Sang ayon ba mo na ma-impeach si Pangulong Aquino?

[Nardskey]

Sa gina ingon ko unsay nagsugdan tiwason nalang jud, kay kun magpirme ta ani wala tay kapaingnan tanan. Walaman siguroy impeachable offense ang gihimo ni pinoy. Ang media raman siguro ang nag hisgot ug impeach dayun sakyan dayun sa kadaghanan para modako ang issue.

[æRLO]

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.

politically motivated or not, any kind of pork barrel mechanism is unnecessary, and only welcomes to be exploited. It seems whoever wrote that statement is very ill-informed about how the government works.

There is a reason why congress has to authorize appropriations for the budget, as that is how the 3 co-equal branches works.

There is a reason why the president has his/her "hands tied" when we're talking about the budget--and that is ensured by our constitution, as faulty as it is.

There is a reason we have annual GAAs that have to be authorized by the Congress. Because if an appropriation is not deliberated and authorized beforehand, chances are it is susceptible to corruption.

Quite simply, bisan pa ug good ang intention sa pork or discretionary funds, it is superfluous and very exploitable. With regards to the president not having the funds readily, that's how a constitutional democracy works. Yes, it's slow and not very efficient, but if people believe that it's the reason things aren't being done, then maybe they should urge for a change in government type. I personally would like an authoritarian one. You give the right person unlimited power and we won't have these problems--pero goodluck nalang sa pag pangita aning "Mr. Right".

[Vietcong696]

before you say such words ... kindly read this thread in it's entirety ... https://www.istorya.net/forums/politi...oy-aquino.html

we only had a break from all the "rational discussion".

besides, aren't the people in the Palace acting as kids too ??

mas walay buot paman gani mga senator ug congressman

You don't get the point, To my understanding you are just jaded and somewhat became irrational because of the callousness brought upon by the ailing republic... We all are jaded, but it ain't a justification to be childish. Politics will forever be a cesspool, we all gotta deal with that. Egos will clash period but who do really cares about our republic is the question that we should ask. It seems you really hate aquino, ok but a word of advice hate can impair judgement

[hax!]

Kining mga impeachment2x ba mura nigara naman sad nuon mga tawo ani. Too much democracy kills a nation.

Naa lang makit'an buslot hala impeach2x na.

Pero ug ilahang mga manok gani naay mga bangag pa bungol2x lang. LAWL.

i agree ani. murag ang mga taw nakisabay pud sa panahon nga gamay ra gani nga sayop sa presidente impeach2 daun murag ga sabay2 gani sa uso. honestly lang pud sa though wala ko kaabot sa uban nga mga presidente pero ang mga taw puro rajud reklamo mao pud nay isa sa rason nganu maglisod ta ug lambo kay d ra gani ta maka uyon dli nata mo try ug nindot ba ug outcome mag una ta ug reklamo.

[johnjob]

Gasto na kau ug i-impeach si pnoy.unya way klaro kay iya ang senate,house,sc, ombudsman.Gawas kung mukalas ug suporta ang AFP kana nuon katuohan pa.

[peewee_toot]

Naa lang makit'an buslot hala impeach2x na.

Pero ug ilahang mga manok gani naay mga bangag pa bungol2x lang. LAWL.

ma igo baya c noy2x ani. look at what happened sa iyang mga kontra sa politika... GMA, corona, etc. diba na pap-ha.

pero kung memebro gani sa iyang KKK, aw, pa buta-bungol jud dayun.

[jack_bauer_v2]

politically motivated or not, any kind of pork barrel mechanism is unnecessary, and only welcomes to be exploited. It seems whoever wrote that statement is very ill-informed about how the government works.

There is a reason why congress has to authorize appropriations for the budget, as that is how the 3 co-equal branches works.

There is a reason why the president has his/her "hands tied" when we're talking about the budget--and that is ensured by our constitution, as faulty as it is.

There is a reason we have annual GAAs that have to be authorized by the Congress. Because if an appropriation is not deliberated and authorized beforehand, chances are it is susceptible to corruption.

Quite simply, bisan pa ug good ang intention sa pork or discretionary funds, it is superfluous and very exploitable. With regards to the president not having the funds readily, that's how a constitutional democracy works. Yes, it's slow and not very efficient, but if people believe that it's the reason things aren't being done, then maybe they should urge for a change in government type. I personally would like an authoritarian one. You give the right person unlimited power and we won't have these problems--pero goodluck nalang sa pag pangita aning "Mr. Right".

bro, maybe somehow you are also ill-informed with how the national government works viz executive.. yes while its true congress needs to nod for mational budget it is also true that presidents are given discretion.. i just cant think of any reason why you are not in agreement to manager-prresident analogy..

if the president is not a manager then why is it that fund releases need DBM approval?

change government form? dont you think almost all government works in a manager discretion scheme viz budget?

[æRLO]

bro, maybe somehow you are also ill-informed with how the national government works viz executive.. yes while its true congress needs to nod for mational budget it is also true that presidents are given discretion.. i just cant think of any reason why you are not in agreement to manager-prresident analogy..

if the president is not a manager then why is it that fund releases need DBM approval?

I guess you don't know what the GAA is for, silly. The DBM can approve of fund releases, granted that it follows the budget appropriation from Congress.

change government form? dont you think almost all government works in a manager discretion scheme viz budget?

read the constitution, then tell me what the executive branch can and cannot do. Not all governments work the same way with regards to budgeting.

[jack_bauer_v2]

^hehe... i have been well informed of how the GAA works.

[Nefarian]

Uploaded with ImageShack.com