Second-rate insults

Well, the widely publicized “bakla” and “bansot” taunts over at the House of Representatives aren’t as biting as some classier political insults I’ve recently noted down.

Take this gem of a putdown: “There are two perfectly useless things in this world. One is an appendix and the other is Poincare.”

Hurled by French Prime Minister George Clemenceau against his long-time political enemy Raymond Poincare, one could actually hear the snickers of those who heard it in the room.

Another: “They never open their mouths without subtracting from the sum of human knowledge,” snarled an obscure and exasperated English 18th century English parliamentarian at the verbose ignoramuses populating the House of Commons.

Still yet another. Since many of us are still besotted with all-things American, more so since the personage involved happens to be the subject of a long-running Broadway hit, Alexander Hamilton was once tartly described by a bitter opponent as “a mushroom excrescence.”

I am on a roll here. Hopefully, dear reader, you’re with me in this roly-poly descent into “insultdom” triggered by the recent efflorescence of two language-challenged congressmen of our present Congress.

Anyway, one more. Here’s how American senator Jack Kemp taunted his fellow senator Bob Dole: “In a recent fire, Bob Dole’s library burned down. Both books were lost. And he hadn’t even finished coloring one of them.”

So, compared with all of the above, can “bakla” and “bansot,” usually met by silence, ever compete?

And, when you think about it, coloring books perfectly describe our two congressmen and their grade-school macho antics when they traded barbs during a pandemic-induced Viber exchange while confronting each other on who gets the lion share of the public works budget next year.

Still, if you want to know which between “bakla” and “bansot” is more striking, I cast my vote on “bansot.”

Though I would have preferred if the protagonist who hurled it had his wits about and blurted out “vertically challenged” as what a fierce opponent once did to describe a former Philippine president with. It would have been elegant wit, historical too and avoids censure from the Ethics committee.

At any rate, I appreciate you staying with me here on this footnote about the pitiful state of our present political language. As you can clearly see, I’m not excited over “bakla” or “bansot” as the two words are strong evidence of how in a battle of wits, the skills of our present-day pols have deteriorated to such an abysmal extent.

I won’t also hold it against you if you manage to conclude that the two pejorative words reflect the larger picture of the present thuggish nature of our politics.

Indeed, it’s an unavoidable conclusion that childish taunts remind us more of thugs flexing beefy muscles to duke it out rather than the ratpier-sharp tongue-lashing of eloquent, well-read statesmen of yore.

So much so the contrast further bolsters fears that our present “trapo-fied,” bourgeois, feudal politics have hopelessly cast us into a dank well where we aren’t getting out of anytime soon.

In the same vein of hopelessly drowning in fetid water, do we still find it shocking that the cause of the fight of these barong-clad characters at the House is still about public monies, billions of public monies?

The fight, of course, is a serious matter since it is about public funds. But what is really new about it? Don’t we meet up with it every time we read the news about Congress?

Anyway, the present resentment over public monies reminds me of old black and white crime movies, technically known as “noir,” French for the color black. “noir” stories are ever present in books, movies and Netflix series.

Now in “noir,” there is always the scene of a darkened room where after a caper, the ne’er-do-well gather round to share the loot.

Imagine the head of the notorious cabal, bent on perpetuating himself as top dog, starts distributing the loot using the formula: “One for you, another one for you, two for you and two for me.”

How will the scene end up? I leave it up to you. But a shootout or flying kung fu fisticuffs wouldn’t be out of place. That’s exactly what’s happening over at the House.

Don’t get me wrong, however. I’m not saying it is hardboiled criminal activity. Legal laws cover it all up. But I also wouldn’t put it past you if you arch your eyebrows that the bare-faced juggling of public monies without check is dangerously close to being one.

“Indeed, it’s an unavoidable conclusion that childish taunts remind us more of thugs flexing beefy muscles to duke it out.

“Coloring books perfectly describe our two congressmen and their grade-school macho antics when they traded barbs during a pandemic induced Viber exchange.