Pat Rabbite on Prime Time tonight

kaiser sauze

Amhran Nua wrote: »

He is right though, the signs were all there and clear to see, not hidden in some government ledgers, before, during and after the bubble. Why were Labour not rasing the alarm and trying to get people to listen? Populism? Is Pat Rabbitte not indulging in more of the same here? What will that translate to in terms of what they will do if and when they get into office?

I wasn't kidding when I said they scared the bejaysus out of me.

I am not debating the signs, I am stating who managed the economy to the implosion that we have now.

It was a Fianna Fáil led government.

Spudmonkey

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Let's not fool ourselves that anyone selling bad news would have been murdered by the electorate during the bubble. That's a very good reason why, assuming they are acting rationally, the opposition were not ringing alarm bells or talking about busts (if they even anticipated the eventuality).

There are three villains in this story. Fianna Failure, the eletorate, and the system. We can hopefully change the system (in the teeth of opposition of the political establishment, and I'm not just talking about FF here). We can relegate FF to electoral oblivion - for a while. But we are stuck with a pretty ignorant, short-termist, insight-free electorate who gave them the keys to the car that they drove off the cliff.

So what Labour engaged in was populism just like FF? Who's to say thats not what they are all about now? All they think about is their own political backsides, nothing more and nothing less.

I am willing to relegate FF into oblivion when the next election comes around. I don't see any political alternative however, not from Labour anyhow.

kaiser sauze

Spudmonkey wrote: »

Were Labour in power, they would not have done any different as indicated by Pat Rabitte's position. Saying that they didn't have the mechanism in which to create policies is straw manning tbh.

Asserting that Labour would have done something that they never had an opportunity to implement is just not history as it happened.

Monty Burnz

Spudmonkey wrote: »

So what Labour engaged in was populism just like FF? Who's to say thats not what they are all about now? All they think about is their own political backsides, nothing more and nothing less.

I am willing to relegate FF into oblivion when the next election comes around. I don't see any political alternative however, not from Labour anyhow.

The alternatives are not great. But given the choice between two poor candidates and candidate that has been proven time and again to be riddled with incompetence and corruption, I'll take a chance on the other guys.

As I've tried to argue, the problem unfortunately goes deeper than just Fianna Failure. You've certainly heard the expression that you get the government you deserve. Unfortunately, I think that's exactly what we have.

Amhran Nua

kaiser sauze wrote: »

I am not debating the signs, I am stating who managed the economy to the implosion that we have now.

Have Labour got a defined step-by-step plan to lead us out of this implosion?

Monty Burnz

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Have Labour got a defined step-by-step plan to lead us out of this implosion?

I'm no fan of Labour, but if they did come up with some sort of fiction like that at short notice, I'd have no faith in them at all. We are in serious trouble, and anyone selling you easy answers is not to be trusted. Those folks are the political equivalent of the faith-healers who prey on cancer sufferers.

kaiser sauze

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

An obligation that it can be argued they did.

You probably turn the TV off when Joan Burton comes on, that is your deficiency.

Eamon Gilmore has been trying to extract answers from Cowen, and Ahern before him, for years now. Just because you have blinkers to what Labour have been doing doesn't mean they abdicated their responsibilities.

Even when Rabbitte was leader of Labour, he made a weekly habit of skewering Ahern.

In any case, we are here now and Fianna Fáil led us here. Suck it up!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

norrie rugger

omerin wrote: »

I got the impression that Pat Rabbite's rant was pre rehearsed. He fluffed his lines though when he kept referring to "you" in his rant, he must have been rehearsing thinking one of the Brians were going to be on the program.

What exactly is incorrect about referring to a group as "you"?

You is also plural and can rightly be used to refer to the government

kaiser sauze

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Have Labour got a defined step-by-step plan to lead us out of this implosion?

I'm sure something will appear when a general election is announced.

It's called a manifesto.

Nemi

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Who cares - at least he spoke the truth.

If you read back over the relevant chain of posts, and some of the recent ones, you'll see that's too gentle an assessment. If Pat Rabbitte and Labour were/are not offering any fundemental alternative, then he isn't speaking the truth.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

There are three villains in this story. Fianna Failure, the eletorate, and the system. We can hopefully change the system (in the teeth of opposition of the political establishment, and I'm not just talking about FF here). We can relegate FF to electoral oblivion - for a while. But we are stuck with a pretty ignorant, short-termist, insight-free electorate who gave them the keys to the car that they drove off the cliff.

I think that's a good way of putting it. Only, don't overstress the 'ignorant' part of the equation.. Large elements of that electorate are not ignorant, but correctly reading their interests. An awful lot of people got to enjoy a lifestyle that, strictly speaking, they didn't earn. Of course, now the battle is on for who actually has to pay the resulting debts.

And I don't mean some gold circle. I mean several hundred thousand voters, who will continue to see that their interests are best expressed by FF.

Amhran Nua

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I'm no fan of Labour, but if they did come up with some sort of fiction like that at short notice, I'd have no faith in them at all. We are in serious trouble, and anyone selling you easy answers is not to be trusted. Those folks are the political equivalent of the faith-healers who prey on cancer sufferers.

So no plan is better than any plan? Besides which, they've had as much time as the government to come up with something, and yet they have nothing; also, there is no reason to believe that the answers must neccessarily be easy.

kaiser sauze wrote: »

I'm sure something will appear when a general election is announced.

It's called a manifesto.

Its called winging it and hoping nobody sees that the emporer has no clothes, if you ask me. Haven't we had enough of that from FF already?

Rubik.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

OK, but there is world of difference between an election manifesto and a negotiated program of government, with Labour as the junior partner. If FG/Lab had won the 2007 General Election, the Minister of Finance would most likely have been Richard Bruton.

kaiser sauze

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Its called winging it and hoping nobody sees that the emporer has no clothes, if you ask me. Haven't we had enough of that from FF already?

You are mistaking a manifesto for what actually happens

Amhran Nua

kaiser sauze wrote: »

You are mistaking a manifesto for what actually happens

Have we got a single clue what Labour will do if they get into government? If not, how could anyone reasonably support them?

20Cent

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Have we got a single clue what Labour will do if they get into government? If not, how could anyone reasonably support them?

On a side note could you post a link to amhran Nua's manifesto?
On an iPhone want a capital a but can't be arsed with the auto spell no offence.

Amhran Nua

20Cent wrote: »

On a side note could you post a link to amhran Nua's manifesto?
On an iPhone want a capital a but can't be arsed with the auto spell no offence.

http://amhrannua.com/irish-politics-policies

It might take a while to read that lot on an iphone. More ideas coming down the pipe in the forum here also:

http://amhrannua.com/public-forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=268

KetchupKid

Nemi wrote: »

An awful lot of people got to enjoy a lifestyle that, strictly speaking, they didn't earn. Of course, now the battle is on for who actually has to pay the resulting debts.

And I don't mean some gold circle. I mean several hundred thousand voters, who will continue to see that their interests are best expressed by FF.

Yes, lot of people got to enjoy a lifestyle they didn't earn, but not several hundred thousand, and that's the problem, many people saw their home equity soar and even though their gains were only on paper, they had the perception of doing great under Fianna Fail. Yes, some were lucky to sell at or near the peak, but even more over extended themselves and bought second and third properties and are now in negative equity. This reminds me of the case in America 2 years ago when people like Joe the Plumber thought they'd be better off under the Republicans with the likes of Bush and McCain, even though they were actually better off under Obama and the Democrats. These misguided thought and dreamed that some day they would be rich and unrealistically voted for the party that only looked after the rich. Fianna Fail has also only looked after the best interests of the rich and those that caused all the trouble in the first place. We don't know if Fine Gail or Labour would have done better, but they certainly couldn't have done any worse. I don't have any unrealistic dreams of ever being rich and I'm certainly not going to vote for the party that has propped up and protected the rich while selling the rest of us down the river!!

kaiser sauze

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Have we got a single clue what Labour will do if they get into government? If not, how could anyone reasonably support them?

If they did some step-by-step now, like you demand, it would be out of date by the time of a likely general election such is the massive daily changes this country is going through right now.

The government's figures and stances from last week are out-of-date, so why bother?

If they posted one now, you and donegalfella would just quote it out of context. A lot like donegalfella quoted Rabbitte, from 2007, out of context and it was used by DeVore as a thread starter in AH. Both of them look rather foolish now.

Amhran Nua

kaiser sauze wrote: »

If they did some step-by-step now, like you demand, it would be out of date by the time of a likely general election such is the massive daily changes this country is going through right now.

Why, we put up our policies at the start of last year, and they are as valid today as they were then. We're adding to them and refining them all the time, as well.

kaiser sauze

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Why, we put up our policies at the start of last year, and they are as valid today as they were then. We're adding to them and refining them all the time, as well.

A lot of your policies are aspirational and do not depend on an underlying economy's strength or weakness.

It is also easy to make sweeping, grandiose, declarations when you have no representatives in parliament.

lucernarian

KetchupKid wrote: »

Yes, lot of people got to enjoy a lifestyle they didn't earn, but not several hundred thousand

I think Nemi's post was very accurate and I see no reason to think that Fianna Fáil would only have a couple of thousand relatives, property developers and colleagues remaining who would vote for them. If reasonable credence is given to the opinion polls, 20% of the electorate is still a sizeable chunk of opinion who think FF TDs would better them for whatever good or bad reason. I can only assume the Shy Tory effect would mean the numbers would be higher still.

Amhran Nua

kaiser sauze wrote: »

A lot of your policies are aspirational and do not depend on an underlying economy's strength or weakness.

Whatever about aspirational, you are correct in that a lot of them can be done on a shoestring, many are designed to be self sustaining, especially with upcoming refinements. If a handful of enthusiastic volunteers can manage it, why isn't Labour coming out with something, anything at all?

kaiser sauze wrote: »

It is also easy to make sweeping, grandiose, declarations when you have no representatives in parliament.

Is it so hard to make any statements when you have representatives in the Dáil? FG have produced quite a few.

I repeat, it is insanity, beyond comprehension, to follow a party with no policies.

kaiser sauze

Amhran Nua wrote: »

I repeat, it is insanity, beyond comprehension, to follow a party with no policies.

Are you saying that I follow Labour?

That been said, a party with no policies could also mean Fianna Fáil!

Amhran Nua

kaiser sauze wrote: »

Are you saying that I follow Labour?

Do you?

kaiser sauze wrote: »

That been said, a party with no policies could also mean Fianna Fáil!

Correct. The FF machine has long since grasped that under our electoral system, you don't need to have national policies, just keep filling in the potholes and showing up to the right funerals. Thats why we have such weak and dubious leadership on all sides. Change the electoral system and you change the landscape.

kaiser sauze

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Do you?

That's fine, I thought for a minute you were making a baseless assertion that I support The Labour Party.'

johnn

Rabbite sounded like he had a right carrot up his ass.

Spudmonkey

kaiser sauze wrote: »

Asserting that Labour would have done something that they never had an opportunity to implement is just not history as it happened.

Look mate, no-one is arguing that FF aren't to blame or that what happened didn't happen. But there is no denying that Labour have said in the past that the actions they would have implemented are along much the same lines as FF. In fact I distinctly remember several budgets which Labour shouted down as they deemed increases to welfare and pensions too low.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

The alternatives are not great. But given the choice between two poor candidates and candidate that has been proven time and again to be riddled with incompetence and corruption, I'll take a chance on the other guys.

As I've tried to argue, the problem unfortunately goes deeper than just Fianna Failure. You've certainly heard the expression that you get the government you deserve. Unfortunately, I think that's exactly what we have.

So you have to vote for the least worst option? Voting for B simply because he isn't A, isn't good enough and is precisely the reason the electorate get what they deserve.

Gator

Just saw it and I have to say it is the first real comment I have heard from a politician..... ever...you can see that he cannot control himself and has a deep personnal felling about it.

All I have to say is fair play to him....FF have destroyed the country but unfortunatly there isnt much choice when you look at the rest

yosemite_sam

It was a cheap shot at someone who wasn't up to defending himself

Nemi

KetchupKid wrote: »

Yes, lot of people got to enjoy a lifestyle they didn't earn, but not several hundred thousand, and that's the problem, many people saw their home equity soar and even though their gains were only on paper, they had the perception of doing great under Fianna Fail. Yes, some were lucky to sell at or near the peak, but even more over extended themselves and bought second and third properties and are now in negative equity.

I'm not sure that the accounting works out that neatly. And many people really did earn substantially more during that period than you'd expect - right down to hairdressers. That bubble money moved everywhere. Earnings in the building trade benefited. Earnings in the public sector benefited. Earnings in banking benefited. Its not that hard to work up a figure of several hundred thousand people.

FF can be seen as attempting to protect the interests of a number of definable groups. Anyone whose wealth depends on property - given that a significant effect of support for the banking sector is delaying both a fall in property values and the necessity for indebted people to unload their assets for whatever they can get for them. Through the Croke Park Agreement, they are protecting the gains made by the public sector during that period. Pensioners are another group, who actually vote, that have had their boom-time gains largely protected thus far.

Monty Burnz

yosemite_sam wrote: »

It was a cheap shot at someone who wasn't up to defending himself

Because he's a lightweight who shouldn't be in government? Or because he's not a bull****ter who can think fast enough to spew a load of nonsense to excuse Fianna Failure bankrupting the country?

neilster

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Because he's a lightweight who shouldn't be in government? Or because he's not a bull****ter who can think fast enough to spew a load of nonsense to excuse Fianna Failure bankrupting the country?

In December 2006 Richard Bruton stood up to implore ...to beseech ...to beg ....Brian Cowen to eliminate Stamp Duty as the property bubbles started to fragment ...thereby suggesting to artificially pump up the demand again

who is it that says that Fianna Fail bankrupted the country ....all the political parties did if they demanded more , FF shid have said stop

but

if working mothers demanded more childrens allowance
if parents demanded more teachers
if people demanded more health spending & Gardai
if the grey voters demanded increased pensions
if CORI demanded more welfare payments
if businesses lobbied for increased tax allowances
if parents asked for no university fees

have i missed anyone cos we are all to blame and varying degrees we have all benefitted and now on the reverse we to different degrees are suffering and will suffer more ? maybe instead of the blame game we can try as patriots to get this country back in the game ...i love this country and people particularly at this moment underestimate us but i dont

P. Breathnach

neilster wrote: »

In December 2006 Richard Bruton stood up to implore ...to beseech ...to beg ....Brian Cowen to eliminate Stamp Duty as the property bubbles started to fragment ...thereby suggesting to artificially pump up the demand again...

Don't stop there: what answer did he get?

neilster

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Because he's a lightweight who shouldn't be in government? Or because he's not a bull****ter who can think fast enough to spew a load of nonsense to excuse Fianna Failure bankrupting the country?

I think we can criticise Pat Carey at exactly the same moment that Pat Rabbitte gives us a policy :

on Public Sector Pay
on the Croke Park Agreement
on Water Charges
on Property Taxes
on the 2010 Budget correction without making cuts or any other major matter

How you can say we cant possibly save the banks whilst also knowing that no OECD country or serious soverign has welched on Domestic Bank debt ever ...including S Korea, Latvia, Hungary , Sweden , Finland, Norway in their own bank crises

we cant include Argentina or Zimbabwe cos maybe we shouldnt join their elite club of banana debt repayment

neilster

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Don't stop there: what answer did he get?

well history shows that there was no elimination of stamp duty , whats your point

neilster

Nemi wrote: »

I'm not sure that the accounting works out that neatly. And many people really did earn substantially more during that period than you'd expect - right down to hairdressers. That bubble money moved everywhere. Earnings in the building trade benefited. Earnings in the public sector benefited. Earnings in banking benefited. Its not that hard to work up a figure of several hundred thousand people.

FF can be seen as attempting to protect the interests of a number of definable groups. Anyone whose wealth depends on property - given that a significant effect of support for the banking sector is delaying both a fall in property values and the necessity for indebted people to unload their assets for whatever they can get for them. Through the Croke Park Agreement, they are protecting the gains made by the public sector during that period. Pensioners are another group, who actually vote, that have had their boom-time gains largely protected thus far.

You can go further with this point ...someone mentioned solicitors lucky to have a job or salary halved ..there was solicitors doing two conveyances a week ...riding the property bubble for all it was worth..you mean that money went up in smoke ...it is banked away....have the fees gone down ...exact opposite ..if there was too many solicitors during the boom it is supply and demand but these are the same people baying for public sector blood whilst they keep an eye on their section 23 houses in longford,,leitrim wherever which never need a tenant whilst our tax allowance pays for it

jmayo

F**ks sake for some of the posters around here it appears more important who might have wrecked the economy than who did actually wreck the economy.

Just remember in future when you have to use a public hospital, have to go help your kids school with a dig out to buy toilet roll and watch the fact they are in prefabs, watch you elderly relatives receive cr** treatment whilst left ontrolleys, watch your kids emigrate, cough up even more for even worse services, perhaps even watch your ill child or disabled child recieve substandard care and attention, then posters remember who cuased this and not who might have caused this.

If we live in the realm of might haves, Mayo might have won a few All-Irelands over the last 15 years, Ireland might have gotten to a few world cup tournaments, roy keane might have led us to a world cup final, Dell might have stayed in Limerick, or bertie and all the ff boyos might have had a shred of decency and honesty.
They are all might haves which do not change the facts we have today.

BTW for any folks who didn't know, one of biffo's mates in Offaly had a company that made a fortune renting portocabins to schools?

P. Breathnach

neilster wrote: »

well history shows that there was no elimination of stamp duty , whats your point

My main point is that there is more to be said. Fine Gael were seeking a reduction in, or elimination of, stamp duty. There was also a campaign in the media (well, in the Indo, led by Jody Corcoran) for the same thing. I can't remember if Labour took a position on the question at the time.

Brian Cowen said no, and defended his decision with economic arguments. It was the only time in Brian Cowen's public life that I was impressed with his performance.

People seem to have forgotten his rise to power. He left few footprints as he was, if I may describe it thus, "going forward". Then he got the top job, and we soon learned that he could not fill Bertie's shoes.

The best people have their bad points, and the worst people have their good points.

Monty Burnz

neilster wrote: »

In December 2006 Richard Bruton stood up to implore ...to beseech ...to beg ....Brian Cowen to eliminate Stamp Duty as the property bubbles started to fragment ...thereby suggesting to artificially pump up the demand again

Would that not also had the effect of reducing our dependence on one-off property transaction taxes?

Listen, Fianna Failure can spin themselves into the grave this time if they like - I think anyone with a brain has finally seen where supporting corrupt incompetents leads to.

ArtSmart

mgmt wrote: »

Left wing politics got us into this ****e.

Spudmonkey

jmayo wrote: »

F**ks sake for some of the posters around here it appears more important who might have wrecked the economy than who did actually wreck the economy.

Personally I don't think so jmayo. What I do think is more important is finding a credible alternative to the gombeens we have now, as opposed to voting for Eamon for the simple reason he isn't Brian with that being the only reason.

norrie rugger

yosemite_sam wrote: »

It was a cheap shot at someone who wasn't up to defending himself

Then he should not be there.
Look of all of the smug gits in FF, Pat really does seem like a good guy and is not directly to blame but he IS supporting the government and was acting as their representation. He was a fair target.
I did feel a bit sorry for him on a personal level but as a FF TD/Minister he deserves all he gets (in a professional manner)

P. Breathnach

norrie rugger wrote: »

Then he should not be there.
Look of all of the smug gits in FF, Pat really does seem like a good guy and is not directly to blame but he IS supporting the government and was acting as their representation. He was a fair target.
I did feel a bit sorry for him on a personal level but as a FF TD/Minister he deserves all he gets (in a professional manner)

In effect, you are justifying the reduction of political discussion to the level of playground bullying. Rabbitte wins because he shouts louder than his mild-mannered opponent.

PeakOutput

P. Breathnach wrote: »

In effect, you are justifying the reduction of political discussion to the level of playground bullying. Rabbitte wins because he shouts louder than his mild-mannered opponent.

i was wondering would people have this opinion alright

i only saw the clip last night and i did kind of feel sorry for pat but i also think he is a fair target

i think pat rabbitte took the opportunity to get the headlines but nothing he said was untrue really so im a bit on the fence

i might have to watch the whole show to see if a decent political debate did actually happen before that if it did theni guess i dont have too much of a problem with pat rabitte using that as his conclusion but if they were both kind of on par and he wasnt able to beat him with political points and thats how he decided to get the upper hand then he is a bit of a plank

he reminded me of a guy who attacked me verbally in the train station the other day. i was arguiing over a ticket and he came up(random member of the public, little fat bald man) shouting at me that he was a citizen and a taxpayer and how dare i this and how dare i that he shut right up when i said i was both those things too so i guess he though i was a foreigner

anyway pat rabitte 10 out of 10 for truth 6 out of 10 for method

norrie rugger

P. Breathnach wrote: »

In effect, you are justifying the reduction of political discussion to the level of playground bullying. Rabbitte wins because he shouts louder than his mild-mannered opponent.

Don't try to put words in my mouth.
I could just as easily say that you are condoning the government sending mild mannered TD's out, as they are untouchable.

Carey is an elected official, who entere public life, knowing the ramifications of that. He is a member of FF, government and a minister. If he is not up for the game, then he should not play.


Rabbitte wins becaue he is RIGHT, not because Carey is weak

P. Breathnach

norrie rugger wrote: »

Don't try to put words in my mouth.

I didn't.

norrie rugger

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I didn't.

Way to avoid the entire post, beyond that

P. Breathnach

norrie rugger wrote: »

Way to avoid the entire post, beyond that

Frankly, I'm not interested; I'm a mild-mannered person, and you are trying to to browbeat me.

Het-Field

ninty9er wrote: »

At this point I'd consider not so that some of the idiots in the parliamentary party could be purged, however given the constituency I vote in that's not going to be generally very helpful as both TDs would freely admit things have gone wrong, FF presided over terrible waste and that the leadership has been lacking. They realise it, but are just not sure what to do about it.

On the other hand there are the John O'Donoghues of this world. Great poet, but what's he doing in the Dáil.

Problem with not voting FF is that the ones that should lose their seats get re-elected on their pot-hole fixing record and the ones who balance being a public representative with being a legislator will get left behind on the scrapheap and a whole generation in the middle will be lost.

It's not for any policy reason at the moment as I don't see to many policy differences in reality, however where they do exist, I'm generally not too pushed.

FF policy (admittedly post election review) would be closest to my personal views on 3rd level funding, however this has been sacrificed in the programme for government. I have no faith in FGs idea of a graduate tax as taxes don't transcend international borders and I do not believe in the Labour Party and Green's idealogical "free education" policy. However as an elected representative myself, I have a mandate to oppose my personal view and can see why people would argue that way, I just don't agree with them.

When people come to see "Fair Care" for what it actually is in a nutshell (complete privatisation of the health service, but publicly funded), they will see that things aren't all rosy, but could be worse.

I fully believe, though the smartarses on this forum will laugh and mock, that the banks will eventually repay every penny owed to the taxpayer for recapitalisation.

I think in hindsight, Anglo should have been allowed to fail. It would have been of comparatively little consequence to us as opposed to the European countries whose banks were throwing money at Anglo on a wholesale basis in exactly the same manner as Anglo was doing on a commercial and retail basis. That sentence is the reason we are where we are.

We would not have a huge deficit were it not for Anglo, and Anglo alone. No other bank set out to corner the market like Anglo, but they were forced to follow suit to keep custom. Nobody raised an eyebrow, not the regulator, not the ECB, not the banks that were providing the money.

People need to get real. The government didn't set out to create this situation, no government would. If any government set out to do this, then fair enough, it should be ashamed, but anyone, anyone, anyone, who thinks that any government would set out to do to a country what has happened to Ireland should go see a psychologist to see where their childhood went wrong!

The government has presided over a massive mess, but anyone who thinks that any member of the government hasn't tried their best to keep things on track should be the ones hanging their head in shame for even thinking that possible of someone who has at least had the good grace to put themselves before the electorate before taking it upon themselves to moan, whinge and generally disrespect the mandate given to each TD in Dáil Éireann.

A long answer, but that's my Pat Rabbitte moment for today.

That is a comedic response, which is NOT couched in reality at all.

I think you have just created the largest of large strawmen by suggesting that other posters on this forum believe that the Government set out to cause this crisis. We all know that they didnt set out to do so. However, their actions were so wantonly stupid, lacking any sense of hindsight of financial bubbles and artificially inflated markets, that it could be equated to a resolution to cause the crisis.

"We would not have a huge defecit if it were not for Anglo". WRONG ! Anglo is part of the problem. However, Government expenditure was greatly exacerbated by Bertie Ahern's penchant for popularity, and Brian Cowen's willing complicity Bertie's drive to be loved. 10 % increases per annum were unsustainable. However, it suited the government's purpose, and allowed the likes of Mary Hanafin to appear on Questions and Answers spouting about the large amounts spent on this, that and the other. If the Government had spent smarter, and not harder, we would have a far more managable condition on our hands. Of course, the populists dont see the wood from the trees, and as a result we are where we are. They allowed rent prices sore, they allowed electricity prices remain at some of the highest in Europe, and they ramped up PRSI and minimum wages in an attempt to curry favour with "the staff" (Bertie's phrase in relation to the Willie Walsh issue at Aer Lingus).

The policies of this Government have
1.Ensured that the IMF and the EU are now directly involved in the budgetary and financial affairs of the country.
2.Provided for a nation defecit of something around 24 Billion Euro
3.Allowed for our unemployment levels to reach 13%
4.Our borrowing abilities severely curtailed. Is our interest rate on Irish bonds currently sitting around 8.3 % ??
5.Our competitiveness is virtually shot, with potential "management" of our low corporation tax rate on the cards.
6.A massive leadership vaccum, where our "Prime Minister" has failed to make ANY "state of the nation addresses". He has never spoken to the people, and is now resorting to the usual reactionary pot shots at Fine Gael, Labour and Sinn Fein (all of whom I cannot stand)

The aformentioned matters fail to mention the dirty bib suffered by the Government after the Ryan Report, the Willie O Dea issue, and the John O Donoghue scandel ("iv been true to myself" and all that B.S). The first year of this Government was spent with Bertie bouncing up and down to the Tribunal, where he told the most extraordinary stories, before his position became so untenable that he was forced to resign. Further, we have had the resignations of Martin Cullen, and Jim McDaid. The Government also suffered over the High Court ruling handed down by Nick Kearns in the High Court in relation to Sinn Fein and Pearce Doherty. The public issued a rebuke of FF/GP in the Local Elections. Eoin Ryan lost his European seat to a Trot (which speaks volumes about the public sentiments towards the incumbent Government).

You have picked a few examples of opposition policy which you dont like. Fist you say "Taxes dont transcend national boarders". Regrettably for you, you have misunderstood FG's policy in relation to the Graduate tax. Failure to pay, can result in the issuing of a summons which will allow the courts to take care of non-complicance.

Fair Care is similar to the current system of legal aid, and as such is quite workable. You have just decided to try and spin it. However, the state's health policy is one of the few things I would subscribe to.

Either way, it is impossible to vindicate a vote for FF at the moment. The IMF have come in under their watch. Think about that.