Sigaw ng Bayan Ad, Revisited

Remember how the Sigaw ng Bayan ad claimed that the presidential system breeds dictatorship?

I got curious, and took a look at some of the worst dictators the world has ever known, and guess what I found out?

Pol Pot - Cambodia had a parliamentary monarchy before Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge came to power.

Idi Amin - Uganda had a parliamentary system in place when Idi Amin seized power in a coup in 1971, and became a dictator.

Benito Mussolini - Italy had a parliamentary monarchy before Mussolini came to power and established Italy as a fascist state.

Adolf Hitler - Germany had a hybrid presidential-parliamentary system before Hitler became Chancellor. And we all know what happened after that.

It seems to me that it doesn't matter what type of government is in place for a dictator to flourish. If a person is determined enough to wrest power by any means, then he (or she) will become a dictator.

I think that the Sigaw ng Bayan convenors have to rethink their arguments, because, from where I'm standing, Sigaw's arguments for pushing a parliamentary system ring hollow.

Sigaw ng Bayan Ad

One of the reasons why media education for the youth is so important is that they must be trained to recognize how an entity will attempt to influence them into buying some product or following some cause, and how they can decide for themselves what they want to believe.

The full-page ad of Sigaw ng Bayan, the main proponent in pushing for Charter Change (Cha-Cha) is a good example to study.

In the ad, Sigaw answers the charges of the One Voice group, a group opposed to Cha-Cha for now. It also attempts to answer the various criticisms that One Voice has against Cha-Cha. Finally, it counter-charges that One Voice is misleading in its criticisms, and ends by claiming that Cha-Cha is the only hope for our country.

And yet, Sigaw itself is misleading in its claims and statements in its ad.

First of all, Sigaw labels those behind One Voice as the “super-elite,” claiming as proof the expensive ads that One Voice airs. Once more, Sigaw resorts to labeling, probably because they can't adequately answer the charges of One Voice. It's ironic, considering the backers of Sigaw are probably members of the elite, as well.

It’s ironic that Sigaw claims that the “presidential system breeds dictatorship,” and that a shift to a unicameral parliamentary government will save us from the so-called failure of the presidential system.

It conveniently forgets that we did have a semi-parliamentary government under the Marcos regime, and that we did have a unicameral legislature, the rubber-stamp Batasang Pambansa, which approved anything Marcos wanted. Who’s to say that a new unicameral system won’t be the same?

I’ll have to do some research into dictatorships to see whether Sigaw’s claim that presidential governments create dictatorships is true. Does Sigaw imply that the U.S. President is a dictator?

As for the failure of the presidential system, while it’s true that all sorts of negative events mentioned in the ad happened under the presidential system, Sigaw is misleading in stating that the events occurred “for over 70 years”. Actually, all of the negative events that it mentions happened in the last 40 years, although, admittedly, this is still a bad figure. Still, it does a disservice by trying to paint the entire duration of the system as a failure.

The nine million Filipinos who have purportedly signed the people’s initiative is even less than the eleven or so million who voted Erap into office, and even that wasn’t a clear majority of Filipinos, but a plurality. In other words, it’s still a minority of Filipinos who are actually interested in Cha-Cha, and, personally, I’m not even sure if all nine million who signed the people’s initiative are wholeheartedly for Cha-Cha. I’m pretty certain, though, that a percentage of them aren’t. By acting as if nine million constitutes a majority opinion goes against the democratic vein. If the call for Cha-Cha is truly overwhelming, then the numbers should be even greater than nine million.

What’s disturbing is that, to illustrate the numbers it commands, the Sigaw ad states, “Our name is Legion, and we are many.” Wasn’t this uttered by a demon which Christ cast out into a herd of pigs? Does this mean that we should similarly cast out Sigaw’s call for Cha-Cha? (Addendum: According to Manuel Quezon III, it's taken directly from Mark 5: 9 in several Biblical versions. My version, The New American Bible states it as, "Legion is my name. There are many of us." Go figure. )

It is also misleading when they state that One Voice is against Cha-Cha, which it isn’t. One Voice simply asks that it not be done now, because the time is not right.

Finally, I will repeat what I have said in the past: Sigaw misleads us when they argue for the people’s initiative to revise the Constitution, because the Constitution allows the people’s initiative to amend the Constitution, not revise it. A shift in government form is a revision, period.

For Sigaw ng Bayan, no matter how much they deny that that’s not the case, Cha-Cha is the magic formula to all our problems. Amend the Charter, and all our problems will be solved.

It’s a simplistic view, considering that what ails the nation is much more complex than revising the Charter. What is needed is to change the minds and hearts of the politicians and the people, because without such change, no amount of Cha-Cha will ever solve the problems of the country.

Therefore the answer for national change is not Charter Change, but people change.

Classes Cancelled

It's been a while since stormy weather caused the cancellation of multiple class days.

Yesterday, due to the incessant rain, and maybe due to the President's State of the Nation Address (SONA), classes were called off, which was a good thing, because it had been raining non-stop the night before.

Last night, I received a text from my chairperson that classes would again be cancelled today, and, no wonder, because, even as I write up this post, the rain is pounding mercilessly outside. Hazel and I decided to do our groceries, and the strong rain caused flooding in our area, making the return home a little difficult, not to mention hazardous.

Of course, my students are probably rejoicing, as are we teachers (what, you think students are the only ones happy when there aren't any classes?). There will be a bill to pay, though, the cost being what topics and lessons will be affected by the cancellation. But still, two more days of rest isn't so bad now, is it?

Not for me, anyway.

To ID Or Not To ID

It’s not often that one finds a gaffe in the newspaper as glaring as the one on page 8 in the Sunday edition of The Philippine Star. 

The article continues the headline about the identification (ID) plan that the government is planning to implement. It reads:

“Arroyo administration officials have repeatedly given assurances that the ID system would be used (boldface mine) against political opponents or be abused by corrupt law enforcement officers.”

I’m pretty certain that there should be a “not” somewhere in that, but, somehow, given the caprices of our current government, it does seem apt. Ironically, it highlights the concern that government opponents have against the proposed ID system.

The proposed ID system seeks consolidate the various governmental IDs that are currently in existence, such as driver’s licenses and Social Security System (SSS) IDs. The resulting national ID will make it easier to facilitate tasks in the government system; instead of carrying so many IDs around, under the new system, only one card will be needed.

I’m not sure how the ID system would be used against political opponents; personally, I think that it would streamline the way we deal with the government.

My main concern with the system is the possible corruption that it will generate, and the dangers it faces as a technological device.

It’s generally perceived that the government system is corrupt; it’s not possible to get things done quickly unless you grease the wheels a little bit. Plus, some people pay their way to avoid having to meet some of the requirements for such things as driver’s licenses. It’s no wonder that anybody can get a driver’s license, which is why driving in Metro Manila is always hazardous.

But I digress.

 

I can see the possible hitches one will encounter in trying to get the ID to begin with. Will the government bureaucracy make it difficult for us to obtain the IDs, unless we pay a little extra to make it happen? That’s a possible problem.

The other problem is technological in nature. If the ID is implemented, it’s likely that all of our information will be available on computer. Any determined hacker will want to get his or her hands on such information. And that’s when the information be used.

The proposed ID system is a good idea, but the government had better make sure that that system, if implemented, is foolproof and ironclad against unwanted and illegal incursions, and ensure that corrupt officials won’t be able to use it against the Filipino citizenry..

Hectic Weekend, Part ?

I actually wrote this Sunday night, but, because of the weather and the SONA, I wasn't able to post it. So here it is.

All it took was one mix-up, and my Friday night was totally screwed up.

According to my sister’s email, my dad was scheduled to arrive in the Philippines last Friday at around 10:40 pm. So Buddy and I decided that we’d leave our house at 9pm, which we felt would give us enough time to make it.

It was smooth sailing until we got to Guadalupe, where we got stuck in tortoise-pace traffic, which lasted all the way to just before the Magallanes flyover, where, strangely, the traffic suddenly loosened up. It was strange because we couldn’t see what was causing the traffic. It was as if everybody decided that they’d move at a snail pace until a certain point, and then speed up. Weird.

The next gridlock we encountered was near the Ninoy Aquino International Airport, and traffic once more slowed down. When we got to the airport, and passed the security check, we made the mistake of completely missing the parking lot entrance. What made this really bad was that we had to go all the way back to find a U-turn.

Once we were parked, it was 10:40 pm, and we figured that our dad would have already landed, and getting out would take some time.

We waited for two hours, and we were getting worried. I mean, we realized that it would take some time for our dad to pass immigration and get his luggage, but this was ridiculous. I asked a guard about the flight from the U.S., and he told me that it had landed ages ago, and the passengers had long disembarked.

Fortunately, Buddy had the presence of mind to call our sister Mia on his cellphone, and we learned that our dad was arriving … Saturday.

We checked our sister’s email again, and nothing said that the flight was arriving on Saturday. Oog.

So home we went, and on the way home we encountered heavy traffic near Cubao, which was weird because it was already 1am. It turned out that repairs were being done on the P. Tuason underpass, and traffic was a one-lane affair.

We got through that, and we realized that we were hungry, so we passed by Wendy’s, where Bud had a big bacon classic, and I had the regular big classic. And so the day came to an end at 2 in the morning.

The next day, we double-checked our email, we made sure that the day and time was right, and so, we decided to set out at 8:30 p.m., to make leeway for the traffic. However, apparently, we got caught in the Friday going-home and gimmick traffic the night before, and we got to the airport in less than an hour. Wonderful.

Our dad arrived on time, and we waited for about an hour for him to pass immigration and to get his baggage.

And so, the weekend adventure came to an end.

Untouchable?

Commission on Elections (Comelec) Chairman Ben Abalos and the other Comelec Commissioners apparently believe that they’re above the law, and the Supreme Court. 

In the current investigation of the Office of the Ombudsman of the Comelec’s P1.3 million Mega Pacific poll modernization contract, lawyer Gabriel Villareal, representing embattled Commissioner Resurreccion Borra, claims that the Ombudsman “would be violating the Constitution if it persists in investigating impeachable officials” (quoted from an article in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, dated July 19, 2006) such as Borra. Villareal goes on to say that, “The Ombudsman cannot undertake the task of even investigating Comelec officials prior to any impeachment proceeding, because this power rests solely with the House of Representatives.”

In addition, Chairman Abalos stated that he was willing to present evidence of no wrongdoing, but not to the Office of the Ombudsman, because the Comelec’s official stand is that the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction over the Comelec.

All of this made me a little curious, so I borrowed my wife’s copy of an annotated 1987 Constitution, which conveniently included in its annotations a copy of Republic Act (R.A.) 6770, which defines the functions and structure of the Office of the Ombudsman

In the Constitution, Article XI, which deals with the accountability of public officers, lists the function of the Ombudsman as follows,

“Sec. 13. The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the following powers, functions, and duties:

(1) Investigate on its own, or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public official (boldface mine), employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient.”

Hmmm. I don’t see “impeachable official” anywhere in that part of the Constitution. Neither does there seem to be any exceptions to that section. Therefore, the Ombudsman does have the authority to investigate the Comelec and its officials.

In fact, the body which practically ordered the Ombudsman to investigate the Comelec was the Supreme Court. So, are the Comelec Commissioners saying, in effect that they’re beyond any legal power in the Philippines?

But, wait, there’s more.

In Section 22 of R.A. 6770, which defines the Ombudsman’s investigatory power, states, “The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the power to investigate any serious misconduct in office allegedly committed by officials removable by impeachment, for the purpose of filing a verified complaint for impeachment, if warranted.”

In other words, the Ombudsman is acting in accordance with its mandate as defined by the Constitution and R.A. 6770, and has every right to call in Abalos and company to ask them about the apparently anomalous contract.

Talking with a friend of mine who’s better steeped in constitutional law and politics than I am, I learned that what Villareal and Abalos are doing is to employ delaying tactics, to slow down the Ombudsman and gain some breathing ground.

It’s a splitting-hair sort of argument. The lawyer and the Chairman apparently equate investigation with impeachment, and attempt to make the quantum leap that the two actions are one and the same, even though it clearly states in the Constitution and R.A. 6770 that: one, no public official is exempt from investigation, and two, while the Ombudsman isn’t empowered to impeach an officer like Abalos, it is empowered to investigate him.

If the Mega Pacific contract is above board, as Chairman Abalos claims, then he should not be hesitant to present his evidence before the Ombudsman. His hesitance tells us that that may not be the case.

The whole affair is reprehensible. It shows how far public officials will go to escape culpability and responsibility, and how lawyers will twist the law to suit their own ends. Abalos himself is a lawyer, and his stand on the Ombudsman tells me either of two things: one, he is ignorant of the law, which brings into question his competence as Comelec Chairperson, or two, he is attempting to exploit the law to further his own ends, which means that he is probably corrupt.

I'm inclined to believe the latter.

Presidential Arrogance

One of the problems of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is that she doesn’t know when to quit when she’s ahead.

Take a look at her statement regarding God being her only judge.

I think it’s a bit presumptuous; after all, we, the Filipino people, also get to judge her, having elected her, although that is currently being question, given the fact that there are several impeachment complaints against her.

In a way, by saying that God is her only judge, she practically removes herself from any culpability. She is beholden to none except herself. She is able to do whatever she wants, without any recrimination.

I didn’t realize that the Philippines is now a theocracy.

This isn’t the first time that our President has invoked religion in her public life. After Pope John Paul II passed away last year, she was quoted as claiming that it was the Pope who convinced her to break away from Erap. It was convenient that Pope John Paul II was no longer alive to contradict her.

Then, a few weeks ago, when the President met with Pope Benedict XVI, her spinmeisters tried to sell us the idea that the Pope’s blessing on her meant that she was doing a good job governing the country. Of course, the Pope isn’t going to waste time to clarify himself, so the President can take what he said and twist it to suit her purposes.

And now, she says that only God can judge what she’s done, which is, in my estimation, a very arrogant statement. Does this mean that she’s President by divine right?

No.

In the same way that the Presidency is not a birthright, as the hacks in the Daily Tribune once wrote, neither is the Presidency a divine right. The President, whether she likes it or not, still has to answer to the people she is supposed to serve. And, if she keeps up with statements like that, she will have to answer to them very soon.

To Serve Or To Be Served

In a conversation I had with an old friend last Thursday, one of the topics we coursed over was politics, and my friend mentioned that what’s infuriating about a good number of our public officials is that they work under the delusion that they are our lords and masters, conveniently forgetting that their actual job is that of being a servant to the people. 

This can be seen in the arrogant way some public officials treat people coming to them for help, often asking for grease money to facilitate whatever task needs to be done. This can also be seen in the way our public officials flaunt traffic laws, or expect that they be treated like kings when they go someplace.

One of the reasons for this is that the Philippines is made up of political dynastic families, which rule their respective areas like fiefs. As a result, they treat political office as if it’s a birthright, rather than something to be earned.

The only time they act like they’re our servants, my friend opined, is when election time comes around, and they come to us, asking for our vote. But, even this action is tainted, because a good number of politicians simply buy their way into office, spreading goodwill in the form of peso bills, expecting the people to remember who their patron is. And so the system continues, with the officials as masters, and we, their servants.

However, they forget that, as officials, either elected or governmental, they are our servants, and they should remember to treat us with more respect. This is difficult, of course, due to the Filipinos’ political immaturity, which the politicians have no intention of nurturing to maturity. Otherwise, Filipinos will realize that they’re being screwed over to no end by our politicians. Of course, the politicians aren’t interested in slitting their own throats, or ending their corrupt political careers, and so, they leave the political education to NGOs or other such organizations.

The corruption must stop, but it’s going to be a difficult task. We Filipinos are so blasé about politics; we simply accept that that’s the way things are, and nothing we can do will change things.

That is not the case. If we just get off our collective butts, and do something about the corruption in our system, we can change things. We did so in 1986, and in 2001.

What needs to be done is for us to actively remember that our officials, not we, are the servants, and we should remind them of that at every opportunity.

"Pirates of the Carribean: Dead Man's Chest"

Jack Sparrow: [to Elizabeth] You know, these clothes do not fancy you at all. It should be a dress or nothing. I happen to have no dress in my cabin.

Ever since I saw the trailer for "Pirates of the Carribean: Dead Man's Chest," I'd wanted to watch it. I liked the first movie, and I enjoyed the performances, particularly Johnny Depp's Oscar-nominated role as Captain Jack Sparrow. I felt that he captured the rougish, foppish Sparrow and made the role his very own. I also liked the story, which was a classic pirates caper complete with all the trimmings. Thus, I was excited to watch the next installment in the series.

Yesterday, I got my chance.

The movie was everything I'd hoped for. It had swashbuckling action, colorful characters, and a rollicking story that kept me and the audience glued for well over two hours.


(SPOILERS FOLLOW)



The story begins with the interrupted wedding of Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) and Elizabeth Swann (Keira Knightley - rowr!) as they are accused of aiding in the escape of Captain Jack Sparrow. The bearer of the arrest warrant, Lord Beckett (Tom Hollander), makes a deal with Will: his and Elizabeth's freedom, in exchange for Jack Sparrow's compass.

Meanwhile, Jack Sparrow, sailing the seas in his beloved Black Pearl, discovers that he is living on borrowed time. It turns out that to be able to sail the Pearl, he made a deal with Davy Jones (Bill Nighy), the supernatural captain of the Flying Dutchman, to have the Pearl for thirteen years. And now, time has run out, and Jack must figure out a way to save his skin.

And that's all about the story I'm going to share. Anything more would give away too much, and spoil the story.

As for the rest...

All in all, the various settings for the movie captured a lot of the pirate-y flavor. Tia Dalma's (Naomie Harris - rowr!) abode, the cannibals' home, and Tortuga all added a flair to the movie. The design of Tortuga, in fact, contains images from the actual ride.

Some of the action scenes were amazing in their choreography, and I felt a little for sorry for the stuntmen would have to pull off the scenes, but they did a bang-up job in the fight scenes. The same goes for the sea shots, especially the battle between the Pearl and the Dutchman.

I also liked the design of the cursed crewmen of the Dutchman, who sported all sorts of marine life features, which added to the aquatic atmosphere of the Dutchman, as well as to their menace.

Aside from the setting and the scenes, it's the characters who make the movie run. At the foremost is Depp, as Cap'n Jack Sparrow, who has some of the best lines in the movie. The two bumbling pirates from the first movie, played by Lee Arenberg and Mackenzie Crook, also provide some comic relief, as well as some really colorful dialogue.

Of the new characters, it's Jones and Tia Dalma whom I like the most. Nighy is able to bring a insidious air to Davy Jones, and makes him as memorable as the first movie's villain, Barbossa, played by Geoffrey Rush.

Naomie Harris, as the voodoo woman Tia Dalma, is at once both sultry and creepy, and the way she colors her voice to reflect this makes for another memorable character.

Of course, the movie ends at a cliffhanger (a wonderful one, at that) , but that's only understandable, considering it is a three-movie series. Still, it's a rip-rollicking ride, which only whets my appetite for the final chapter in the story.

Classes Cancelled

Oh, well. Better late than never.

Classes in the High School were cancelled due to the heavy rainfall around 11 o'clock. The announcement fortunately arrived in the dying minutes of the class session, so not too much time was lost to the joyous shouting and rejoicing that erupted with the news. In my class, we could hear the ruckus from the third year wing, but, since the students were working on a seatwork, I was able to keep them on course to finish. It was only when the messenger bearing the news passed by the classroom that I allowed the students to celebrate.

I just wish that the announcement came earlier, considering that the downpour was already pounding early this morning. That way, it wouldn't be such a hassle for people to call for someone to fetch them. The sad part for some students is that, since the people slated to fetch them may be tied up elsewhere, they're stuck in school until later this afternoon.

As for me, I'm heading home with the end of this post. Hallelujah!

I can sleep.

Fleur de Lys

After reading Lori's post about Fleur de Lys, it was almost fortuitious that Hazel had a yen to eat there. That way, I would be able to try the waffles, which looked really appetizing on Lori's blog.

I didn't realize how often we went to eat at Fleur de Lys while Hazel was pregnant with Caitlin until the waiter, who was there for most of our visits then (whose name I probably should ask), asked us if Gabby was the baby Hazel was carrying. I'm sure he was just trying to be friendly, considering that Gabby's four, and very talkative, something a months-old baby wouldn't be able to do. Still, it was nice that he remembered us.

Hazel settled for her regular meal, the pesto pasta, and The Next Best Thing, which is a soft, gooey chocolate cake slathered in chocolate syrup and served with a scoop of vanilla ice cream, for dessert. I decided to try the savory waffle, settling on the sweet chorizo hamonado and scrambled eggs to accompany it.

When the waffle arrived, it was about 5-6 inches square, with a pat of golden butter oozing on top, with two pieces of the chorizo, scrambled eggs, and slices of fresh crunchy tomato. The waffle was pretty good, although I'm still trying to identify the herbs used to flavor it. The chorizo tasted sweet and savory, like a firm tocino, ably complementing the waffle.

Aside from the food, and the great dessert, what I like about Fleur de Lys is that it's fairly cozy, and the service is very good. The waiters were very accommodating with our requests for extra utensils and stuff for Gabby, and they were very friendly.

The next time I visit, I'm having the waffle again, but this time with the smoked Italian sausage, which my brother says is also excellent.

Quick One

Yep, I've been out for a while. My system bogged down over the weekend, and I'm still not completely over it.

It's been busy, though, what with the end of the World Cup and French player Zidane's memorable if disgraceful headbutt (see it here!), the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines coming out with their statement not supporting the impeachment bid, and, on the local front, dealing with two daughters with no yaya, and Hazel and I both suffering from physical breakdown. Still, I'm up and about, what with the advisory marks due in two days, so, life goes on.

Irresponsibly Stupid

A columnist in a leading newspaper opined that Senator Jamby Madrigal was naïve in going to the Netherlands to meet with National Democratic Front (NDF) leaders, and calling for a return to the peace talks. I’m more inclined to go with the labels self-serving, irresponsible, and stupid.

I found Sen. Madrigal’s actions self-serving because she went without any government sanction; in fact, she apparently concealed her true purpose in getting permission from the Senate to travel to Europe. The problem with her actions is the Philippine government isn’t currently interested in suing for peace with the NDF, mainly because: one, the NDF’s military arm, the New People’s Army (NPA) continues to conduct their raids on towns and to wage war against the government, and, two, the President is determined to find a scapegoat that will absolve her of her current political problems, but that’s another matter. Sen. Madrigal probably went in order to advance her own status as a Senator, or to make her mark on Philippine politics. Unfortunately, she’s going about it the wrong way. By acting on her own, she is speaking for no one except her own self-interest.

In addition, her actions were irresponsible because there is a structure for the peace process, and, with her ill-advised move to sign a communiqué with Satur Ocampo and Joma Sison, a known “enemy of the state.” Once more, she wasn’t acting on any authority but her own self-interest, which means that she’s actually endangering the peace process with her actions. At the same time, she’s a public official, a person sworn to uphold the State. I can’t see how she’s doing that by hobnobbing with people like Sison.

Instead of naïve, I think what Sen. Madrigal did is stupid because she doesn’t seem to realize that she’s dealing with people who have been using every and all means to overthrow the government. A while ago, in an interview on ANC, she was acting puzzled as to why there was such a fuss, saying to the effect that communism is legal in other countries, so what’s the problem? The problem is that the communists in other countries have eschewed the armed struggle, and fought their battles in the political arena, while the NDF-NPA continues their armed struggle, resorting to terrorist tactics and banditry to further their bankrupt cause.

It was pathetic to see her put on what she believed was a brave façade, and claim that she was ready to face any persecution for her actions. If the government is smart, it will not make a political martyr out of her. The better thing to do would be to ignore her, and relegate her to obscurity.

This isn’t the first time Sen. Madrigal has acted rashly. A few months back, she attempted to put down Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, and was reduced to quivering tears by the more politically astute Senator in the process. At the rate she’s going, she’ll outdo another former opposition member whose claim to fame was performing a cha-cha during the Estrada impeachment trial.

Interesting Internet

Browsing through the Internet can be a very colorful experience, considering the wealth of stuff one can find on it.

Here are just a few links which I found, through various sources:

La Linea was a animated series of line drawings made between 1969 and 1991, wherein the character, a silhouette of a man, walks a straight line, and is subjected to all sorts of shenanigans by the all-powerful drawing hand and white pencil.

Superdickery archives all of the stupid, weird and sometimes disturbing covers and frames that have appeared on comic books, focusing mainly on Superman.

Want to see how Optimus Prime might transform in live action? Go here.

Wondermark is an online comic strip which takes the old classic illustrations, and gives them new hilarious meaning in the form of a comic strip.

Remember the old Matrix-style ping-pong played by two Japanese? Someone posted it on YouTube, which is a great site for finding interesting and entertaining videos.

"Superman Returns"

Last Sunday, I was able to watch “Superman Returns” at Eastwood. 

I'm not sure what I was expecting, considering that the trailer didn't leave me breathless like I was with "Batman Returns".

Still, it was an interesting way to reintroduce DC Comics's iconic heroes. Unlike "Batman Begins," which was a much-needed restart to the Batman's story, "Superman Returns" begins where the movies starring the late Christopher Reeve ended.

(SPOILER WARNING)

The story begins with Superman returning to Earth after a five-year journey to the ruins of his home planet, Krypton. By then, people had gotten used to not having Superman around; Lois Lane, in fact, had moved on, gotten engaged and had a son. Superman's return, however, is cause for much rejoicing around the world. Their savior had returned. This, in turn, causes much tension between Superman and Lois, as it is very clear that whatever they felt for each other still remains.

But, as always, the fly in the ointment, Lex Luthor, recently released from prison, plots to take over the world once more, this time making use of Superman's Fortress of Solitude, as well as a large chunk of Kryptonite.

How Superman saves the world again is just something you have to see for yourself.

The story was pretty good, although lacking in action. I can see why my teenage nephew was bored with it. Still, it was a good enough story, with enough pathos and comedy to keep the ball rolling.

There is a lot of parallelism used between Superman and Christ, but, according to those who’ve made a study of Superman, such allusions were made from the very beginning, when Superman was created. While interesting, I felt director Bryan Singer went a little heavy with the parallelism, practically bashing the viewers over the head with such things as Jor-El's commentary of sending his only son, and, of couse, the apparent defeat and revival of Superman.

As for the actors, I felt they did a good job of portraying the various characters.

Brandon Routh is a worth successor to the late Christopher Reeve. Routh plays the role of Clark Kent with all the naiveté and bumbling affection that comes with the character. As Superman, somehow, he’s just a little too stiff; in fact, it looks like his hairdo was set into place by gobs of hairspray.

Kate Bosworth seems to be a little too young to play the worldly Lois Lane, but she does her best with the role, and is able to manage a solid performance. James Marsden, a.k.a. Cyclops, plays Lois' fiance Richard, who is as clean as apple pie can be, and provides a difficult choice for Lois, considering that she is forced to choose between two decent and honorable men.

Kevin Spacey looks like he’s having a blast as Lex Luthor, although he doesn't seem as menacing as Gene Hackman's portrayal of Lex in the old movies. He does have some of the better lines in this one.

The supporting cast also deserves mention

Parker Posey plays Kitty, Lex's ditzy companion. Having seen her in "Blade: Trinity", Posey has a good range of playing varied characters.

Frank Langella's portrayal of editor-in-chief Perry White is underplayed and wonderful to see. While not as volatile as Marvel's J. Jonah Jameson, White is still hardnosed and hungry for the next big scoop, and Langella is able to show this in his performance.

Sam Huntington, as Jimmy Olsen, provides a bit of comic relief to the movie. Even though he's been with the Daily Planet for some time, he still shows a bit of innocence about the world around him, moving through it garrulously.

The kid they got to play Lois' son, Tristan Lake Leabu, reminds me of a young Kieran Culkin, and 

shares the same wide-eyed innocence, which makes him perfect as Jason White.

Considering that I had just watched "Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle" (those of you who like weird comedy should see this; it's really great.) only two days before "Superman Returns," it was strange to see Kal Penn so neat and tidy, as opposed to his portrayal of the stoner Kumar.

Going into "Superman Returns," one should not expect a slam-bang, action-packed extravaganza, although there is quite a bit of action in the movie. The movie focuses more on the people, particularly the relationship of Superman and Lois Lane. As long as you like that sort of movie, you should go and watch "Superman Returns."

Political Shots

One has to tell the government that the separation of Church and State works both ways. While I don’t agree with Bishop Yñiguez in filing one of the numerous impeachment complaints against the President, it’s his right to do so as a citizen of the Philippines. What I find funny is that the government has called on the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) to sanction Yñiguez for his actions, citing the separation of Church and State. If it truly believes in this principle, then what right does the government have in ordering the CBCP around? 

I think it was Fr. Joaquin Bernas, SJ, who noted that politicians conveniently trot out the Church-State separation principle when it suits them. This, the calling of sanctions against Yñiguez, is one of these times.

* * *

If the opposition is so concerned about the timing for the filing of their impeachment complaint, why not choose a time which is clearly past the one-year ban, instead of the pathetic spectacle of multiple filings? And if lawyer Oliver Lozano is truly an oppositionist as he claims, shouldn’t he work with the opposition, instead of acting like a loose cannon, and doing whatever he pleases?

At the same time, the opposition had better have the numbers to push the impeachment through; otherwise, it’ll be all for naught. For better or worse, impeachment is a political card to play, and one should have the necessary numbers to make it work.

* * *

 

It’s interesting that when the One Voice group came out with their criticism of the Charter Change movement, they were branded as “elitist” by Cha-Cha mover Sigaw ng Bayan leader Raul Lambino and “anti-poor” by former UP President Jose Abueva. It’s apparent that those for Cha-Cha aren’t interested in debating about whether it should be done; they’re simply interested in ramming it down the Filipinos’ throats, come hell or high water, damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead, and to hell with anybody raising objections to their agenda.

But in a democratic society, people should engage in debate, to flesh out the issues at hand. And one doesn’t debate by calling the other side names.

What the One Voice group is calling for, from what I understand of their statement, is for sobriety and calm thought to prevail, to slow down and truly see what changes are being proposed. So far, I’ve heard a lot of noise supposedly calling for Cha-Cha, but very little about what changes exactly are being proposed. What’s difficult here is that we don’t even know what we’re debating over. Are we looking at changing the form of government, which isn’t an amendment under any color, or the protectionist economic provisions, or anything that we feel should be taken out and changed?

On the topic of the signature campaign, it’s interesting that Fr. Bernas noted is a recent column that two districts in Zamboanga didn’t have any signatures collected from them. But the Constitution is very clear about the numbers: 12 percent of the total Philippine population, and 3 percent from each district should be present for the people’s initiative to take effect.

It’s very possible that there are spurious signatures among the supposed 10 million signatures collected; in fact, it’s a certainty that some of the signatures come from those who don’t really understand what it was they were signing.

This is what makes the pro-Cha-Cha movement dangerous, as it’s apparent that it’s willing to use any and all means, fair or foul, in pushing their agenda through. Cha-Cha is being used by the people in power to continue to perpetuate themselves in power, and, as long as that is the existing agenda, we Filipinos should continue to fight against this threat to our freedoms. Lord knows our country has enough problems.