Didn’t she learn from the criticisms of the bad rendition of the national anthem of His Haughtiness, Martin Nievera, during the Pacquiao-Hatton fight?

Organizers of these boxing matches should make sure that the singers of our national anthem will sing it as it should be sang and with pride. And pleeeaaaassseee, get a real Filipino to sing it. Not a Filipino who holds an American passport.

The problem with singers like Dessa and His Haughtiness is they try to use these boxing matches as a venue to showcase their talents. Desperate for worldwide attention, they try to end the national anthem with a big bang, only to fizzle at the end and have it backfire on them.

They are fortunate that the Filipino boxers win their matches. Otherwise it would have been doubly tragic.

Next time a Filipino mangles the natonal anthem, I suggest he/she gets knocked out in public. After all, they shame the Philippines with their showboating.

His arguments are weak if not downright wrong. For one thing he states that, although Nievera didn’t sing it traditionally, he did not disrespect it. Duh… So, singing our national anthem without respect to THE LAW is not being disrespectful. At the very least, Nievera disrespected the composer, Julian Felipe.

De Quiroz also argues that Americans have been singing their national anthem, The Star-spangled Banner, in different renditions because they’re "secure in their patriotism," even citing Jimi Hendricks’ now iconic version played in Woodstock. Americans aren’t secure in their patriotism. The truth is they don’t really give a rat’s ass about anything and that’s why Jimi Hendricks played The Star-spangled Banner the way he did because Americans were being indifferent to the Vietnam War.

De Quiroz then wonders why historian Ambeth Ocampo disapproves of Nievera’s rendition when Ocampo teaches a "pop" version of history to make it more appealing to present-day listeners. Here’s where de Quiroz shows his naivete. Certainly history should be taught in a way that today’s listeners (i.e. the youth) can understand it, for it is merely a story of our past. Our national anthem, on the other hand, brings honor to those of our past who died that we in the present may enjoy our freedom. To sing it any other way than how it should be sang dishonors our history.

If we were to allow people to sing Lupang Hinirang any which way they want, then what’s next? Would we also approve of Martin Nievera using the Philippine flag as a beach towel because he wants to connect tradition with post-modernity?

But here’s my take on why Nievera sang the anthem the way he did: He wanted worldwide attention. Nievera doesn’t hide his burning ambition to be an international star. He tried singing in the Las Vegas strip, but he was a curtain raiser to a magician. Thus, the Pacquiao-Hatton fight was an opportunity to be on a worldwide stage. Notice that he sang the anthem first in a low pitch and then ended in a high note that was designed to elicit oohs and aahs. He also sang in different beats. The problem was his singing just didn’t hit the mark. He had pitch problems as he ended and the entire performance was just ghastly.

Never mind if he sang the Anthem rightly but in a bad way. But he sang the Anthem in a wrong way badly. And it backfired on him.

Did Nievera sing with thoughts of the youth? I doubt it. Did he sing it wrong albeit with a patriotic heart? Yeah, right. He’s an American, for crying out loud!

I believe Nievera used the National Anthem for his own agenda at the expense of Filpino pride and honor. Maybe, Conrad, he should have sang "Ang Himig Natin" instead.