ABOGADO: Is the Senate overstepping its constitutional bounds in the imp...

Gas Lighting

Gaslighting is a slang word for making someone question their sanity or their powers of reasoning.

When someone suggests that you are losing your mind (that may not be his real intention) ... but he makes you question your mental health ... teases you that you are forgetful and you don't hear well and your eyes are failing you... and accuses you that you are oversensitive and over-emotional ... that is the start of the vicious cycle of gaslighting.

The gaslighter often tricks you to make you uncertain about what is real and what is not. So when he says, pointing to the sky, "Look ... what was that ... and you said 'it is an airplane" and he insists "that was Superman," he was there to confuse you.

He was there invalidating what you saw ... contesting your feelings ... and in some part challenging your point of view.

The origin of the phrase began when a stage play was performed under the same title, GAS LIGHT. It is a story of a husband trying to drive his wife crazy by dimming the lights (which were powered by gas) in their home, and then he later denies that the light changed when his wife points it out.

Back to the topic ... people who gaslight feed you with lies, and the victim is aware that they are being lied to. The gaslighter's main concern here is how they were able to inject some kind of doubt into the person, doubting their REALITY when the incident is crystal clear and lucid, and they have seen everything en toto and heard enough.

Telling the victim their eyes and ears are not reliable is the start of the abusive template, and when the victim shows signs that they are wobbling in their position, especially with what they saw and heard, gaslighting is up for a good start.

I know of somebody who is quite savvy with gaslighting as a child (although I doubt if he knew what he was doing ... he was only seven then.) He woke up one December morning ... and I said: "Where are you going?" and he told me that he was going to attend and serve in the MASS."

Doubting what he is up to, I also went to church just to find out. I personally chose the seat in the last pew. He was not serving in the mass (I can see the acolytes in front from where I sit) ... and then I heard a familiar laughter at the back of the church ... it was him together with his friends. The REALITY was ... he woke up early to meet with his friends, and not because he became a holy convert that morning.

He told me lies ... and what was worse was ... he believed his lies. He looked me in the eyes, without batting an eyelash despite the blatant lies ... he maintained his claim that he served in the mass.

Pwede ba yon? Nagiging acolyte siya that morning pero hindi ko siya nakita sa harap ng altar ... kundi sa pintoan ng simbahan?

Bakit hindi na lang aakuin na sigi na nga ... nahuli mo ako. I woke up this early to be with my friends. Bakit kailangan paglaruan pa ako at questionin kung ano ang nakita at narinig ko?

And why do I have to question my sanity or my visual and hearing acuity .... or ask myself, was I dreaming (eh maliwanag pa sa tanghaling tapat ang chronology ng mga pangyayari??

At ako naman bakit kailangan maniwala ako sa sinabi niya ... eh ang nakita at narinig ko ay taliwas lang naman sa kung ano ang gusto niyang paniwalaan ko at kung ano ang gusto niyang palabasin.

And here's the twist of the story: I don't know what gaslighting was back then. But despite seeing that he was there at the back of the church with friends, I did not see him in front of the altar, either.

The REALITY was he did not ... but he succeeded in making me let go of the story by making me doubt and question my REALITY ... my sanity ... and my senses! Was I dreaming ... I painfully asked myself while rubbing my eyes (or in Tagalog, namamalik-mata ba ako?)

Having earned more units in General Psychology, Abnormal, Cognitive, Developmental, and Physiological Psychology, I taught Mental Hygiene and Psychiatry at the university and followed up with students in Psychiatric hospitals ... I can't believe a seven-year-old child has done that number to me.

Definition

Word: Stepping Stones

Definition: Sila yong mga taong inaapakan mo para umangat ang buhay. 

Sila yong mga taong ginagamit mo para maisakatuparan ang iyong mga pangarap.

Mas maraming tinatapakan ... more chances of succeeding.

Kidding aside ... a person who uses others for their own gain without genuine concern for the relationship is often referred to as a manipulator or exploiter. Other terms that might apply include:

• Opportunist: Someone who takes advantage of situations or people for personal gain.
• User: A more informal term for someone who exploits others for their benefit.
• Narcissist: In some contexts, this term is used to describe individuals who have an excessive interest in themselves and often manipulate others to fulfill their own needs.

Ideally, a relationship (such as a boyfriend-girlfriend or parent-child relationship) should be a two-way street. However, some parties can use the other for their self-interest, and they give nothing back. 

Relationships should be mutually beneficial. Both parties should feel valued and respected.

But in the giant chessboard called life, people are either tools to be used ... or obstacles to be removed.

This is the other kind of stepping stone - FYI

Pageant Result: Mister Supranational 2025

The winners of Mister Supranational 2025 from left to right: Kenneth Cabungcal - Philippines - Fourth Runner Up, Zuemerik Veeris - Curacao- First Runner Up, Swann Lavigne - France - Mister Supranational 2025- Winner, Michael Mazi- Nigeria - Third Runner Up, and Mauricio Calvo -Mexico - Second Runner Up. The pageant was held at the Strzelecki Park Amphitheater in Nowy Sącz, Poland, on 28 June 2025.

Netizen's Reaction

There is one photo of Hari that is soon to become viral, and commenters have a field day giving their two cents' worth, ranging from snide remarks to taunting or poking fun at the image.

I am not really sure kung legit at totoo ang photo.  Sa Europe ba yan? At saan naman niya nakuha ang mga sampaguita at mistulang nasa Quiapo lang siya. 

At bakit nakashort lang si Hari Ruki (it almost rhymes with harakiri - a ritual suicide by disembowelment with a sword practiced in Japan as an honorable alternative to disgrace or execution), knowing how image conscious he was, and he was never seen in a get-up like this in public places?

At bakit may tapal sa tuhod? Salonpas ba yon? Or naglalakad pa siya sa simbahan ng paluhod? Or hindi na niya makayanan ang lamig sa the Hague Netherlands (kung doon nga kinunan ang photo? Or gawang AI na naman ito?

Anyway, totoo man or gawa-gawa lang, the netizens were not reticent at walang preno ang kanilang bibig at keyboard sa paganalyze ng image.

Some comments were funny ... some scathing (although I hate stepping on the dying dog) ... some of their one-liners deserved to be preserved in this blog for posterity.

For their originality and tongue-in-cheek fashion, the comments were created with the intention that they will be valued and remembered by people in future generations. Here are some of the comments. 

-W.R - Hindi mo makuha sa dasal ang sitwasyon mo ngayon Roque. Kahit lumakad ka pa ng paluhod. Kasi panay din ang labas sa bunganga mo  ng masamang pananalita at kasingalingan.

- B.T - Kunyari lang yan. Gusto lang niyan ang sympathy ... eh, you can't hear remorse in him.

-B.L. Nakapasok ang demonyo sa simbahan?

-C.L. - Kawawa naman. Sana bunganga na lang ang tinapalan.

-A. J. - He wants to look religious ... and the image highlights the fact that he has no one to turn to.

-R.R - May rayuma na?

-R.A. - Photo ops lang.

-F.A. - May tapal sa 2 tuhod ... posas na ang kasunod.

-A.C. - Kung pumasok sa simbahan dapat ikumpisal na ang lahat ng kasalanan ... for your peace of mind. Confession na nga ... magabogado ka pa?

-B.N. - Pag-uwi niyan sigurado naka-wheelchair ... at naka neck brace.

-U.V. - Dapat bibig ang tapalan ... ang baho ng lumalabas ... nakakasuka.

1. 

   

   

   

.Eh bakit may tapal ... or salonpas pa sa tuhod

Dismissing An Impeachment Case Is Immoral and Unconsitutional

The scheme that one senator-judge will motion to dismiss the impeachment case against the VP is highly irregular, immoral, and unconstitutional ... that is, according to one legal luminary who did not flinched his eyes when he said that.

He further stated that you could not find a court in the world where a judge would advocate and propose the dismissal of the case.

The impeachment needs to be TRIED and HEARD. No senator should make any motion to dismiss ... motion to acquit ... or motion to convict without a hearing or trial.

 Simply put, you could not acquit or convict the VP without considering the testimonies and evidence presented during the impeachment inquiry.

Any senator worth their salt should know that. For isn't that the most basic thing a senator should know? Pwede ka bang mag-acquit or dismiss ng ganon-ganon na lang, Conversely hindi din pwede mag-sentence ng conviction na wala man lang trial and litigation.

So it is high time that the Senate ay umopo na at pakinggan ang ebidensya at saka magpasiya - whether to give the VP the clean bill of health ... or gnash her teeth after being laid off.

Wala na ang Senate ng dahilan para hindi ituloy ang paglilitis.

Hindi na puede idahilan at mamilosopo pa ang liderato ng Senado na "sigi ipakita mo sa amin kung saan parte ng Constitution mabasa na merong nagbabawal sa mga senador na gagawa ng motion to dismiss katulad ng ginawa ni Bato.

 "Sigi ipakita ninyo ng magkalaman na na bawal gumawa ng ganoon motion ang isang senator judge?"

That was funny and full of ignorance. Diba dapat ang NASASAKDAL lang (Si VP Inday yon) ang dapat magfile ng motion to dismiss ... so by very nature that the Senate act as impeachment court ... bawal kahit sino mang hukom o kahit sino man sa mga Senador ang gumawa ng ganyang mga motion. 

Kung nabubulagan lang sila dahil kaibigan nila si Inday at hindi sila nagiisip ... lantaran na at inaamin nila na mga Senador sila ng mga Duterte at hindi senador ng bayan. 

"A judge never moves to dismiss ... it is one of the parties who moves to dismiss ... never the judge.

It is the judge who rules on the motion to dismiss ... kung pagbigyan o hindi.

Pero sa aking pananaw MALI ang pagbiyan ang motion to dismiss kasi ang utos ng Saligang Batas ay PAKINGGAN ang kaso."

What's In A Name?

The phrase "What's in a name?" suggests that a name is just a label and doesn't define the true essence or value of something or someone.  It implies that the inherent qualities of a person, place, or thing are more important than the name itself. 

This phrase is famously from William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, where Juliet argues that Romeo, despite being a Montague (an enemy family), is still the same person she loves.

Does the name of the school matter? In our feature today, who are we to question and shade the people in the community or the teachers and students of the school, who really have nothing to do with where the name came from?

It is preposterous and absurd to see and hear netizens making snag comments like "huwag pagaralin dito ang mga anak ninyong babae ...: or "pag-graduate ng bata manyakis na lahat ... or Guys dalhin ninyo ako dito ... this is where I belong!"

It is really unfair if netizens think the school breeds aberrant behaviors, and is populated by loony psychopaths, fruitcakes, and nut cases.

Of course, we know that the commenters were just joking ... or they are just trying their goddam best to make cute remarks and statements para mapansin.

But to the people who are directly or indirectly connected with the school ... may isang KUROT at KIROT silang naramdaman every time people tease and make fun of the name.