Finishing one's college degree is not a guarantee or manifestation that an individual overcome drug addiction and i know that for a fact.Originally Posted by ajol
Finishing one's college degree is not a guarantee or manifestation that an individual overcome drug addiction and i know that for a fact.Originally Posted by ajol
Originally Posted by arnie121
logical thinking! ...and this has always been the way i perceive things in this country. puro bitaw na sila guilty, adto na lang ko sa na'ay agi, bahala na lang kinsa ang mas dako ug kickback.
Well you can do a drug test to be scientific about it.Originally Posted by LytSlpr
In a competetive US University. If you get hooked into drugs.... I don't know how you can mix using drugs and studying to get a passing mark... maybe you stop for a year and get rehabilitated and go back to the university to continue
But continuing to use drugs and still getting decent grades.....
or you can still continue using drugs and just do 1 or 2 subjects per semester....
But a full load for a semester and still doing drugs.... I don't think there is someone who can do that feat....
It would be better if you can state what college degree was finished by this person who is a drug addict that you know for fact and how long did it take for this person to get that degree.
I need to know to be able to understand how a continuous drug addict can finish a four year course without any extensions
But if you will tell me he/she got a college degree in 8 years or more eventually still on drugs.... I will say that is one die hard addict.
since you said "Finishing one's college degree is not a guarantee or manifestation that an individual overcome drug addiction"
If the person was able to finish 1 semester with a full load (this only shows he can minimize drug use). I can say he overcame drug addiction(for 1 semester) but after school he became an addict again. Well that is a different scenario. At least the tuition money wasn't wasted for that semester since he passed.
Nothing wrong about what Luli said. The "personal attacks" were truth, not made up stories to destroy the person of Joey de Venecia. She just reacted to the expose of Joey that her father was involved. Nevertheless, even without Luli's statement about Joey I won't bother to listen more to whatever Joey has to say. It is obvious where he is coming from. He lost in the bid, remember?
What true colors of Luli? She is human like all of us, she has feelings ang emotions. If ever it was your father who was accused, would you not react immediately? That's just being natural.
OT: Sir, I personally know someone who became a lawyer hooked on drugs and never had a hitch in his studies also some people who became nurses and are now abroad. My point is, though it is rare that a person can be successful "on drugs" but it is not impossible.Originally Posted by ajol
tsk2x...
luli still has to learn the ropes...sooner or later she would learn to play by the rules...
it shows lang na bata pa c luli..^_^...ehehhe..
She just told the truth. Joey admitted to it anyway. Below the belt but, forgivable. She's not a politician. She was just being a daughter. Human, with feelings entitled to mistakes and not media savvy.
As for Mike and Joey - MGA PLUNDERERS ! kuyog mo ni ERAP!
depensa ra to siya sa iyahang amahan. natural ra to iyahang reaction. bisan ako naman siguro. bisan kinsa kung ato na ganing ginikanan hilabtan naaaah! gawas ug kung pirmi ka kulatahon sa imo amahan, kana dili gyud na molaban ang anak.
the issue here is NOT whether de Venecia Jr was a past drug user, or if his hairline is receding. these are irrelevant issues to the accusations presented.
other than obvious ad hominem statements, Luli Arroyo coming up with the aforementioned issues against de Venecia Jr. were not meant as an answer to the latter's accusations, but as red herring statements meant to divert attention.
but are they relevant to de Venecia Jr.'s accusations? definitely not. ask any lawyer.
one should not be too dumb to see that.
What we call chaos is just patterns we haven't recognized. What we call random is just patterns we cant decipher. What we can't understand we call nonsense. What we can't read we call gibberish. - Chuck Palahniuk
Similar Threads |
|