Re-Sharing: The Interview was last night, Manila/Beijing time, but on Dr. David O’s side in the U.S., it was early morning. Feel free to share as you like. I wish everyone a blessed weekend. Thank you 😊❤🙏 To Watch, click the link below: 👇👇 Link:

This is quite NOT a positive steps moving forward 👇😔

It’s official, according to the New York Times, China has the World’s Largest Economy, while the United States economy is the second-largest in the world. Indeed, in terms of nominal GDP, after China's economy, which is often considered the largest due to its rapid growth, despite its lower per capita GDP compared to the U.S. China’s economy has outpaced the U.S. in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP), which adjusts for differences in cost of living and inflation, making it the largest when measured by PPP. This ranking is often debated depending on the metrics used (nominal GDP vs. PPP). The shift toward China being the largest economy by certain standards (like PPP) reflects its growing economic influence, but in nominal GDP terms, the U.S. still holds the lead. The following are the Salient Points of the New York Times article: Economic Growth vs. Quality of Life: The article seems to contrast the acceleration of the U.S. economy with the stagnation or decline in other areas of American life, such as healthcare, education, and social mobility. Despite economic growth, large portions of the population are experiencing a deterioration in their quality of life. This phenomenon could be tied to increasing inequality, where the benefits of a booming economy are disproportionately going to the wealthy, while the majority of citizens face rising costs and stagnant wages. Rising Inequality: Since the 1990s, the prosperity gap between the wealthiest Americans and the rest of the population has significantly widened. The wealthiest individuals and corporations have seen considerable growth in their assets and influence, while the middle and lower classes struggle with wage stagnation, inflation, and increased costs of living, making it harder to achieve upward mobility. Social and Structural Gaps: The gap between economic success and quality of life might be reflective of systemic issues—such as healthcare access, housing affordability, and educational outcomes—that continue to undermine the well-being of many Americans despite overall economic growth. These structural problems, which have worsened in recent decades, can prevent individuals from fully benefiting from a strong economy. Policy and Governance: The article could likely touch on the role of policy decisions in exacerbating or failing to address these disparities. It may discuss how certain policies, whether regarding taxation, healthcare, or labor laws, may have inadvertently contributed to widening the divide, benefiting corporations and the wealthy while leaving others behind. Conclusion: The article suggests that economic growth, while essential, is not enough to guarantee improved quality of life for all citizens. A holistic approach that addresses systemic inequalities—through better access to healthcare, education, affordable housing, and fairer economic policies—is crucial to bridging the gap between prosperity and the well-being of ordinary Americans. It might also emphasize the need for policies that ensure the benefits of economic growth are more broadly distributed across all segments of society. Link:

This 👇 showcases pinas

Here are my two cents on this issue: Context/Incident: The incident centers on a traffic violation involving an American driver who used the EDSA busway along Ortigas Avenue without a valid license. Following this, the driver made allegations of "Chinese spy tagging" or espionage. These claims led to the Chinese Embassy in Manila expressing shock and concern, with reference to the US Embassy staff in a traffic dispute with the Philippine National Police (PNP) traffic enforcers. Note that the EDSA busway, a dedicated lane for public transport, is reserved for the convoys of high-ranking government officials, including the President, Vice President, Senate President, House Speaker, and Chief Justice. Additionally, on-duty ambulances, fire trucks, and police vehicles are also permitted to use the busway. Unauthorized use by other vehicles is considered a traffic violation and is subject to penalties. Please refer to the video footage below from the Department of Transportation-Special Action and Intelligence Committee for Transportation (DOTr-SAICT) showing a Sport Utility Vehicle (SUV) with diplomatic plates from the American Embassy passing the busway on Ortigas Avenue. My Reaction: The incident involving a US Embassy staff member in Manila who flagrantly violated traffic laws while making unfounded allegations of "Chinese spy tagging" raises serious concerns regarding respect for Philippine laws and regulations. The US staff member's actions were marked by arrogance and aggression, showing a blatant disregard for local rules and a troubling lack of professionalism. Undoubtedly, the behavior of the two US Embassy staff in this incident reveals several issues, primarily concerning respect for local laws, diplomatic sensitivity, and the handling of public authority. The DISRESPECT for local laws by the said US Embassy staff in Manila was glaring and blatant. The core issue here is the apparent lack of adherence to the traffic regulations in PH, especially the use of the EDSA busway. Likewise, while the enforcer's actions might have raised questions about legality (photographing a passport), the immediate assumption that the enforcer could sell this information to "Chinese spies" highlights a lack of respect, cultural sensitivity, and a misunderstanding of the local law enforcement's authority and authorities. Also, the US Embassy staff project an overbearing diplomatic ENTITLEMENT. The idea that diplomatic staff can FLOUT, DISOBEY, or BREAK local laws without consequence just because they have diplomatic immunity is way overboard. While immunity ensures protection from unfair treatment, it should NOT BE AN EXCUSE for breaching the basic domestic laws of the host country. Furthermore, the response from the US Embassy, affirming that its staff is instructed to follow Philippine laws, is positive but INSUFFICIENT. Why? Precisely because, while the US Embassy's statement emphasizes adherence to local laws, the underlying attitude displayed by its staff reflects a problematic view of diplomatic immunity and local sovereignty. The incident serves as a reminder that diplomatic staff should be well-versed in the laws and customs of the host country and that respecting local regulations is crucial for maintaining positive international relations and avoiding the perception of superiority or entitlement. Note that all diplomatic missions, regardless of country, need to have a clear commitment to fully respect and follow local laws of the Philippines, especially in cases that involve public safety and law enforcement. Foreign diplomats and their staff should be held accountable if they violate the laws of the land while respecting their diplomatic privileges.

Stick to the plan ang peg??? 👇

Sharing: IN the unfolding "game of thrones" in the country's political landscape, on Feb. 5, the House of Representatives impeached Vice President Sara Duterte, a move that will undoubtedly be etched in the annals of Philippine political history. The impeachment, supported by 215 of 306 lawmakers, surpassed the one-third threshold required to proceed. Interestingly, the first to sign the impeachment complaint was Sandro Marcos, the son of the incumbent president. To cap it all off, the family tag team was completed with the final signature of House Speaker Martin Romualdez, President Marcos' cousin. This sequence of events paints a vivid picture of the Marcos-Romualdez political alliance's central role in orchestrating this outcome. The impeachment trial is set to proceed in the Senate after Congress reconvenes on June 2, 2025, following the midterm elections in May. A two-thirds majority vote (16 out of 24 senators) is required to convict and remove Duterte from office. If convicted, Duterte potentially would be permanently barred from holding any public office, effectively ending any future political aspirations. To continue reading, click the link below: TMT Link:

The Gangrenous Disease of Corruption in the Philippines: A Surgical Extraction. By: CG Admiral Joel S Garcia PCG (Ret.) Constitutional change is a must...we are presently ruled by the mob - the non-income tax payers - we are not ruled by the oligarchs, as they keep on saying that we are. During election time, the turn out of the total registered voters at an average is 75%, and approximately 60% of that 75% turn out are the non-income taxpayers, who most of them receive bribes (whether it be in pseudo legal means such as the ayuda gobledegook or thru illegal means whatever that may be) from the political candidates. They should not be allowed to vote. Our present electoral process is an evil system in the guise of upholding the Constitutional right to vote, but is actually indirectly destroying our democracy and economy. Most of the Senators, Congressmen, Governors, and Mayors, as well as their opponents, shell out at least, as a conservative estimate and at an average, a staggering amount of P500M each during election time to bribe the non-income taxpayers. The conservative estimate is at least P1.5T are used to just bribe voters. How will they recoup their "investment"? The answer is obvious. Link:

Indeed, God Saves the Philippines!! No matter what, whatever happens.. you have my support, VP. Stand tall and stand your ground! The fight isn't over yet. 💚

Indeed, God Saves the Philippines!!

As I said, and I will reiterate once more, the ball game on VP Impeachment is in the Senate, and mid-term term elections is very critical.

Mind you, this is a temporary delay.. The critical time will be after the May 2025 elections. Everything was orchestrated and calculated moves of those in power. The 2025 May elections is crucial. I guess, folks, you know what I mean by this. Be VIGILANT!

Here’s my two cents on the rolling Impeachment Case against PH VP Sara Duterte! This is a reminder and somewhat to enlighten the Filipino public to be VIGILANT! In the PH, impeachment is fundamentally a political process rather than a purely legal proceeding. While it may involve legal arguments and principles, its essence lies in the political will and maneuvering of those who control the legislature - both houses, the House of Representatives (HOR), and the Senate. This dynamic reflects both the design of the impeachment process under the 1987 Constitution and the broader political realities of the country's ever-backward politics. Note that the House of Representatives impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte carries significant political and legal implications for the Philippines. Since the HOR approved the articles of impeachment, the process moves to the Senate, which conducts a trial to determine VP Duterte’s guilt or innocence. A conviction in the Senate would result in Duterte's removal from office and her possible/potential impending lifetime disqualification from holding any public office. PH Constitution provides that key high-ranking officials, such as the President and Vice President, can only be removed from office through impeachment. This process is handled by the HOR and the Senate, both political bodies dominated by elected officials with their own political affiliations, interests, and allegiances. The impeachment process begins in the HOR where at least one member must endorse an impeachment complaint. If the House Committee on Justice finds the complaint sufficient in form and substance, it is deliberated and voted upon. A one-third vote of all House members is needed to transmit the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Given the highly partisan nature of PH politics, the decision to move forward with impeachment often depends on the political alignment of the HOR majority rather than on the legal merits of the complaint. Suppose the sitting president or a powerful political bloc controls the majority in the House. In that case, an impeachment complaint can be easily dismissed, regardless of the strength of the case, or can easily be passed no matter how wasted it is for lack of substance, proper documentary evidence, and merits. This is the crux and the irony of the kind of partisan, patronage, and personality-based politics in PH. Once the articles of impeachment reach the Senate, the senators act as judges. However, their votes are often influenced by their political interests, party affiliations, and public perception rather than purely legal arguments. The required two-thirds vote (16 out of 24 senators) to convict means that political calculations, such as alliances, public sentiment, and electoral implications, play a decisive role. If an impeachment move against Vice President Sara Duterte progresses to trial, the impeachment court would be composed of the Senate of PH, with all 24 senators acting as judges and the HOR as Prosecutors. Since impeachment in the Philippines is more political than legal, the outcome will largely depend on the composition of the Senate and their political alignments. Because PH politicians ultimately decide impeachment, it often becomes a weapon wielded by the ruling administration against its opponents or a shield used to protect allies. The process is not always about accountability but about consolidating or weakening power. Conclusion: In theory, impeachment in PH serves as a constitutional safeguard against abuse of power. In practice, however, it is dictated by political interests rather than legal merits. The fate of an impeached official is often determined by shifting alliances, public sentiment, and the calculations of those in power rather than by the strength of the evidence against them. This reality makes impeachment more of a political exercise than a true legal proceeding. #ProtecttheVP

The House of Representatives' impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte carries significant political and legal implications for the Philippines. If the House approves the articles of impeachment, the process moves to the Senate, which conducts a trial to determine her guilt or innocence. A conviction in the Senate would result in Duterte's removal from office and her possible/potential impending lifetime disqualification from holding any public office. #ProtecttheVP

👇👇