The Verdict

In the grand theater of Philippine politics, where the scripts are often written in disappearing ink, Representative Rodante Marcoleta’s recent quest for the "exact coordinates" of the West Philippine Sea (WPS) deserves its own standing ovation.

While the rest of the country looks at a map and sees a clear sovereign struggle, Marcoleta approached the issue like a man trying to find a specific grain of sand on a beach, while wearing a blindfold he bought himself.

To answer the burning question of which flavor of "confused" he was serving, let's look at the menu.

---

The Marcoleta Menu: Pick Your Poison

Category	Diagnosis	Why it fits
a. Playing Dumb	High Probability	It takes a lot of intellectual effort to act like Google Maps doesn't exist.
e. Sea Lioning	The Winner	Relentless, "polite" questioning aimed at exhausting the opponent rather than finding the truth.
g. Gaslighting	Strong Contender	Making the public doubt their own eyes (and the 2016 Arbitral Ruling).
h. Disingenuous	The Baseline	The fundamental ingredient in every word spoken during that hearing.

The Art of the 'Sea Lion'

If you aren't familiar with Sea Lioning, it’s a harassment technique where a person masquerades as a "civil seeker of truth" while asking endless, repetitive questions. 

Marcoleta didn't just ask for coordinates; he treated the West Philippine Sea like a lost Grab pin.

"Is it here? Is it 2 inches to the left? If you can't give me the longitude of every single wave, does the ocean even exist?"

By demanding hyper-specific data for a concept that is already legally and geographically defined, he wasn't seeking clarity—he was seeking a distraction. 

It's the political equivalent of asking for the chemical composition of the ink on the Constitution to avoid talking about what the words actually say.

Faux Naïf or Just Faux?

There is something almost poetic about a seasoned lawmaker acting like a freshman in a geography 101 class. 

Being a faux naïf (pretending to be "childlike" or "simple") allows him to bypass the heavy lifting of patriotism. 

If he "doesn't know" where it is, he doesn't have to defend it.

The Verdict

To my friends, Marcoleta was a masterclass in Disingenuous Gaslighting. 

He wasn't "turning a blind eye"; he was trying to convince us that our eyes were broken. 

It takes a special kind of talent to look at a national treasure and ask for the receipt, the coordinates, and the blood type of the guy who named it—all while the house is practically on fire.

In the end, he wasn't lost at sea. He was just trying to make sure everyone else lost their way.

Flipfloping: DDS Way of Life

In the intricate theater of Philippine politics, few phenomena are as paradoxically amusing and intellectually stimulating as the public’s polarized reactions to the Makabayan Bloc’s impeachment moves. 

On one hand, when the Makabayan Bloc attempts to impeach President Bongbong Marcos (BBM), they are hailed as heroes by their supporters—champions of justice and accountability.

 On the other hand, when they turn their sights on Vice President Sara Duterte, these same actors suddenly become pariahs, reviled and ostracized by many. 

This curious flip-flop in public sentiment encapsulates what can only be described as a “DDS mentality,” a term that has come to signify a particular brand of political allegiance marked by selective outrage and an almost tribal adherence to favored figures.

The humor inherent in this mentality lies not just in its inconsistency but also in how transparently obvious it is.

 Imagine cheering for someone who demands accountability from one politician but then vilifying them for holding another equally powerful figure accountable. 

It’s akin to applauding a referee for calling fouls on your opponent but booing them when they call fouls on your own team. 

The Makabayan Bloc’s dual role—venerated or vilified based solely on who they target—exposes a cognitive dissonance that is both frustrating and comical. 

Such behavior underscores how political loyalty can often trump principles, with supporters wearing blinders that filter information through partisan lenses.

Adding another layer of amusement are the so-called “NPA” references thrown around by critics whenever the Makabayan Bloc acts against their favored politicians. 

Accusations linking these lawmakers to insurgent groups serve less as substantive critiques and more as ad hominem attacks designed to dismiss dissenting voices outright. 

This tactic reveals an intellectual laziness disguised as vigilance—a refusal to engage with arguments on their merits, instead opting for guilt by association or simplistic labeling.

 The result is a political discourse that often resembles playground taunts rather than mature debate.

Ultimately, reflecting on this DDS mentality through an academic lens brings us face-to-face with broader questions about political identity and democratic engagement in the Philippines. 

The oscillating admiration and hatred directed at the Makabayan Bloc highlight how deeply entrenched partisanship can distort reasoned judgment. 

While it may be tempting to chuckle at these contradictions from afar, understanding them is crucial for fostering a more informed electorate capable of transcending knee-jerk reactions. 

After all, democracy thrives not on uncritical loyalty but on principled critique—and perhaps learning to laugh at our own absurdities might just be the first step toward achieving that ideal.