TaN: Sometime this week, Mr Duterte said (before a gathering or some kind of forum and in front of media) that 2 of every 5 or 40% of his (public) statements are lies. With this public admission, there are several conclusions that can be drawn.
First, that Mr Duterte has openly and under no duress or trickery admitted to being a habitual liar. It, therefore, cannot be considered slanderous or libelous to call him a liar.
Second, since Mr Duterte has voluntarily admitted to be a habitual liar, it must not be presumed (and justifiably so) that he has no word of honor and cannot no longer be trustworthy. Ergo, his tirades and insults — about this or that person is an “idiot”, is “stupid”, and whatever labels he attaches to any of his hated detractors and critics can no longer be taken as insulting since, for all we know, he is secretly admiring the person and is just envious hence his public branding of derogatory and debasing adjectives and descriptions. Moreover, for a person who is but a mediocre student with just above average grades, Mr Duterte has no business judging the mental or intellectual capacity or level of other people. His words mean nothing.
Third, since Mr Duterte has admitted to being a consistent liar, it could likewise be possible that that admission or public pronouncement (of himself) is a lie, in which case he could be a bigger liar than just 40%. [It is not possible to lie about oneself being a liar because to accept the contrary — i.e., that one is not a liar since he lied about being a liar or lying — would be a self-contradiction or illogical. When one lies about being a liar, one is still lying and s/he would still be lying.]
Last, it is not good policy for a leader to consistently and persistently “boast” of killings so and so many criminals and wrongdoers nor “encourage” others to kill or emulate him/her. Encouraging the death of others as a means of solving the problems besetting the country is not just not the only solution but it is never the solution. Taking another’s life is so final and leaves no room for a reversal or salvation. It is as if a wrongdoer will never change for the better anymore.
People do not just get one chance in life. We have so many chances. Imagine, for a while, that had Mr Duterte met someone like him (today) during his youth and, considering how “naughty” — to say the least — he had been and had not been given so many chances (second, third, fourth, etc), he may not be alive today to be president. Moreover, I pray that his children or grandchildren will never be involved in illegal drugs else, as a matter of justice, they should meet the same fate as those killed in the bloody campaign of Mr Duterte to eradicate evil from his country and turn it into a paradise on earth.
This will never happen as there is only one Paradise and, believe me, it is not nor will it ever be on this earth. For those who believe — truly believe — in the Holy Scriptures, this world is destined for the furnace. Just as in the Great Biblical Deluge, this world is bound for another and final cleansing — by fire, as is written and foretold — and God keeps His promises. Until then, Mr Duterte, please stop playing God. As far as anyone can tell, God has not “deputize” any other than His Only Begotten Son to reform mankind because only He knows how to do it correctly.
And stop lying or, at least, behave like a president and not a hoodlum.
TaN: Once again, it has been proven false the adage, You cannot teach an old dog new tricks — i.e., depending on the definition of “tricks”. As advanced in age as I am, I still learn things that I should have learned in my younger years.
What I am referring to is that we, i.e., me in particular, have unknowingly and/or ignorantly but without malice or unintentionally that there are terms we use that are not appropriate — specifically, gender terms.
It was not until some weeks ago that I learned that the terms “male” and “female” are inappropriately used to refer to people when, in fact, they are terms used for non-people, such as animals. For people, the proper terms are “masculine” and “feminine”.
Moreover, it was only then that I epiphanized that this likewise is true not only with the English language but with the Chinese language too.
TaN: Having a different opinion or set of values or dissimilar philosophy with the (sitting) President should not be grounds for not being appointed to the Cabinet or be a consultant or adviser for as long as the said person works for the good of the country. After all, is it not that that is what is needed for the position — competency, dedication, and integrity?
Although it may seem difficult — or even impossible, for those who are narrow-minded or suspicious or prejudiced — to accept and believe that it is possible to hold a different point of view than the President, it does not necessarily mean that it is impossible. And just because the ideology happens to be different does not mean that it is wrong or bad. No person has a monopoly on patriotism.
Furthermore, there are such people who can dissociate their sentiments and opinions and beliefs from their (official) duties and responsibilities. Believe it or not, there are people who can disagree and still do what needs to be done for the country.
Having differences of or in opinions and values are the very essence of a democracy — where a free exchange of ideas brings out all possibilities from which the best idea will be chosen. As they say, No one has a monopoly of (good) ideas and intelligence. [I know because I used to be in such a position.]
Contrary to the popular belief, there are people who can vehemently disagree with you — in many aspects including methodology — but can set such contradicting views and sentiments aside to work for the common good. As they say, Nothing personal.
So, come on. What do you say? Let us work together for the common (public) good, for the country, for the people.
TaN: For those who celebrate or even just acknowledge and greet each other on (St) Valentine’s Day, the bad news is that, since St Valentine is a saint of the Catholic Church, it should be that only Catholics who can rightfully celebrate it.
Moreover, for among those who may not be Catholics, they can still greet Catholics but to participate in its celebration is stretching it.
In any case, non-Catholics can still celebrate the day but just not because it St Valentine’s Day.