New and Used Car Talk Reviews Hot Cars Comparison Automotive Community

The Largest Car Forum in the Philippines

Page 21 of 232 FirstFirst ... 111718192021222324253171121 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 420 of 4627
  1. Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    12,683
    #401
    Quote Originally Posted by cast_no_shadow View Post
    What are you smokin?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Probably the script was written by XJP

    Sent from my SM-N970F using Tapatalk

  2. Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    3,187
    #402
    Quote Originally Posted by BratPAQ View Post
    I can't imagine the horror if they win. Go will surely resign and we have duterte for another 6 years with this pandemic.

    Or worse, whoever else would be president, would have an "accidental" death,& digong would succeed. I think only Isko (or maybr Pacquiao?) can beat him for vp.

  3. Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,380
    #403
    Drama drama nila ngayon yan para malihis ang issue sa COA

    Sent from my RMX1851 using Tapatalk

  4. Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    19,003
    #404
    something smells and it ain't coffee


    https://twitter.com/ANCALERTS/status...146912260?s=20
    Last edited by baludoy; August 25th, 2021 at 08:26 PM.

  5. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    54,631
    #405
    i'm not a lawyer, but
    if one looks up the official job description of the Vice President,
    it is argueable that the immediate past President can not be Vice President.

  6. Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,310
    #406
    Quote Originally Posted by dr. d View Post
    i'm not a lawyer, but
    if one looks up the official job description of the Vice President,
    it is argueable that the immediate past President can not be Vice President.
    Can you quote and link your source? That's interesting


  7. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    54,631
    #407
    Quote Originally Posted by BratPAQ View Post
    Can you quote and link your source? That's interesting

    the 1987 Constitution. article VII.

  8. Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,310
    #408
    Quote Originally Posted by dr. d View Post
    the 1987 Constitution. article VII.

    "The President shall not be eligible for any re-election. No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time."


    This one? The 1st statement with the word 'any' seems to mean any position, but the next statement said 'same office' which means the presidency only. But we have previous president that run for office again but at lower position like GMA. I wish they have made this statements clearer.




  9. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    54,631
    #409
    Quote Originally Posted by BratPAQ View Post

    "The President shall not be eligible for any re-election. No person who has succeeded as President and has served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time."


    This one? The 1st statement with the word 'any' seems to mean any position, but the next statement said 'same office' which means the presidency only. But we have previous president that run for office again but at lower position like GMA. I wish they have made this statements clearer.



    yes.
    that is why i originally qualified my statement with "argueable".
    whenever a law is argued, what must be kept in mind is the spirit that that law was designed to uphold.
    to better understand the spirit of that law, let us remember the prevailing political atmosphere at that time.
    "they had just toppled someone who had stayed in power for longer than the then-mandated 4 + 4 = 8 years only."

    gma's case was unique.
    she was not elected into the presidency the first time; it was thrust unto her by the law. it was argued that she did not fall under the no-re-election rule.
    can we imagine if vice presidents thrust into the presidency, were not allowed to run for president the next term?
    no one would want to run for vice president!
    Last edited by dr. d; August 26th, 2021 at 03:39 AM.

  10. Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,310
    #410
    Quote Originally Posted by dr. d View Post
    yes.
    that is why i originally qualified my statement with "argueable".
    whenever a law is argued, what must be kept in mind is the spirit that that law was designed to uphold.
    to better understand the spirit of that law, let us remember the prevailing political atmosphere at that time.
    "they had just toppled someone who had stayed in power for longer than the then-mandated 4 + 4 = 8 years only."

    gma's case was unique.
    she was not elected into the presidency the first time; it was thrust unto her by the law. it was argued that she did not fall under the no-re-election rule.
    can we imagine if vice presidents thrust into the presidency, were not allowed to run for president the next term?
    no one would want to run for vice president!
    I'm talking about GMA being elected as congresswoman after being president. Comparing that to Duterte to be elected as VP. The only difference is the position, and GMA is in local office.

    If GMA were allowed to run and win in another public office, why wouldn't they allow run on a "different" public office for duterte?

    As I said, these law should be made clearer.


  11. Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,365
    #411
    As professor Agabin said,if there's a conflict between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law,the latter must prevail,this may go way up,to the SC

  12. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    54,631
    #412
    Quote Originally Posted by BratPAQ View Post
    I'm talking about GMA being elected as congresswoman after being president. Comparing that to Duterte to be elected as VP. The only difference is the position, and GMA is in local office.

    If GMA were allowed to run and win in another public office, why wouldn't they allow run on a "different" public office for duterte?

    As I said, these law should be made clearer.

    some arguers say there's no law preventing the immediate past President from running for congressman.

    if the immediate past President is not allowed to become President again, why elect him to a position whose sole official job description is exactly that which he is not allowed to do?
    i think retired SC justice carpio agrees with me.

    see!
    "argueable."
    Last edited by dr. d; August 26th, 2021 at 11:04 AM.

  13. Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    5,975
    #413
    I just heard dugong withdrew the bunggo-dugong tandem to make way for Sara


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  14. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    54,631
    #414
    Quote Originally Posted by bloowolf View Post
    I just heard dugong withdrew the bunggo-dugong tandem to make way for Sara


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    i vaguely recall hearing something like that in this morning's radio news...
    but as i was still half-asleep...
    i am sure, the news will be re-iterated later toaday.

    ... ang gulo nila!
    parang mga hinete, jockeying for position in the nation's wildest race...

  15. Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    5,975
    #415
    Last night, Bunggo announced that he is not that keen on Presidency, para bang tabang. After campaigning, giving away shoes, epal relief goods…. Wala rin palang gana tumakbo.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  16. Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    54,631
    #416
    Quote Originally Posted by bloowolf View Post
    Last night, Bunggo announced that he is not that keen on Presidency, para bang tabang. After campaigning, giving away shoes, epal relief goods…. Wala rin palang gana tumakbo.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    yes, he has mentioned it several times in the recent past. but...
    " i'll believe it when i see it. "
    on the last day of filing for candidacy.
    heh heh.
    Last edited by dr. d; August 26th, 2021 at 10:36 AM.

  17. Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,009
    #417
    In the US Constitution, the president cannot run for VP. That would make it very clear. Maybe our Philippine Constitution framers underestimated the greed for power of politicians after Macoy.

  18. Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,501
    #418

  19. Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,009
    #419
    Quote Originally Posted by Yatta View Post
    I'd be more wary of a BBM-SARA tandem. Because that will put the whole syndicate together.

  20. Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,773
    #420
    Quote Originally Posted by shadow View Post



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    All gloves off! Sara v Bong Go/Honeylet is proxy fight between Duterte’s first and second families

    https://politics.com.ph/all-gloves-o...cond-families/

    Sara Duterte: 'I do not hold grudge vs Go'

    Sara Duterte: 'I do not hold grudge vs Go' | The Manila Times

    away away na? [emoji848]

Tags for this Thread

2022 Presidential Elections