last wednesday, comedian senator tito sotto wrapped up his turno en contra with a sorry attempt at profundity, lifted, yet again, yes again, this time from a 1966 speech of bobby kennedy, and this time, translated into tagalog, presumably by his staff, and atrociously at that. when challenged, he reportedly said, marunong pala managalog si kennedy, ha. josko, parang sinapian ni iskalera of the infamous iskul bukol, lol. good job.
nakakadesespera, my mother would say, as in nakaka-despair, na kailangan pang ipaliwanag kay sotto na plagiarism din yon? kahit pa ipinasalin niya sa tagalog, hindi pa rin kanya ‘yon. what he did was to appropriate and claim as his not just the sentiments of kennedy re nation and small actions but also the way it was expressed. and he can’t claim fair use, excuse me, not in an official senate speech where he is on record as saying that everything in his speech was original.
he says a friend texted him the material. without attribution to kennedy? friend ba ‘yon o foe? o me attribution but sotto thought, ah 1966, wala pang internet noon, wala ito sa google, mwahaha.
the worst of it is, walang sanctions on sotto, the arrogant recidivist. unfortunately, the senate president, the only one higher than sotto in the senate, who is in a position to reprimand the majority leader and his staff for intellectual dishonesty, is on the same anti-RH side as sotto, and, like sotto, all he does is insist that we answer sotto’s points rather than focus on the plagiarism. but, really, why should we even bother? sotto’s dishonest; he has lost all credibility.
Ryan Edward Chua @ryan_chua
Sen. Enrile says Senate should not concern itself with Sotto plagiarism issue: “Hindi ko na papatulan ‘yon.”
ganoon. eh nakakawala din ng credibility ‘yang pagkampi kay sotto at pag-condone ng dishonesty. where is the enrile of the corona impeachment trial, the one who was so strict about following the law and observing the rules of good manners and right conduct. ay, teka, he was strict nga lang pala with prosecutors and defense counsel, but allowed fellow senator-judge miriam her rants… so what happened to HER? i been waiting for a WHA??? why is she so quiet now, like all the rest? can it be, as some quarters suggest, that all of them are guilty of plagiarism in one form or another? so complicit silang lahat?
and then, again, there’s senator drilon, who was supposed to have tweeted this yesterday:
Frank Drilon @FranklinDrilon
Again, I am deeply saddened by the continuous lapse of judgment by the Senate Majority Leader. This House is not a place for mockery. 12:02 pm sept 6
apparently it’s been disowned by drilon, he has no twitter account, says his staff, and i can’t find it anymore. hmm. still, the question remains, why is he so quiet? isn’t this the perfect time to take to the senate floor and challenge enrile’s and sotto’s leadership? isn’t intellectual dishonesty, and condoning it, ethical grounds for a vote of no confidence? or can it be that drilon does not want to antagonize sotto et al because the LP will be needing their support for the president’s budget of php 2.0006 trillion, up 10.5 % from 2012’s (1.816T), up 21 % from 2011’s (1.563T), and which leonor briones alleges to be “understated,” that is, short by 449.34 billion in principal amortizations due in 2013, and rife with “hidden and vague” items to the tune of 282 billion, how dishonest, what a coincidence.
obviously there’s going to be a lot of wheeling and dealing between the executive and legislative departments, every one looking out for himself/herself or his/her vested interests before nation’s. but as in gloria arroyo’s time, kung di maipasa ng konggreso ang 2013 budget, this year’s budget can always be rolled over to next year. what makes this budget so urgent, given its alleged deficiencies? what makes it more important than the RH bill, e wala namang garantiya na ikauunlad ito ng bayan. di bale sana kung naipasa na ang RH bill, at may budget na for the RH law. instead, ang nasusunod ay ang wishes of 3 out of 10 filipinos and not the wishes of 7 out of 10. anong klaseng gobyerno at demokrasya ito?
as for sotto and how to make him pay for intellectual dishonesty, it looks like we’re on our own. like arbet bernardo’s fb status and thread say:
The Senate Ethics Committee will not act unless a complaint is filed. So if you want to censure Sottocopier, you know what to do.
… at least pag may complaint na and they don’t act on it, para lang silang frat. Eh as of now may palusot pa sila, walang complaint, so they can’t act.
and to my question, where are the cause-oriented lawyers who are usually quick to file complaints? they won’t move on their own? maybe they plagiarize too… arbet’s response was: where is oliver lozano when you need him LOL.
seriously, what happened to civil society? puro ba na-co-opt na ng aquino admin? and what about mainstream media? fence-sitting as always, hanggang reportage lang, walang taking a stand against plagiarism and spreading the word, explaining the immorality of it, down to the masses? and what about the church, the guardian-kuno of our morals? okay lang sa kanila sotto’s kind of deceit and duplicity because it’s for the anti-RH cause? the ends justify the means? good job.
sotto deserves to be sanctioned, declared in contempt of the people, for intellectual dishonesty. it wouldn’t be the first time that a sotto is found guilty of contempt and “falsehoods,” by the way. tila it runs in the family.
Why not you filing a complaint, Angie? Just a footnote to your article, UP Law School professors did in fact file a complaint against Justice del Castillo for plagiarism, but the Supreme Court made light of it and instead blamed the computer software for typographic errors and innocent oversight in putting in the proper citations. That said, it appears there is little else that can be done. Intellectual dishonesty punishes by discrediting the whole body of work produced by the author and has so far been deemed sufficient for the purpose…..
He got trolled. Someone suggested it to one of his staff. Tatanga.
Low-dose Antibiotics prevent. They prevent recurrent infections.
Immunosuppressants prevent. They prevent rejections post-organ transplantations.
Anticoagulants prevent. They prevent venous thromboembolic episodes (deep venous thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism).
Antiplatelets prevent. They prevent blood clots that may lead to heart or brain attacks.
Vaccines prevent. They prevent specific diseases.
Natural and artificial contraceptives prevent. They prevent unintended pregnancies. Unintended pregnancies lead to abortions.
ARE THEY ESSENTIAL FOR HEALTH AND WELL-BEING?
…and mind you, all of them have side effects and adverse events. Benefits must outweigh the risks.
Bottom line is CHOICE. Ultimately, an individual must choose to receive or not the essential preventative methods.
@baycas: I beg to disagree. Its NOT choice as rallying point for RH bill. The pills and the condom have been available in the market since decades ago though its usage were popular and accepted by majority of our people who are educated and wellinformed. While the rythm method (seven days before and after) are available for free to every couples in this country. These methods were propagated among the depressed and marginalized poor during the Marcos regime and the literature for effective family planning were distributed by the concerned govt agency. Even teachins which my auntie (previously an adviser to the govt’s fmily planning Center) did to the squaters to spread the benefits of family planning did not fly. The reason for its failure is simply you cannotimpart scientific ideas to an EMPTY stomach. therefore, the REAL bottomline issue is can the govt afford the TRADE-OFF of spending 17 billions to benefit the foreign medical suppliers (sic) to control population growth. Further, is there assurance that a demographic wind/transition will effectively raised our economic growth as developed and advanced countries have?
Joji die hard pinoy,
You are right it is not about choice. It is about freedom and the inalienable right to choose.
One does not need to justify the exercise of an inalienable right. And it is the government’s duty to enable people to exercise their rights and freedoms.
SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES ARISING IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS
General Comment No. 14 (2000)
The right to the highest attainable standard of health
(article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights)
From the link above:
Article 12.2 (a). The right to maternal, child and reproductive health
14. “The provision for the reduction of the stillbirth rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy development of the child” (art. 12.2 (a)) (10) may be understood as requiring measures to improve child and maternal health, sexual and reproductive health services, including access to family planning, pre- and post-natal care, (11) emergency obstetric services and access to information, as well as to resources necessary to act on that information. (12)
Footnotes:
10. According to WHO, the stillbirth rate is no longer commonly used, infant and under-five mortality rates being measured instead.
11. “Prenatal” denotes existing or occurring before birth; “perinatal” refers to the period shortly before and after birth (in medical statistics the period begins with the completion of 28 weeks of gestation and is variously defined as ending one to four weeks after birth); “neonatal,” by contrast, covers the period pertaining to the first four weeks after birth; while “post-natal” denotes occurrence after birth. In this General Comment, the more generic terms pre- and post-natal are exclusively employed.
12. Reproductive health means that women and men have the freedom to decide if and when to reproduce and the right to be informed and to have access to safe, effective, affordable and acceptable methods of family planning of their choice as well as the right of access to appropriate health-care services that will, for example, enable women to go safely through pregnancy and childbirth.
Yes, Senator Enrile, contraceptives are essential medicines. But you probably know that already. Stop delaying the passage of the RH Bill.
september 3, 2012 by connie veneracion
actually, this is one of the few things that sotto is right about. strictly speaking, it aint medicine.
but its a rhetorical issue, not a substantive one.
Strictly?
yup. whats your definition of the word medicine? note that veneracion’s “take down” of cold medicine as “not medicine” is incomplete.
what’s yours? kindly explain your “strictly speaking…” statement.
serioso? from online dictionaries (or ANY DICTIONARY) The science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease (in technical use often taken to exclude surgery).
condolence…
http://professionalheckler.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/in-memoriam/
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/video/nation/09/09/12/santiago-hits-sotto-alleged-plagiarism
baycas, thanks for the links :)