Listen to “One Day More.”
Itaguyod ang Katotohanan.
It is time to be COUNTED!
Join us at the Friday Inter-Faith Prayer Rally
Ayala cor. Paseo de Roxas — 4:00 to 8:00 PM
Where former President Cory Aquino and Jun Lozada will join us as we make the call for Truth and Accountability.
Black and White Movement, together with Hyatt 10/La Salle 60, MBC, MAP, Manindigan,
and other professional and church groups will assemble at the
AIM (Paseo de Roxas) Parking lot at 3:00 PM.
Please join us.
Sa Totoo Tayo. Now Na!
Today there will be people from all walks of life and different generations and varying political and non-political persuasions, coming together to make a stand.
It’s unfortunate that the focus on Makati will obscure the efforts being made elsewhere in the country. Whether a rally in Cebu City, or elsewhere, the only divide I see is between urban and rural Filipinos: though the majority, for some time now, of Filipinos are urban dwellers. I strongly believe the sentiments among urban Filipinos are converging while rural opinion won’t be far behind.
Returning to today’s rally, the authorities are pulling out all the stops: PNP renews warning about communists, terrorists at rally. They’re spooked.Yesterday, something remarkable happened at PUP, see: PUP bomb threat fails to stop Lozada. And something else happened, see: Dirty Tricks in Uniffors.
But two bloggers say it best.
Market Manila declares he will be there:
Because we live in a democracy by choice. Because not speaking up when you know something is wrong makes you an accomplice to the wrong. Because I think everyone must be held accountable for their actions, particularly where their actions impact the welfare of millions. Because of the increasingly brazen disregard for the laws and even basic ethics that should apply to educated individuals. Because in many ways, I am embarrassed to be in the same gene pool as those who are perpetrating and then possibly getting away with such outrageous actions. Because of dozens of other reasons I will keep to myself as I know you get the point.
A reply he gives to a commenter is zeroes in on the issues even more:
mapster, I agree that we have to do everything we can everyday. I pay my taxes and a LOT of them. I have never ever slipped a policeman lunch money. I have voted with a conscience and watched at the polls. I have volunteered services for politicians or candidates which I thought rose above the rest, and I have never accepted any gifts, compensation or positions for the effort. So yes, I think we have to do our daily bit. But I also used to believe that we had a high corruption rate because we were poor… and that somehow the petty corruption of the streets and licenses, etc. were a function of poverty. But that is simply not true. The folks who are implicated in multi-billion scandals are well to do, and as someone above says, how much money do they need to live a decent and comfortable life? And the Hello garci scandal was offensive precisely because it suggests that the elections themselves are rigged, hence the votes of the people are ignored. At the very least, we have to indicate a great deal of displeasure and let everyone know they can’t get away with these kinds of behaviors.
As for being in the company of crooks and wannabees as some intimate above, I think in all democracies people from all walks of life will band together for similar causes, though they all may not look, sound, or be the same. While some of the folks who will be there at the rally this afternoon are opportunists and perhaps not folks I would normally look up to, many others could or should be every day folks who simply want to say, TAMA NA! And while I am not the biggest of Cory fans, I think she IS someone to look up to and her presence is only one of the minor reasons I would show up this afternoon.
I agree with other sentiments about changing the system et al. But I would agree more that we need to change the people on a massive scale with folks that really want to do the BEST for their country, a noble and difficult scenario, I concur.
As for others, you are definitely entitled to your opinion and free to choose what you will, can or want to do. With Marcos it took 20 years to reach the “boiling point.” In subsequent administrations the flare ups occurred with less time required. But at some point, when we all are personally so incensed or affected directly, you too will feel the need to do something.
If you re-read the post above, I would like to point out that I only said that I WOULD BE GOING. Not that I thought all of you should as well, that is obviously your choice.
Touched By An Angel says,
Though not a popular choice by our Catholic Bishops, I believe, GMA has to go. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has to go.
I truly believe that The President and her people have engaged in so much lying that they can no longer recognize the truth even if it stared them in the face. (PDI) As to the next step to take, I will take one step, one day at a time. I do not have the answers yet but in time, I will discern it. Our Filipinos will discern it. I will be there at the The Interfaith rally…
Among young people, there will be those, like on a red day who will be there, as will Tristan’s Mental Assylum ristan’s Mental Assylum and Jamel Ignes who is attending a rally for the first time! (for the religious, see melo touch). Other young people share their views, and efforts at discernment: a slice of wine.. and a shot of cake.. points out the dividing line and respects those who have decided to speak up against the President. There are others who are still uncertain, yet watchful, like Prudence and Mandess, and such as student Timmyland or who remain ambivalent, who will not go but who will be keeping those gathered in their thoughts, see OFW jihAn.zillA. Sh, and Yeweifang’s blog .
Among more senior bloggers, Red’s Herring puts everything in perspective:
If the events that have led to People Power I (EDSA Revolution of 1986 or EDSA I) are any guide, revolutionary uprisings go through certain levels (of consciousness): First, the underlying belief by a sizeable segment of society that the rulers and certain institutional arrangements have lost legitimacy; second, certain intense participants or change agents have gotten around their sense of powerlessness and come to realize they have the power or capacity to effect the needed changes; third, the disaffected members of society have more or less formed a consensus as to the nature and or scope of the changes they desire to occur in lieu of the illegitimated rulers or arrangements, whether be it about a total systemic overhaul, a “regime change,” an extra-constitutional overthrowing of a corrupt or immoral government, etc.
My sense is that People Power III has already reached the first and second levels of consciousness described above. However, before the Great Beast “could take care of itself” today it has yet to hurdle the third level of consciousness.
For one, I have noted even the reformists in the military and the progressives in the civil society are still tentative about the scope and the nature of the changes to be sought (note should also be taken for instance that the mere suggestion during the Manila Peninsula “uprising” that a military junta was being contemplated has not sit well with potential supporters), while other veteran people power practitioners are apprehensive the next exercise “could again end up repeating a vicious cycle of simply ‘moving on’ in circle, and not leaping onward or to a higher ground” or a “new qualitative state.”…
…Now, the question once again: Why is People Power III taking its time?
My own take is: There is yet no general consensus among potential people power participants and activists, as has been in EDSA I or EDSA II, as to what change to aspire for and institute.
Arguably, proposals for reforms or transformations, at odds with each other for the most part, still abound. To cite a few: some who believe the two EDSAs were both a failure aim this time to act against a failed system and plan to overhaul it either according to some rigid ideologies or based merely on the “best practices” of ongoing successful experiments; other groups are just angry and frustrated because of “relative deprivation” (middle class weighed upon with a looming downgrade to the next class complain how come only their counterparts in other regions are having all the fun); still others are focused only on struggling for control of the state apparatuses and effecting “regime change” while keeping both the political and economic structure intact; and specifically, accused coup leader and now detained senator Sonny Trillanes is eager to transform the nation “without reinventing the wheel” or whereas Bishop Francisco Claver can only entertain the belief that “our problem comes down to this: how to correct the aberration that is the present administration without destroying the stabilizing structure that is our democratic system of government.”
…As a result, reactionary moves from old and once reliable alliances, the CBCP in particular, are silently taking place in the form of tokenism (a plea to President Arroyo to take lead in the fight against corruption) and diversion (a call for a new brand of People Power through “communal action”).
Mon Casiple on the part of the political pundits, observes,
The nature and circumstances of this political crisis is such that it can only have one resolution: the end of the Arroyo regime within the context of the existing electoral democracy. From there, it may result in the affirmation of this electoral democracy and thus the integrity of the 2010 elections. Or, more remote, it may lead to the ending of the electoral democracy itself. At any rate, these are the days of reckoning.
The people’s consciousness and readiness to action are developing by leaps and bounds. The usual tactics by the GMA administration are not working anymore and proved to be ironically pushing faster the momentum for change. From the JDV triumphal ouster to its present travails, the Arroyo administration has rapidly traversed a half-circle towards a downward spiral.
What’s Casiple referring to? I can only guess, but think of this. Did you notice the article, 52 governors troop to Palace to show support for Arroyo ? A friend encountered one of these governors on a plane bound for Manila, and the governor prattled on about how he was going to Manila on business -only for my friend to see the governor on TV lurking near the edge of the gathered governors. Said my friend: you see, they’ve begun to get embarrassed over their support for the President (the governor knew my friend’s an oppositionist; but a mere month ago, the governor would needle my friend and crow about the President every chance he got). And the news leaves an even bigger question hanging: what of the other 29 governors?
Recall that one of the officials proclaimed a convenor of the Loyalist rally in Manila on Feb. 25 pointedly told the media, “oh, I’m in Manila doing shopping.”
While Amando Doronila notices that:
Speaking to a joint meeting of the Makati Business Club, Management Association of the Philippines and PinoyME Foundation last Feb. 26, Aquino did not make a pitch for another People Power uprising, to the disappointment of many people. She merely called on President Arroyo to step down, saying it was the least disruptive way out of the “severe moral crisis” facing the country. She said, “She must give way to a credible government that could lead by example. Given our concern to protect the moral pillars of democracy, the extra-constitutional removal of the President is not an ideal we would want to aspire for.”
Aquino’s call for restraint was echoed by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, which in a pastoral statement on Feb. 26, called on the President to allow her officials to tell the truth about the slew of allegations of corruption related to several government transactions, but fell short of demanding her resignation. Instead, the bishops urged the President to be “part of the effort” to seek the truth.
The coyness of Aquino and the disappointing position of the bishops restraining people power highlighted the departure from the dynamics of 1986, when Aquino rode the crest of a forceful people power movement driven by the activist archbishop of Manila, Jaime Cardinal Sin, and the mass civilian participation in street protests in support of the military mutiny led by Marcos’ Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and Constabulary chief, Lt. Gen. Fidel Ramos.
Today’s configuration has lost the fervor for mass action of 1986. It tells us that today’s movement is not based on mass action to bring pressure on the key support institutions of government to defect, such as the military and the bureaucracy. Today’s movement has changed emphasis. It has shifted its cutting edge from confrontation in the streets to bringing moral pressure on government. The shift is not exerting a powerful pressure on government officials to step down. It emboldens them to stonewall.
Though as the Inquirer editorial today points out,
We realize that, in itself, the language of the recommendation (“Urge the President and all the branches of government to take the lead in combating corruption wherever it is found”) seems to be neutral. But in the present context, it actually disregards a fundamental reality. In the scandal over the National Broadband Network, the President and her men have been less than forthright in telling the truth. That, in fact, is one of the reasons we have a crisis in the first place.
Apropos of the bishops, read An Open Letter to the CBCP at Brown SEO.
(courtesy of pedestrianobserver)
@cvj
I agree with you but the point I wanted to make was that an Airline is not in the same category as, say Taiwan’s Integrated Circuit foundries, South Korea’s LCD innovators……that article obliquely touches the fact that ASEAN industries don’t generate or own their own IP…we do have the world class factories in the Philippines but we provide very little value added services.
We need to put money into incubation centres (such as that ASTI inside UP) and we need to develop home-grown technologies. Tulad nalang ng ZTE-Broadband ek-ek na yan. We can build that broadband network ourselves, sure we need to buy equipment from outside, but the design should have been passed on to DOST…
Having said that, SAL is truly amazing for a government owned company, well managed and separated from government appointees….unlike our Govt companies whose boards are full of mga talunan sa election pero binalatuhan na rin ni GMA ng mga position…(Take for example Mike Defensor, this man has jumped from one post to another and yet he is underqualified for all those posts…
Please extend my congratulations to SAL (baka sakaling bigyan ako frequent flyer points…)
cheers
PS. I don’t look at the neo-liberal ek-ek of the Economist. It’s only one source of info 😀
it seems that there are people out there debating with their own alter egos, and in the process getting lost in their own arguments.
stick with the issues, guys!
riddler,
hehe, tonsils mo. but your arguments have meat and substance nevertheless.
mindanaoan,
you don’t have to choose between them. just choose yourself and what is right for you. then hopefully the rest of the choices are easier
Riddler,
Of course I perfectly understand what you are alluding to. We should turn back the clock and install the “makapili” form of justice. I hope your neighbor wont finger you when that time comes accusing you for this and that with no way of defending yourself. Good Luck with you when that time comes.
some people skipped logic 101. you dont answer questions ‘begging the question’
UP n, ZTE is rumored to be interested in buying Motorola, which is in trouble financially. That does not mean there are no corrupt executives at ZTE. Chinese corporations have never been interested in building good reputations.
Bencard, some flotsam carry the ashes of the beloved
Madonna,
O o nga, tonsils ko.
Dinadaan ko na lang sa bastusan kasi talagang bastusan na ang mga pro-GMA na sumusulat dito pero ayaw naman nilang aminin! Panay kasinungalingan na ang naririnig natin pero ayaw pa nilang tumigil.
Pero kung susuriin ninyo ang aking sinusulat, may mga laman yan at ang mga impormasyon na aking inihayag ay pawang katotohanan lang. Ang ayaw ko lang sa ibang mga tao ay kung sila ang tatanungin, umiiwas sila at ayaw sagutin ng tuwid. Yun ay isang uri ng kasinungalingan dahil ang bawat tao ay mayroong pananaw, tama man o mali.
Magdiwang,
Thank you for your concern but I am perfectly capable of defending myself from my neighbor or from those who seek to do me ill.
I wish the same for you.
Mindanaoan,
Yes, I skipped logic 101. Its not taught in Harvardian College but at least, my teachers taught me courage, integrity and honesty and to answer all questions even if the question is supposedly “begging the question” because in that way, we learn and profit from other people’s cowardice.
Nash (at 2:42am), i agree and thanks for the clarification. Like you, i also think the Economist article is correct in attributing the lack of industrialization of the Southeast Asian economies (including ours) to their respective big businesses who engage in rent-seeking. This type of analysis does make more sense than Benign0’s double standard, where he lets the Taipans off the hook while placing the burden of industrialization on the common folk.
manolo, why not put a shoutbox here just like in pcij? that would be good for those who miss taking their pills (like i sometimes do :))and may not scare away potential commenters.
CVJ, I think the business model which RP took in a way by-passed traditional manufacturing. We went straight to IT, knowledge-based, and the sort. This strategy utilized our skilled, English-speaking labor pool but not enough. That’s why 3,000 OFWs leave each day. Also as a consequence, we import almost all manufactured goods for consumption. Is this a valid assessment?
To Winnie Monsod,
Like a good wife, Gloria might have promised her husband a cut of the Philippine economy if it does well on her term. And it did, and he did.
Riddler, the only way to have integrity without logic 101 is to shut yourself up from any intellectual suggestion. Gloria has learned that the hard way.
Are u teh spokepersn of M. Buencamino?
or are u the regular commenter who has a change of halloween costume in this period of lent.
take ur prozac, it may ease you a little bit. bwahaha
riddler,
Reminds me of the inutility at times of the so-called rules of logic, i.e. rules against ad hominem arguments (some invokes this when in fact they crossed the line of degrading the truth or when they stonewall, such as what frequently dear Ate Glo uses).
Logic is the servant of the truth, not the other way around. I say when a person is in all honesty being a cad, or evil as Neri says, or Salceda says a lucky bee — and it’s the truth, well stating so trumps puny logic all the time.
Good a.m. folks or night (to others who are on the other side of the globe). Calling it a day na.
Maginoo, yes i think that’s a valid assessment although the by-passing was not a conscious choice but a result of lack of industrial policy. (The last such policy i remember is Marcos’ 11 Major Industries before 1983.) Our technocrats are neo-liberal market fundamentalists and to them, industrial policy is a bad word.
Whether the strategy of leapfrogging via services alone is enough to result in a sustained acceleration of our economic growth is arguable. Both China and India have both manufacturing and services to fuel their growth.
“invokes” — invoke
Courage? Calling people who do not agree to your opinion, duwag with another DISPOSABLE ALTERNICK.
bwahahaha. joke of the day. thanks for making me laugh.
Madonna,
Logic is a servant of nothing. It is a good unto itself, as philosophers like to phrase it. In logic, one can always find a liar. The problem is the way Filipinos treat truth-finding as a debate, with time limits, etc. In this situation, the person who talks rapidly wins and the person who hesitates looses.
@Cat
Huli ka na sa balita. Prozac has been shown to be as effective as a placebo.
i share mindanaoan’s observation. we have very erudite bloggers here. please continue the good work, so i don’t have to increase my reading.
Cat, whatabout integrity?
Who you calling erudite?
Cat,
O Beha! Natawa ka! Masarap ba yung pusa mo? At least, di baluktot ang mga facts ko! Pwede ba? Magpakatotoo ka naman! Pro-GMA ka naman, ayaw mo pang aminin! Beha!
@cvj
you, reading benign-zero? ay, bumaba na tingin ko sa iyo. Matapos mo akong laitin for reading The Economist, heto ka pala at na-advertise mo pa si Benign-zero. 😀
cheers
Cat,
Oh and by the way beha, I was not forcing Mindanaoan to agree to my opinion. On the contrary, I was merely asking him to answer a question which he refused to directly answer.
You know beha, next time, please check the comment thread. You are not only grievously wrong on your facts, you are also so lazy following the thread.
Halika, magamin ka na. Aminin mo ng pro-GMA ka. Hanggang ngayon, ayaw mo pang aminin. Nakakahiya ba? Ikaw ang duwag! Beha!
nash, i plead no contest. 😀
most commenters here are worth debating with. you really learn from them even as, at times, you disagree. some insolent interlopers, who manage to pop in and out like foul air, are best ignored and left to their own insane soliloquy. as the big C’at admonishes, don’t feed the trolls!
Cat,
Beha! Sumakay ka pa kay Manuel Buencamino!
Uulitin ko beha! huwag mo nang pagtanggolan si Bencard. Abogago yon, kaya niyang depensahan ang sarili niya. Si Manuel Buencamino, isang diplomat lang naman. Magtapatan sila.
Hindi ako spokesperson ni Manuel Buencamino. Hindi niya kailangan ng spokesperson. Kayang kaya niyang sagutin sino man kahit na mga pro-GMA na bloggers na nagpapanggap na objective kuno tulad mo. Beha!
Salamat sa Prozac pero di ko kailangan yon! Beha!Bigay mo na lang kay nash.
Bencard,
You’re such a weasel. You call yourself a lawyer and yet, you could not even dare answer Manuel Buencamino’s challenge to you!
No, i think i will make it my duty to see to it that pompous guys like you and Cat deserve all the true recognition that you deserve, i.e., you’re a coward.
And until such time you can answer Manuel Buencamino’s challenge, I will always remind you of him.
Troll? Oh, so that’s what you are!
Sagutin mo si Manuel Buencamino and I will desist. In the meantime, panero, let me have the privilege of calling you duwag!
paki-moderate yung spite. baka mainis si manolo at kick-out tayo lahat.
hahaha! it’s entertaining here.
calling it a day. but before i retire, i’ll continue w/ my countdown… DAY 3
Riddler, I think you are articulate enough to defend and express yourself on the issues. Like you said you believe that your opinions are relevant. What I dont understand is why you have to call people names. This is a social networking site where people can agree to diagree without resorting to insultin people. Peace.
Thank you for reminding me BC.
I should be repeating it as matra today.
NEVER TAUNT CAGED ANIMAL by dangling food to his nose.
sometimes it FARts the loudest. mwehehe.
memo to myself. repeat that again and again.
mlq3, we have debated these matters oftentimes before but each time is an opportunity to reinforce or revisit our positions.
each time an impeachment attempt fails because of the application of pre-set rules adopted by the duly-empowered impeachment body, it is a triumph of the “rule of law”. each time a prosecutor dismisses a complaint, or refuses to indict, for lack of sufficient evidence, it is a triumph of the rule of law. each time a president act according to her interpretation of the constitution, he/she is implementing the rule of law, until and after her act is invalidated, in a proper case, by the supreme court. no one, but no one, including 9,20,30,50 or even 100 thousand “interfaith” rallyists, can take the law into his/her/their own hand.
btw, i don’t think lozada is a most “credible” authority on justice.
Magdiwang,
Fair comment but there are trolls here who deserve to be treated as such. People who continually and deliberately foist lies do not deserve a genteel treatment. The minimum requirement I believe in this comment thread is that at least do not deliberately misstate your facts. Those who deliberately prevaricate deserve the scorn heaped upon them.
Bencard,
Panero, tama na yan! Sinasagot mo si Manolo pero hindi mo pa sinasagot si Manuel Buencamino? Sabihin mo sa akin na mali ka at titigil na ako. Rule of law, rule of law, eh yung challenge ni Manuel Buencamino, di mo masagot!
Hay, cobarde!
@bencard
“each time a president act according to her interpretation of the constitution”
Please excuse me, but even people who did not go to law school KNOW that is is NOT the president’s job to INTERPRET the constitution.
cheers.
Cat,
Beha! Make another memo: I, Cat, promise to distort the facts, este, not to distort the facts pala.
Beha!
was that another UTOT, or was that the real stinky thing? and it calls me “panero”, amazing!
Bencard,
Ha ha ha, that was funny! Duwag ka pa rin! Sagutin mo si Manuel Buencamino. Duwag!
Bencard,
Hoy Duwag! Baka ang roll of attorney number mas mataas kaysa sa yo! Once again with feelings, sagutin mo si Manuel Buencamino. Duwag!
nash, i’ll humour you. everybody, including you, can interpret the constitution the way you understand it. if anyone is aggrieved because of your “interpretation” he can sue you and the court will decide whether you are correct or not. if you don’t agree with what i’m telling you here, ask your own attorney, or maybe abe margallo can help you.
Readers,
This is why I am so mad at Bencard who so arrogantly proclaims he is a lawyer and why I find him to be the First Coward of this thread. This is what he said to manuel buencamino:
“buencamino, first, who says it is a treaty? don’t you know there is a complex process in negotiating and consummating a treaty, not the least of which is approval by the legislature? second, in a contract, each party recognizes the other’s capacity, i.e., ownership of the subject matter. are you saying that while we have to recognize china’s claim, they don’t have to recognize ours? try not to lecture me on legal principles, will you?”
In response, this is what Manuel Buencamino retorted:
Bencard,
buencamino, first, who says it is a treaty? don’t you know there is a complex process in negotiating and consummating a treaty, not the least of which is approval by the legislature? second, in a contract, each party recognizes the other’s capacity, i.e., ownership of the subject matter. are you saying that while we have to recognize china’s claim, they don’t have to recognize ours? try not to lecture me on legal principles, will you?
FIRST, if it is executive agreement, an moa or mou, it is worse. That means your president singlehandedly committed the Philippines to recognizing China’s claim to the Spratleys without the consent of Congress. Can you see the constitutional problem you just created for your president?
Maybe we should check to see if she made a similar deal with Malaysis over Sabah. If you will recall the farthest Fidel Ramos ever went on the Sabah issue was to announce he was going to put it on the backburner. You know there is a world of difference between FVR’s and your president’s position.
SECOND, our claim is we are the SOLE OWNERS AND SOVEREIGNS of that disputed territory. That’s why we cannot enter into a contract with a party that has a rival claim. We cannot enter into a mutual recognition arrangement without sacrificing our claim to SOLE OWNERSHIP AND SOVEREIGNTY!
Which part of SOLE OWNERSHIP AND SOVEREIGNTY do you not understand?”
And then bencard again arrogantly displays his shingles and talks down to buencamino in this way:
“buencamino, it’s my business to understand the concepts of “sole ownership†and “sovereigntyâ€Â. what about you? being able to write those words doesn’t necessarily connote technical understanding of those terms. i don’t think debating the matter would benefit either one of us. sorry, buddy.”
And this is what buencamino said that nailed bencard’s pompous lawyerly ass:
“bencard,
“buencamino, it’s my business to understand the concepts of “sole ownership†and “sovereigntyâ€Â. what about you?â€Â
I am a diplomat. It is my business to understand matters involving national territory and sovereignty because that is my business.
So I am telling you that recognizing another country’s claim to territory we say we is ours weakens our claim and strengthens theirs!
So once again I ask you: which part of SOLE OWNERSHIP AND SOVEREIGNTY did you not understand?”
I checked the comment thread for that day and to date, Abogagong Bencard has yet to answer Buencamino’s challenge!
I have continually issued a challenge to Bencard because I despise the way he foists his lawyerly abilities on other just because he is a lawyer. Well, I too am a lawyer and I would never talk down to any person.
That shyster Bencard deserves to be pilloried and until such time he answers the challenge of Buencamino, I, as a fellow member of the bar, will hold him to his arrogance and pompousness!
the impeacment proceedings( at least three) against gma wasn’t dismissed because of lack of sufficient evidence! it was a numbers game- as admitted by arroyos lapdogs un congress. they only used that “lack of sufficient ecidence” as an excuse! if you don’t know these then quit arguing! do you watch news or read the papers? trust it was all over every newspapers then even a first grader will tell you this!
the rule of law in congress is being bastardize and prostituted by arroyo’s congressmen. rule of (arroyo’s) law that is!
@bencard
I don’t need an attorney. Maybe it’s you who needs one, baka may maniwala sa iyo na the president can really “interpret” the constitution.
Yes, we can casually ‘interpret’ the constitution when we are in da kanto but in your statement you say that the president should ACT according to her/his interpretation of the constitution. Maling mali ka doon, As in wow mali.
let us have it all in the open! be able to defend your position! if you can’t stand the heat get out! it is either you have or you don’t! will it stand in plaza miranda?!
FUN!FUN!FUN!