Balkan Yugoslavian Home Cooking

 I've been to this place three times already. Jesus, they weren't exaggerating on the blog reviews, Balkan's stuffed pljeskavica is to die for! The pattie itself is good (it's chewy with a sausage-ish texture), stuffed with mozzarella and served with a LOT of fries (you can opt for rice). Huge serving so I couldn't order any other so I'll just had to go back for the goulash. I did come back for the goulash and they werent kidding too when  they said it's good for up to 3 people. I had to ask for a doggie bag and ate the left over a couple more times at home lol.  

Last time I was there I had goulash and dzigerica (pork liver steak topped with garlic, served with mashed potatos) ... if you havent tried this place you're missing half of your carnivorous existence.

Red Engine Diner at The Columns

Good ribs but for a place that offer steak and ribs, Red Engine does not give you the option to order sides. It would've been better with slaw or spuds but everything comes in a set. So the meat comes with rice, iced tea and garnish (that is 3sticks of carrots and 2sticks of turnip). Cheap, though, and they have good service (no service charge too) so I can't really complain ... much :p

Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children

I think the reason why a lot of people wrote very bad reviews of Ms Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children saying the execution failed is because the common misconception is that the photos were there to illustrate the text when it's actually the other way around ... the story is made up out of (or around) the photos. I don't want to sound overly analytical but the rabidly fanatic (haters) wrote reviews enough to scare people away when they really shouldn't. I'm not defending the book (well, maybe I am sort of lol) but I've read worse pieces that actually "earned" awards and I can name two right now but I already wrote reviews for them before so I'll leave it at that. Heh.

What I'm saying is, when reading fantasy novels, I think people should be open to a whole world of possibilities. Like the protagonist being a rich, spoiled and feeling-misunderstood teenager and not the usual poor and oppressed but nice kid in town. In the real world, most poor and oppressed kids end up in juvie.

Granted, there can be a lot of "inconsistencies" like some-photos-referring-to-the-same-person-aren't-really-the-same-person-inconsistent but one would think people reading a fantasy novel shouldn't be very literal and use their imaginations, hey? Or the some-photos-not-being-a-huge-part-of-the-story-inconsistent but how do you know the author wasn't planning to write something more about them in the next books since this is a series. And especially now that you lot have pointed it out. Kee-hee.

Moving forward, I don't believe this should be under the horror genre. The cover and the photos may have that overall feel and yes there's that supernatural thing going on but X-Men isn't a horror story, is it? And as for those people who said this is "nothing but an X-Men story with a twist" ... what's your beef with people with special abilities not wearing underwear over tights? As for the hollows and wights, that could easily pass for SciFi. I also don't agree to this being under historical fiction. Just because the words WWII, Polish immigrants and the Nazi were mentioned doesn't make it a historical fiction. It's just a setting and is part of the plot.

Now, after all that "defending" bit, I have to say I liked this book and it's more than just okay but I wouldn't go as far as saying I loved it. I would read the sequels, of course, but this book is only a 3-star for me. Three and a half since I'm generous. I thought the money was worth it too. I thought the chapters toward the end was pretty ... suspenseful.

The biggest thing that I didn't like about this that made me take off 2 stars is not actually part of the story. The reason? This.Is.A.FRIGGIN'.Series. How could I be so stupid? I should pay more attention to the blurbs. I've had this book on my to-read list for a while because of the cool concept but never paid much attention to the "Miss Peregrine, #1" bit on the title row. In this trilogy-infested(?) era I'd really like to sit down and read a book and then move on to another story and not wait for the next installment to come because, really, if the world ends this year then we won't get to read the next books. Heh. Seriously, I picked the book up because of the concept but the concept alone (imho) does not have enough juice for a series.

And before I forget, my favorite photo was the one Abe used to explain to Emma why he couldn't come back. What was yours?

The Vanishing Act of Esme Lennox

 
Apparently, back in the days, trying out your mother's clothes would earn you a one-way ticket to an asylum. I wonder what they'd think about girls trying out their mother's shoes cause I did that more than I can count.

I picked the book up and I couldn't put it down. It wasn't amazing. It was ... engaging. The plot was simple but it had a complicated (albeit thin) story filled with complicated characters. I found myself getting sucked into their lives it makes me wonder if that puts me in the category of a gossip-monger. Heh.

I thought it was good how Kitty's Alzheimer's-addled thoughts was written/presented. I also liked how the difference between dating now and then was compared ... subtly.

What I found confusing was the timeline. If the book's setting was around early 2000 and Esme was thrown at the asylum at age 16 which was 60ish years ago then that would've only been in the 30's or 40's. I'd be generous and indulge you and say it's in the 20's but that still doesn't fit. The setting of Esme's younger days seem to be during the 1800's ... Jane Austen days. I didn't like how it ended (just like that) but I thought it was a pretty smart move. It was too complicated that it was probably best for

The book touches a number of controversial issues. There's rape, sibling rivalry and adultery to name a few. I still can't find the word to describe the book, or rather, the lives and activities of the people in the book. The first that came to mind (controversial) doesn't give justice to them and the others (lewd?) ... too harsh. I liked that it was deliciously intriguing, though. So that would do for now.

The Fire Chronicle

I actually enjoyed this book more than the first one. Probably because, of the siblings, my favorite is Michael and this is his story. I was about to give this 5 stars ... until I read the ending. Yes, I know it's not a bad ending but knowing the third book won't come out until next year (please let it be next year!) was kind of a downer. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS NEXT!!! lol.

When I said on my Emerald Atlas review that Emma was the least I liked ... I take it back lol. She really grew on me and I thought she was cute. I also liked that there is more to the story now than just finding the three books.

Anyhoo, the book is a bit predictable in some areas (like Rafe's destiny) but that wasn't so bad either because you only realize it as you read on. For die hard Harry Potter fans, yes, you will notice maybe a couple of similarities but please stop b**ching and just enjoy the story. It's not so much as the original concept but the story telling itself that I loved. I read on a novelist/screenwriter's blog that people usually come out with the same ideas but the plot develops as you write the story and I have to agree.

Liesl and Po: It wasn't Ineffable after all

Id like to get my hands on the audio book version of Liesl and Po if only for the fact that Jim Dale narrated it. It was the main reason why I learned of the book's existence (second being Lauren Oliver's Delirium trilogy is already on my to-read list). As it is, I have to settle for the printed version for now but it's not such a bad thing because I fell in love with it's packaging and presentation. I feel like a kid again admiring the drawings in random pages.

Now, the plot, the characters (especially Mo who is not even a main character) and the way they are related to each other somehow was pretty cool. The story, however, is a different ... well ... story. 

If the packaging is what makes a reader pick a book up, the plot is what makes them buy it. It's like a summary that holds the promise of what you'll find in the book. The story, on the other hand, is more intimate and is what makes a reader hold on to the book and endure eaach page. To cut it short, I found myself reading fast to finish the book not because I couldn't put it down but because I wanted to know how it will end (I already know WHAT will happen I just want to see HOW it will happen). The author also seemed to have a habit of quoting random things as if to give depth to it than what's necessary. It draws my attention away from the main story and those parts come off as a filler. But that's just me. I was thinking if I had listened to Jim Dale telling the story I probably won't mind much so when I do get to have that version I will revisit this review to see if there's a need to tweak it.

Ironically, the one word that I won't use to describe this book is the one mentioned in it a lot. Ineffable. The book was just okay. 

The Emerald Atlas

This is a children's book. With no pretenses of being deep or possessing hidden messages. Just a story that teaches how strong family bond can be in difficult situations, how friendship can overlook age or race, and how a person has the ability to shape their own future ... okay maybe there's one hidden message there. Heh.

Of the three kids, Emma comes off as the least to like. I mean, you wouldn't want your kids picking fight and justifying it, eh? But she grows on ya. Lol. I guess she's the stereo type of a kid who grew up from one orphanage to another. Trying to hide pain and emotion by pretending to be tough. Michael would be my favorite. There's something cute about his annoyingly academic character. And I can actually imagine him ogling at the dwarfs (dwarves? lol).

Overall, it makes you laugh enough, cry enough and it's light enough. I think the best part is that it actually has a happy ending. <s>SPOILER: No one died lol.</s> A lot of children's books now are sad and filled with death (oh wait, fairy tales are filled with deaths and evil magic too, pft), like a person can only know happiness if they know sadness. I get the point but <b>children should be children. Present them with the ugly truth at an early stage in their lives and they grow up too fast.</b>

This isn't C.S. Lewis or J.R.R. Tolkien or JK Rowling but it's good. Books about wizards and witches and other magical creatures have been under close watch since Harry Potter which isn't fair. Don't get me wrong, I loved Harry Potter. But people, especially adults, should open their hearts and minds to new blood ... err books.

THE SOMNAMBULIST ... kinda hits close to home =/

How to rate this book ... I really liked it but I might be biased because parts of the story hit close to home. And I know that's not a good thing if you've read this book but there are some things you grow fond of if only for the fact that it reminds you of something from the past.

I randomly picked this up because I was curious about the cover and the title. And then I read the teaser at the back ... I thought it was Jane Eyre-ish and I really liked that one so I went ahead and bought it but I think the only similarity is that they are both Victorian gothic. Still, I'm a fan of the Victorian era so the setting fascinates me.

This is tagged as historical fiction by a lot of people but I don't quite agree. The only historical part here are the references to violence against Jews but I'm not even sure the dates are accurate. I'm no expert but I think those years were when Jews are actually given civil rights (?) and citizenship in most parts of Europe and the violence didn't start again until early 1900's up to the holocaust. If I'm wrong then I'd love to be enlightened (anyway I'll just read about that history later on lol). As for the other parts, I think every story has some sort of history to it. If you chose a specific decade for the story that is not the present (that is from the past) then it's already a history. It's just a setting. I think the genre is mostly mystery, family drama, intrigue and romance.

The story telling is mostly first person, with the main character narrating but there are parts told thru a third person which is kind of confusing at first and when I got over the confusion it turned awkward. It's as if it was just plastered there just because. I guess it's because the distribution isn't even.

As for the story it was so obvious from the very beginning what Phoebe's identity was but I suppose that's what the author wants. It's not like a real secret because everyone around her knows except her. It's the consequences of hiding her identity that's actually heavier and there are other buried secrets that are more disturbing than that and that caught my attention as well. I don't think that it was stupid that she didn't know (as per the other reviews I've read) when everyone does because that's the point. Everyone else is hiding it from her.

I liked the characters, the intrigue, the setting and I guess the story overall. I'd like to read her next books too. :)

I am the Messenger

You know how some authors can be self-righteous when trying to come up with something that they want to use as a tool to restore a person's faith in mankind? This is not one of those books. This book has "awwwww" written all over it. I was smiling 95% of the time but also shedding tears of joy half of the time. Like i said: awwwww.

I finished this in less than 24 hours. Yes, it's mostly because I have a lot of time on my hands at the moment but there's no denying the book is very readable ... if you know what I mean. It's very light and simple. There are no elaborate plots, or complex dialogues, or poetical phrases to muse over. The book just spells it out for you and the author had fun doing so (All of his characters are a bunch of smart asses. Even down to the boy who patted down the Doorman and only had a brief role).

But having said that, I am the Messenger is also very thought-provoking. If this was a campaign (and it actually is, I tells ya!!!), then I'd say it's very effective. I wasn't expecting the book would turn out the way it did. Somehow I had different expectations when I read the cover summary. But I was immensely impressed when I realize what it's all about.

And the ending? ... at that time when it hits you and realize who it is behind Ed's mission like it asked on the cover? ... That's the best part you have to watch out for. My reaction? "Wow ... just ... wow"

Hands down ... one of the best books I've read this year. :) Kudos to Markus Zusak! You are officially one of my favorite writers ever!

The Brief and Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao ... made me a fan of Google Translate

Not really sure how I'm going to rate this book. I was thinking I should give this a full 4 stars (5 is highest), but in the end I decided for 3 1/2.  Not that it didn't deserve it. I did have fun reading the book and I did smile at the ending. Yes (and I don't think this is much of a spoiler since the title says it all), the main character died, but the ending did make me smile and murmur ... way to go, Oscar (notice the pun, would'ya?). Now, when the LA Times reviewed the book and said: "It's impossible to categorize ... Diaz's novel is a hell of a book. It doesn't care about categories." ... they weren't kidding. It's a contemporary literature historical fiction, bit of SF (if only for the fuku) memoir (of some sort) all rolled into one. And pardon me if I forgot anything else. Why 3 1/2, then? There are two things that killed this for me. First, I don't speak Spanish. I understand very little of it so I had to (yes) Google Translate the other's I couldn't understand. And second, I'm sure everyone reading the paperback noticed it too ... the book is swarming with footnotes. I mean, I get it, you'd want a better way to explain the history etc without ruining the flow of the story but it's actually very distracting especially if the footnotes take half of the page. And being me, I can't ignore the footnotes. I have to read them so it still ruined the flow. So there. I can get why it won the prestigious award (and people may say these awards are nothing but a politics-filled joke) but I guess there are just books that only cater to a specific crowd. This one may not be something written for mine but, again, it is a fun read. Oh and if you're not a native speaker like me, you might want to get the audio book as well. It just gives the book a different feeling. And speaking of the audio book, the woman narrator can get monotonous in some parts (maybe it's just me). Jonathan Davis was pretty cool, though.

We The Living: A book to be read with an open mind

I was told I have to read her works chronologically (as in from which book she wrote first) to see how her philosophical and political views developed throughout her writing career so I read this book first. While this is not as popular as Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged (which I haven't read as of this post), I think this explains a lot about the author.

I wrote a paper about We The Living (A Deconstruction of -the character- Kira Argounova which maybe I should post on this blog but after I edit it again) for a graduate school application but, to be honest, I still can't figure it out. I mean, I'm not sure if I like the book or not. Or more specifically, if I like the main character or not (and, admit it, liking the main character has a lot to do when deciding whether you like a book or not). I decided it best to stay in the middle. Thus the three stars.

It's not the book, per se, that I'm trying to rate here because this is already a controversial piece. It's a very good historical fiction especially since the author actually lived through the Russian Civil War. If it's just the story, the genre and the writing style then this is an easy 5. There are lines from the main character that I can imagine being said with passion. As tragic as the ending is, I actually liked it too. It's realistic. Period. But I guess I should say I don't completely agree with Ayn Rand's philosophies in life which is explicitly written in this book through Kira Argounova. And she did say this is the closest to an autobiography she has ever written. Now when I say I don't completely agree, I meant I DO like some of her ideas and ideals. Like her view on God and heaven :

"God -- whatever anyone chooses to call God, is one's highest conception of the highest possible. And whoever places his highest conception above his own possibly thinks very little of himself and his life. It's rare, you know, to feel the reverence for your own life and to want the best, the greatest, the highest possible, here, now, for your very own. To imagine a heaven and then not to dream of it, but to demand it.

And her individualism:

Don’t you know, don’t you know that there are things, in the best of us which no outside hand should dare to touch? Things sacred because, and only because, one can say: ‘This is mine’? Don’t you know that we live only for ourselves, the best of us do, those who are worthy of it? Don’t you know that there is something in us which should not be touched by any state, by any collective, by any number of millions?”

Now, there are decisions, the protagonist made, that I didn't agree to. The way she handled her family situation is a bit of a let down. Or her not telling Andre things she should have especially about her relationship with Leo. I understand a girl does what a girl has to in tight situations but I think she could've handled it better, this is one of those scenes where her individualist and objectivist philosophies come out as selfish. It's hard to explain and I might have to read the book again to look for those specific things. Lol.

If anything, Kira's/Rand's opinions told through carefully chosen words can be very inspiring so I would suggest for people to read this … but to do so with an open mind.

The Giver ... Bit disturbing for a children's book

Normally, I only write about books I actually like but The Giver leaves this reader confused that I can't move on. I'm not particularly excited about this book and I thought maybe I need to read the sequels to appreciate it fully.

The main thing that pushed me to read The Giver is the fact that it won a Newberry medal so I thought it must be something. I also read good reviews about it (some even raving of the books ingenuity to teach children). There is a fourth book coming out too so I was fairly convinced I'd at least enjoy reading this even if it doesn't make it on top of my list. I mean, if there is a fourth book surely that means the first three that came out are good enough? As you can see, I gave it only a single star ... for good organization of a concept. I know for a fact it's not easy to write. But in general, this short book is a big let down for me.

The story is kind of disturbing for a children's book. I'm not sure I want my nephews reading this until they're at least 16 or already understand what the holocaust was. By coincidence, I have been reading books that has a connection to the holocaust so maybe it's hard for me to process this without comparing. Granted, there is no mention of the event in the book but a reader is led into that conclusion. There is much discrimination in this book. The parents in this book are not actually biological parents, they are people who are chosen and expected to be able to raise children well. Actual birth mothers only give birth and after 3 or 4 times of doing so are sent to perform hard labor because they are not perceived to be able to raise children well or do "more important jobs". These women are looked down on by the community in general. There is also genocide in a way because they kill and dispose of babies that do not reach the community standards and they do the same process for adults too old to work or live on their own. So that is the conflict. But what about the resolution?

I think the author used the part when the helpless newborn is disposed off for being the weaker version of the twins as the big turning point of the story. It is what made the protagonist decide to fight against the system but the presentation is actually weak. The main character's attempts and reasoning appear so half-hearted.  I think that's one of the things that killed it for me. For such a simple story it failed to explain how things became the way it is.

Even the ending is weak. It closes to the protagonist catching (dying of) hypothermia and that might be a good ending for a book that has a sequel but the thing is, the second and third books were written so many years after the first one (it's like she wasn't sure she wanted to do so) and from what I gather, even though the books are related and grouped into a quartet (previously a trilogy), the sequels does not present a conclusion to the first one. 

Again, I would have to read the newer books to know but it may take a while before I find the interest to after this.

The Book Thief: The book that taught me how to properly swear ... in German

A lot of books, whether it be fiction or a documentary, were written about the holocaust. This is one of them, although that wasn't the reason why I picked it up. There are three reasons.

One is the Book Thief herself. I thought at first this is a story of an exceptionally gifted and intelligent girl who would somehow save her neighborhood if not the world. This is usually the case in young adult books, isn't it? Markus Zusak, however, made an even more interesting protagonist. A very plain girl whose love for books (and stealing books) was actually quite accidental. What was more interesting for me was that, at the age of 10, she didn't even know how to read. Clearly this wasn't a book about some sort of prodigy but an ordinary girl raised in an era of fascISM and antisemitISM. She's not without flaws (she's a thief, after all), she is impulsive and proud but she does have qualities that makes her worthy of a reader's respect.

The second thing that made me seal my decision on reading the book is the last sentence of the book description on Audible (I have both audio and eBook). The description read: "This is an unforgettable story about the ability of books to feed the soul." I fell in love with that. I think anyone who loves books and reading books will be able to relate to that phrase. Books are a way to forget about reality and experience a totally different world. Words, when written a certain way can work it's magic on anyone.

Last? The story was narrated by DEATH himself. That kinda reminded me of Terry Pratchett's Discworld Series, although, of course The Book Thief is a lot more serious than Discworld. Death in both books have a sarcastic humor, though. It's as if it comes with the job but that makes it fun to read too.

Some things to watch out for in the book?

1) The childlike sketches of Max Vanderburg and the stories accompanying it.

2) Death's small notes. They are everywhere in the book. I love that in a way, it gives a fresh look to the pages. Yes, I meant "look". It makes a page more alive, somehow. Not monotonous and ordinary to the eyes.

3) German terms and their English equivalent. This is most important for non German speakers, as myself. I would actually suggest to read the book/eBook while listening to the audiobook to learn how to pronounce the words and sentences too. Hey, I learned how to swear properly in German. Kee-hee.

One of the best things about the book (in my opinion) is how Markus Zusak presented the characters. In most books there are good character and bad characters. All of the main characters here are merely victims of the situation. The setting is Nazi Germany and although the people who lived in this small town are "law abiding citizens" of the Nazi ruler, each and everyone of the characters have their own sob stories that pushed them to be where they are.

To summarize, I felt amusement from Death's way of looking at things (when he's not feeling sentimental), love for characters like Rosa who has a bad mouth but a good heart, anger towards Nazi Germany for reasons I don't have to spell out and sadness for the children who are the most helpless and suffered so much during the war. This book is a sad story all in all. But it stirs so many feelings in a person.

And yes. I cried too.

Thoughts on: The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time

I've read a few books (fiction) about autism and this is one of those that I liked most. Yes, I would recommend this for everyone, parents especially (even those whose kids do not have autism). No, I won't go as far as saying it's an awesome book. For one, this is not a happy book, the main reason being ... it's too real. But that is also what makes it so good.

There should be a few different ways to rate this book instead of just an overall pick-a-number-of-stars-to-go-with-it. Here's an attempt (feeble, maybe) to explain my point. There may be a few spoilers although I'll try not to give away too much. 

1) Concept/Awareness/Cause/Subject: Five stars. I don't think I have to spell it out. This is one of those books that aim to raise awareness about autism in kids. What they are going through and why adults should rally alongside them and their ... let's call it "rights" for now because I can't seem to find a fitting word. 

2) Story telling: It's pretty generic. There's chronology, words are clear, pace is just right, I won't say it's dragging too as it's not a long book. Pretty straight forward so ... For that I'd give it a fair 3 stars.

3) Conflict. It's all over the place. The two main conflicts being: It's a story of a kid with autism whose parents are divorced and are both having some sort of affair. And as you can imagine, in a story like this, every other conflict has their own ... sub-conflicts. And since I'm a person who hates reality and its conflicts (heh) ... Four stars.

4) Twist and Conclusion/Ending: When I finished the book I thought ... "Oooookaaaaayyy ... That's it?" Then I thought, "Well, how do you expect it to end?" The too real story's ending is abrupt but the author actually made us a favor of giving us a realistic, but at least not tragic and traumatic, ending for the kid. Four stars.

Over all, it's far from Kite Runner or Orphan Master's son but they share something in common ... It kinda makes you wish you live in a better world.

People, Please Don't Get Delusional

Another Senator Tito Sotto blog, I know. I just need to get this out once and for all. Before that, let me make it clear (and yes this is me being defensive) that, politically, I'm not a fan of this guy. I grew up watching his movies (dahil yun lagi ang palabas sa sinehan sa Tagaytay) but I never voted for him, he never gave me a reason to. This blog is not on his defense either but I know some fanatics (of stuff they don't understand) might look at it that way because ... well, they don't understand. So let me begin discussing the topic by telling you that yes, like many haters and (feeling) patriotic people on the web, right now, I think this guy does not deserve a seat in the senate and that I do not think he knows what he's doing.

Now, most of the people online bash these politicians for the things they say but they may be doing it for the wrong reasons. The main thing that pushed me to write this blog, though, is not what the senator above said, but something I heard from a grown person somewhere ... that it's shocking and sad to know that this country's rulers, the upholders of the law, do not write their own speeches and their own papers (for whatever cause). So ... as the title of the post says ... People, please don't get delusional. 

If you do not know yet, politicians and our country's leaders very rarely (or do not at all) write their speeches. They have a personnel(s) for that, and they have a team who does the research. Why? Because they have other things to do than spend the day in front of a desk writing a speech or going out to do research from scratch. Writing a speech, ladies and gentlemen, is not their job. It's not what they're getting paid for. And it's not the reason why people should vote for them ... although, of course, in this country, mamatay lang kamag-anak qualified na maging presidente.

Granted, the speeches should get their approval first and the content should be what they believe in (or what they got paid for, kee-hee), but that was not my point. The upholders of the law's real job is to, UPHOLD THE LAW. They are the "face" of what people (and again those who paid for it) believes in and fights for. 

Here's an example, the president. This guy's job is not to make laws (yes he can lean and put pressure on some people because he has that power to, and that ladies and gentlemen is the biggest form of corruption, duh!!!), he does not write the law and does not approve it (supposedly). Other parts of the government writes and the other approves. He should also not be wasting his time blaming the past administrations for his failures but that's another story, eh? THE PRESIDENT IS AN ADMINISTRATOR. He administrates, overlooks, leads, inspires etc. Yes he should make sure whoever stole money should pay for it but he is ruling a country with actual people in it and a lot of problems to face. SO he can't just concentrate on that one thing. What does a manager in a company do? DELEGATE. That is what secretaries of departments are for and that is what his allies are for. Get the gist?

So if I am a senator, for example, that gets invited to hold a speech for whatever function or for the RH Bill (there, I said it!), and I have a ton of appointments to go to like a closed meeting with the party to discuss our official stand on an issue, meeting other people who wants me to lobby for their cause, publicity stunts, functions I'm invited too, personal stuff (and TV shows ngehe) I can't slave the day away writing speeches for 8 other functions I'm supposed to give a pep talk at for the month. At best, I should be sitting with the team making sure things are in order. That they know what I want to say, and that we get the facts straight so I don't look stupid in front of people.

So you see, what's really scary here is that the people who works for him (Sen. Sotto) gets away with it because he himself is unaware of what the real issue is about. Also, the people he hired are competent but only up to a point. They do not know how to address an issue, they just deflect it. Maybe it's ego but clearly, they do not want to accept the fact that they made a mistake by not doing their job properly. If our leaders' staff can do that, can the rest of us act the same way? And if we do, could we get away by being arrogant too (like that lawyer who couldn't keep his mouth shut about bloggers being just bloggers).

If anything, this senator should fire his staff and get a new one.

Random ramblings ... and Why You Shouldn't Mess with Michael D. Higgins

DISCLAIMER: I am somewhat drunk so bear with me.

Apparently, this debate between Michael D. Higgins and Michael Graham that had recently gone viral  is old news (it was from 2010) but I have to join in virtually shaking the hands of the Irish President because he really killed it. Lol. I'm not going to pretend I completely understand what's going on, as far as I know (and by know I meant read-from-the-internet-which-sometimes-doesn't-really-amount-to-anything-because-people-copy-paste-and-react-about-shit-they-don't-know-anything -about-all-the-fucking-time), the tea party movement is a bunch of whiny people who oppose government tax spending and tax increase (but which citizen in what country doesn't have an opinion on this? ... oh wait ... N.Korea),hates Obama and sometimes support the war and may have racist members. And if that is truly the case ... I don't think I like them much.

Actually, I'm not going to discuss the tea party movement here. Hey, I'm not from their parts of the world so don't expect me to be able to relate to the tea party hoopla much more pretend to make a solid opinion on it. No,  this is about some of the things that the Irish president said that may be related to local events. I liked Higgins in this debate because of the bit about his Sarah Palin depiction. It's very true in a lot of ways but I can say that because it can be attributed (if that is the right word) to other conditions and circumstances.

The more popular line was, "You're about as late an arrival in Irish politics as Sarah Palin is in American politics, and both of you have the same tactic. The tactic is, to get a large crowd, whip them up, try and discover what is that creates fear, work on that and feed it right back and you get a frenzy." He said this while Graham tries to interject but to no avail *sniggers*.

For the most part, I can understand where the Irish President was coming from. Aside from the loud cheers when Higgins said "... be proud to be a decent American rather just a wanker whipping up fear" (I mean, seriously, who didn't like that :p), it's his description of the alleged Sarah Palin “tactic” that people should ponder about. Face it, it happens … all the time.

A lot of people talk of things they barely know anything of (like me right now?lol). It has happened to everyone at one point or another. You read something online, watch something on the prime time news and suddenly you feel very passionate about it or against it. That is what the media feeds on right now, people’s thirst for sensationalism. And of course they have the gall to deny it and call what they do responsible journalism.

Locally, on the death of the DILG Secretary Robredo … while  in a cab going home, there was a DZMM radio broadcaster who was answering a listener’s tweet. The listener said something about the media (particularly ABS CBN lol) sensationalizing and milking Robredo’s death too much. To this, the broadcaster answered something like it’s hard for us to report anything else as journalists, but he did not elaborate on that. He also said, they respect the former secretary and honor him so they feature him a lot. First off … journalism is not an easy field … so don’t say it’s hard for you to talk of anything else because if that is the case, what the hell are you doing working in there??? There is no easy line of work. And if you respect the guy so much go ahead and report the facts, give him a bit of a tribute but stop planting conspiracy theories in the heads of your audience. You’re reporting these things because that’s what a common person wants. Drama. The frenzy. Conspiracies. Get your facts and work on them, why doncha?!

Seriously, Higgins said it all in his debate (the long part) if you paid attention: “You're not dealing with facts … you're talking about ships that you don't know the name of, you don't know the number of. You're really a good student of that kind of journalism that says: well look, if i could get away with it it's good; if i can work people up it's even better, but the fact of the matter is this is just, this is just very, very dangerous stuff …”

***

RANDOM RAMBLINGS: (If only for the fact that I'm too lazy to create a separate post)

• The guy who slapped the MMDA employee on the road ... Yes, he was an arse and yes he shouldn’t have slapped the MMDA guy and yes he probably deserved to be crucified for the world wide web to see but a FB page that had his (alleged) home address in it??! Goes to show how powerful, so out of control and so scary the social media can be. How would you like that to happen to you just because someone didn’t like something you did? No matter what size of the action is.

• The RH Bill and that plagiarism issue … I’m pro, btw. And I don’t think the people associated in making the bill approved or not should appeal to people’s emotions when debating their point (because being too emotional is the second biggest problem of the Philippines -- first being the increasing population, hah!).  But anyway, the plagiarism issue … people got so worked up on that and I too was upset when the Senator said (or was it his chief of staff) that Ms. Pope was “just” a blogger. Well, you know what? I’ll say this again, people copy and paste on the Internet ALL THE FUCKING TIME! The biggest mistake of the senator’s staff is that this is a very controversial issue and that the whole country and even people out of the country is actually paying attention! Of course, there is this thing called spinning articles and the senator’s staff should’ve at least done that. But what about the other bloggers who not only posts but does actual research before writing something up (but before you say you can't write without researching, please read the paragraph again, wise-ass)? Their articles get copied too and then get spun using a bot and presented as a brand new article under a different writer’s name, all for the sake of traffic. And we all wonder why writers don’t get paid much? Lol. Okay, okay, that’s for a different topic. Moving on …

El Nido: This is ... Philippines ???

The travel bug hit me kinda late this year ... partly because of the new job, partly because I'm broke (heh), and partly because I wanted to sulk and feel bad because of some bad decisions but that's for another story.

Anyhoo, El Nido - what a transition, eh?

The name itself sounded exotic and beautiful so I had a lot of expectations about the place and this trip. For one, the gang was in Coron  last year and it was A BEAUTY! El Nido and Coron are in the same province and since El Nido became popular internationally before Coron did, I thought it would surpass last year's adventures. Well, it did. And in extremes.

I was hoping for a relaxing vacation but the weather didn't permit it. We wanted to go away and we did but oh! the price we paid! It rained everyday during the scheduled tours so we were wet even before we got to hit the beach shores; couple times during the island hopping tours our boat nearly tipped over; we got stuck at the sandbar they call "Snake Island" for 3 friggin' hours I was so sure I'd catch hypothermia! Going there (yes there were misadventures even before we reached the island), we experienced extreme turbulence. Aside from the heavy shaking, the plane dipped a few feet down that my ass actually left the seat, the last 10 years of my life flashed back, and the pilot said: "Ladies and gentlemen, we will now be experiencing ... self-reflection." ... OK, you caught me ... that was one of my friends exaggerating.

Regardless, it was the company and the "going away" part that I actually enjoyed and was looking forward to so it wasn't all bad. And hey, we got "rescued" by an official looking rescue team in their official looking rescue jackets (or raincoats) and despite the huge waves I would admit it was pretty awesome.

The destination itself, however, was a disappointment. Don't get me wrong, they have some of the most amazing bitc-- oh wait that's me, I meant-- beaches in El Nido and a 3-day tour is not enough to get tired of. I even went inside the musty, disgusting smelling cave (but really what would you expect in a cave ... Eau de Parfum?) and had fun doing that. I don't think it's fair to compare it with Coron as well at this point since, again, it was rainy during this trip whereas I burned in the other. In both trips, though, we stayed in the town proper. I'm not a full fledged backpacker (although I dream to become one) but staying in town is the best way to "experience" what the place has to offer. So anyhoo, what am I ranting about? The culture ... or the lack of it.

When I say lack, I'd like to make it clear that they are not devoid of it so don't get smart with me. It's just that ... I barely felt it.

FOOD. When I go to a new place for the first time, I like to eat what the locals eat, where the locals eat. Apparently in El Nido, they eat pizza and pasta. I'm not picky, I would eat what's available as long as I'm not craving for anything specific but this is a vacation and I like to pig out on good food when on vacation. Given, a lot of foreigners stay at the town proper so they would want to offer what the foreigners are used to and in different varieties. And yes, the locals have the right to eat pizza anytime they want to. But what about local tourists? If there are families or groups visiting who want to eat local dishes then there is very limited choice, sad to say. The price of the food is also very standard. This might be good for local businessmen, though, so people don't just go to the one who offers the lowest price. There are some good places but it's not something I'm going to crave for.

PEOPLE. Oh they are sincerely nice and accommodating. And we are paying guests, after all. Lol. I asked the tour guide on day one.
Me: Kuya, ano'ng dialect nyo dito?
Kuya: Madami na. Iba-iba. Kasi madami nang dayuhan.
Me: Ah. Anu-ano yon?
Kuya: May German, Italian, French.
Me: (Errr... ok) Yung local dialect? Tagalog lang?
Kuya: Oo, Tagalog dito.

I rest my case.

Well, this is a tourist town with immigrants from European countries and I can't really blame the food and that dialect conversation on them. It wasn't their fault they saw the potential of this country waaaay before we did.

I guess what I'm getting at is that ... places like Vigan boasts of a Spanish town but, hey, the Philippines got owned (in more ways than one) by the Spanish so when I went there I knew, "This is Philippines." Baguio might be overrated for some but I never get tired of walking on their highly populated streets even on my own because and when I do I can say, "This is Philippines." Manila is a place vacationing locals want to get away from but when I'm here I can feel, "This is Philippines." So why can't I feel the same for El Nido when I know that it's in the same province (and also has immigrants from Europe) as Coron, a place where I felt I was in the Philippines?

Then again maybe I wouldn't have noticed if it wasn't raining so hard.