Skip to main content

No Acquittal For Leila Dilemma's MASSIVE FAILURE OF THE MIND In Defending The 1987 Constipation

Leila Dilemma was finally cleared of all charges by the Regional Trial Court. Today is also the third death anniversary of Noynoy Aquino. However, we need to look at it that if it took SEVEN YEARS to prove Dilemma's innocence (which I doubt she's fully innocent) -- she needs to ask herself the question, "WHY DID IT TAKE SEVEN YEARS?" Dilemma was arrested during the time of former president Rodrigo R. Duterte and was released during the regime of former crown prince turned President Bobong Marcos. It seems that the former crown prince of the Empire of Marcos has a hand in Dilemma's release. Dilemma is glad to be cleared of her charges. Dilemma is going to move against her nemesis Duterte. 

I'm afraid not so many Filipinos know or realize the difference between a parliamentary system and a presidential system. Some people still insist that the Empire of Marcos is a parliamentary system. Take for example -- the IMBECILE Jason VOORHEES who commented in the Get Real Philippines comment section -- still insisting that the Empire of Marcos was really a parliamentary system. Is Jason VOORHEES stupid or just plain manipulative? Is that Jason a paid Yellowtard troll or what? I can't be sure but I'd just assume he's just another moron who believes that the Empire of Marcos was a parliamentary system. Never mind that details from people like the late Ninoy Aquino and the late Lee Kuan Yew point out it. Lee even pointed out his meeting with Cesar Virata. Virata was described to be a NON-STARTER for taking over the Philippines. Virata was NO LEADER either. How's that for a parliamentary system? Jason VOORHEES still refuses to get it -- dismissing Lee Kuan Yew and still sticking to his narrative, "DA EMPIRE OF MARCOS WAZ A PARLIAMENTARY, COS THERE WUZ A PRIME MENESTER AND HIS NAME WAZ CEZAR VERATA!" 

Just thinking about Facts First PH -- is it really all that reliable? I don't believe in an infallible fact-checker. Dilemma was invited to talk over with Atty. Christian Esguerra. I decided to Google for Dilemma's stand on charter change. This is what I found on the Internet and it shows her MASSIVE FAILURE OF THE MIND:

“Hindi Konstitusyon ang may kasalanan kung bakit mabagal ang pag-unlad ng sektor ng Agrikultura at Edukasyon (na kung maaalala ng lahat ay siyang ‘tinutukan’ ng dalawang pinakamataas na opisyal ng pamahalaan). Ang dapat unahin: Mas matatag na imprastruktura, tapat na mga pinuno at mapagkakatiwalaang mga institusyon,” giit ni De Lima.

“Alam ng bawat Pilipinong mulat at makatotohanan kung sino ang tunay na naetsapuwera matapos ang EDSA Revolution: Ang diktador at ang kanyang pamahalaang tadtad ng katiwalian at pang-aabuso.

“Binuo ang 1987 Constitution para pigilan ang anumang muling pagtatangkang umabuso at manatili sa poder. Dapat pagdudahan ang nasa likod ng basurang patalastas na ito at ang mga sabik na sabik at nagmamadaling baguhin ang Saligang Batas,” saad pa niya.

Really Leila? I guess Leila should still be called LIEla because of what she just said. Even if Dilemma is innocent of the drug charges trumped against her -- she's still having her failure of the mind. It seems Dilemma is treating the 1987 Constitution as some sacred divine revelation instead of a set of rules that need to be updated. Dilemma does speak a certain degree of truth about establishing a new constitution -- to replace the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines -- which was the very law of the Empire of Marcos. 

However, Dilemma is LYING when it comes to what she said that it's not the fault of the constitution that education and agriculture are slowed down. Okay, let's challenge Dilemma to check the NEGATIVE LIST OF THE PHILIPPINES this 2024 and explain this:

Up to 40% Foreign Equity

Procurement of infrastructure projects in accordance with Section 23.4.2.1(b), (c), and (e) of the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of RA. 9184

Exploration, development, and utilization of natural resources

Ownership of private lands, except for a natural-born citizen who has lost his Philippine citizenship and has the legal capacity to enter into a contract under Philippine laws. 

Operation of public utilities

Educational institutions other than those established by religious groups and mission boards, for foreign diplomatic personnel and their dependents and other foreign temporary residents, or for short-term high-level skills development that do not form part of the formal education system as defined in Section 20 of Batas Pambansa (BP) No. 232 (1982)

Culture, production, milling, processing, trading except retailing, of rice and corn and acquiring, by barter, purchase or otherwise, rice and corn and the by-products thereof, subject to a period of divestment.

Contracts for the supply of materials, goods, and commodities to Government-Owned and Controlled Corporation (GOCC), company, agency or municipal corporation 

Operation of deep-sea commercial fishing vessels

Ownership of condominium units

Private radio communications network

What Leila needs to explain is who in the right mind would rent a space if they were only allowed to own 40%r of their business?! I wouldn't rent a space if I had to give 60% of my profits and I was only allowed to hold 40% of my profits. Let me remind people that REVENUES ARE NOT PROFITS. Profits are only what's left when taxable income is DEDUCTED from tax payable. What's left after tax payable is the profit. Leila may want to explain what foreign company would want to invest in education and agriculture IF they had to look for a Filipino oligarch to do business with -- then split 60% with that oligarch? If no one in their right mind will rent if they can only own 40% of their business in that area -- the same goes for foreign investors!

If Leila is truly innocent of the drug charges -- by all means get her acquitted. If Duterte et al cooked charges against her falsely -- Leila has the right to press charges. However, I still feel that Leila can be charged with NEGLECT OF DUTY with what happened in Bilibid last 2014. Putting that aside -- the one thing Leila can't be acquitted of is her MASSIVE FAILURE OF THE MIND. Leila still defends the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines like it's so great. 

If the Liberal Party of the Philippines wants to have an OPPOSITION or BE THE OPPOSITION -- why not shift to a REAL parliamentary system? Just a bit of a question to them is if the Empire of Marcos was a real parliamentary (and Raissa Robles needs to answer that too) -- why did Ninoy even mention, "We have a parliamentary without a parliament!" in his Los Angeles speech? Later on, Ninoy and the late Salvador "Doy" Laurel challenged the LEGITIMACY of the Empire of Marcos. The 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was ILLEGAL! Revolution was the only way to get rid of it. 

In the parliamentary system -- two parties genuinely FACE OFF AGAINST EACH OTHER. Right now, the Liberal Party of the Philippines should be the Opposition not only in name but also in ACTION. The parliamentary system votes by parties. If Bobong is the prime minister then Leni Loud Robredo is the Opposition Leader. Since Leila is a member of the Liberal Party -- she can serve as one of Leni Loud's appointed Shadow Ministers. Bobong would have his own cabinet. Leni Loud would have her own cabinet. Leila's challenges to Bobong will not be in a separate press conference but in the Weekly Question Hour. Leila would debate against her equivalent from Bobong's cabinet.

A shame really that Leila had visits from European countries. Leila needs to see that Germany uses a parliamentary system. Leila needs to see that the American constitution has been amended several times. Why does Leila still defend the 1987 Constipation like as Hilarious Davide says it, "DA BEST IN DA WORLD!"? 

Comments