Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Lisbon 2: prepare to bend over and recieve ur destiny!

Options
1…1213151718…63

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    SheroN wrote: »
    What does the SF stand for in your name?

    Simon Farrelly. (*Sighs*)


  • Options
    #423
    Biro
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,091 ✭✭✭Biro


    walshb wrote: »
    Are you serious?

    Simple: If you were asked, "what seems the more silly approach, voting NO to something you know nothing about or voting YES to something you know nothing about."

    This is IMO a no brainer; so why are the YES campaigners saying that the NO
    side are retarded for this. The YES side voted YES and knew nothing; that's retarded!

    I agree with that, I thought you meant the other way around, and was trying to figure out your logic.
    Still, it's better to vote either YES or NO by being informed.


  • Options
    #424
    ben bedlam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 261 ✭✭ben bedlam


    It will be fantastic having that pig Cowen resigning next October.


  • Options
    #425
    thelordofcheese
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,368 ✭✭✭thelordofcheese


    thewing wrote: »
    I can't wait to vote no and shove it down their throats again the cheeky fookers...

    If only there was some other way to affect actual change in a government. Some sort of election. A big one, like a general election. I mean, that'd be the perfect way to do something about a government you're not happy with.

    Ohh well, guess we're going to have to stick to being petty in unrelated matters.


  • Options
    #426
    sk8board
    Registered Users Posts: 3,320 ✭✭✭sk8board


    thewing wrote: »
    I can't wait to vote no and shove it down their throats again the cheeky fookers...

    in one line you've summed up everything thats wrong with our government, and everything thats wrong with our people.

    Why not just vote for Dustin again instead, or just stay at home; leave deciding the countrys future direction to the rest of us, both yes and no.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    Ckal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 422 ✭✭Ckal


    sk8board wrote: »
    in one line you've summed up everything thats wrong with our government, and everything thats wrong with our people.

    Why not just vote for Dustin again instead, or just stay at home.

    Dustin could do a better job than our Government ;)


  • Options
    #428
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 55,507 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Biro wrote: »
    I agree with that, I thought you meant the other way around, and was trying to figure out your logic.
    Still, it's better to vote either YES or NO by being informed.
    No bother!

    Hey, in a perfect world everyone would be informed and all would vote
    accordingly; though, in a perfect world, govts would also respect the decision!


  • Options
    #429
    SheroN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,972 ✭✭✭SheroN


    Darragh29 wrote: »
    Sure they wouldn't ask us to vote on something and then throw our decision out the window, would they now???

    If they had thrown our decision out the window they would have said "**** you ireland" and went ahead and found someway to progress the treaty without Ireland.

    All they are doing is clearing up the concerns people had the last time about the treaty and giving them a chance to vote on it again.

    If people are still not happy, they will vote no again.


  • Options
    #430
    hobochris
    Registered Users Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭hobochris


    SheroN wrote: »
    Do people honestly think that after the treaty is ratified that the EU will turn around and tell Ireland to shove their legal assurances up their hole?

    Really now?
    Why not, all they have to say is prove it.

    And besides If you check, this treaty technically gives Europe the power to change the Irish constitution, which in turn means these assurances mean nothing.

    I'm sorry but I wont have some french surrender monkey pissing all over a constitution that Irish people gave their lives for.


  • Options
    #431
    Ckal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 422 ✭✭Ckal


    SheroN wrote: »
    If they had thrown our decision out the window they would have said "**** you ireland" and went ahead and found someway to progress the treaty without Ireland.

    If I remember correctly, they demanded the treaty was ratified even with a clear NO from us.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    SheroN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,972 ✭✭✭SheroN


    hobochris wrote: »
    I'm sorry but I wont have some french surrender monkey pissing all over a constitution that Irish people gave their lives for.

    Way to generalise.


    I'm sure had Ireland been in France's position in WW2 we would have bent over and took it from the nazis too.


  • Options
    #433
    ben bedlam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 261 ✭✭ben bedlam


    thelordofcheese wrote: »
    If only there was some other way to affect actual change in a government. Some sort of election. A big one, like a general election. I mean, that'd be the perfect way to do something about a government you're not happy with.

    Ohh well, guess we're going to have to stick to being petty in unrelated matters.

    But what if the general election does not go to plan? Would'nt we have to have another one to get the right result?


  • Options
    #434
    hobochris
    Registered Users Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭hobochris


    SheroN wrote: »
    If they had thrown our decision out the window they would have said "**** you ireland" and went ahead and found someway to progress the treaty without Ireland.

    If they could have done that they would, The only thing stoping them is that would be political suicide. they have atleast pretend to listen to the people even if they are running their own agenda, its how they stay in power.


  • Options
    #435
    Darragh29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,097 ✭✭✭Darragh29


    SheroN wrote: »
    If they had thrown our decision out the window they would have said "**** you ireland" and went ahead and found someway to progress the treaty without Ireland.

    All they are doing is clearing up the concerns people had the last time about the treaty and giving them a chance to vote on it again.

    If people are still not happy, they will vote no again.

    They can't, the rules are clear, either all member states ratify the treaty or the treaty is in the bin. When we vote no on the next occasion, all the huffing and puffing in the world will not change the fact that whatever the next treaty brings, it has to be ratified by every member state. These are the rules and thankfully they are easy to understand. We are being bullied into undertaking a certain course of action and I won't be having it.


  • Options
    #436
    hobochris
    Registered Users Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭hobochris


    SheroN wrote: »
    Way to generalise.


    I'm sure had Ireland been in France's position in WW2 we would have bent over and took it from the nazis too.

    If they Irish people were as you suggest then we'd still be ruled by the English.


  • Options
    #437
    SheroN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,972 ✭✭✭SheroN


    Darragh29 wrote: »
    They can't, the rules are clear, either all member states ratify the treaty or the treaty is in the bin. When we vote no on the next occasion, all the huffing and puffing in the world will not change the fact that whatever the next treaty brings, it has to be ratified by every member state. These are the rules and thankfully they are easy to understand. We are being bullied into undertaking a certain course of action and I won't be having it.

    What do you suggest happens then?

    Say Ireland votes no again. The EU stays as it is and doesnt' evolve any further?


  • Options
    #438
    thelordofcheese
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,368 ✭✭✭thelordofcheese


    ben bedlam wrote: »
    But what if the general election does not go to plan? Would'nt we have to have another one to get the right result?

    I could be wrong, but i believe we have had several since the state was founded.
    I could be wrong though, maybe when people voted for the first time what they meant was "here's our decision and never, ever, EVER ask us again".


  • Options
    #439
    hobochris
    Registered Users Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭hobochris


    SheroN wrote: »
    What do you suggest happens then?

    Say Ireland votes no again. The EU stays as it is and doesnt' evolve any further?
    by evolve you mean become part of a super state bullied into a false democracy?


  • Options
    #440
    ART6
    Registered Users Posts: 2,632 ✭✭✭ART6


    It may have escaped the attention of the EU elite, but long before the current recession leaped out and bit us all we were already losing ground fast to the developing economies of India, China etc. So how were we in the EU reacting to that? With continuing floods of regulations that hampered our industries and dramatically increased their costs, while at the same time insisting that the EU must find a way of competing. Doing that in handcuffs while the other guy has both hands free presents some difficulties. Approving the Lisbon Treaty simply ensures that the EU Commission can continue to stifle our industries, and that, to me, is as good a reason as any to vote NO.

    Clearly Cowan et al can't see that, but since none of them have ever worked in industry that's hardly surprising. We have an interesting case here of the blind leading the sighted.


  • Options
    #441
    hobochris
    Registered Users Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭hobochris


    thelordofcheese wrote: »
    I could be wrong, but i believe we have had several since the state was founded.
    I could be wrong though, maybe when people voted for the first time what they meant was "here's our decision and never, ever, EVER ask us again".
    If this gets a yes vote then we may never vote on such an issue again, the treaty gives the EU power to remove the need to vote on such things from our constitution.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #442
    Reflector
    Registered Users Posts: 380 ✭✭Reflector


    well just because we voted no doesn't mean that they shouldn't try again. If they address the issues that people felt they didn't like why wouldn't people then vote yes?


  • Options
    #443
    Tar.Aldarion
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,092 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tar.Aldarion


    Funniest reason I heard to vote no was becasue people were not happy with some cancer department in Sligo, amongst other reasons my brother heard while campaigning for the no side.

    I can't wait for more pamphlets that just tell lies and every tom, dick and harry believing them. Let's not let the government tell us what to do, lets let an american organisation with flash pamplets!

    I didn't vote, as I'm not too bothered but I do dislike people voting for stupid reasons.
    Some I remember off the pamplets:

    The treaty would make us part of the nuclear option: a legally binding protocol commits us to support Euratom.
    We would give powers to the EU to raise its own taxes from citizens of the member-states, leaving their governments with less to spend.
    It would become obligatory to have competition in public services in such areas as health and education. This would lead to further privatisation and increased inequality. VOTE NO TO RESTRICTIONSON WORKERS RIGHTS.
    At WTO talks our influence on trade will be further weakened.

    Rofl.


  • Options
    #444
    SheroN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,972 ✭✭✭SheroN


    hobochris wrote: »
    If this gets a yes vote then we may never vote on such an issue again, the treaty gives the EU power to remove the need to vote on such things from our constitution.

    I understand and am fine with that.


  • Options
    #445
    Darragh29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,097 ✭✭✭Darragh29


    SheroN wrote: »
    What do you suggest happens then?

    Say Ireland votes no again. The EU stays as it is and doesnt' evolve any further?

    What should have happened last June when we rejected Lisbon, is that Lisbon should have been put into the bin. Then immediately afterwards, because this is now the third time out of three democratic attempts to ratify this threaty, that this entity has been rejected by an electorate, so that should have been the end of it.

    If the treaty was readable and I could satisfy myself that it did what it said on the tin, I'd be happy enough to consider voting for it, assuming that we didn't have sinister comments issued like:

    “Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly – all the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way”.

    Valerie Giscard D’Estaing, Architech of the Lisbon Treaty

    I might consider voting for it. Now more time has been wasted with the wrong approach, trying to get us to ratify this when I don't think it's going to happen. A wiser reaction would have been to hammer out a new treaty and listen to the electorate of no less than three jurisdictions.


  • Options
    #446
    IvySlayer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,187 ✭✭✭✭IvySlayer


    Looks like we may have to save EU's bacon again, just as they saved ours:D

    The general population of Europe don't want this. I like the EU, it's done us good, it helped us build Ireland to its stature today. I like THIS treaty and see no reason to change.

    When it comes around again I shall vote No. Although due to low turnout which will probably happen again I fear the Yes might just get it.


  • Options
    #447
    SheroN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,972 ✭✭✭SheroN


    Reflector wrote: »
    well just because we voted no doesn't mean that they shouldn't try again. If they address the issues that people felt they didn't like why wouldn't people then vote yes?

    No they would not. A lot of the no voters have apparently moved the goal posts. They now have a list of other concerns that libertas forgot to include on their posters last time round.


  • Options
    #448
    hobochris
    Registered Users Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭hobochris


    Reflector wrote: »
    well just because we voted no doesn't mean that they shouldn't try again. If they address the issues that people felt they didn't like why wouldn't people then vote yes?

    Take out the ability of the eu to change our constitution and I would happily vote Yes.


  • Options
    #449
    Darragh29
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,097 ✭✭✭Darragh29


    hobochris wrote: »
    If this gets a yes vote then we may never vote on such an issue again, the treaty gives the EU power to remove the need to vote on such things from our constitution.

    That's the scariest thing about Lisbon, you wouldn't know what hairbrained idea they would come up with and we would no longer be asked for our opinion, just like the other EU countries that would love a vote on Lisbon but their governments haven't the balls to ask them, knowing well that it would be thrown out like Paddy two hours after last orders!


  • Options
    #450
    Terry
    Registered Users Posts: 26,061 ✭✭✭✭Terry


    Darragh29 wrote: »
    To insist that a voter stick exclusively to the subject matter is to underestimate the intelligence of a human being. There is nothing at all wrong with me fully supporting Lisbon, but deciding to give the government a kick in the nuts when I get into the ballot box on the day of the referendum, and voting no. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with this, if this is what I decide to do! As a voter, I am infallible. No decision I make can be wrong.
    Really?
    You just want referendum after referendum?

    Great idea, especially in a time of recession.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #451
    sk8board
    Registered Users Posts: 3,320 ✭✭✭sk8board


    Tar.Aldarion wrote: »
    Funniest reason I heard to vote no was becasue people were not happy with some cancer department in Sligo, amongst other reasons my brother heard while campaigning for the no side.

    I can't wait for more pamphlets that just tell lies and every tom, dick and harry believing them. Let's not let the government tell us what to do, lets let an american organisation with flash pamplets!

    it mightn't be the way I'd phrase it, but I still tend to agree.

    we had a general election just 12 months before L1, and yet even the FG and Lab TD's couldn't persuade their own voters, who had chosen them to represent them just a few months previous. Instead they chose to believe the flash pamplets and the shinners.

    god, why didn't Miriam O Callaghan push Mary Lou 'canned rhetoric' McDonald more on Prime time last night.
    SF campaigned for a No, for FF to go to euope and get assurances. They've done that; 'will you now be voting Yes' asked the lovely Miriam. Queue standard evading the question and usual nonsence canned answers.


Advertisement