User Login

TipidPC.com is the largest online IT Community in the Philippines. Have something to sell or share? Sign up for an account now. It's absolutely free!

Forum Topic

Luneta 8-26-2013 againsts Pork Barrel

  • they are just yellow propaganda machine in my opinion lang po..
    my gulay, yung link mo ay sa the spin busters:

    This blog is owned by working journalists..


    pero walang mga pangalan! talk about propaganda!
  • spin busters or not.. the info are true.. lumabas na din yan sa news. the events mention did happen..

    -- edited by coldfeet on Jul 22 2014, 01:56 AM
  • buti pa pcij..ito sandamakmak na details regarding DAP.. 3 part article

    2nd part link
    http://pcij.org/stories/funds-freed-in-a-rush-projects-yield-slow-results/
    <click here for link>
  • Public Lives
    Mad about the DAP
    By Randy David |Philippine Daily Inquirer
    12:45 am | Thursday, July 24th, 2014
    <click here for link>

    In May 2010, as she prepared to leave the Palace, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo insisted on appointing the new chief justice before the president-elect, Benigno S. Aquino III, could formally take office. When this plan was questioned, the Supreme Court ruled that the outgoing president had all the right to do so. Still, simple courtesy should have restrained the outgoing president from exercising that option, and a sense of propriety should have prevented Renato Corona, the beneficiary of that brazen midnight appointment, from accepting it. But that wasn’t what happened. To everyone’s consternation, Corona became chief justice.

    The new President did not take this sitting down. Armed with a strong electoral mandate, he mobilized his allies in Congress to reverse the outcome of this preemption of presidential powers. Corona was impeached for lying about his properties and bank deposits in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth. This costly venture was paid for not only in the form of diverted legislative energy, but also—for P-Noy—in terms of unnecessary expenditure of political capital and public funds. Knowing how politics runs in our country, we could only speculate on how much additional PDAF was doled out in the course of this exercise.

    But this was long before Janet Lim-Napoles and Benhur Luy came into the picture. Up to that point, the PDAF was constitutional. Government justified it as a legitimate way of identifying local projects. Analysts saw it as a tool of political patronage. But no one equated it with plunder. When the Napoles scam was exposed by the media, the public outcry reverberated through the chambers of the Supreme Court. Twice in the recent past, the magistrates of the high court had affirmed the legality of the PDAF. But, in 2013, when it was again brought before them, they struck it down as unconstitutional, thus supplying a legal warrant to public anger.

    No one foresaw how the issue would hit the President, who had won on a vision of ethical governance. After Luy and other whistle-blowers narrated how lawmakers routinely raided their PDAF using Napoles’ network of fake nongovernment organizations, three senators were charged with plunder. One of them, Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, in a vain attempt to fudge the issues, delivered a privilege speech in which he insinuated that the administration had tried to shape the outcome of the Corona impeachment by offering additional PDAF. His point was that the President had the biggest pork barrel of all. Instead of merely saying these were not bribes, Malacañang responded by talking about stimulus spending using savings under the DAP. This prompted critics to go to the Supreme Court to question its legal basis.

    Under different circumstances, no one outside the Cabinet would have known that the DAP existed. Not because of any conscious effort to conceal it, but only because the conventional budget practices it contained had not been challenged. If the Supreme Court now says these practices violate the Constitution, so be it. But it is one thing to say they are unconstitutional, and another to presume malice behind them. If an investigative report on the DAP had been written before July 2013 when the pork barrel controversy first erupted, I doubt if it would have elicited the kind of disgust we are now expected to feel over its uncovering
  • Editorial
    The disappointed
    Philippine Daily Inquirer
    12:46 am | Thursday, July 24th, 2014
    <click here for link>

    The two impeachment complaints filed against President Aquino this week make for disappointing reading: Their premises are premature, their logic strained. They take the self-serving statements of accused plunderers at face value; they trivialize the country’s harrowing experience with tyranny. But, in a deeper sense, the complaints reflect the spasm of disappointment that convulsed the country in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling on the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program. If the last years of the Aquino administration will be spent obsessing over just how much money went to which project, and how much of the DAP went into private pockets—what a fall in expectations! The administration’s clear mandate to fight corruption becomes a sorry struggle to prove that it was not itself corrupt.

    Both complaints assume something that has not yet become final: that each element of the Supreme Court decision will stand. But in fact, the ruling does not become final and executory until after a decision is reached on the administration’s motion for reconsideration. (And sometimes, as we know, the Court reverses itself even after a final and executory judgment.) While it doesn’t seem likely that the 13-0 vote will be reversed, it is still possible that some elements of the ruling—for instance, the Court’s restrictive definition of savings, which in its view can only be computed toward the end of a given year—might still change.

    The first complaint, filed by militant group members as well as civil society personalities, simply assumes that the DAP is Mr. Aquino’s “own Presidential pork barrel,” attaches to it the Court’s own most recent ruling declaring the Priority Development Assistance Fund as unconstitutional, and then leaves it at that.

    The second complaint, filed by youth groups, cites as the third ground for impeachment the assertion that Mr. Aquino committed graft and corruption, but the sole basis for making that claim is only another assertion: Sen. Jinggoy Estrada’s, who suggested in a privilege speech that the President bribed senators with DAP funds to convict Chief Justice Renato Corona. The complainants do not offer any additional evidence, or indeed even attempt to root Estrada’s coy claim in reality. They simply take the self-serving word of a principal accused in a plunder case, and take it as proven fact.

    Not least, both complaints trivialize the meaning of “tyranny” and “dictatorship,” blithely alleging that President Aquino’s actions on the DAP and later his aggressive posture against the Supreme Court amounted to “a tyrannical abuse of power”—now he was “acting like a full-fledged tyrant,” “guilty of tyrannical abuse of power and gross exercise of discretionary powers,” and therefore: “We all have to nip a dictator in the bud” (sic). But the last time the country had a “full-fledged tyrant,” the chief justice himself was reduced to sheltering the dictator’s wife from rain and sun with an umbrella. That the Court is no longer subservient is the clearest proof that the complainants’ talk of tyranny and dictatorship is merely rhetorical.
  • External Image


    caption please...

    buti pa sila, nakaupo lang sila jan, suwesweldo ng malaki hehe

    -- edited by tsismoso7 on Jul 24 2014, 03:23 PM
  • External Image


    -- edited by tsismoso7 on Jul 24 2014, 03:26 PM
  • External Image

    hindi talaga maiimpeach si Pnoy
  • abad: use it or lose it..on dap



    lousy palusot...
  • Abad was good justifying the DAP Issue.. I STILL believe in Aquino administration, Kakaiba approach ni Pnoy and it looks like nagbebenefit tayo..

    Now BIR requesting for SC Saln.. and it was denied.. ano po ibig sabihn neto?
  • again kahit pa maganda ang intention, kapag lumabag sa patakaran in this case sa saligang batas, mali o iligal pa rin itong maituturing.. eto yung sample sa previous page.. klarong klaro

    May similarity yung DAP doon sa account manager namin hehehe..
    ""Naglagay ng malaking pera ng companya sa kanyang personal account, at nahuli.
    Ang rason niya para mas madaling makakuha ng pera pag sa emergency na kailangan ng mga tao o ng trabaho.
    Matagal kasi ang proseso naman kung masusunod yung tama. Ayon natanggal at muntik pang makasuhan. Good faith naman yung purpose niya hehehhe..
  • Abad was good justifying the DAP Issue.. I STILL believe in Aquino administration, Kakaiba approach ni Pnoy and it looks like nagbebenefit tayo..


    ano ano yung mga benefits na sinasabi mo?
  • eto list print mo
    http://www.dbm.gov.ph/?page_id=9796
  • BAha sa manila, road projects na dinadaanan mo, Rehabilitation sa squatetr na pugad ng krimen yan lang ang tanda ko , NAIA?

    I find the Pnoy administraton executes project very quick! not to mention put in jail the corrupt ( unahin na ang mga di ka alyado)
  • nice to see na ang news ngayon pinapakita na ang projects funded by DAP.
  • yung DAP ng pinangsuhol sa mga senador noong corona trial

    kasama din sa project.
  • again kahit pa maganda ang intention, kapag lumabag sa patakaran in this case sa saligang batas, mali o iligal pa rin itong maituturing..
    Hindi ganyan ang stand mo noong impeachment trial ni CJ Corona.
  • I’m not a lawyer, but this is what I think about the DAP controversy
    July 24, 2014
    <click here for link>

    it doesn’t necessarily mean Aquino is going against the Constitution. But he’s in fact expanding the Constitution to new realities and making it exactly a living constitution that meets day to day challenges
  • Hindi ganyan ang stand mo noong impeachment trial ni CJ Corona.


    because that time (and i still do) believe SALNs can be corrected especially in good faith.. and since napag desisyunan na ng mga senator na mali talaga ang incorrect declaration of SALN (kahit pa walang bahid ng malice) dahil lumabag ito sa batas, then nararapat lang na i-apply din ito sa kaso ni PNoy.. tama ba?
  • it doesn’t necessarily mean Aquino is going against the Constitution. But he’s in fact expanding the Constitution to new realities and making it exactly a living constitution that meets day to day challenges


    ano yan? gagawa sya ng sariling constitution nya base sa kanyang own interpretation (mali ata to LOL)

    you mean constitution ver 2.0? wow so trabaho na rin ni Presidente mag balangkas ng bagong constitution?

    pati pag interpret ng batas which is trabaho ng Supreme Court, inako na nya.. ngayon pati trabaho ng lehislatura aakuin din nya?

    yikes absolute power corrupts absolutely

    LOL
  • Sino ba nag approve sa DAP?

Who's Online

291 active users within the last minute, 148 members, 143 guests.
Our newest member is pgqadbwplc
Click here to see online members.

Browse Items

More »

Search TipidPC


New Want to Buys

Active Items for Sale

Active Want to Buys