UNBELIEVABLY WELL PUT CHAY,


 BUT YOU KNOW THE PHILIPPINES, IT IS NOT "PRINCIPLE" IT IS USUALLY ALLIANCES, 
INFLUENCE PEDDLING, AND CRONYISM THAT MOTIVATES ALL POLITICAL GAMESMANSHIP


POLITICS IS MERELY THE FACADE FOR THE PERSONAL QUEST FOR POWER BY MANY 
POLITICIANS BECAUSE THEY SEE THE FILIPINO MASSES AS BEASTS OF BURDEN.. THEY 
COULD CARE LESS IF THE EDUCATED 10% KNOW THEY ARE OUTRIGHT THIEVES AND 
CRIMINALS.


 AS ERAP BOASTS, " I DON'T CARE WHAT 10% OF THE FILIPINOS THINK OF ME BECAUSE I 
CAN CONTROL THE REMAINING 90% COMPRISING THE MASSES 
 
 THAT IS NOT AN EMPTY BOAST. TO BE ELECTED MAYOR AFTER A CRIMINAL CONVICTION, 
EVEN IF PARDONED IS TELLING OF THE FAILURE OF THE PINOY TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN 
REALITY AND CELLULOID FILM FANTASY


 LET ALONE IMELDA IS SOLICITING THE HELP OF HER NEPHEWS IN LAUNCHING THIS WHITE 
PAPER AGAINST BINAY, WHO IS SUPPOSEDLY THEIR ALLY BECAUSE SHE KNOWS THIS IS THE 
LAST CHANCE FOR HER SON TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT. 


  ERAP HAS TRIED TO RESTRAIN BINAY FROM DEFECTING CLAIMING HE IS THE KINGMAKER 
BUT IT SEEMS BINAY IS NOT CONVINCED


  ERAP HAS HIS OWN AGENDA. HE WANTS HIS DIMWITTED SON NOW IN JAIL TO BE THE VP 
CANDIDATE


  IMELDA ONLY NEEDS TO CONVINCE 30% OF OUR INDOLENT MASSES BECAUSE SHE CAN BUY 
THE OTHER 25%. AS THEY SAY IN THE PHILIPPINES,  SA BILANGAN ANG PAGPAPANALO. 
HINDI SA BOTOHAN


 IF IMELDA HAS GOTTEN CONTROL OF PART OF THE $ 13.5 B NEVER RECOVERED ( WE ONLY 
FOUND $ 1.5 B ) THEN WITH $ 1 B, SHE CAN BUY THAT REMAINING 25%


  SHE HAS DELUSIONS OF REDEEMING HER HUSBAND'S SORDID REPUTATION, EVEN IF SHE 
HAS TO BUY IT


  SHE WANTS HER HUSBAND BURIED IN THE LIBINGAN NGA MGA BAYANI EVEN IF HE IS 
BETTER SUITED FOR LIBINGAN SA MUNTINGLUPA


LYNN














With all due respect, Senator Saguisag, you are treading on dangerous ground 
again.  You wanted the bases out as a matter of principle, come what may.  What 
happened is that the Chinese seized on the vacuum that was created and are now 
the owners of what used to be in the Philippines' Exclusive Economic Zone.


You want PNoy out by 2016 as a matter of principle. Even if that would probably 
mean a return to GMA-style, Estrada-style and, to an extent, Macoy-style 
governance.


When you already know what the bull is going to do in the China shop, wouldn't 
you try to do everything in your power to stop the bull from coming into that 
shop in the first place?


Being married to an idea - the one presidential term written into the 1987 
Constitution - at the expense of being blind to its consequences it seems to me 
is a slavish concoction of a mechanical mind.


We must be focused on what is good for the country and not what is good for the 
constitutionalists. No constitution is perfect.  Especially the U.S. 
Constitution.  And that is why there are now 27 amendments to the U.S. 
Constitution, and counting.


The first ten amendments are the Bill of Rights. The delegates to the first 
constitutional convention forgot about the Bill of Rights. Imagine!  This shows 
that a constitution is only as good as the sum total of the delegates' smarts.


As knowledge advances, succeeding generations may in fact be in possession of 
new knowledge that trumps the biases inherent in a constitution.


There was bias against prolonged tenure because of the country's experience 
with the evil Marcoses. But those biases do not apply when the executive is a 
benevolent and corruption-fighting machine.


We have found a leader who is potentially a benevolent version of Singapore's 
Lee Kwan Yew. We may not have another one like him in the next few generations. 
So what happens to the country in the interim?


We have to do everything in our power to keep PNoy in office, especially since 
the heir apparent can be viewed only "through a looking glass, darkly."


The title of a novel that is now near-classic.


C
 


  




On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 11:13 PM, Rene Saguisag [email protected] 
[Worldwide-Filipino-Alliance] <[email protected]> 
wrote:

 
 
  
    
                  

    The Supreme Court would know how to deal with sedition. So would the DOJ.

    But, there is nothing seditious in filing professionally a vigorous motion 
for reconsideration (MR), which courts routinely deny anyway. That's what 
lawyers are expected to do in our adversary system, raise every possible 
defense available under the laws of the land. 
    The MR may incite? But, Holmes said, every idea is an incitement. Which 
urges immediate action. "Let's march now!" differs from "let's march next year."

    No way the SC would reverse itself in DAP the way Florenz Regalado had an 
11-0 decision reversed 0-11 in 1967 in Tactaquin v. Palileo, a tort case. So a 
mere four months later; today an MR in the Lenny Villa case (Ateneo Law frat 
hazing fatality) has been pending for two and a half years.

    I am for bringing down our high and mighty and unelected Supreme Court to 
the level of the U.S.'s, which rules on illegality and unconstitutionality, but 
never, to my knowledge, on abuse of discretion of a co-equal branch, elected at 
that. That has been the case since Marbury v., Madison, decided in 1803, on 
judicial review.

    I am for weakening our judiciary so that it would no longer decide on the 
location of a petrochemcial plant, the sale of Manila Hotel, or the choice of 
National Artists - better left to the elected who run for reelection.

    In the U.S., the judiciary is the least dangerous branch, here it is the 
most dangerous. It seized on "Grave Abuse of Discretion," which Chief Justice 
Roberto Concepcion, as a ConCom Delegate, on July 10, 1986, seemed to me to 
have been an effort to prevent martial law abuse, not in times of normalcy. No 
GAD in the paradigmatic admired U.S. Consti.

    We are now into the last 675 days or so of the PNoy watch. I will do what I 
can to help him return to private life in 2016, to write a book, plant a a tree 
and father a son who will carry on the family name. He has suffered enough 
trying to lead an ungovernable scofflaw nation. 

    An anti-pork rally today? Would that mean we in the 1987-92 Senate are to 
be condemned? Pork continues in the U.S.. It is not toxic per se. If the picnic 
succeeds, without the smell of gunpowder we had to deal with in the time of 
Macoy, that may hold promise of massing against China. Sana.

    Meantime, we look at the Inevitability of Jojobama in 2016 when all the 
saints will go marching in? Daughter Nancy, instead of helping us deal with 
China, BangsaMoro, Global Warming, etc., is busy defending her dynasty.

    Insanity I think is a qualification for wanting to run an un-runnable 
ungovernable masaya scofflaw nation of know-it-all kadunongs and pilosopos, now 
more than a hundred million, and multiplying like rabbits. Millions of insane 
voters prevented a restoration of Erap in 2010.

    GMA, JPE, Jing, Bong, Gigi, Janet, et al. would then be immune today but an 
Ampaw Prez may have seen to the contrary, without minimizing the presumption of 
innocence. 

    Would today's rally be progressive? Or nihilist? Who would benefit in 
anarchizing our society?

    Let's enjoy Fil-Aussie golfer Jason Day's and Pinoy archer Gabriel Luis 
Moreno's feats na lang.


-- 

Saguisag & Associates Lawyers
4045 Bigasan Street, Palanan
1235 Makati
Office Nos. (+632) 551-6350/833-4140

Fax No. (+632) 831-2276





    
             
__._,_.___
                     
 
    
        
        Posted by: Rene Saguisag <[email protected]>        
     
    
 
    
      
        
          
                          Reply via web post                      
          
•
          
                           Reply to sender                      
          
•
          
                          Reply to group                      
          
•
          
            Start a New Topic          
          
•
          
                            Messages in this topic                (1)           
           
        
      
    
         
    VISIT YOUR GROUP                                                           
  
  
 • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use 

  
        
     
  
     
.
   
 
__,_._,___
  



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Center for Good Governance" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to 
[email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/center-for-good-governance.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Center for Good Governance" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to 
[email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/center-for-good-governance.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to