And no wonder Trillanes failed in a coup plot. Now we know why.

The whole affair about Matobato is like the trash we see in local TV soaps. Very poor plot, drifting and boring story, zero imagination and you always get a feeling that the creators were in a hurry to do everything because all they were thinking of was rake in huge profits out of nothing. Nothing was well thought of. And it's bombarded with lots of commercials, besides.

Fortunately, there are good actors and actresses around to offset trash TV programs.

Story writers and directors like that see their audience as idiots. The same with some lawmakers. They keep insulting Pinoy audience intelligence---always assuming that their audience think the way they do. So, they get someone like Matobato as witness, and perhaps coach him about how and what to answer during the inquiries prior to the hearings. But problem is, cheaply bought witnesses always prove to deliver cheap results. They tend to blow up their inconsistencies or say a lot of funny stories, like a murder in a "McDo Hotel."

Like most Pinoy soap or movie producers, conspirators in Congress hate spending too much for their production. All they think of are the returns. They should've opted for a real pro who can really internalize the roles he plays, although that would cost a fortune. If you see your audience as top caliber, you'd surely spend a lot to make your presentation credible. But if not, you'd just get someone like Matobato---a "witness" who saw or knows nothing.

Allowing Matobato on the witness stand tells us how De Lima and company see us (and especially how Trillanes see us when he said Matobato was a "reliable witness"). They think we're stupid. They think we'd just take their word for it. And that's an insult to the Filipino people. They will always do the same in their future actions as lawmakers, and more so when they seek higher offices in the future.

They should've tested the quality of their witness first before presenting him in public. If the testimony proves to be garbage, then the witness should be scratched from the list and never allowed to be seen testifying in public.

I've watched Got Talent shows online, and you'd notice how each contestant that reached the final stage show superb performance. That's because they underwent rigid screening to make sure that only quality participants get to be seen performing in public.

If Got Talent is that serious with its standards, surely the Philippine Senate should set much higher standards in screening witnesses who take the stand.

Why are Some Duterte Critics Stupid?

cartoonstock.com

Aside from taking things out of context (and sometimes it seems intentional), most Duterte critics are really hell-bent on just sabotaging his efforts. It's not just to get their news items more controversial than they really are (to get higher ratings), it's really to destabilize his administration. Kick it out of existence and replace it with theirs.

And all because they're still so infatuated with Mar Roxas and PNoy. They just want to prove that Duterte was the wrong choice and Mar should've been seated in power. Putting down a government to replace it with one run by your political idol is not really insane. It's pathetic stupidity. If it were "insane" it would have sounded better. At least "insane" is genius gone overboard. But it's not. It's stupidity.

You can see how they just want to put down Duterte so the yellow Liberal Party could take over through VP Leni Robredo (and Mar and company could then rule the country through her) and also probably somehow save party-mate Senator De Lima in the process. The plan to oust or impeach Duterte---or something like that---has been true all along. And the effort involves some media organizations and even news blogs.

A lot of unsuspecting and misinformed individuals eagerly join them as misguided tools, not knowing that news sites and blogs they get information from make a lot of money misinforming people like them.

I'm NOT a Duterte fan or follower. I support him mainly because the bible says the faithful should submit to the governing authorities. I'm always loyal to truth, nothing else. Actually, I don't like the guy, especially how he talks foul-mouthed with his curses and expletives and how he retracts words he has already said officially (he is the highest official in the land and he should be aware that everything he says in public is official) in the guise of intending to mean another thing.

Well, sometimes silly reporters do twist his words around to mean another nasty thing or take everything completely out of context.

But sometimes, Duterte speaks one thing now and a moment or day later Malacanang comes out with a disclaimer, explaining how the president really didn't mean what he said or was merely misquoted. One begins to get tired of hearing that after a while. So, what things did he really mean? Who do we believe, him or his spokesmen or Cabinet? People may never take him seriously one day and just wait for his spokesmen for the real thing. People may tend to take everything he says as something merely preposterously said. That will be a big disaster.

I've observed how some sites or blogs sound so happy each time they can report something bad about Duterte. They watch out for his blunders or misworded statements and blow that out of proportion. I mean, build a whole planet out of it. They get a kick out of that and I can't understand why. Put down your own president, the president of your country? You must be a brainless traitor to want to do that. And for sure you're a coward, too. Traitors are automatically cowards---and morons.

I saw this idiotic site where every inaccurate or false news item (there are a lot of bogus news and news sites online) was directly attributed to Duterte, as if he was responsible. They assume that sites like that are under Duterte's "payroll."

It's similar to how unthinking critics blame gangland-style extrajudicial killings on Duterte and General Bato's PNP. And because of their lack of imagination, they can't understand why cops have to shoot "suspects" if they shoot at them. Why is there sometimes an over-kill? Well, I can imagine why when it's dark and you're in the middle of the shooting and you're the target. It would be hard to aim at the shoulder, hand or legs if the "suspect" aims at your heart or head.

Your tendency is just to shoot back. Self-preservation instinct tells you that.

And anyway, all such incidents are placed under investigation and the promise is that all those proven at fault will be charged accordingly. I, too, detest over-kills, but I also have to understand where the cops are coming from. In the first place, why involve yourself in what you know is highly illegal and then blame cops for overdoing their arrest? Toy with that thing and you deserve whatever consequences you get--even if you're not directly involved or if you claim to be already willingly surrendering.

If you want a quiet life, you shouldn't have allowed yourself to get involved in any way.

To be sure, I denounce killing of innocent people merely assumed to be suspects. It's the height of stupidity to just shoot anyone who looks like a pusher or addict. As a cop you were supposed to be trained to engage in lawful combat. You know the rules of engagement. Shooting a suspect in a shootout is different from plain shooting a non-combatant, no matter what you suspect him of.

Don't they teach trainees how to handle unarmed suspects using hand-to-hand self-defense techniques without using guns? It's a simple matter to lock the arms of an unarmed suspect resisting arrest if you are trained like I am. And definitely, you wouldn't be able to tackle me if you tried to grab my gun from my holster if I was really trained for these situations like how cops should be.

So, why always use a gun as first line of defense?

Some folks in Congress want the anti-drug operations to stop. Duh? So drug figures could recoup and better strategize their operations? When I hear this, I'm reminded of how traitors in Aguinaldo's cabinet wanted the revolution to stop so the country could just yield to the Americans.

If we stop Duterte's aggressive anti-drug campaign and do things the way previous administrations did it with decency and oligarchic style, the shootings and killings may stop. But that won't amount in any way to genuine and lasting peace and order. It will just be a lull before the storm of a narco-nation.

Are You for Duterte, De Lima, Leni or Aquino? The Correct Way to Watch a Political Circus

cartoonstock.com

As usual, a circus is on among major political figures in the country---Duterte, De Lima, Leni, Aquino and others, with special appearances by the UN and some US diplomats. And it's fun watching them do their tricks. Each of them have their special skills. But the problem is that a lot of people do not know how to watch political circuses. They never learn.

They try to join the circus.

Remember, circus is only for watching, unless you're officially part of the show. Imagine if one from the audience suddenly goes out of the benches and joins the parade of lions or tigers. He'd end up dead meat, literally. Or, imagine a clown or juggler doing a difficult act and you suddenly appear from nowhere and interrupt.

As long as you stay seated in the benches, circus is a fun and entertaining sight to watch.

But people take sides and support a personality. That ruins the circus. I've watched people who claim to be the "thinking majority" lambaste at the "die-hard," rabid Duterte supporters, not realizing that they too are like that when they defend the opposing side. They can't see how they're also die-hard, rabid De Lima or Leni or Aquino supporters.

And they call each other idiots.

Well, in a way, that adds so much fun to the whole circus. The more clowns, the better.

You shouldn't support personalities. Support worthy issues. Especially, support truth. Anyone who goes against truth you should criticize, expose and reject if need be.

Imagine if the circus crowd becomes divided---one group favors one clown and the other walks out because they favor the other clown. The whole show may be affected, Or worse, the circus may be closed down. No more fun, then.

I don't like Duterte as president, but because he is now in fact president, I have to support him. That's what the bible says. I also didn't like Arroyo and Pnoy, but when they were president, I supported them. But it's a conditional support, as opposed to a blind support. I know right from wrong. If Duterte proves wrong I will criticize him. But if he's correct, I'll applaud him. I won't be a Duterte rabid fan as many folks are who embrace everything the guy says. Fanaticism takes away your ability to discern between good and evil.

Neither will I be a rabid Duterte detractor like a lot of unthinking people are (yet they believe they're the smart ones) who oppose anything that comes from Duterte. They'd prove Duterte wrong even in his right decisions and defend his detractors even if they're dead wrong. Such a silly way to apply your intellect, energy and resources.

I'm always loyal to truth. I seek truth, not personalities or popular issues. If anyone is against truth, I don't care how popular he is. I will criticize him. But if anyone is for truth, I don't care what his background is. I'll applaud him.

Constructive criticism is what you do when someone you support (and you have no choice but to support him) makes a mistake and you need to call his attention to it.

Detraction, on the other hand, is willful prejudice against a person based on hatred and animosity. And it's a sign of stupidity, idiocy and immaturity. They just want to put the guy down. What for?

Are you able to decide in favor of someone you don't like? And do it sincerely, too? I have been exposed to situations like this and have become used to it. God's Word tells me not to have biases but to always be fair.

People often squirm or scowl when I side with unlikely people or issues. For instance, Pinoys may favor a Filipino candidate over an American in a beauty pageant because they're Filipinos. But a beauty pageant is not about siding with a fellow Filipino. It's about who's really the most beautiful.

Going back to political circuses, a circus is best left to itself if you want the fun to continue. Anyway, you can never save a circus gone haywire by anything you could do---much less by joining it. Well, one day, if for some reason you decide you want to be a clown or monkey or crocodile, then by all means, join the circus.

How You Can be Contented: Ego has a lot to Do with It

cartoonstock.com

Only the ego is discontented. Count on that. If not for the ego or self-importance or self centeredness, we'd all be living happily ever after, utterly contented with our lot in life.

But the ego makes us go after what we deem is the best. We won't settle for "good" because we think that most people settle for that. We think that the daring few go after the best. If you hit your "best" you're best of the best! And only a few are like that.

I doubt.

I think the the majority today are all after the best and only a few good men settle for what is good. Only few are happily contented with what God gives them. It's like the narrow road---everyone takes the broad path to perdition thinking it's the best option and only the tough and daring take it.

It's actually the reverse. If you take the narrow road, you are tough and daring. And the narrow road is living a contented simple life as Jesus did.

But the ego is there. I don't think anyone can get rid of it. Like the flesh, the ego serves a purpose. It tells you how to keep satisfied and meek. It teaches you to control and mature. You'd become a robot without your ego. Ego is the breeding ground of self will.

What you do is suppress it. If you don't feed it, it starves and weakens and "dies." But mind you, it can resurrect anytime it tastes even a drop of self importance, like Dracula to a drop of blood. If it dies it just lies around there, waiting for your wrong decision. When your feelings are hurt and you decide to assert your ego, the ego revives.

You can right a wrong done to you without asserting your ego. I train myself to deal with right and wrong without getting emotionally involved. Can you do that? It needs hard training. If someone wrongs you, you see it and demand some remedy. But if you don't get the remedy, you leave it at that unaffected. I term it being cold-blooded or callous with your emotions, especially if they prod you to assert your ego. Unperturbed. Unfazed. Unfeeling.

You see how cold-blooded hired killers deal with their targets? They say they're just doing their jobs. Nothing personal. In the same way, you "assassinate" your emotions. You take nothing personal. Yeah, you may even fight for your life if threatened, but you do it without emotion---no hate no vengeance. Nothing personal---you just needed to save your life.

Well, that's taking it to its extreme, which I hope wouldn't happen.

You have dreams and ambitions. You also desire things. You do your best to get them. But if you don't, it doesn't bother you. You're cold-blooded in that sense. You don't feel frustrated or anything like that. You just settle on the fact that it's not for you. No big deal. So what?

But you feel the ego is still there. Anytime you lose control, it will grab power and do a coup. I still get ousted from power now and then. But the frequency and intensity lessens with training. Of course, I still cry or laugh or feel sad, but it's no longer ego-based. It's like how Jesus wept for Jerusalem, not because his ego was hurt, but because he was concerned for its people.

When the ego is hurt, it aims to do a better job because it needs to prove something. "I'll show them that I'm not a loser and I'm going to outdo them all!" Merely having that thought---proving yourself to people---already makes you a failure. It proves you are their slave because everything you do is aimed at pleasing them.

I'd do better after failing---not to prove anything---but because I just love doing better. The emotion is there, loving to do better, but it's no longer ego-based. Even if you fail trying to be better, you remain satisfied and happy. Loving to do better that is ego-based will never end up fulfilled or happy. The ego never gets contented and people around you get negatively affected by it.

Yes, you may get to be a big success. But you're a rotten, pathetic success.

That's why satisfaction often comes in old age when you are in your death bed and very weak, just waiting for your time. The ego is then subdued. That's why power is made perfect in weakness. When you're about to die you think of nothing else but what truly matters in your life and loved ones. You don't aim for anything anymore---except aim to do things you're still able to do for yourself.

I just pity those who are in their death beds and still do not find contentment. When the ego is still alive at such times, you just suffer more. The pain merely aggravates and not even pain-killers would help. You can't let go of things. You struggle, and that only increases the misery.

The ego can also be generous, but it is so only to prove its worth. And often, the generosity awaits a return. The ego cannot just do good deeds silently. It will want something in return---though it will always deny the fact.

But contented people, with their egos subdued, will give away and forget about it. They don't mind losing material things because to them it's a gain. They don't count the cost. Anyway, if they can't afford to give, they won't. They never want to please anyone anyway, so there's no need to force themselves to sacrifice.

Why God Made Saturday

sites.google.com

Saturdays are special. People are usually free from work on Saturdays and have more time to do what really matters to them. I work at home online and am my own boss, so I'm home 27/7. But still, Saturdays are special to me.

First, the wife's here (and when she's around it's a wonderful blessing enough), so are the kids (and sometimes the lil grand kid). Second, there's more time to do other things like laundry, cleaning the yards, defrosting and cleaning the fridge (as if there's something in it that needs cleaning), watching on Youtube or some DVD, or go out somewhere entertaining like a mall.

And yeah, Saturday is when I treat myself to more soya curd (taho). My family seldom joins me in this (sigh).

But often, Saturday early mornings are for more workouts (sometimes brisk walking with the wife). Particularly, it's for teaching some people about my style of Filipino streetfighting martial arts which I designed for street combat and self defense, plus teaching the bible.

My style of Filipino streetfighting is not for competing in tournaments to prove I'm champ or better than anyone. I'm not into that. I never need to prove anything about  myself or to myself. I just need to protect myself and family from bad people.

I'm always a contented person. My contentment is with God alone.

Some say Saturday is Sabbath which is supposed to be total rest day. But doing things for family is "total rest" to me. Jesus did a lot of work on Sabbaths so he was accused of "breaking the Sabbath law." But to him it was "rest" because he fulfilled God's will with the things he was doing. And among God's will is caring for the family.

Saturday is family day. Sunday is the same, but half of Sunday is usually devoted for what happens on Monday. Saturday is devoted wholly for family.

Sunday is not for God. Others believe that Sunday is the "Lord's Day," but it's a shame really to be devoting just one day to the Lord of lords who owns your life. So I believe the Lord's Day is everyday. It doesn't mean I go to church everyday or I have to be religious everyday. I detest religion, religiosity and anything connected to them. I don't "go to church" anymore. Church is where I am with the company of genuine believers talking about Jesus.

Thus, Saturdays are for God and family (because God is family), and that makes it more exciting. Often my family and I just stay home and talk casually while we work or enjoy our meals at the dinner table.

Oh and yes, lastly, Saturday is when either I or my wife cook special native food dishes our kids love---like sinigang na maya-maya belly sa mustasa at miso, almon bigas, grilled bangus or my secret Chyo family burger.

The Better Ones

ideas4sustainability.wordpress.com

Imagine if we were all better than others---if each single individual on the planet were "better" than the next one. Who'd be the "others"? Who'd be the "next one"?

It seems that people around you have become your competitors. I don't know what the competition is all about but they're there trying to compete with you, trying to be better than you are. I'm not sure if I'm any good---definitely I don't think I'm any better than the next guy---but people seem to be always comparing themselves with me.

This guy comes to me and asks how my business is. And then he tells me how he did his business with a hint that he did it better than how I'm doing it. I look at him thinking whether he is there to share some tips on how I can be better at what I'm doing, but no. He doesn't sound like that. He's there to prove he's better than I am.

And he talks like I'm so interested about his ideas and I am just too eager to hear everything he has to say. So I try to figure out---did I ever say I wanted his ideas or ask him to teach me how to do things? As far as I know, I didn't. So what is he doing here? But he just keeps talking anyway, like an idiot.

Almost everyone is out there to prove he or she is the better one. And I guess that's how society is oriented these days. It starts in the family, school, community and the workplace. There is this prodding, an urgency to prove you're better than the other guy. That's why people talk like that. They look for someone to put down, tell him that he's not doing things right, and then magnify their greatness over him.

They love telling people how things ought to be done.

Try it one time. Listen to how people talk. They often talk like they're the sweetest, nicest, wisest and kindest person in the world. Worse are those who talk like they're the only successful guys in the solar system.

And even if they are indeed, so extremely successful, I'm not interested. So what? I'm not impressed. What always impresses me are meek people who often just listen to people---and there are really successful people who are meek like that. I'd love to listen to them tell their stories.

I like folks who talk about how right other people are. Do you know someone who is like that? Here's what I mean. You're reading the headlines over a cup of coffee in a corner of a cafe and this guy approaches you. Umm, let's say he's your friend. It so happens he finds you there and sits across you. Then he starts:

"Hey! You look stunning (without being sarcastic or flattering). How are you? I heard how you did that project in the community! How were you able to put the other guys together and work heartily on that project? That's definitely some leadership! I also once did a project like that but I'd like to know how you did it."

Or, let's say he's asking about your small bible study group. And I emphasize the word small. "Hey, how's your bible study? I've been wondering how you keep your group intact, loyal and persistent. I appreciate people like that, and you manage to train those guys to be like that. What's your secret?"

I'd like to be that kind of person---considering others better than myself, interested about other people. It's dead tiring to hear someone who loves talking about himself and his achievements and how good he is. Worse, how he is better than you are--although he may not say it outright like that.

Ever wondered why when praying, you never hear God audibly talk back to you? He just listens. He's interested about what you have to say. He gives you the option to listen to him, and if you do, that's when he tells you things.

May God help me never to be among the better ones.