Saturday, November 30, 2013

USA basically told Philippine government to accept New China Sea Map

Nice to see the USA acting tough vs China on Senkaku, but China knows USA goes out of it's way to avoid China. On the contested area of Scarboroagh Shoal, here's what the USA quietly told the Philippine government.

If you even have half an understanding of what is going on with China vs Philippines on Spratlys and Scarborough, you'd find out the current US president is no reagan or thatcher.

U.S to PH: stop anti-China rhetorics


Many , including high-ranking Philippine officials, like to think that increased presence of American military in the Philippines, which is a subject of talks between the two countries starting today, is a commitment by the Americans to defend the Philippines in case of an armed conflict in the West Philippine Sea, where a number of islands are being claimed wholly or partly by the Philippines, Brunei, China,Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam.

Those who have taken these view will be disappointed because the U.S has taken a neutral position in the conflicting claims in the South China Sea (part of it is referred to as West Philippine Sea) and has always been consistent in urging for a peaceful resolution of the conflicting claims.

The Obama administration has decided to rebalance its military forces from Middle East to Asia, in what is seen by analysts as a move to contain China’s hegemony in the region.

Primarily, the U.S. wants to ensure that the sealanes are open and unhampered for international navigation.

But as former UN Representative Lauro Baja, Jr. observed, the Americans do not want to ‘vulgarize’ this objective.

In increasing its presence in Asia, the United States does not want to play referee to countries fighting over islands, rocks and shoals. “They want a stable region. They don’t want to prejudice their strategic relations with China, which is more important than claims over rocks and shoals,” Baja said.

In preparation for the implementation of their Pivot to Asia policy, senior American officials have been coming here the past months and assessing the situation. One thing that they were concerned about is the tension between the Philippines and China over the disputed islands especially Bajo de Masinloc otherwise known as Scarborough Shoal or Panatag shoal and lately the Ayungin shoal.

The Philippines has filed a suit with the UN Arbitral Court questioning China’s nine dash-line, which encompasses the whole South China Sea including several countries’ territories.

A source said some of the analysts interviewed by American officials said that the “Shame China” strategy of the Department of Foreign Affairs under Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario has contributed largely to the deteriorating relations between the Philippines and China.

Del Rosario has, several times accused China of “duplicity and intimidation.” MalacaƱang spokesperson Edwin Lacierda has also made sure that he is not behind in China-bashing.

A US Marine Corps helicopter and Navy LCAC vehicle approach USS Essex during Balikatan 2009

A US Marine Corps helicopter and Navy LCAC vehicle approach USS Essex during Balikatan 2009. From Exercise Balikatan Facebook.
In the 2010 and 2011 State-of-the Nation address by President Aquino, he had strong words against China.

In his 2011 SONA, Aquino, declared: “ There was a time when we couldn’t appropriately respond to threats in our own backyard. Now, our message to the world is clear: What is ours is ours; setting foot on Recto Bank is no different from setting foot on Recto Avenue.”

He was referring to the disputed Recto or Reed Bank near Palawan.

In his 2012 SONA, he talked lengthily about the situation in Bajo de Masinloc. He said, “We demonstrated utmost forbearance in dealing with this issue. As a sign of our goodwill, we replaced our navy cutter with a civilian boat as soon as we could. We chose not to respond to their media’s harangues. I do not think it excessive to ask that our rights be respected, just as we respect their rights as a fellow nation in a world we need to share.

“There are those who say that we should let Bajo de Masinloc go; we should avoid the trouble. But if someone entered your yard and told you he owned it, would you agree? Would it be right to give away that which is rightfully ours?”

Aquino can be stubborn. But he listens to America. Last year,a month after he withdrew all the ships from Bajo de Masinloc, he, supported by the majority of the members of his cabinet, decided to send back the ships to the area which was by then already controlled by the Chinese. Upon learning of MalacaƱang’s decision, the U.S. relayed the advice through defense officials that it would not be wise to send back the ships to Bajo de Masinloc. The ships were not sent back.

Our source said, two weeks before the President’s State of the Nation address, U.S. officials advised the DFA and Malacanang to tone down their anti-China rhetorics to reduce tension in the region. That explains why in last month’s SONA there was no mention, not a word, about conflict with China.

Last Aug. 2, Del Rosario, who never let any media opportunity to censure China pass, told members of the foreign correspondents association in the country, that he was not keen on guesting in their forum on the South China Sea because he was “looking for a modus vivendi with China.”

China should thank Uncle Sam.

Friday, October 04, 2013

An Alternative Explanation for Jinggoy's 50 Mil PDAF

hindi ito related kay napoles kickback scam.

ito yung pdaf na na-release sa 2012 sa mga senators between october and december

==============

First off, hindi na kailangan i-bribe ni pnoy ang lahat ng senators na bumoto to convict corona. a majority of senators from PNOY's camp and those anti-GMA estrada camp don't need much convincing to remove GMA's biggest protector in the Supreme Court. Ironically, that would include Jinggoy EStrada, na kaaway ng mga Pidals.

so ito yung mga senator judges. let's categorize them. this is how they leaned before the trial started:
 
SURE or LEANING vote for Conviction: Alan Cayetano, Pia Cayetano, Drilon, Jinggoy, TG Guingona, Ping Lacson, Loren Legarda, Sergio Osmena, Kiko Pangilinan, Nene Pimentel, Antonio Trillanes, Enrile
Toss ups: Ed Angara, Escudero, Honasan, Tito Sotto, Manny Villar, Ralph Recto 

Likely to vote NO: Joker Arroyo, Miriam, Lito Lapid, Bongbong Marcos, Bong Revilla.

Toss up sila angara, Honasan, ralph recto, sotto at villar dahil dating anti-arroyo ang mga ito na naging pro-arroyo, and vice versa. (many thought villar was GMA's secret candidate in 2010, not gibo teodoro.) difficult to tell about escudero dahil opportunist ito. these guys don't need pork barrel to be convinced, but it doesnt hurt.

Among the Sure OR Likely NO, sila lito lapid at bong revilla ang "gettable" dahil mukhang balimbing ang mga ito (kung sino ang nasa Malacanang, doon sila). Mukhang "buyable".

and like i said, of all the senators, si jinggoy ang hindi na kailangang suholan dahil alam natin ang history ng pamilya niya with the arroyo's/pidals, and by extension GMA's right hand man during her VP days and in the Supreme Court.

so if i needed to bribe the senators, si lito lapid at bong revilla ang priority target ko. among the toss ups, escudero, honasan, sotto may need some grease money. villar is too rich to be bought and he seems to want to rehab his image (stealth GMA prez candidate) by letting her wife run under the PNOY ticket in 2013. angara and recto looks persuadable without resorting to pork.

pero ang nangyari is almost everybody who voted for conviction got some sort of PDAF. sa tingin ko, hindi ito bribe. it's more like rewarding your allies a doing a good job post impeachment, even if many of the SURE convict senators didnt ask for a PDAF bonus. those who voted NO werent denied their pork, but they didnt get additional PDAF bonus.

Nobody was denied their pork (some "self-denied")

even joker who voted NO was given 47 Million for his pet projects in 2013.
Conclusion: it wasnt a bribe, more like a christmas bonus directed at his coalition for doing the right thing.

but having said that, i'm still with ping lacson, abolish all forms of pork in the future. :D

Saturday, August 17, 2013

Thoughts on Hillary, Rubio and Ted Cruz

1) Rubio will be a much better GOP opponent against Hillary than the more combattive Ted Cruz. Cruz would have been great against Obama in 2012 where energizing and turning out the (angry) base is important. Against Hillary (female candidate), that might not work. Rubio OTOH, could duplicate what Obama did in 2008 vs Hillary and run on Hope and Change against the partisan and racially divisive Obama administration and Democratic Party. Do the voters want 4 more years of divisive, polarized politics under Obama-Clinton? Rubio has better credibility running as a non-divisive candidate over Ted Cruz.

In short: You go to war with Ted Cruz. You unite the country with Marco Rubio.

2) Only way Rubio has a shot at the 2016 nomination is if the Gang of 8 bill fails, and he proposes a better plan that is palatable to the base. Hopefully, something like this one.

Sunday, August 11, 2013

How Illegal Immigration in the USA got worse after 1982

Ezra Klein wrote:


After passage of a comprehensive immigration law in 1986, the U.S. began militarizing the border with Mexico even as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and, later, the North American Free Trade Agreement strengthened economic ties with Mexico. From 1986 to 2000, trade with Mexico increased eightfold....

 According to Massey, the rise of America’s large undocumented population is a direct result of the militarization of the border. While undocumented workers once traveled back and forth from Mexico with relative ease, after the border was garrisoned, immigrants from Mexico crossed the border and stayed.

“Migrants quite rationally responded to the increased costs and risks by minimizing the number of times they crossed the border,” Massey wrote in his 2007 paper “Understanding America’s Immigration ‘Crisis.’” “But they achieved this goal not by remaining in Mexico and abandoning their intention to migrate to the U.S., but by hunkering down and staying once they had run the gauntlet at the border and made it to their final destination.”

 Many Illegals did choose to stay in the USA after 1986, but NOT because of the "militarized border." These people would still go home if their families and kids were still in Mexico. And the so-called "militarized border" is still porous to this day, so not exactly that difficult to come in and out of the country illegally.

But the Supreme Court did decide on Plyler v Doe in 1982, giving non-US born children of illegal aliens free access to US K-12 Public Education. This allowed the indigent migrant worker the option to finally be able to bring their children to the USA and not worry about the cost of private education in the USA. And if you bring the kids, might as well bring the wifey too to look after them.

So question to Ezra Klein, why would the migrant worker self-deport back to Mexico if his family are already in the States and his children enrolled in LAUSD?

Again, it's not the fence. it's plyler v doe. if the mexicans want an amnesty deal, plyler v. doe needs to be overturned first for future illegals.

Saturday, June 22, 2013

How to solve USA's Illegal Immigration Nightmare

1) First, eliminate access to free K-12 public school education for future illegal aliens. This should be minimum required for any immigration reform. Plyler v Doe + Schumer-Rubio guest worker program simply won't work.

2) No more automatic citizenship for children born in the U.S. to 2 non-American parents. Move to Jus Sanguinis. Plug that anchor baby loophole.

3) Once both are done, I would give legal residency and work permits for qualified young adult "Dreamers" who are not recent arrivals. No limits will be placed on the types of jobs they can apply for. 

4) Have a guest worker program with Mexico limited to agriculture sector and those who want to work as nannies/maids.

5) Temporary means temporary. Low Skilled Guest workers should not be given permanent residency if the guest worker program is to work for USA. 

Related: How Illegal Immigration got worse in the USA after 1982.

2 Fox Pundits Against, 1 For the Schumer-Rubio Bill

While Charles Krauthammer and Sean Hannity seems to be against this current bill, Bill O'Reilly has supported it (after getting a call from Marco Rubio.)

Video of Bill O'Reilly supporting the bill (watch both videos).

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Why GOP could lose House in 2014 if Ocho Amnesty Bill passed

Many of the GOP's base will be demoralized and angry by Republican stupidity to show up in 2014. I myself noticed that the Ocho Guest Worker Program allows the temporary worker to bring their family and children to the USA. Compare that to how Hong Kong handles their guest workers. Tell me which one is more effective and which one is stupid.

Oh, but you say, this is just a short term hit, long term this will benefit the Republicans, right? Wrong. This stupid deal adds more Democrats to their voter rolls.

But the worst thing about this deal is that it won't stop a repeat of another wave of illegal immigration. It just presses the reset button.

Saturday, April 20, 2013

My Alternative to the Ocho Plan

 that is not reliant on border security with Mexico.

  1. First, eliminate access to free K-12 public school education for future illegal aliens. (If USA is serious about curbing illegal immigration, stop providing free stuff to non citizen illegals. Prop 187 pls)
  2. No more automatic citizenship for children born in the U.S. to 2 non-American parents. (ie plug the anchor baby loophole)
Once these two are accomplished first, then we can talk about amnesties and legalization.

As long as there are democrats, you cannot rely on them to secure the borders.