A supporter of President-elect Duterte went to great lengths to write a rebuttal against the writer of PDI who equate the former to the shrewd “Pilandok!”
In the article posted on June 7, 2016, Ms. Sylvia Mayuga compared President-elect Rodrigo R. Duterte to the shrewd “Pilandok,” and the 16 million Filipinos or so who voted for him (39 percent of total votes cast) to “king crocodile” and “sultan” who, for their utter gullibility and stupidity, were easily duped by the cunning “Pilandok.”
The highly emotional and visibly-irked supporter of President-elect Duterte wrote in his rebuttal letter to the PDI and quote:
No, I won’t take that. I am a lawyer who voted and campaigned hard for Duterte because I believe in his platform against drugs, criminality and corruption. No other rival candidates gave much importance to these; as a matter of fact, one of them stands charged with corruption.
The lawyer supporter of President-elect Duterte accuses the PDI columnist as another anti-Duterte member of the print media. However, the lawyer clarified he respects her feelings towards the President-elect, but to call the 16 million people who voted for him “gullible and stupid” is below the belt.
Mayuga obviously dislikes Duterte. It’s her right and I respect that, founded or not. She, however, does not have the right to insult those who voted for and supported Duterte by branding them as gullible and stupid.
The lawyer reminded the PDI column writer that President-elect Duterte received a wide support from classes A,B,C while the D and E classes lend their support to either VP Binay or Sen. Grace Poe. The lawyer pointed out that classes A,B and C are the more educated and discerning ones. Before ending his letter, the lawyer asked who looks stupid now for calling the voters under classes A, B and C stupid?
The Duterte supporter and author of the rebuttal letter is none other than Atty. Rex G. Rico from Jaro, Iloilo.
The PDI column writer referred in the rebuttal letter is Sylvia Mayuga.
In case you are too lazy to google the story of Pilandok, allow me to post an excerpt from the controversial PDI article, but let me dwell on the part where the author gave her readers a summary of story of “Pilandok”.
Consider the tale of Pilandok’s mother sending him to collect mangoes from across the river. The bridge across this river has collapsed, but King Crocodile refuses him passage. Here emerges Pilandok’s persuasive power, convincing King Croc to prove his might by summoning all his followers. The king accedes. Pilandok counts all 20 crocs while hopping to the other side of the river on their backs. There he feasts on ripe mangoes, has himself a great nap, then picks a bagful of the fruit for his mother.
But how to get back home? King Croc is both angry and hungry enough to eat him right then, but Pilandok’s gift of gab knows no bounds. This time he promises to give King Croc his own liver to eat if he is allowed to fetch it from his home. Naive King Croc lets Pilandok hop on his tribe’s backs again to go fetch his liver, which, of course, never happens.
Next the trickster goes all the way to the top of the food chain. Pilandok convinces the sultan to come visit an underwater kingdom full of treasures that he has just found. A mesmerized sultan follows Pilandok to the river, where the trickster pushes him to drown. Pilandok returns to the palace wearing the sultan’s cape and crown; he is now the new sultan of the realm.
Any thoughts on this post?