Comments on Former president NOYNOY AQUINO.

[Nefarian]

---

Oi the deal is still open. Asa namo? hehe

[lecreigh]

Lage iya nalang unta ning pasagdan total 1trillion ra man na

maayo unta sunod presidente dili na magsigeg subay aning kwarta sa katawhan arun wa nay gubot.

Syaro dili moasenso ang Pinas.

im not sure if naka G ka sa akong gisulti, what im saying is that nangita napud na xag paagi para kang arroyo napud mapahid ang mga current issues nga gi atubang sa iyang administration. grabe jud iyang dumot ni arroyo bah, its bordering on ridiculous. have him resolve that napoles pork barrel scam & dap before xa mag blame2.. so childish kaau ang reaction ni pnoy. he should answer all the allegations instead of blaming it on someone else.

kulang na lng kung magbagyo iyang i-blame kang arroyo.. nyahahah! :P

[Crinkles11]

im not sure if naka G ka sa akong gisulti, what im saying is that nangita napud na xag paagi para kang arroyo napud mapahid ang mga current issues nga gi atubang sa iyang administration. grabe jud iyang dumot ni arroyo bah, its bordering on ridiculous. have him resolve that napoles pork barrel scam & dap before xa mag blame2.. so childish kaau ang reaction ni pnoy. he should answer all the allegations instead of blaming it on someone else.

kulang na lng kung magbagyo iyang i-blame kang arroyo.. nyahahah! :P

Murag last year to nga bagyo bro perting baha, giblame ni pnoy si arroyo ato oi.

[Nefarian]

Just a random statement from an article.

"You know, asking the President to scrap his own discretionary funds is politically motivated. They dont see the good intention of the President in spending these amounts to good use. Politicians especially on the opposition side are insecure of the money in the hands of the President. Since the lawmakers are to give up their PDAF they want the same to the President. But you see there is a big difference between the lawmakers and the President. The lawmakers main function is to debate and to craft laws. The Executive function is to deliver and implement projects. The lawmakers "executive"function in PDAF for their chosen projects is only a sideline to their main function which is lawmaking. It will not hurt if their "executive"function be clipped.

But to say that the President should altogether scrapped his discretionary funds is to render inutile the Executive in performing its functions. The President is the manager. He has to have access to the funds anytime. How can you manage a corporation when your hands are tied? The manager cannot always go to the Board of Directors to ask money to fund the day to day and emergency needs of the company. It has to have funds."

A PRESIDENT WITHOUT BUDGET? THEN BETTER ABOLISH THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT.

WHAT WE NEED IS TRANSPARENCY IN THE PRESIDENT'S SPENDING NOT ABOLISHING. AT LEAST THIS WAY ONLY ONE PERSON IS LIABLE.

******

The deal is still open.

[johnjob]

Running a government with insufficient knowledge and student council secretaries is a plus.Bang!

[hulagway]

hahaha...related sa corruption ang kaso?

[lecreigh]

Murag last year to nga bagyo bro perting baha, giblame ni pnoy si arroyo ato oi.

paeta!!! :P

[amingb]

Sa Case nga gi file nga Plunder karon ni Arroryo ( Malampaya Fund ) which walay diay klaro direct participation ang presidente according ni De lima tungod sa Negligence kasuhan ug Plunder ....

Sa sunod admin ani mao sab ni Buhaton sa mga mo puli kasohan pud ni si Pnoy ug Negligence ....

Si Mike Arroyo gi apil pud nila ( Tuason’s husband is a cousin of Mike Arroyo ) hinoon wa pa sila ebedinsia ug direct participation ....

Mag duda ta ba nga Diversionary Tactic napud ni .. kay na puno naman sa Bira si Pnoy as Pork Barrel King ...

[Nardskey]

Murag nangampanyan ni sila palabwanay sa ihi.

[jack_bauer_v2]

Just a random statement from an article.

"You know, asking the President to scrap his own discretionary funds is politically motivated. They dont see the good intention of the President in spending these amounts to good use. Politicians especially on the opposition side are insecure of the money in the hands of the President. Since the lawmakers are to give up their PDAF they want the same to the President. But you see there is a big difference between the lawmakers and the President. The lawmakers main function is to debate and to craft laws. The Executive function is to deliver and implement projects. The lawmakers "executive"function in PDAF for their chosen projects is only a sideline to their main function which is lawmaking. It will not hurt if their "executive"function be clipped.

But to say that the President should altogether scrapped his discretionary funds is to render inutile the Executive in performing its functions. The President is the manager. He has to have access to the funds anytime. How can you manage a corporation when your hands are tied? The manager cannot always go to the Board of Directors to ask money to fund the day to day and emergency needs of the company. It has to have funds."

A PRESIDENT WITHOUT BUDGET? THEN BETTER ABOLISH THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT.

WHAT WE NEED IS TRANSPARENCY IN THE PRESIDENT'S SPENDING NOT ABOLISHING. AT LEAST THIS WAY ONLY ONE PERSON IS LIABLE.

******

The deal is still open.

ako nlay makig deal nimo bro.. money down pa.. now na.. agad2x.. 2x sa imong offer..

ayko ingna kani mga haters dri, di gyud ni sila mo supporta sa abnoy.. pahalag mgka muritsing ang nasod.. Gibo baya ni sila ha..