La Salle officials placed last Thursday’s game with Ateneo, which
Ateneo, however, noticed the mistake and quickly put star guard Jai Reyes back into the game. But, Reyes entered the game without properly informing the official’s table, getting a technical foul for it;
While it seemed that the mistake was corrected, with La Salle benefiting from it,
The sheer absurdity of the situation is appalling. I won’t argue against the Ateneo violation, but it’s pretty clear that: one, the mistake was quickly corrected, with La Salle getting two free throws and possession, and two, the presence of both foreign players didn’t have an adverse effect on the game.
What did lose the game for
UPDATE: In today's Philippine Star, there was a story on the sports page where coaches Norman Black of Ateneo and Franz Pumaren of La Salle were trading barbs on the non-controversy. Pumaren struck as rather idiotic, because, in his reaction to Black's statement that the mistake didn't alter the outcome of the game, Pumaren responded that if he plays both his foreign players in the first quarter only or up to the third quarter, it's okay because "it won't alter the outcome of the game." It's idiotic because, in the first place, Laterre and Long didn't play at the same time, and, if it happened that they did, it was only for a second or two, which didn't have any impact on the game. What Pumaren is saying is an entirely different thing, and it shows how desperate he is to save face in front of the fans, that he's willing to say anything that will put him in a good light with them.
In reaction to the State of the Nation Address (SONA) last week, a number of the President’s opponents had some scathing words to share with the public. At least they would have been scathing if they actually made sense.
In particular, Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN) head Renato Reyes scoffed at the President’s promises of increased attention to expanding infrastructure. He was quoted in the Philippine Daily Inquirer as saying that infrastructure won’t help Filipinos get jobs.
Um, forgive me if I’m wrong, but aren’t workers needed to put the infrastructure into place? Won’t the increased expansion of infrastructure help create more jobs for jobless Filipinos?
It’s statements like these that make me question the motives of the leftist movement. I know this will sound naïve, but it appears to me that the good of the Filipino people is farthest from the minds of the movement.
The problem I find with the leftist activist movement is that they seem to want the government to do everything for the Filipino people. They appear to want to reduce the Filipino to being mendicants, always expecting a handout from the higher-ups. Won’t the creation of new jobs help instill some pride in our countrymen? Imagine the swelling of chests whenever they pass by a new bridge or new road and say, “I had a hand in that.” Isn’t that a lot better than simply waiting for the next dole-out from the administration?
Another problem I can see is that the leftists are too limited in their world view. I have yet to hear a leftist such as Satur Ocampo or Teddy Casino condemn the wanton killings of policemen or soldiers; the leftist movement, in fact, was silent regarding the killing and beheading of Marines in Basilan. So, Ocampo, Casino and company find the murder of activists a human rights violation, but not the deaths of Marines and police killed in the line of duty? They’re either hypocrites or sociopaths when they adopt such a one-sided view.
Finally, I cannot see the leftist movement contributing to the development of the country, because it seems that they’re more concerned about tearing it apart. Or worse, they see nothing wrong in exploiting the corruption that bedevils the nation. The leftists were very vocal about the evils of the pork barrel funds of our lawmakers, but, once they were elected to the same office, there is nary a peep from them about such evil. I guess money talks, and money talks loudly.
The next time the left-wing side of politics speaks, I'll take it with a huge grain of salt.
The next time the left-wing side of politics speaks, I'll take it with a huge grain of salt.
With the conclusion of the President’s State of the Nation Address (SONA) today, and with the top-ranking positions in Congress duly filled, the government will once more go back to its everyday routine of horse-trading.
It remains to be seen whether the President will be able to deliver on all the projects she’s outlined in her SONA. It’s clear that she’s aiming to be remembered as the President who set in motion the massive development of infrastructure, which will rival or surpass former President Marcos’ infrastructure plans. If successful, the President will have helped the country move forward economically.
Now, if she only devoted more time to the moral side of her Presidency, although, as several columnists will say, her alleged cheating during the 2004 presidential elections will have destroyed any moral edge the President may have had. These pundits will rant and rail against the President, continually questioning her moral authority to rule. The Philippine Daily Inquirer’s Conrado de Quiros, for one, consistently refers to her as the “unelected President.”
And yet, despite all of this, the President manages to survive; it is almost certain that, unless there is a scandal with enough evidence to blow her administration apart, she will finish her term in 2010.
President Arroyo survives partially because of two factors. One, the public perception is that there is no one else fit to follow; in Marcos’ time, there were the Aquinos, and, in Estrada’s time, Arroyo came to power by default, since she was the Vice-President. Having seen that simply toppling a corrupt regime is not enough, the Filipino people have apparently decided that they are willing to wait until Arroyo finishes her term.
The other factor is the disarray in the opposition ranks. Ever since Arroyo’s rise to the Presidency, the opposition has squandered opportunity after opportunity to gain the upper hand, mainly due to both the differences in political ideals, and the individual ambitions of the opposition members. In 2004, the opposition was split between choosing the late actor, Fernando Poe, Jr., and Senator Panfilo Lacson. Lacson would not give way, and, thus, the opposition vote was divided enough for Arroyo to win, with a little help, of course from ‘Garci.’
While the opposition won rather convincingly in the senatorial elections last May, they were immediately relegated once more to the minority because they couldn’t decide on a single candidate for the Senate Presidency. Newly re-elected senators Loren Legarda and Lacson opposed Manuel Villar’s claim to the Senate leadership, as this would probably wreak havoc with their own presidential ambitions in 2010; Villar, of course, is turning a moist eye to that lofty seat as well.
In the resulting election, Senator-elect Manuel Villar, with help of the administration senators, and with some of the opposition senators, reclaimed the position that was his before the election. This drew harsh words from those in the opposition camp, both for Villar and for the opposition senators who supported him. It is unlikely that this unrest in the Senate will abate anytime soon.
With the economic success that the country is enjoying, coupled with the fractures in the opposition alliance, the President can probably look forward to a graceful exit in 2010.
I’d just like to state that I was able to get my copy of J.K. Rowling’s “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows”, the final book in the wildly popular series, from my high school library last Saturday. Along with it came a free copy of “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince”, thanks to a promotion by Scholastic Press, Rowling’s American publisher.
I was able to finish “Deathly Hallows” by early evening last Saturday, and that is all I will have to say for now. No spoilers, no reactions. I’ll just wait for the rest of you to read it, and then I’ll probably have something to say (although I daresay some of you probably finished it sooner than I did.). Until then, this is it for “Harry Potter.”
Yesterday afternoon, I was watching “Top Story” on ANC, and one of the guests they had on the show was Antonio Calipjo Go, the academic supervisor of the Marian School of Quezon City. Of course, Go is more famous for his tireless crusade against the errors that are found in elementary school textbooks. Here are a few of the examples that he found in various textbooks:
* Stop playing in your computer now.
* Be in the peak of health.
* Around the pool is an orientally-designed porch.
* I have seen some orchids in our neighbor’s botanical gardens.
* Some plants are self-planters. They plant their own seeds.
* I’m capable of being the best me I can.
* The city’s voice is soft like solitudes.
* I dipped my tired feet into a basin of water to soothe the ache and fret.
* Do animals move only when the wind blows? What animals don’t move when there is no wind but move when the wind blows?
* Take me to the water breaks.
* Rizal made himself famous as a writer.
* Stars seem to twinkle because they are very far away. There are dwarf stars. They are like people.
(taken from this site)
A few days ago, he placed an ad in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, questioning whether it was proper to place “titi”, the Filipino word for the male sex organ, in a Filipino textbook.
Apparently, he was on “Top Story” a few nights back, and had a verbal tussle regarding the errors with one of the undersecretaries of the Department of Education (DepEd). The undersecretary supposedly explained that the reason was that the term was to be used in conjunction with what the students were taking up in Science.
In yesterday’s show, Go pointed out that, if that was the case, why was the Filipino word for pimp, “titatita”, also included? Was this also being taken up in Science?
Go has some valid points about the textbook issue. If the DepEd is allowing such books to proliferate, how can the average Filipino child expect quality education? It didn’t help that a DepEd policy adviser, Carlos Valarao, admitted that the books with errors continue to be circulated because, in this case, the procurement of new Filipino books wasn’t scheduled yet. That’s really bad. Does he mean to say that erroneous books continue to be distributed, simply because the DepEd is too focused on following its schedule of procurement? Shouldn’t the DepEd be moving more quickly than that?
However, it must be pointed out that Go’s crusade does have some flaws in it, and I don’t mean those that the DepEd officials are railing against. In yesterday’s show, Go criticized the inclusion of a story about a boy who ate stars and a story about a hawk who loved a hen in the textbooks, calling them without any sense. Go went as far as to mention that in the story about the hawk and the hen, the hawk gave the hen a ring which she wore around her neck. Wouldn’t the hen choke then, Go wondered.
Perhaps if anchors Tony Velazquez and Pia Hontiveros were more well-read, they might have been able to point out that, in literature, there is such a genre called fantasy, which includes stories such as fairy tales and folk tales. In fact, the stories Go questioned happen to be Alfred Yuson’s “The Boy Who Ate Stars”, a 1990 Palanca-award winner for children’s short story , and “The Hawk and the Hen”, a Visayan folk tale. Surely these stories are worth including in an English textbook?
On the whole, Go’s crusade is a worthy cause, and I hope that his efforts will bear fruit in the form of better-written textbooks. But maybe he should either brush up on his literature, or refrain from criticizing something that is obviously out of his sphere of knowledge.
So much for writing the past week. It’s been a busy week in school and at home, which made writing about anything past last Monday difficult.
Last Thursday, we watched “Harry Potter and the Order of the
Character development of the new characters was mixed at best. I think Katie Leung, who played Cho Chang, was lacking in displaying emotion; maybe she was too nervous about “The Kiss”? However, casting scored a 10 in finding Evanna Lynch, who played Luna Lovegood. I think she captured the seeming flightiness and deep wisdom that Luna showed in the book.
Casting also scored well in choosing the one who played the annoyingly sinister Dolores Umbridge, Imelda Staunton. She evoked the right amount of dislike from the audience.
Of course, the rest of the mainstay cast did as well as they could, even though a number of them had a very limited role in the film.
I wonder if the actors who have made up the core of the series will make it to the end. I’m particularly concerned about Dame Maggie Smith, who plays Professor McGonagall. She appears visibly aged in “
All in all, “Order of the
A word of warning: as the series approaches its conclusion, it has become darker and darker. Starting with “The Goblet of Fire,” those with very young children should think twice about bringing them to the remaining movies.
What’s interesting are some of the movies that are coming up.
“Ratatouille” – The latest offering of the wildly successful pairing of Disney and Pixar, “Ratatouille” is directed by Brad Bird (“The Incredibles”), and focuses on the travails of a rat with dreams of becoming a world-class chef. The fly in the ointment is, of course, he’s a rat. From what I’ve seen of the trailers and the sneak peeks, it looks like Pixar will continue its streak of good filmmaking.
“The Simpsons Movie” – After eighteen seasons on the small screen, television’s well-loved dysfunctional family makes its debut on the silver screen. “The Simpsons” will make a comfortable transition, from the look of the trailer.
“The Dark is Rising” – At first, when this trailer started rolling, I thought it was about Philip Pullman’s “The Golden Compass.” Then, when the trailer mentioned the battle between the light and the dark, I realized that the movie was Newbery Award-winning author Susan Cooper’s “The Dark is Rising” saga. I’m looking forward to the upcoming movie, having read the series back in the ‘90s. I wonder if it’ll be a series, or will the filmmakers mash everything into one movie. I hope it’s the former.
One of the problems with the “Transformers” movie for me is that I felt that it would suffer from comparisons to the original series which came out more than two decades ago. A pre-review based on the trailers came out on YouTube, which pretty much summed up my own fears about the movie.
Two weeks ago, I got to watch the movie, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that I enjoyed it.
Oh, of course, it wasn’t comparable to the original series; there would be numerous points I’d disagree on, if that were the case. But, on its own, it was an impressive piece of work. The computer graphics were awesome in detail, especially the transformations and the battle scenes.
Story-wise, it was rather lightweight, but, then again, one doesn’t watch this type of movie and expects that it will win Best Picture in the Oscars. No, “Transformers” is a park-your-brain-at-the-entrance-and-enjoy-the-spectacle type of movie. It’s pure, solid enjoyable entertainment for those of us who look for simple pleasures.
If there was something that irked me, it was the fact that there was more focus on Shia LeBeouf and Megan Fox; the battle between the Autobots and Decepticons seemed to take backstage at times. Of course, in the climax, it was all robotic carnage. It was difficult to take in all the action, especially since some of the Transformers had the same coloring. Sometimes, it was hard to tell who was the good guy and who was the bad guy. But that’s mere quibbling.
“Transformers” is one of those movies which will probably leave an indelible mark on those who grew up with the cartoons, as well as the new generation who didn’t. It’s that, in life, there will always be more than meets the eye. Heheh.