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

David Norris - Post-Revelations

Options
1…2223252728…36

Comments

  • Options
    #722
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    looksee wrote: »
    We must hope for a President with the dignity and instinctive courtesy of Mary McAleese, someone who can put aside their ego in order to be the formal and professional reperesentative of the country.

    Like this?


  • Options
    #723
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    looksee wrote: »
    I was going to vote for Norris, now I am not.

    I was going to vote for Bertie, now I am not.


  • Options
    #724
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Android 666 wrote: »
    Like this?

    The overreaction to that incident has parallels here.


  • Options
    #725
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Android 666 wrote: »
    Like this?

    Isn't it time to move on a bit? When somebody uses their suffering as a metaphor, the Jews, or in that case, other like minded fundamentalists, do the routine two step upset mambo again!
    Boo hoo.


  • Options
    #726
    HarryPotter41
    Registered Users Posts: 1,402 ✭✭✭HarryPotter41


    Android 666 wrote: »
    Like this?


    The thing is, was she far wrong? Mary McAleese has been an excellent President at at the times when it was needed spoke as a voice for the ordinary Irish people in a way that David Norris would not have been able to because in my humble opinion he is detached from the ordinary ground floor of life in this country. The Nazi comment was not her finest hour but to compare that comment to David Norris' actions is laughable.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #727
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    The point I'm trying to make is that nobody is free from making errors of judgement. Mary McAlesse is as prone as anyone to making gaffes as anyone.


  • Options
    #728
    HarryPotter41
    Registered Users Posts: 1,402 ✭✭✭HarryPotter41


    Android 666 wrote: »
    The point I'm trying to make is that nobody is free from making errors of judgement. Mary McAlesse is as prone as anyone to making gaffes as anyone.


    Writing a longwinded, self preening, narcissitic letter to the defence of an adult who had sex with a minor is a hell of a lot different from making a comment which I am damn sure an intelligent woman like Mary McAleese, having said it, thought what are you at ya fool. She was doing an interview, David Norris sat down and put a lot of thought into his letter and had to go to the trouble of delivering same. Not comparable.


  • Options
    #729
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Android 666 wrote: »
    The point I'm trying to make is that nobody is free from making errors of judgement. Mary McAlesse is as prone as anyone to making gaffes as anyone.

    There is a scale though....slip of the tongue, unfortunate metaphors versus misuse of office in a statutory rape case. The latter, rightly, precludes somebody from running for high office.
    If we are ever going to get uncorrupted fair government then that has to be the way.


  • Options
    #730
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    There is a scale though....slip of the tongue, unfortunate metaphors versus misuse of office in a statutory rape case. The latter, rightly, precludes somebody from running for high office.
    If we are ever going to get uncorrupted fair government then that has to be the way.

    So back to my original question: should Gay Mitchell be excluded from running for office then?


  • Options
    #731
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,921 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Android 666 wrote: »
    The point I'm trying to make is that nobody is free from making errors of judgement. Mary McAlesse is as prone as anyone to making gaffes as anyone.
    Everyone makes gaffes but D.N. made a very very serious gaffe and paid the price. You cannot make little of sex abuse against minors so the result in this case was the right one.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #732
    HarryPotter41
    Registered Users Posts: 1,402 ✭✭✭HarryPotter41


    Android 666 wrote: »
    So back to my original question: should Gay Mitchell be excluded from running for office then?

    No, on the basis that he released his plea at the time and it was in the public domain and therefore any action that needed to be taken should have been taken then to preclude him from running for office of any description.


  • Options
    #733
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Android 666 wrote: »
    So back to my original question: should Gay Mitchell be excluded from running for office then?

    He definitely has questions to answer, although I fail to see how he was personally going to gain from his letter.
    Perhaps some of our cozy self reverential journos (who should have revealed all this stuff years ago instead of leaving it to a blogger) would maybe do their jobs for once and find out, instead of lecturing us from on high.


  • Options
    #734
    denhaagenite
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭denhaagenite


    Android 666 wrote: »
    So back to my original question: should Gay Mitchell be excluded from running for office then?

    I don't know how this is relevant, considering David Norris stepped out of the race of his own volition. There was public pressure but the decision was ultimately made by him.


  • Options
    #735
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    He definitely has questions to answer, although I fail to see how he was personally going to gain from his letter.

    It makes him a hero with the Iona institute.


  • Options
    #736
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Biggins wrote: »
    ...And of course there won't be one fifth the stick about Gay Mitchel's actions either - one is left to draw ones's own conclusions about that too.

    Gay Mitchell was doing what MEP's from all over Europe have been doing for years. Speaking out against the use of the death penalty and calling for life imprisonment as opposed to execution. Norris was intervening solely because the man in that case was his ex. Apples and oranges. One is the actions of a public representative of a country and union which consistently argues against the use of the death penalty. The other is a public representative getting involved in a case because it concerned his private life. Any attempt to 'draw conclusions' for how it is treatment screams of a childish tantrum tbh.


  • Options
    #737
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    denhaagenite wrote: »
    I don't know how this is relevant, considering David Norris stepped out of the race of his own volition. There was public pressure but the decision was ultimately made by him.

    Good point, I badly worded my post. So, should public pressure be brought on Gay Mitchell to step down from the presidential contest because of his 'abuse of power' in relation to Paul Hill?


  • Options
    #738
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    prinz wrote: »
    Gay Mitchell was doing what MEP's from all over Europe have been doing for years. Speaking out against the use of the death penalty and calling for life imprisonment as opposed to execution. Norris was intervening solely because the man in that case was his ex. Apples and oranges. One is the actions of a public representative of a country and union which consistently argues against the use of the death penalty. The other is a public representative getting involved in a case because it concerned his private life. Any attempt to 'draw conclusions' for how it is treatment screams of a childish tantrum tbh.

    How come Gay Mitchell singled out Paul Hill and not any of the other 64 people executed that year? Because he was an anti-abortionist plain and simple.


  • Options
    #739
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Android 666 wrote: »
    Good point, I badly worded my post. So, should public pressure be brought on Gay Mitchell to step down from the presidential contest because of his 'abuse of power' in relation to Paul Hill?

    If it's proven...yes.
    If anybody is found to misuse their office for personal gain...the door is the wooden thing in the wall.


  • Options
    #740
    Android 666
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭Android 666


    HarryPotter41 wrote: »
    No, on the basis that he released his plea at the time and it was in the public domain and therefore any action that needed to be taken should have been taken then to preclude him from running for office of any description.

    Total horse manure. The guy defends a double murderer with the same 'abuse of power' that Norris used and you think that's okay?

    I suppose this country gets the candidates it deserves.


  • Options
    #741
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,993 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    prinz wrote: »
    Gay Mitchell was doing what MEP's from all over Europe have been doing for years. Speaking out against the use of the death penalty and calling for life imprisonment as opposed to execution.
    Well what some people are asking is why Mitchell intervened in this particular case and no others. Why not the many that precedeed and succeededed this one? And if it's a coincidence that the case he pleaded some clemency in happened to feature a stance against abortion, something he has opposed himself.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #742
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Android 666 wrote: »
    How come Gay Mitchell singled out Paul Hill and not any of the other 64 people executed that year? Because he was an anti-abortionist plain and simple.

    Did he? Do we have proof of that? Did he appeal for the death penalty to be waived for anyone else any other year?


  • Options
    #743
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    ixoy wrote: »
    Well what some people are asking is why Mitchell intervened in this particular case and no others. Why not the many that precedeed and succeededed this one? And if it's a coincidence that the case he pleaded some clemency in happened to feature a stance against abortion, something he has opposed himself.

    http://breaking.tcm.ie/ireland/mitchell-condemns-nigerian-death-sentence-64945.html

    Seems he gets involved in more than this one case. Do you think that involved headed paper? Did it involve abortion?


  • Options
    #744
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    ixoy wrote: »
    Well what some people are asking is why Mitchell intervened in this particular case and no others. Why not the many that precedeed and succeededed this one? And if it's a coincidence that the case he pleaded some clemency in happened to feature a stance against abortion, something he has opposed himself.

    He has some history is opposing the death penalty and has, as far as I know, made similar representations in the past, but obviously not in every single death penalty case.

    His choice in picking this guy (who was unrepentant to the end) may be a bit odd, but if we're going to make this into something that should call into question his candidacy, we might as well send the bulldozers up to the park.


  • Options
    #745
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    There is also the subtle but important point to be made that FG have endorsed this guy, they have examined his record and have nominated him as their candidate. FG obviously have no problems with him writing the letters. Now it is up to us to vote for him or not vote for him.

    Norris didn't get that far. He couldn't get 20 TD's to ignore the fact that he wrote the letters. He did the right thing and departed.

    Now our 'free' (ha!) press have to do their jobs and scrutinise the remaining candidates fairly. (I won't be holding my breath on that one.)


  • Options
    #746
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,069 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Meh, whatever about Mitchell's letter.. he's a bad choice for the role of president imo. He opposed the decriminalisation of homosexuality and more recently the equalisation of age of consent laws and abortion law reforms. He's a politician that bases many of his views on religion. A 1950's style creeping Jesus. Is that what Ireland wants in 2012?


  • Options
    #747
    denhaagenite
    Registered Users Posts: 1,169 ✭✭✭denhaagenite


    Ah lads, stop the presses, we're all saved now that Dana is entering the race.


  • Options
    #748
    General Zod
    Registered Users Posts: 2,661 ✭✭✭General Zod


    prinz wrote: »
    http://breaking.tcm.ie/ireland/mitchell-condemns-nigerian-death-sentence-64945.html

    Seems he gets involved in more than this one case. Do you think that involved headed paper? Did it involve abortion?

    Ministers and TD's make statements on a lot of things, you're conflating the issues here.

    Norris stood down from the race, and rightly so, for writing to a foreign government on seanad headed paper pleading clemency in sentencing.

    Mitchell has not stood down for doing the same thing (albeit clemency in a death sentence case).


  • Options
    #749
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    denhaagenite wrote: »
    Ah lads, stop the presses, we're all saved now that Dana is entering the race.

    Don't even joke about it:eek:


    Jesus - you weren't joking
    http://www.highlandradio.com/2011/08/03/dana-set-enter-race-president/


  • Options
    #750
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,873 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    dvpower wrote: »
    we might as well send the bulldozers up to the park.

    I agree, it should be an option on the ballot paper, if you pick none of the above please vote to remove/dismantle the office of president.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #751
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    dvpower wrote: »
    Don't even joke about it:eek:


    Jesus - you weren't joking
    http://www.highlandradio.com/2011/08/03/dana-set-enter-race-president/

    Sweet Jesus.....I think we need a posse! :eek:


Advertisement