Our president

Jay D

President Mary McAleese has said people need to stop buying drugs if we want to put drug gang out of business.

She was speaking during a Late Late Show interview to mark her tenth year as President.

Mrs McAleese said it was a simple equation; sellers don't have a market unless they have buyers and people who buy the drugs are responsible for the sellers on the street.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1110/mcaleesem.html


who else thinks that she is nothing but a useless cow getting free holidays everywhere and talking complete ****e?

aidan_walsh

Hit a nerve did she? Buyer or seller?

Crucifix

Was she appealing to people to stop buying drugs, or saying we should crack down on drug buyers?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

or the government could stop criminalising it...

either way, I'm getting more today.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Jay D wrote: »

President Mary McAleese has said people need to stop buying drugs if we want to put drug gang out of business.

She was speaking during a Late Late Show interview to mark her tenth year as President.

Mrs McAleese said it was a simple equation; sellers don't have a market unless they have buyers and people who buy the drugs are responsible for the sellers on the street.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1110/mcaleesem.html


who else thinks that she is nothing but a useless cow getting free holidays everywhere and talking complete ****e?

A useless cow because she speaks the truth on this issue (its not rocket science ya know)?.

Or do you base your observations on something else?.

Because I personally have the highest respect for her office.

(Btw, your in Ashtown, jump over the fence and have it out with her yourself).

Jay D

I don't know whether you realise the precentage of people who are addicted to the drugs they buy - therefore making it extremely hard to kick the habit.

Other than that, these holidays to NZ etc with ****ty reasoning about trade relations etc. Also the fact she re-instated herself. Joke.

faceman

Jay D wrote:

who else thinks that she is nothing but a useless cow getting free holidays everywhere and talking complete ****e?

McAleese focuses more of her efforts abroad, rather than ireland unlike robinson. She is the longest serving, democratically elected female head of state in the history of world politics.

She does have a very old school catholic point of view of the world and has made controversial comments in the past.

However she regularly visits NI (she's from belfast) and does alot to bridge the gaps between the catholic and protestants communities. She was the first South of ireland political figure to attend a july 12th celebration in NI.

im not a fan of her either to be honest, but i think we can (and have done) far worse.

Terry

Jay D wrote: »

I don't know whether you realise the precentage of people who are addicted to the drugs they buy - therefore making it extremely hard to kick the habit.

Other than that, these holidays to NZ etc with ****ty reasoning about trade relations etc. Also the fact she re-instated herself. Joke.

Whose fault is it that they are addicted?


/waits for the inevitable 'alcohol, tobacco, caffiene are worse' bollox.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

well tobacco does kill far more people than any illegal drug, and alcohol does cost the state more money ... but yeah, damn junkies!!!!

arybvtcw0eolkf

Jay D wrote: »

I don't know whether you realise the precentage of people who are addicted to the drugs they buy - therefore making it extremely hard to kick the habit.

.

She may have come accross a little nieve but a person of her standing should make some kind of stand on drugs.

Her message is a simple, but true one.

Addict or just a muppet when you buy drugs on the street your funding gangland & people die. Junkies die, Dealers die, homes are robbed, neighbourhoods are destroyed (the list goes on) and each and every person who either buys or sells drugs on the street have a share of the blaim.

There's also a good argument for legalising drugs, but since the thread is about the president and not legalising drugs that discussion is for another thread I guess.

Terry

Mordeth wrote: »

well tobacco does kill far more people than any illegal drug, and alcohol does cost the state more money ... but yeah, damn junkies!!!!

More widely used and the taxes more than cover any medical expenses.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

so what you're saying is, tax heroin and try to get more people to use it.. excellent idea terry.

magick

drugs are bad mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmk?

Ronan|Raven

We have a president?

Terry

Mordeth wrote: »

so what you're saying is, tax heroin and try to get more people to use it.. excellent idea terry.

Not what I'm saying at all.
Niche groups get too much as it is.

Boggles

Ronan|Raven wrote: »

We have a president?

By the sounds of it, we must do. I don't remember voting for her?

Terry

I'm Ron Burgundy?

Jay D

Boggles wrote: »

By the sounds of it, we must do. I don't remember voting for her?

maybe cause there was NO ELECTION for the last appointment

JIZZLORD

ah, democracy at work...

faceman

faceman wrote: »

She is the longest serving, democratically elected female head of state in the history of world politics.

She wasn't democratically elected the last time.

is_that_so

The presidency up until Mary Robinson was about putting in old fogeys who were either retired politicians or liked golf. The two Marys turned it into the ambassadorial role that, IMO, it should be. We did vote for her ten years ago but as there was no real justification for the cost of a Presidential election (€1-2 million IIRC) which she would have won by a proverbial mile, she was reelected by the Dail. The consensus was and is, IMO , that she is doing a very fine job. I like her manner and her attempts to include everyone. That is her job.

I don't think she is in any way naive. It's not a terribly large leap from recreational drugs to the dealers. Whether people choose to agree with her is another thing. We all have our own reasons for taking positions on either side of the debate.

Gone West

I wouldn't underestimate the value of her going abroad and opening variou things, meeting people etc. It does generate a lot of money down the line and keeps the Irish PR machine rolling.

Moonbaby wrote: »

She wasn't democratically elected the last time.

Yes she was, as there were no other candidates. Her appointment fits in with most modern definitions of democracy. In fact, she *was* re-elected, just without contest.

is_that_so

Moonbaby wrote: »

She wasn't democratically elected the last time.

The option to re-elect a President is available to the Dail, who I am pretty sure are democratically elected. She was the only nominated candidate as her popularity of in excess of 80% meant a guaranteed whipping for any other candidate. So you should take it up with the parties who didn't bother putting up a candidate. The Job Spec

Boggles

is_that_so wrote: »

The option to re-elect a President is available to the Dail, who I am pretty sure are democratically elected. She was the only nominated candidate as her popularity of in excess of 80% meant a guaranteed whipping for any other candidate. So you should take it up with the parties who didn't bother putting up a candidate. The Job Spec

Or in other words, "Sure we couldn't be arsed going through an election, it doesn't really matter anyway lads, give it to that tall bird with the mullet again"

Boggles

FuzzyLogic wrote: »

I wouldn't underestimate the value of her going abroad and opening variou things, meeting people etc. It does generate a lot of money down the line and keeps the Irish PR machine rolling.


Yes she was, as there were no other candidates. Her appointment fits in with most modern definitions of democracy. In fact, she *was* re-elected, just without contest.

But is winning without contest, winning??

Boggles

"Powers and Functions
The formal powers and functions of the President are prescribed in the Constitution. The President, who does not have an executive or policy role, exercises them on the advice of the Government"

From the job description

is_that_so

Boggles wrote: »

But is winning without contest, winning??

If the other team doesn't show up and you get a walkover, it's still winning. The mechanism is there to allow for reelection and has been used very frequently. It's not always about winning. Given the role you would like to have someone good in the position , which she certainly is.

The presidency is a political appointment, based on candidacy but a position that is seen as being above politics.

faceman

Boggles wrote: »

But is winning without contest, winning??

of course it is, why do u think no one else put someone forward?

Boggles

faceman wrote: »

of course it is, why do u think no one else put someone forward?

Huh?

The Chessplayer

Jay D wrote: »

President Mary McAleese has said people need to stop buying drugs if we want to put drug gang out of business.

She was speaking during a Late Late Show interview to mark her tenth year as President.

Mrs McAleese said it was a simple equation; sellers don't have a market unless they have buyers and people who buy the drugs are responsible for the sellers on the street.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1110/mcaleesem.html


who else thinks that she is nothing but a useless cow getting free holidays everywhere and talking complete ****e?

I couldn't agree with you more. McAleese has further devalued the office of President. She really is no more than an insipid lecher - this self-styled Kofi Annan of Irish politics.

It's such a pointless role. All she does is cut ribbons at shopping centre openings, and make daft comments about "the island of Ireland" and "reconciliation".

I'd say she guffaws alot on holiday, with her lecherous husband, about the handy number that she has...and she didn't even have to face election for a second term because nobody gave a sh!te.

eirebhoy

I thought she came across very well on the late late last night.

mike65

I'd say she guffaws alot on holiday, with her lecherous husband, about the handy number that she has...and she didn't even have to face election for a second term because nobody gave a sh!te.

Is Mr McAleese a lech?

Mike.

Dave!

way-hay

Archeron

I'd do her. And at the end of the day, isnt THAT the important thing?

MagicMarker

Jay D wrote: »

President Mary McAleese has said people need to stop buying drugs if we want to put drug gang out of business.

She was speaking during a Late Late Show interview to mark her tenth year as President.

Mrs McAleese said it was a simple equation; sellers don't have a market unless they have buyers and people who buy the drugs are responsible for the sellers on the street.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1110/mcaleesem.html


who else thinks that she is nothing but a useless cow getting free holidays everywhere and talking complete ****e?

She's absolutely correct.

The Chessplayer

Archeron wrote: »

I'd do her. And at the end of the day, isnt THAT the important thing?

Are you joking me? She's about 60! She's got a head like a bag of hammers.

irishfeller

Jay D wrote:

President Mary McAleese has said people need to stop buying drugs if we want to put drug gang out of business.

Wow what words of wisdom! And she should have kept going to tell us how to sort out all the problems of Ireland:-

- All people have to do is stop getting sick to end the problems in the health service.
- All criminals need to do is stop commiting crime of end the problems in the justice system.
- All people need to do is stop driving cars to end the carnage on the roads.

Its all so obvious - why wasn't it thought of before - thanks Mary for pointing us in the right direction...

Wertz

Boggles wrote: »

The President, who does not have an executive or policy role...

She is a figurehead, not a policy maker. She signs off on constitutional amendments and such by the elected government, which is why IMO it is not her place to patter drug policy hyperbole. She is entitled to her opinion and Pat Kenny is entitled to ask her for it. Doesn't mean to say anyone has to listen to it.

I'll take this with the same grain of salt I took the archbishop's comments last week, the reason being I honestly couldn't give a f*ck; I refuse to be held accountable for my indirect actions or to hold any shared blame for gang violence in this country. I don't do or buy cocaine BTW, whose buyers are seemingly who all these comments are aimed at....but I do buy weed and the occasional pill.

I'm not getting into this whole "alcohol is legal and is worse" argument but if anybody wanted to you can easily turn around and blame drink for just as much crime, violence, suffering and injustice in Ireland as any of the hard drugs....and as ever since it's such a lucrative money spinner for so many people, both directly and indirectly, no-one will ever shake that particular boat.
Some alcohol users have no qualms about using crime to fund their habit if the need arises, fair enough it usually doesn't since drink is relatively cheap and easily available, but it does happen.
Then there's crime commited after drink has been imbibed....they may not be shooting people over 50 quid debts, but kicking the sh*te out of, and possibly killing someone for no good reason after a lock of pints is equally as wrong as someone being injured or killed by a firearm toted by a drug-user/dealer.
Post-alcohol effect also has much to answer for WRT low level crime, criminal damage, petty theft and public order.
But it's legal so not fair game for moral outrage...

Sam Vimes

Mairt wrote: »

She may have come accross a little nieve but a person of her standing should make some kind of stand on drugs.

Her message is a simple, but true one.

Addict or just a muppet when you buy drugs on the street your funding gangland & people die. Junkies die, Dealers die, homes are robbed, neighbourhoods are destroyed (the list goes on) and each and every person who either buys or sells drugs on the street have a share of the blaim.

There's also a good argument for legalising drugs, but since the thread is about the president and not legalising drugs that discussion is for another thread I guess.

this thread is about the president saying that people shouldn't be taking drugs because it fuels gangland crime. the sole reason it fuels gangland crime is that drugs are illegal, forcing people to want to take them to give money to criminals. i think the legalisation issue is extremely relevant to the thread

Steyr

She is a figurehead and chief of Staff of the Defence Forces and as a Soverign Nation what better way to show it than with a President. She has also done an awful lot about cross border relations and an all round great lady and Ambassador for this Nation.

keen

Jay D wrote: »

who else thinks that she is nothing but a useless cow

Would agree with that, just a figure head that doesn't really do anything of importance and spouts her opinions as if she is the wise one and we should all pay attention to her views, just an old woman really with no real job to do.

Jay D

FuzzyLogic wrote: »

I wouldn't underestimate the value of her going abroad and opening variou things, meeting people etc. It does generate a lot of money down the line and keeps the Irish PR machine rolling.


Yes she was, as there were no other candidates. Her appointment fits in with most modern definitions of democracy. In fact, she *was* re-elected, just without contest.

You have to call an election and then the ball rolls.

There was opposition to her move by members of Government

Boggles wrote: »

Or in other words, "Sure we couldn't be arsed going through an election, it doesn't really matter anyway lads, give it to that tall bird with the mullet again"

AngryBadger

Jay D wrote: »

who else thinks that she is nothing but a useless cow getting free holidays everywhere and talking complete ****e?

Ya had me until this sentence man. Don't go for mud-clinging against the opposition before even stating your case.

I disagree with Mary mcAleese on the drugs issue, I also happen to think there are far more important problems, and far more practical ways to solve them. but bad set-up dude.

AngryBadger

keen wrote: »

Would agree with that, just a figure head that doesn't really do anything of importance and spouts her opinions as if she is the wise one and we should all pay attention to her views, just an old woman really with no real job to do.

It's also her brief to refer any un-constitutional legislation for revision. And to be fair, every country needs "just a figurehead" to go to big important dinenrs and talk about the weather. Gives them someone to relate to. And that's kind of important if you want to communicate with other nations.

Overheal

Jay D wrote: »

I don't know whether you realise the precentage of people who are addicted to the drugs they buy - therefore making it extremely hard to kick the habit.

Other than that, these holidays to NZ etc with ****ty reasoning about trade relations etc. Also the fact she re-instated herself. Joke.

the vaster majority of substance abuse isnt addicting, so dont base your argument on that point. People make the choice to explore and quit these substances all the time: one of my friends tried pretty much all of it from the pills to the coke and now he barely smokes hashish. I cant even smoke the hashish anymore: it makes my lungs burn and my gag reflex go wild.

But thats getting somewhat off topic.

As far as McAleese being a figurehead - couldnt agree more. I must admit I don't even understand what her role in the government is at all except to stand on parade once in a blue moon and sign Bills. She could benefit a lot more from public appearance imho, but to come out and give advice like that and expect everyone to just respect it out of hand instead of sitting in their living room asking 'who the **** are you?' is a bit much.

Snarler

Her message is a simple, but true one.

Addict or just a muppet when you buy drugs on the street your funding gangland & people die

There is no logic to this. I don't want to buy my drugs from the gangs. I want to buy them legally from a reputable salesman but I can't. So its the government who are creating the gangs.

From now on this is will be considered the truth around here so no more crap blaming the users for the gangs.

kowloon

Feck it, we can always replace her, better than a monarchy.

DublinWriter

Mordeth wrote: »

well tobacco does kill far more people than any illegal drug, and alcohol does cost the state more money ... but yeah, damn junkies!!!!

Yes, damn those illegal drugs, they're so...untaxable.

tallaght01

To my mind, Jay D is the only one here to have grasped the issue properly.

To eradicate the heroin dealers, for example, you would have to cure all those users of their addictions.

That is an enormous enormous task.

Lots of the cocaine/amphatamine/benzos market are addicted aswell.

Watch the poor ****ers trying to come off that stuff in hospital, and it makes your skin crawl. But, there's not enough detox beds to help even a tiny fraction of addicts. So, as far as I can see it, if she's being serious and this isn't just soundbite, she needs to start using her influence to get a lot more drug rehab beds publicly funded. We can't just rely on a methadone programme forever and expect to get on top of the problem.

cooperguy

Snarler wrote: »

There is no logic to this. I don't want to buy my drugs from the gangs. I want to buy them legally from a reputable salesman but I can't. So its the government who are creating the gangs.

From now on this is will be considered the truth around here so no more crap blaming the users for the gangs.

Haha, god I hope that was a joke. You really have your head twisted dont you! Because YOU go out and give YOUR money to the gangs so YOU get high its the governments fault! You may not want to but you still do therefore you are funding them and it is your fault (along with the rest of the people like you) the these gangs exist.

Wertz

In fairness it's not heroin that's the problem here, it's cocaine, it's perceived use amongst the wealthy middle classes (an overblown myth IMO; most of the over use/abuse is in working class young adults on moderate income) and the inherent links to gangland criminals with turf wars and infighting, with al that that entails.
I saw a recent comparison somewhere (don't have the figures or link to hand) between cocaine users and heroin users WRT actual money spent in a year on either substance. Expenditure on cocaine dwarves the figures for heroin. Add to that the fact that a lot more people use cocaine than heroin and that they're usually better off financially than the average smackhead and you're left wondering why dealers bother with heroin at all; I suppose the fact that you have a ready and stable market for your product rather than a fluctuating level of demand based on time of week, year etc is a bonus....oh and the fact that you can cut the smack to half it's potency and the addict will simply buy twice as much.

People on heroin are far from likely to head off out on an armed robbery spree, shooting random members of the public. They may pose that threat in the search for money to fund a habit, but once they're high, that's it...nighty night. So heroin addicts aren't really the problem here and even if they were, getting them to come off their fix is going to take a bit more than some bleating on a chatshow from someone in a position of power...