Opinion makers feeling the heat.

thecaptain

The media personalities and the rest of the paid propagandists must be feeling the pressure.

I know the politicians are getting it from the big boys. Our lads know that if they cannot do the job, as has been shown, the Europeans will have them thrown out.

You see, the gravy train runs when things are going as planned, Cowen, Martin and the boys know that the old expense accounts will go, and they are not happy. Same story with the opinion makers, as could be seen on Newstalk today, they really are crumbling at the thought of their jobs going.

Its all about results, this treaty was a must be, the fact that they could not convince the plebs raised serious questions over their personal usefulness.

The days of the useful idiot may well be behind us as the velvet glove comes off the iron fist.

thelordofcheese

In other news the sky is falling. More at 11.

robindch

thecaptain wrote: »

The media personalities and the rest of the paid propagandists must be feeling the pressure.

Haven't seen Ganley since Friday. Wonder what happened to him?

Sherifu

Casey/Fleming, you have a point?

lostexpectation

rte presenters are spitting, pk asked richard green of coir if he wanted the euro to fall? and rodney rice in particular has been shouting at the no side

turgon

lostexpectation wrote: »

rodney rice in particular has been shouting at the no side

Bitterness. I hope the politicians don't see this vote as a no to Europe. It is a no to Lisbon.

Fuascailt

turgon wrote: »

Bitterness. I hope the politicians don't see this vote as a no to Europe. It is a no to Lisbon.

Which is a no to a more efficient, practical europe.

Scofflaw

turgon wrote: »

Bitterness. I hope the politicians don't see this vote as a no to Europe. It is a no to Lisbon.

We really need to establish some clarity on that, I fear. At the moment we're at the point where the voice of the people has spoken, and said "mmrrbbnnl bnllhh vnnn" (which is to say, it is unclear exactly what is meant by the rejection).

cordially,
Scofflaw

turgon

Fuascailt wrote: »

Which is a no to a more efficient, practical europe.

No, a practical Europe is a very broad idea. The Treaty of Lisbon is one method of achieving it.

Buying a car is a broad idea. But just because I didn't like one car, one could hardly claim I was against the idea of buying a car altogethers.

Similarly I am for reforming the EU, against Lisbon.

turgon

Scofflaw wrote: »

We really need to establish some clarity on that, I fear. At the moment we're at the point where the voice of the people has spoken, and said "mmrrbbnnl bnllhh vnnn".

Yes, the people have voted No. And I wrote a very cordial letter to the Minister of Foreign Affairs outlining why I did vote No. So that it wouldn't appear the no side were in fact just a pile of ignoramuses. So that the voice of the No side wouldn't just be "mmrrbbnnl bnllhh vnnn"

Scofflaw

turgon wrote: »

Yes, the people have voted No. And I wrote a very cordial letter to the Minister of Foreign Affairs outlining why I did vote No. So that it wouldn't appear the no side were in fact just a pile of ignoramuses. So that the voice of the No side wouldn't just be "mmrrbbnnl bnllhh vnnn"

Ah - I shall have to go back and clarify that, evidently. I'm not suggesting that the No side are a pile of ignoramuses, but that what is being touted as a clear rejection of Lisbon is actually a babble of conflicting voices lacking any such clarity.

hopefully more clearly,
Scofflaw

force eleven

Scofflaw wrote: »

Ah - I shall have to go back and clarify that, evidently. I'm not suggesting that the No side are a pile of ignoramuses, but that what is being touted as a clear rejection of Lisbon is actually a babble of conflicting voices lacking any such clarity.

hopefully more clearly,
Scofflaw

Perhaps so, one could say the same about the yes sides reasons - loyalty to the government/political parties, loyalty to Cowen (saw this in Offaly),EU has been good for us etc, afraid of voting No, etc, all of these as primary reasons for voting Yes and not necessarily on the substance of the treaty.

Crash

True, but a yes vote carries a message, but no action need to be taken on it. A no vote has to be analysed, and see why voters were opposed, to see if there's some way to sort it. So while you may say that yes votes were as mumbled and incoherent overall as the no votes, it doesn't matter. What matters is that, as scofflaw states

actually a babble of conflicting voices lacking any such clarity.

force eleven

crash_000 wrote: »

True, but a yes vote carries a message, but no action need to be taken on it. A no vote has to be analysed, and see why voters were opposed, to see if there's some way to sort it. So while you may say that yes votes were as mumbled and incoherent overall as the no votes, it doesn't matter. What matters is that, as scofflaw states

Okay, so by following the logic, a yes vote does not need to be analysed, and therefore the Lisbon Treaty could have been passed by people who hadnt read it, didn't understand it, and basically towed the party line as it were. Fundamentally, I think that would have been worse. A blind yes vote vote would be far more damaging than a thoughtful no.

murphaph

I'm getting rather sick of the newspapers talking of Cowen taking a beating and questions of his leadership due to the "disaster", "calamity" etc. of the NO vote....it's as if to say he failed to convince us of something he should have been able to convince us of. It ignores the possibility that what was being offered wasn't worthy of being accepted by us and assumes we should have voted yes but Biffo couldn't get the message across well enough.

I paid little or no heed to Biffo, Gilmore, Kenny, Ganley or Mary bloody Lou.....I just don't want further integration. I voted NO based on my own analysis and this patronising talk of "Cowen's failure" is patronising to say the least. It's as if the papers want the people to question their own judgement and say "hmmm, maybe I should have voted yes". The papers (across Europe) should be questioning the treaty (and the whole 'project'), not the people!

murphaph

force eleven wrote: »

Okay, so by following the logic, a yes vote does not need to be analysed, and therefore the Lisbon Treaty could have been passed by people who hadnt read it, didn't understand it, and basically towed the party line as it were. Fundamentally, I think that would have been worse. A blind yes vote vote would be far more damaging than a thoughtful no.

but we voted no, so it's irrelevant. It's the NO vote that needs analysing (across Europe IMO).

Crash

Force eleven wrote:

Okay, so by following the logic, a yes vote does not need to be analysed, and therefore the Lisbon Treaty could have been passed by people who hadnt read it, didn't understand it, and basically towed the party line as it were. Fundamentally, I think that would have been worse. A blind yes vote vote would be far more damaging than a thoughtful no.

True, you're right. a blind vote either way is wrong. But the simple fact is that as it stands, what i've stated there is true. A yes vote will only ever be interpreted in one way. A no vote, for its own sake, NEEDS to be interpreted. Did people vote because they want no more EU integration? Did they vote no because of section 142.22.1 of the treaty? Did they vote no for bull**** reasons that will be impossible to fix? Did they vote no because of dislike for the EU? Did they vote no because of dislike and distrust of FF?

In my eyes, all of the above are true, and could be said of the yes side as well. But a yes vote doesn't need to be analysed in the same way, the message is clear. A no vote does.

limklad

robindch wrote: »

Haven't seen Ganley since Friday. Wonder what happened to him?

aliens took him and anal shot him with the lesbon trety:rolleyes:.

He will lie low for some time. He will probally wait and see what the government will do before making any further moves.