By Farah G. Decano

 

​“MY deepest apologies to my fellow countrymen for advancing the presidential candidacy of my brother, Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos Jr., the namesake of my deposed late father, former President Ferdinand E. Marcos. I relentlessly pushed him to run despite my knowledge of his substance abuse issues.

​Forgive me for being the chief architect of the UniTeam, the strategy that secured his victory. It was I who personally convinced Mayor Sara Duterte to run as his Vice President.

​I apologize for the detrimental decisions, or the outright failures to act, by my brother concerning the critical issues plaguing the Philippines—failures that I fear may be the tragic consequence of the addiction that consumes his mind.

​My sole motivation was to restore the Marcos name to a place of honor in our nation’s history; thus, I treated my brother’s electoral victory as a personal and historical mandate.

​I apologize sincerely.

​I failed to fully consider the profound ramifications for the Philippines under ‘Bonget’s’ presidency. In that critical moment, the welfare of my family superseded the welfare of the Filipino people.

​I offer my humblest and repeated apologies.”

​Too bad. This poignant declaration is a purely hypothetical speech by Senator Imee Marcos.

​Based on  reports, Senator Imee Marcos has never extended any such apology to the Filipino people for her pivotal role in the election of her brother, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Instead of expressing remorse for her past actions, her public statements were reportedly focused on vehemently criticizing the President and the First Lady regarding unsubstantiated claims of drug use.

​Her conspicuous failure to apologize to the Filipino citizenry suggests a deeply ingrained sense of impunity—a profound illusion that the welfare and respect of the people are negligible concerns. The very act of pushing a presidential candidate whom she reportedly knew to have a substance abuse problem reflects a staggering disregard for the sanctity of the highest office in the land. It is an insult to the Filipino electorate.

​If any sense of delicadeza and hiya governed her choices, she would have championed the most capable and untainted member of the Marcos family for the presidency. Allowing an individual with such a cloud of controversy to assume the highest post is comparable to knowingly entrusting a critical, highly sensitive diplomatic task to an individual who is demonstrably intoxicated. The implication is that the nation’s governance is viewed with an alarming degree of cynicism and disrespect.

​Ganoon na lang ba ang tingin mo sa mga Filipino, Senator Imee?

*          *          *          *

​Senator Imee, the people I spoke with in Ilocos Norte say that you were a far better governor than your ading BBM. Why didn’t you just run for President yourself? Why did you allow someone you consider an incompetent fool (bangag) to be elected president?

​Was your motivation really to clean the Marcos name, or was it your desire to return to power? Did you simply use BBM because his name was more winnable?

​Is it possible that you harbor ill will toward your brother because you did not become as powerful as you aimed to be?

​Could it be that you are simply ampalaya?

Baka kasi ikaw ang nagluto, tila, iba ata ang kumain?

*          *          *          *

​Actress and model Ellen Adarna is rapidly emerging as an accidental but potent figurehead for a zero-tolerance stance against infidelity and verbal abuse within marriage.

​Recent reports disseminated across various social media platforms indicate that she has chosen to separate from her husband of four years over persistent accusations of verbal abuse and cheating, notwithstanding the fact that the couple shares a young child.

​Adarna’s decisive action appears to champion a crucial countercultural movement: the notion that women are not obligated to endure years of suffering and abuse before seeking an exit from a toxic marriage.

Her choice sends a clear message that the stability and solidarity of a family unit must not be dependent on the perpetual martyrdom of the woman within it.