GRPundit

According to Rappler CEO Maria Ressa, pioneering crowdsourcing site Wikipedia "released" a list of "Philippine Fake News Sites". Well, actually she parroted an article title used in the Philippine edition of the almost-porn media outlet FHM ... The propagation of an article written by a misguided author published on a media outlet not exactly known for its intellectual integrity is quite ironic behaviour exhibited by a self-annointed "thought leader" in the field of anti-"fake news" activism. It's wrong on many levels but hardly surprising as this is, after all, Maria Ressa we are talking about. Wikipedia does not "release" stuff. It does not own or author any of the content it hosts. It relies on the work of an army of volunteer contributors and editors to create and maintain its content. All Wikipedia does is provide the platform for all that volunteer work. Ressa, being a self-described "expert" on

What were the Rapplerettes hoping to achieve by producing a video about journalists waxing poetic about their imagined victimhood? Very likely, public sympathy. And when and if they do get that public sympathy, what then? See, it's that usual headscratcher of a question that remains unanswered yet again after this quaint stunt. Perhaps these bozos should stop to think that, maybe, they attract so much derision against their persons because they keep writing about themselves . They turn every challenge to their views into a narrative of victimhood rather than an opportunity to reflect then respond intelligently . This is disturbing behaviour when exhibited by the Philippines' supposedly foremost self-appointed "thought leaders". Rather than serve as an example of people who step up to challenges, they propagate a self-destructive habit of shrinking into comfy cliques of mutually-assuring cronies -- precisely the sort of dysfunctional social mechanism that re

The Philippine Opposition are failing the Filipino people by continuing to propagate a pathetic national disease - colonial mentality . This they do by furthering a perverse neediness for Western validation. We see this in the way they once again turn to the presumptuously-named "International Criminal Court" for validation. Ultimately this "Rome Statute" which they hold up to protest Duterte's announced withdrawal from the ICC is like no more than the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration on the South China Sea dispute -- just a piece of paper kept in an office on the other side of the world that is not relevant to the average Filipino voter. Outside of the tony carpeted offices of European bureaucrats, and in the real world where guns, tanks, and bombers, decide global politics, they are not worth the sheets of paper they are printed on. It is pathetic that Philippine Opposition "activists" look to an overseas governing body to valida

Is the case of embattled Chief Justice Lourdes Sereno to be decided on the basis of her popularity? Apparently the Philippine Opposition think so. A tweet fielded by a certain Yoly Villanueva-Ong serves as a case in point.. The Phil Judges Asso (PJA) has about 1200 members and only 20 of them signed the manifesto asking CJ to resign! There are 15 diff employees associations and only 4 called for CJ to resign.  11 assns couldn’t be coerced to sign. Midas touch can only go so far. Begone Satan! The facts surrounding Sereno's violations of the law, however, cannot be changed by popularity. Whilst making political decisions involves assessing how popular or not an option is, making legal decisions involves logic and reason -- something that "thought leaders" of the Philippine Opposition evidently don't apply very well to evaluating important issues of national consequence.

Why are some people so sure that Supreme Court justices can be removed only by impeachment? Art. xi.2 merely mentions one mode of removal, hence “may be removed from office, on impeachment”. Note the presence of the word “may” (in the 1935 and 1973 constitutions it was “shall”) but the absence of the word “only”. The language thereof doesn’t preclude other modes of removal. Art. viii.11 states that a justice stays in office “during good behavior until they reached the age of seventy years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office.” That’s suggestive of three different and other modes of separation from office there. Then there’s Art. viii.7.3, which can be interpreted as a continuing requirement. to insist in the impeachment only argument is to make art. viii provisions inutile. Even the president can be removed by modes other than impeachment: Art. vii is replete with alternative modes, including the cabinet getting rid of the president by way of Art. v

Embattled Chief Justice Lourdes Sereno has resorted to engaging in a media blitz. She upholds a tried-and-tested Yellowtard tradition -- if you can't beat them on logic, beat them in showbiz. You gotta give credit to Sereno. The foreign media is the best bunch of bozos before whom playing the Woman Card works best. She has crossed the Rubicon that separates officers of the judiciary and the politicians that inhabit the voter-determined space of the other two branches of the Philippines'government. She is now motivated by popularity rather than on sound reason and playing the ace cards that characterise the rhetoric of the confused liberal minds of the Philippine Opposition. This style of thinking is exhibited by Inquirer columnist Rina Jimenez-David in her article today ... Among those standing behind Sereno are many of her sister-awardees in The Outstanding Women in the Nation’s Service (TOWNS) awards. This is nice to know. Unfortunately it does not pass the So Wh

Folks, you have to distinguish between wrongdoings committed and lack of qualifications of an impeachable official.  The remedy for wrongdoings stated in the Constitution (bribery, culpable violation of the constitution, graft and corruption etc.) is impeachment. On the other hand, if the official LACKS ANY QUALIFICATION required by the office then that official can be subject to a quo warranto petition. And if the official is elected and benefitted from CHEATING during the elections, that official can be removed via an election contest/election protest. So it is extremely incorrect to say that an impeachable official can only be removed from office via impeachment. If that were the case then BBM's electoral protest against Leni (who is an impeachable official) would've been thrown out a long time ago. Tom Berenguer  

Let me get this right: Mocha Uson has no qualifications so is unfit to be ASec but Noynoy who has no qualifications is fit to be president. CJ Corona who mistakenly filed a SALN is impeachable but sereno who failed to file SALNs isn’t. The psych results to determine if Sereno is fit for office cannot be revealed to the public but psych results of Duterte’s annulment case is. Rallying and noisy people cannot remove Sereno from office but it is ok for rallying and noisy people to try to remove Duterte from office. A student activist rude to Noynoy was arrested, that’s fine; a reporter rude to Duterte was banned from Malacañan, not fine. Yellow supporters give their version of history, that’s factual; if any other gives an account - even if personal - that differs from the yellow version that’s revisionism. Finally: progressives argued we don’t need a morally upright, traditional family values person to be president; then progressives hit Duterte because they consider him