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

seamus

Biggins wrote: »

...because its his democratic right to do so and without pressure of having to explain why he is voting in one direction or another!

Actually, it's his constitutional right.

And with every right comes a responsibility, a duty. It's his duty to cast his vote in the manner that he thinks will best serve either himself or society, or both.

Voting for any other reason is as undemocratic as it comes and goes against the very principles of democracy.

20goto10

ven0m wrote: »

Show us where on the voting forms it said:

"If no, please tick why you are voting 'no'"

Democratic voting is simple - a right to say 'yes' or 'no' for whatever reason you like without prejudice for that reason, or a right to question that reason. it is a simple mandate.

Methinks you need to climb down off that horse of yours there hoss.

Thats not what democracy is. Democracy is a political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections. It is the active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life. Tell how voting No because you can't be arsed to understand what you're voting for is democratic? Its an abuse of power influenced by those with an ulterior motive. Its a total embarrasment and even more reason why political power should be taken out of the hands of gob ****es and into those who know what they're doing.

ven0m

Adamcp898 wrote: »

Think I might register to vote just to say no.

As much as I personally dislike people who do such things, that's your democratic right - be it right or wrong.

Donald-Duck

ven0m wrote: »

Go back to fashioning tin-foil hats, you're better at them than debating.

Oh the irony.

ven0m

20goto10 wrote: »

Thats not what democracy is. Democracy is a political system for choosing and replacing the government through free and fair elections. It is the active participation of the people, as citizens, in politics and civic life. Tell how voting No because you can't be arsed to understand what you're voting for is democratic? Its an abuse of power influenced by those with an ulterior motive. Its a total embarrasment and even more reason why political power should be taken out of the hands of gob ****es and into those who know what they're doing.

You are entitled to a vote, & to use that vote as you personally see fit, in whatever manner you wish for whatever reasons, politics, or logic you wish, without rebuke or question. Democracy contains no bias towards how people vote, nor should it. It is the purest form of entitlement within a free state that forms its constitution on the acceptance of that, which ours does.

I'd suggest you go read instead of reducing yourself to calling people gob****es & whatnot because they voted how they voted, which frankly is none of your business.

ven0m

Donald-Duck wrote: »

Oh the irony.

Care to elaborate, or are you here to troll. Join the debate or quit trolling.

wendelsailor

Some of the opinions here are so stupid. In these "hard" times were going to need Europe more than ever and the last thing this country should do is turn it's back on Europe.

Half of you probably don't even understand anything about the treaty anyway!

Mark200

If they change the treaty and then put it up for voting again I don't see why anyone would be annoyed. The whole Libertas slogan was "get a better deal for Ireland" and then when we get the chance on voting for a 'better deal' like Libertas wanted, now the argument is going to be "oh how undemocratic"???

What the hell?

ven0m

wendelsailor wrote: »

Some of the opinions here are so stupid. In these "hard" times were going to need Europe more than ever and the last thing this country should do is turn it's back on Europe.

Which Europe are you talking about? Europe, the people - or Europe as the faceless, nameless politicians?

wendelsailor wrote: »

Half of you probably don't even understand anything about the treaty anyway!

probably quite true, I'll +1 that

thelordofcheese

ven0m wrote: »

Your opinion on this counts for jack - our constitution guarantees otherwise, or perhaps you've forgotten about that.

i havn't, but nice to see you're becoming even more snarky.

ven0m wrote: »

being ignorant of how democracy works is worse, look in the mirror.

I'm sorry, since when does not agreeing with your interpretation of democracy equal being ignorant of how democracy works

ven0m wrote: »

It is not for US to provide an alternative. it is for the DEMOCRATICALLY elected governments of Europe to finally listen to calls from the people of their nations to have referendums, & to follow what is mandated from them.

yes it is. You have said no, you havn't bothered trying to find an alternative.
And i like how you're not ok with the idea of europe telling us how to do things, but no problem telling other countries how they should be run.

hypocracy much?

ven0m wrote: »

'trite' - is that a new word you learned of your 'word of the day' emails?

Way to stay classy, vemon.

ven0m wrote: »

It would serve you better instead of hashing out crass responses to actually make an argument of any worth to support your case & I notice you side-stepped my question to you. perhaps you yourself have no understanding, other than the half arsed position you seem to have taken that offers little support to your logic, or any tangible discussion points furthering your own standpoint.

Heh, you've never once attacked my arguments. You've gone straight to "DEMOCRACY IS UNDER ATTACK AND I AM IT'S CHAMPION" mode.
We're done here. You're a terrible debater and a chore to communicate with.

Oh, And i didn't sidestep your question, i devoted an entire post to it.

ven0m

Mark200 wrote: »

If they change the treaty and then put it up for voting again I don't see why anyone would be annoyed. The whole Libertas slogan was "get a better deal for Ireland" and then when we get the chance on voting for a 'better deal' like Libertas wanted, now the argument is going to be "oh how undemocratic"???

What the hell?

You're confusing two issues;

1. Libertas & it's crackpots who fudged crap; better deal my arse

&

2. How refining democracy through it's removal or bypass can work

the second is the real crux of what the 'no' argument should be, as Lisbon is purely about 'streamlining' the european execution democracy across the union.

EDIT: Lord Of Cheese, I will freely discuss & debate with you how the removal & bypass of democratic instruments within individual member states & parties within the EU 'government' through the denial of democracy is wrong quite happily with you, which is the crux of Lisbon if you'd care to move on from your crackpot posts & engage seeing as that's what you want me to.

Ckal

humanji wrote: »

Why not actually read the treaty (it's honestly not that hard, I managed it FFS, and I'm thick as pig shìt!) and deciding what's best for you? What's the worst that can happen? Sure if the treaty is really that bad for everyone, it'll be a no vote again. One day out of your life isn't going to make that much of a difference.

I did. And I would have voted no. But now that they have "promised" us that we have control of our taxes, have our commissioner, and maintain our neutrality... I don't know what to vote. I still don't like how we won't be able to vote for a European President. If every person in Europe could vote, then I'd have no problem with that.

Can we put aside the argument that No voters voted no because they didn't understand the treaty? Plenty of people in my year voted Yes purely because they liked Fianna Fail. They admitted to this, so I'm not talking bull****. There are plenty of idiots on both sides of the argument, so I think the No-Voter bashing can stop because I've come across some ridiculous reasons as to why people voted yes.

ben bedlam

The best thing about rejecting Lisbon 2 will be that ignorant pig Cowen having to step down as Taoiseach as his postion becomes untenible.

TX123

Dont vote because technically we have no choice. On the polling card it should say "Vote Yes" "have another referendum until you idiots vote yes". So dont bother its not democratic because they will just keep making us vote until yes is made

ven0m

ben bedlam wrote: »

The best thing about rejecting Lisbon 2 will be that ignorant pig Cowen having to step down as Taoiseach as his postion becomes untenible.

Hardly a reason for rejecting Lisbon, as it's not about how bad this government is, but again - you're entitled to cast your vote how you see fit on whatever grounds you like, thank your constitution

20goto10

ven0m wrote: »

You are entitled to a vote, & to use that vote as you personally see fit, in whatever manner you wish for whatever reasons, politics, or logic you wish, without rebuke or question. Democracy contains no bias towards how people vote, nor should it. It is the purest form of entitlement within a free state that forms its constitution on the acceptance of that, which ours does.

I'd suggest you go read instead of reducing yourself to calling people gob****es & whatnot because they voted how they voted, which frankly is none of your business.

Its stubborn attitudes like this that have got us in this mess. Nobody is denying the democratic will of the Irish people. We've rejected it, so ok they have to go back and change it and address our concerns. How exactly do you address the concerns which have nothing to do with what we were voting on? Or how do you address the issue of people voting no because they can't be arsed to find out what they are voting on? Can you not see the problem here? This is not democracy in action.

btw, how you voted is not my business but the outcome certainly is my business. In fact I would say unless you have read the treaty and know what you voted for then it is actually none of your business.

Donald-Duck

What we need is an MCQ at the top of every voting sheet. Simple questions on the issue.

ben bedlam

ven0m wrote: »

Hardly a reason for rejecting Lisbon, as it's not about how bad this government is, but again - you're entitled to cast your vote how you see fit on whatever grounds you like, thank your constitution

Cowen losing his job will be just desserts for the man who last June stated "We respect the vote of the Irish electorate", yet now is determined to ram another referendum down peoples throats again. EU "assurances" mean nothing, as they are not legally binding. Not one syllable of the treaty will be changed, becausse then it would become a new treaty and be re-ratified by the member states. The government will not be able to sustain a credible yes campaign this time, as it is obvious that no concessions have been made. Lisbon will be rejected again.

20goto10

ben bedlam wrote: »

EU "assurances" mean nothing, as they are not legally binding. Not one syllable of the treaty will be changed,

You can't change what isn't there.

ven0m

20goto10 wrote: »

Its stubborn attitudes like this that have got us in this mess. Nobody is denying the democratic will of the Irish people. We've rejected it, so ok they have to go back and change it and address our concerns. How exactly do you address the concerns which have nothing to do with what we were voting on? Or how do you address the issue of people voting no because they can't be arsed to find out what they are voting on? Can you not see the problem here? This is not democracy in action.

btw, how you voted is not my business but the outcome certainly is my business. In fact I would say unless you have read the treaty and know what you voted for then it is actually none of your business.

How is my attitude about how people voted 'stubborn'? Our constitution & acceptance of democracy means we have to accept that people can & will vote how they want for absolutely ridiculous reasons, & there's nothing anyone can do about it. I don't understand why people think 'spoiling votes' is acceptable, what's the point in even voting then, that person may as well abstain along with the apathetics.

The people whinging about people who voted yes or no cos they didn't know, or who voted 'no' as a way to punish the government (which IS retarded!!!) are entitled to that, & all of us who believe in democracy must respect those votes as distasteful as they may be.

Either you want democracy or you don't. There's no grey shades for it, & certainly none that our constitution seems to provide for. Under that framework, someone voting 'yes' because their Rice Krispies told them is as legitimate as someone who understood the crux of what they voted 'yes' for.

That is an inescapable fact, & one all of us on the side of any referendum item must accept as we use the democratic process to mandate.

nyarlothothep

A lot of people voted without bothering to read the treaty and were duped by misinformation. That to me is a total affront to democracy.

ben bedlam

I do not want anything to be changed. The Lisbon Treaty was rejected by the Irish vote, end of. My point is that in the coming weeks and months, the government will attempt to say to the Irish people "The EU looked at our concerns and addressed them" when in legally binding reality, nothing has changed, and the EXACT SAME TREATY will be presented again to the Irish electorate.

20goto10

ven0m wrote: »

How is my attitude about how people voted 'stubborn'? Our constitution & acceptance of democracy means we have to accept that people can & will vote how they want for absolutely ridiculous reasons, & there's nothing anyone can do about it. I don't understand why people think 'spoiling votes' is acceptable, what's the point in even voting then, that person may as well abstain along with the apathetics.

The people whinging about people who voted yes or no cos they didn't know, or who voted 'no' as a way to punish the government (which IS retarded!!!) are entitled to that, & all of us who believe in democracy must respect those votes as distasteful as they may be.

Either you want democracy or you don't. There's no grey shades for it, & certainly none that our constitution seems to provide for. Under that framework, someone voting 'yes' because their Rice Krispies told them is as legitimate as someone who understood the crux of what they voted 'yes' for.

That is an inescapable fact, & one all of us on the side of any referendum item must accept as we use the democratic process to mandate.

What do you want changed? There was a report drawn up as to what needed to be changed in order for the Irish to be happy with the treaty. None of it had anything to do with the treaty! Can you not see the problem here? And besides that, we've spent years debating and negotiating the treaty. If you had a problem with it you should have said so when there was time to do something about it.

ven0m

nyarlothothep wrote: »

A lot of people voted without bothering to read the treaty and were duped by misinformation. That to me is a total affront to democracy.

It might be distasteful to you but it's not an affront according to our constitution, or the underlying principals that democratic voting relies upon.

The execution of a vote by a person who has obtained the right to cast that vote should never depend on a set of pre-determined requirements, apart from a compliance to be of legal age & be registered to vote, as well as turning up to cast that vote with the appropriate i.d. & voting card.

This is why we have our modern versions of democracy, & it arrived from when votes were given to the lower classes who were less educated, & why all democratic voting has evolved to the point at which it currently exists.

Yes it sucks that someone can vote based on what their Rice Krispies have told them, but until the constitution says otherwise, we have to accept the outcome whatever it may be.

ArmaniJeanss

ben bedlam wrote: »

I do not want anything to be changed. The Lisbon Treaty was rejected by the Irish vote, end of. My point is that in the coming weeks and months, the government will attempt to say to the Irish people "The EU looked at our concerns and addressed them" when in legally binding reality, nothing has changed, and the EXACT SAME TREATY will be presented again to the Irish electorate.

Therefore you are fully entitled to vote No - however you are not entitled to say that the refererendum should not take place.

Also Starring LeVar Burton

20goto10 wrote: »

What do you want changed? There was a report drawn up as to what needed to be changed in order for the Irish to be happy with the treaty. None of it had anything to do with the treaty! Can you not see the problem here? And besides that, we've spent 7 years debating and negotiating the treaty. If you had a problem with it you should have said so when there was time to do something about it.

But if we knew, we could shoot it down when it came to the referendum, why bother saying anything beforehand?

skelliser

i personally cant wait to hear from Jim Corr again!

ShooterSF

thelordofcheese wrote: »

I'd disagree, i'm fairly certain post election polls cited "i couldn't be arsed learning about it" as one of the main reasons people voted no.

Certain Fianna Fail ones?

Firstly, i don't think should ever have been put to a public vote. plebicite is a horrible basis for forming law.

I disagree with you here. There are negatives to putting these things to referendum but our constitution is a great thing in that we elect people to run our country by these rules. If they want to change the rules they have to ask us. Without it the government could do whatever it feels for 5 years.

Second, the problem i have isn't that passed or failed, but the encouragement (mostly on the no side) that it's ok to be ignorant as long as you vote our way.

Agreed. I believe everyone has a right to vote Yes or No and can decide themselves. The problem I have is that people seem to cast the no voters into the ignorant pile and the yes voters into the enlightened pile. (See a certain 'tard post earlier)

Third, we're not exactly alien to having issues put infront of us more than once. The idea that if a no vote can lead to a second referendum then so can a yes is stupid, because it fails to acknowledge that the reason topics resurface is because they are not resolved.

Ah yes but at least feign the idea that you'll push to change the treaty or abandon it completely. Dont comeback with the same one. The problem here is if they're coming back with a revised treaty then why did they not protest the EU presidency asking other countries to continue ratifying a treaty that needed to be renegotiated and therefore ratified all over again? Or are they coming back with the exact same treaty? Which really is disrepecting the electorate.

The people here who are doing their best petualant five year old impression would probably be more productive if they actually discussed the treaty itself and what they see as it's problems and what solutions there might be, rather than making trite comparisons to horrible foreign regimes.

I debated the topics less than a year ago. I will again when I see a revised treaty. Till then all we can debate is the actions of our government.

ven0m

20goto10 wrote: »

What do you want changed? There was a report drawn up as to what needed to be changed in order for the Irish to be happy with the treaty. None of it had anything to do with the treaty! Can you not see the problem here? And besides that, we've spent 7 years debating and negotiating the treaty. If you had a problem with it you should have said so when there was time to do something about it.

What would I personally want changed?

Me personally, I would like equal representation at any institutional level within any form of European government, with no preference to any one nation.

Any officials to form part of that European Government must stand for election the same as any other official within a democratic environment, accountable at the end of designated terms for any form of re-election.

I would also like to see any form of constitutional changes put to the people, regardless of complexity. All you can ever do is inform to the best of your ability, & hope & trust the people will deliver their will in their own wisdom (or sometimes lack of, which must be accepted as part of democracy).

I would like to see more transparency about how issues are dealt with across the union, & know exactly how the institutions are funded, come to be & how people are assigned to them.

Too much of how the EU works is not obvious or made freely known or informed to your average EU citizen. There is too much emphasis on the importance of the politician, the politician is there to serve us, be our voice in a room of people charged with making decisions in the best interests of the majority, to protect us.

I think that'd be a start. I could go through the treaty, & go through the points I disagree with & why if you like?

I think the government should sit down, create focus groups from each county, have a private firm carry out discussions as to how people perceived the original Lisbon treaty, find out why those who did vote no why they really voted no, look at how people understood or didn't understand it.

And, I think this really should go back to the EU bodies involved to show them why, & perhaps they should themselves go look in their own backyards, especially those who were mandated 'no' by their people or look into why people really want to have their say on things.

The main problem with the treaty is the fact a group of politicians who seem to be unanswerable have removed people's rights to have their say & by doing so create an air of distrust in Europe, what it does & what it will do for them as citizens in the future.

How hard is that for anyone to understand?

ben bedlam

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Therefore you are fully entitled to vote No - however you are not entitled to say that the refererendum should not take place.

I am entitled to say that another referendum should not take place, as is the country as a whole. We were asked a question, and the majority of our electorate answered NO to that question.