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

Darragh29

seamus wrote: »

Of course it does. If you were being asked, "Do you want to go on holidays to Spain or to Italy?", and your answer was "Rice Krispies!", do you not see how pointless it was to ask you the question in the first place?

More relevant - if you're being asked to choose between A or B, and you ignore the content of either option, but go for B because the presenter wants you to choose A, you're once again completely missing the point of being asked in the first place.

Detail please, how Lisbon plans to curtail the democratic process in this country.

Not exactly a comparable example. If you had someone asking you to pick A or B and this person had a track record of not accepting your desire to pick for example A, after you had picked A, and came back telling you that the choice you made was wrong, that unfortunately you cannot actually pick A and you should have picked B, and then came back a few years later and asked you to pick A or B and again you pick A and again they tell you that you made the wrong decision AGAIN, that they wanted you to pick B and unfortunately again you cannot actually pick A, would you not start to wonder what their problem actually is???

junkyard

I'm voting no as I did the last time and will do again if and when there's another one.

seamus

ven0m wrote: »

You're adding a third option where there is none on a yes/no vote. Your analogy is way way way off.

Thanks for summing it up so nicely. My analogy was spot on as far as I can see.

Your right to vote how you please for whatever reason means this is not questionable. You're injecting moral right/authority into voting, which has nothing to do with voting.

I wouldn't deny someone a vote based on their reasons. But I would personally request that they abstain from voting unless they're voting for reasons which are relevant to the issue being asked of them.

The structure of the politicians within the various constituents of the EC removes any real democratic elections of people to posts, with no framework for public accountability, like we have currently when we get to vote MEP's etc in, or the use of a veto by any member state, or collection of vetos by a group of member states. this isn't rocket science & is core to the fundamental problems within what Lisbon is trying to achieve. A president who is not elected by ballot, or accountable to term balloting? I mean come on, please don't tell me you really need me to explain this to you, otherwise what are you doing in a thread about the Lisbon treaty?

most of that is fundamentally incorrect, or at the very least ill-informed/paranoid. We lose some vetos on issues which don't really require unanimity. This improves the democratic process. Lisbon improves the public accountability of the EU by requiring discussions and votes to be made public and accountable at all times.
We will still vote in MEPs like we do now. The President serves the same function that he does now except that he will have been elected democratically at some point. You don't actually get to vote for who gets to be Ceann Comhairle or even Taoiseach, do you? So how is this any different?
Your points are all very basic stuff which have been shown to be incorrect numerous times in the past.

I think I'll stick to Lisbon threads where people actually understand what's going on.

To my mind, there is nothing illegal, immoral or irresponsible about a protest vote. You have a right and a responsibility to vote whatever way you see fit. What you might think is "best for the people or the country" and what I might feel is "best for the people or the country", could be two entirely different things.

I personally feel that for as long as we are dealing with an intransigent EU that avoids referendums wherever possible and rejects referendum decisions whenever they do have to have a referendum and the decision is not one that they wished for, well I feel that we are better off preventing any further integration with an EU that is administrated on this basis. You appear to feel differently, more power to you, but I still am voting responsibly by voting in line with my views above.

And that's exactly what I said. Your reason for voting is based on what you think is best for you and/or for the country. Great!

Darragh29

seamus wrote: »

And that's exactly what I said. Your reason for voting is based on what you think is best for you and/or for the country. Great!

Yes, but equally if I come to the conclusion that I simply don't trust the people who are asking me to vote for say B, and on this basis decide to vote for A, I am entirely within my faculties to do so.

This argument crept up on the last occasion, "if you don't understand the treaty, please just stay at home and don't vote". This is an affront to any voter, you are fully entitled to vote whatever way you wish, for any reason or indeed for no reason at all. That is your right and your entitlement.

phasers

I love referendums, because my dad gets 300 quid to drive some guy around all day.
Keep voting no Ireland, if only for my dad to earn money (also for political yada yada yada)

humanji

walshb wrote: »

Humanji,, are you honestly telling me that most people in the YES side voted YES because they read the treaty. THE POXY GOVT BARELY READ THE TREATY AND ANY NORMAL SANE PERSON WOULDN'T BE BOTHERED READING THE TREATY.

Wasn't that the major problem. It was so damn extensive and complex and convoluted.

So, if we agree that the majority of VOTERS did not read the treaty, then surely how can
anyone VOTE yes to something they know nothing about??

I voted NO, because I didn't know the precise details. I am being honest; but if you are
telling me that the YES camp voted YES because they all understood the treaty, then that is being totally dishonest. The actual folks pressing for YES didn't know the treaty.

I will vote NO this time not because I do not know the details, but because I refuse
to be dictated to and even if I understood and agreed with the treaty, I will still
vote NO on principal. That's my whole point. For democracies sake and for respect, I believe this is the correct answer

Seriously, think about it. The YES camp voted yes more on the basis of what
they were being TOLD to vote on. I am willing to bet that of the TOTAL
number of people who voted YES, that about 5 percent read that bloody treaty.

Similar to the NO side.

Sorry to go back so many pages, but you do realise that I never said any such thing and that you're just making stuff up?

ART6

ven0m wrote: »

The constitution of the Republic Of Ireland contains the proviso that anything that changes the constitution, or the fundamentals of our own sovereignty must be put before the people by way of referendum. It was a deliberate clause by the founders of our country as a form of protecting us from ourselves & others. It was incredible foresight in my personal opinion.

Agreed entirely. That is why we must defend it.

Many other countries do not have such explicit clauses in their own frameworks, some have options on referendums, & chose not to execute them, some like the Dutch have them & then decided 'screw public mandate'.

Quite. Democracy in action!


No country lost their rights to have referendums. Those that had them by manditory framework had them, & they spoke clearly. Others with options, exercised rights to not have them, which they were entitled to. Fundamentally, the EU is about a group of nations working together respecting each other's differences while trying to achieve commonality.

Those that had them in round 1 said "NO". Their politicians then decided not to consult them again. Democracy in action!

The fundamental crux of what I think you are getting at is that people in various countries with options for referenda had their calls fall on deaf ears with their governments, & those with options didn't exercise them to outrage of many numbers in those countries.

Exactly.


No-one has had anything taken from them here in this entire process. But, what is blatant is this bandying about that Ireland & its voters should respect Europe, while the utmost contempt since our 'no' vote has been shown towards us, which has gone unaddressed by our elected officials in Europe on our behalf, or by people in general.

Except the right to vote on whether or not the new (and very limited) revisions to the EU Constitution were acceptable. This, to me, is a determined push towards a European federal state that by all accounts the majority of the people of Europe do not want: A "democracy" based upon the EU Commission and a bastardisation of the French model, where the administration rules.

ewj1978

To be quite honest about all this.... I'm sick to the back teeth of it... they can take my vote and shove it...we should as a people should NOT vote... cos if we vote yes we're a bunch of simpletons who did not understand the first time and If we vote no they'll just redo it again and again and again.. Feck them I say...next FF and FG prat who comes knocking at my Door I'll set my dogs on them.:mad:

AlmightyCushion

niceirishfella wrote: »

Evasion of the question and your tone,agression and use of bad language speaks yards here.
Mods please note.

If you want us moderators to take note of something please report the post. Posting "please note" in a thread accomplishes very little. Also try and bring our attention to posts you feel are troublesome, that post did not fall into that category.

Darragh29

I'm dying to see what happens when we reject Lisbon next October, then we are in unchartered water!

Biggins

Darragh29 wrote: »

I'm dying to see what happens when we reject Lisbon next October, then we are in uncharted water!

Some said we would be in uncharted water if we said "No" the first time.
O' look, we are still swimming roughly in the same water! Image that!

ART6

ven0m wrote: »

The constitution of the Republic Of Ireland contains the proviso that anything that changes the constitution, or the fundamentals of our own sovereignty must be put before the people by way of referendum. It was a deliberate clause by the founders of our country as a form of protecting us from ourselves & others. It was incredible foresight in my personal opinion.

Totally agree. That's why it must be defended.

Many other countries do not have such explicit clauses in their own frameworks, some have options on referendums, & chose not to execute them, some like the Dutch have them & then decided 'screw public mandate'.

Quite. EU democracy in action!!

No country lost their rights to have referendums. Those that had them by manditory framework had them, & they spoke clearly. Others with options, exercised rights to not have them, which they were entitled to. Fundamentally, the EU is about a group of nations working together respecting each other's differences while trying to achieve commonality

.

Those that exercised that right the first time were not given the chance in the second round. EU democracy in action!!

The fundamental crux of what I think you are getting at is that people in various countries with options for referenda had their calls fall on deaf ears with their governments, & those with options didn't exercise them to outrage of many numbers in those countries.

Quite. EU democracy in action!!

No-one has had anything taken from them here in this entire process. But, what is blatant is this bandying about that Ireland & its voters should respect Europe, while the utmost contempt since our 'no' vote has been shown towards us, which has gone unaddressed by our elected officials in Europe on our behalf, or by people in general.

Agree. This is in my view a determined attempt by the political elite of Europe to impose a European federal state, with what is laughingly called a democracy based loosely upon the French model, and which is totally foreign to us in Ireland and to other northern countries.

Perhaps we should recall that Europe has little track record of democracy. In fact the oldest democracies are the UK and the USA. Our politicians, God rest them (now??) are putting our fate in the hands of infants.

tolosenc

junkyard wrote: »

I'm voting no as I did the last time and will do again if and when there's another one.

It's nice to know that people will be voting, untaintedly, on the issue at hand...

:rolleyes:

ShooterSF

obl wrote: »

It's nice to know that people will be voting, untaintedly, on the issue at hand...

:rolleyes:

Well if you voted no on the issue last time, eh, whats changed? A few provisions about things that FF even said werent in the treaty?
SO if you voted No on the issues then obviously you're gonna vote no again.

oops i nearly forget the argument winner :rolleyes: Ah thats better.

An Fear Aniar

ven0m wrote: »

What about the fact the majority of British people wanted a referendum, but the government there refused to hold one? That speaks volumes about what the EU wants to be.

Exactly, Labout promised a referendum in their last election manifesto. Suddenly, after meetings behind closed doors they decided they're not having one. Wake up people! Your freedoms are being stolen from you while you watch the X Factor.


.

dead air

Voters choosing to vote No because they're angry with the government or because they detest Sarkozy disgust me.

The Lisbon treaty referendum is not a popularity contest.

I detest our government in its current form and I am still voting Yes.

ShooterSF

dead air wrote: »

Voters choosing to vote No because they're angry with the government or because they detest Sarkozy disgust me.

The Lisbon treaty referendum is not a popularity contest.

I detest our government in its current form and I am still voting Yes.

Yeah. Dont forget those feckers who vote Yes because the government told them to or cause they vote the opposite way to Sinn Fein. Darn annoying.

DarkJager

I'll be voting No again - it was my original choice about this treaty and no amount of tinkering or trying to force a yes vote is going to change that. If the EU don't want to listen to the opinion of the Irish people, then let them take their politcal cliques and **** right off..

Darragh29

dead air wrote: »

Voters choosing to vote No because they're angry with the government or because they detest Sarkozy disgust me.

The Lisbon treaty referendum is not a popularity contest.

I detest our government in its current form and I am still voting Yes.

And why are you voting yes???

dead air

ShooterSF wrote: »

Yeah. Dont forget those feckers who vote Yes because the government told them to or cause they vote the opposite way to Sinn Fein. Darn annoying.

Very true, there is a lot of that going on too.

Ronan|Raven

A yes vote is a vote for abortion!!!111111

I wish people who held this view as fact were aborted...

ShooterSF

Ronan|Raven wrote: »

A yes vote is a vote for abortion!!!111111

I wish people who held this view were aborted...

it is pretty bad. Though maybe they had a point now the government has gone back to the EU and demanded reassurances it wont happen (thats sarcasm by the way...)
Atleast with these "reassurances" we can reject the treaty and not have to listen about some yes voters accusing us of believing crap.

An Fear Aniar

At least the Irish people get to have a say in their futures:

http://www.iwantareferendum.com/whobacksareferendum.aspx

Vote NO until everyone in Europe is given the right to decide their own futures.

Why are the political elites trying to force this treaty on us? Because they think they know best?

The 2005 Labour manifesto said: “The new Constitutional Treaty ensures the new Europe can work effectively… We will put it to the British people in a referendum.”

During the run up to the election Gordon Brown said: "It's not as though this is being imposed on the country. People will have the chance to put their views." (26 January 2005)

According to opinion polls, 83% of Labour voters want a referendum (ICM June 2007)

.

Highsider

Ronan|Raven wrote: »

A yes vote is a vote for abortion!!!111111

I wish people who held this view as fact were aborted...

Thought there was some truth in that myself

Davidius

I ****ing knew it.

The Nazis won the war.

I absolutely ****ing new it.

Godwin's law FTW

dead air

Darragh29 wrote: »

And why are you voting yes???

A few reasons...

Trying to rebuild Ireland's reputation in Europe. A few years ago Ireland was the toast of Europe around the time we held the rotating presidency (actually playing a huge part in negotiating the treaty). We are now seen as a selfish brat, throwing a hissy fit because things are going our way.

With a Yes vote in Lisbon round I, we were given assurances on our neutrality and tax veto.

In fact, our constitution already provides for Ireland to opt out of any common defence policy, and as that part of our constitution is not being altered, I can't see how our neutrality can be eroded.

Losing a permanent Commissioner was the only problem I have with the treaty but this affects every other member state also. It seems to me to be a reasonable solution to having too many commissioners with a limited amount of portfolios. The new arrangements provide for each country to nominate a commissioner for every 2 of 3 terms, so all countries are equal in this regard.

The thing is, there's no real major advantages or selling point to ratifying the treaty. I'm voting yes (again) partly because I don't trust the likes of Declan Ganly, Coir, the assorted random collection of socialists et al. Also because of all the issues raised by the No campaign just appear to be totally exaggerated or false. Abortion? Military conscription? Come on now...

Darragh29

dead air wrote: »

A few reasons...

Trying to rebuild Ireland's reputation in Europe. A few years ago Ireland was the toast of Europe around the time we held the rotating presidency (actually playing a huge part in negotiating the treaty). We are now seen as a selfish brat, throwing a hissy fit because things are going our way.

With a Yes vote in Lisbon round I, we were given assurances on our neutrality and tax veto.

In fact, our constitution already provides for Ireland to opt out of any common defence policy, and as that part of our constitution is not being altered, I can't see how our neutrality can be eroded.

Losing a permanent Commissioner was the only problem I have with the treaty but this affects every other member state also. It seems to me to be a reasonable solution to having too many commissioners with a limited amount of portfolios. The new arrangements provide for each country to nominate a commissioner for every 2 of 3 terms, so all countries are equal in this regard.

The thing is, there's no real major advantages or selling point to ratifying the treaty. I'm voting yes (again) partly because I don't trust the likes of Declan Ganly, Coir, the assorted random collection of socialists et al. Also because of all the issues raised by the No campaign just appear to be totally exaggerated or false. Abortion? Military conscription? Come on now...

Most of what you've posted above seems to be based on a fear of what will happen to us if we vote no, rather than any real substantive argument being made for voting yes.

If there is any party in all of this that I don't trust, it's the party that has for the second time, refused to accept our democratic decision. There is no point in being rich if you are not free. This notion of ,"Jasus lads, we better not upset them or they'll take out the wooden spoon to us", this is what we are actually dealing with now with Brussels, "Do this, OR ELSE"!!!

dead air

Darragh29 wrote: »

Most of what you've posted above seems to be based on a fear of what will happen to us if we vote no, rather than any real substantive argument being made for voting yes.

If there is any party in all of this that I don't trust, it's the party that has for the second time, refused to accept our democratic decision. There is no point in being rich if you are not free. This notion of ,"Jasus lads, we better not upset them or they'll take out the wooden spoon to us", this is what we are actually dealing with now with Brussels, "Do this, OR ELSE"!!!

That's fair enough, I see why you would think that but that's not the case. If Ireland votes No (and I honestly don't know how the second referendum will pan out), I will be disappointed. Admittedly, I do fear that a second Irish rejection will remove Ireland from, as the say, "the heart of Europe". I am voting Yes based on what I have read on the treaty.

At the same time, I refuse to be upset or intimated by any European politician that shouts down the original Irish decision. I consider myself just as European as the rest of them that live on the continent. Again, I'm voting yes for reasons that make logical sense to me and not because our elected elite in this country and in Europe tell us that we have to.

I'd encourage undecided people to vote with the facts, not the hype.

mikemac

Long thread so maybe it was posted already.

Voting no to show your disgust with the government is ridiculous. Plus the main opposition parties campaigned for a Yes vote so you're achieving nothing.

Vote on the issues and if you don't understand the damn thing, then ask here or the boards EU forum or the referendum commission or anyone you want.

But if you want to kick the government then use the local elections and don't hijack this referendum

Ckal

micmclo wrote: »

Long thread so maybe it was posted already.

Voting no to show your disgust with the government is ridiculous. Plus the main opposition parties campaigned for a Yes vote so you're achieving nothing.

Vote on the issues and if you don't understand the damn thing, then ask here or the boards EU forum or the referendum commission or anyone you want.

But if you want to kick the government then use the local elections and don't hijack this referendum

Voting yes because you hate Sinn Fein and voting yes because you like Fianna Fail is hijacking the referendum, too. There are always two sides to things like this. I'm sure some yes voters voted yes because they like FF but never read the treaty.

You have a no voter saying "I voted no because I didn't understand what it was about. And I'm not ready to agree to something that I have no knowledge of"
And you have your Yes voter saying "I voted yes because Fianna Fail have done great things for this country and I back them 100% in everything."

AT LEAST the no voter referred back to the treaty, unlike the Yes voter, who did not. (Both statements above were two reasons I heard from both sides, btw)

I think it's time the "Bash the No-Voters!" game died because it's clearly a **** game and it's going nowhere.