The Official After Hours Presidential Election Thread **POLL RESET 23/10**

seamus

Fishooks12 wrote: »

so should we not demand a higher standard from our potential president?

A higher standard of what though? There was nothing underhand about these payments. He wasn't doing something that any of the rest of us wouldn't do. Everything was above board, he was "correctly" in receipt of these payments and he doesn't seem to have made any attempt to hide them.

But anyone with the slightest bit of media savvy would have recognised long ago that this is exactly the kind of thing that would seriously irriate the man on the street.
Since our president is a ceremonial role - it's all about appearances and PR, there are no policies - do we want someone who has difficulty managing their own PR to this degree?

Granted, no other candidate has seen the scrutiny that he has, not even McGuinness, and I still don't believe that he has any more skeletons than the rest of them. The rest of them simply haven't had every member of the media rifling through their closet.

But there's no reason to believe that the ongoing anti-Norris campaign will cease if gets elected, and how will his management of any future "reveals" reflect on the country as a whole?

Sunnyisland

newballsplease wrote: »

thats not head of state is it?

She was the first openly gay leader of a country.

My name is URL

I was gob-smacked by Norris' reaction to Vincent's question about the other letters last night. He had a complete meltdown. Whatever semblance of frankness he had disappeared as far as I'm concerned. If he didn't want to disclose the details of the letters or of who advised him not to release said details then he should have just said so outright instead of going on the defensive. The man looked ridiculous.

Da Shins Kelly

realies wrote: »

She was the first openly gay leader of a country.

What I said was that David Norris would be the first openly gay head of state. Which is true.

Morlar

seamus wrote: »

A higher standard of what though? There was nothing underhand about these payments. He wasn't doing something that any of the rest of us wouldn't do.

As before - speak for yourself. Not everyone would do that - not everyone by a long shot.

seamus wrote: »

Granted, no other candidate has seen the scrutiny that he has, not even McGuinness,

McGuinness has opened his personal bank account to full media scrutiny. Norris whose 'life is an open book' has illustrated repeatedly that he is genetically incapable of providing a straight answer to even the most simple questions.

Seachmall

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

No, look it up. Can you name any other head of state that was/is openly gay?

Nero, in the 1st century.

seamus

Morlar wrote: »

As before - speak for yourself. Not everyone would do that - not everyone by a long shot.

Let's put it this way:

You work for a company, sitting at a computer. You develop RSI, which makes it impossible to use a computer all day any more, and a doctor confirms this. Your employer turns to you and says, "You can't work for us anymore, but company policy says that we will pay you until you retire, and you are not restricted from working elsewhere".
You're telling me you'd turn around and say, "Ah no, it's grand, I don't want the money.". My arse you would.

Anyone who says that they would turn down money being legitimately and freely given to them is either deluded about themselves or plain lying.

Morlar

seamus wrote: »

Let's put it this way:
...

Let's not. None of that is what happened here.

Why are you going to such ridiculous lengths to come up with convoluted equivocations for this behaviour ?

Ah, Shur we'd all do that. No, we would not. Jackie Healy Ray would, Ahern would I would not. Norris is the person here who DID that.

. . . Claim a fulltime disability pension while simultaneously working full time in a well paid, (unvouched expenses) taxpayer funded role for the state.

He is also the one standing in the Presidential Election.

Fishooks12

seamus wrote: »

Let's put it this way:

You work for a company, sitting at a computer. You develop RSI, which makes it impossible to use a computer all day any more, and a doctor confirms this. Your employer turns to you and says, "You can't work for us anymore, but company policy says that we will pay you until you retire, and you are not restricted from working elsewhere".
You're telling me you'd turn around and say, "Ah no, it's grand, I don't want the money.". My arse you would.

Anyone who says that they would turn down money being legitimately and freely given to them is either deluded about themselves or plain lying.

ridiculous scenario that has nothing to do with Sen Norris situation.

seamus

Morlar wrote: »

Let's not. None of that is what happened here.

That's exactly what happened. He was declared permanently unable to lecture for the college, so the college told him that they were going to continue to pay him, insisting that he would not lecture for them despite being paid.

efb

It was for hepatitis. see rte.ie

efb

Good to see that McGuinness banks with an Irish Bank.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1005/mcguinness.pdf

cowzerp

seamus wrote: »

That's exactly what happened. He was declared permanently unable to lecture for the college, so the college told him that they were going to continue to pay him, insisting that he would not lecture for them despite being paid.

His Illness in his own words was that he was getting tired, too tired too talk at lectures! Yet he's not too tired to talk in the Seanad or waffle the ears of any reporter in the media until asked questions he does not want to answer

This is cronyism at it's very worst

efb

cowzerp wrote: »

His Illness in his own words was that he was getting tired, too tired too talk at lectures! Yet he's not too tired to talk in the Seanad or waffle the ears of any reporter in the media until asked questions he does not want to answer

This is cronyism at it's very worst

It was for hepatitis. I don't think you can 'fake' that.

Morlar

seamus wrote: »

That's exactly what happened. He was declared permanently unable to lecture for the college, so the college told him that they were going to continue to pay him, insisting that he would not lecture for them despite being paid.

It's always someone elses fault with Norris isn't it ?

The sympathetic to pederasty interview = Journalists fault.

refusing to clarify views on age of consent between older males and younger males= 'My life is an open book'.

The clemency letter for a 40 yr old who statutorily raped a minor, on senate paper = 'My life is an open book'.

The letters he refuses to release= Legal advice/'My life is an open book'.

Claiming fulltime disability @30k pa for 16 yrs while simultaneously working fulltime for the state in a well paid, unvouched expenses role = 'Trinity offered'.

Is there any point in the whole Norris 'my life is an open book' ongoing drama where personal responsibility comes into play ?

ebbsy

If it means that we can all get disability when tired then Im voting for Norris.:D

Bannasidhe

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

No, look it up. Can you name any other head of state that was/is openly gay?

King Edward II of England.
Queen Christina of Sweden.

What is the relevance of the question?

Paparazzo

Morlar wrote: »

It's always someone elses fault with Norris isn't it ?

The sympathetic to pederasty interview = Journalists fault.

refusing to clarify views on age of consent between older males and younger males= 'My life is an open book'.

The clemency letter for a 40 yr old who statutorily raped a minor, on senate paper = 'My life is an open book'.

The letters he refuses to release= Legal advice/'My life is an open book'.

Claiming fulltime disability @30k pa for 16 yrs while simultaneously working fulltime for the state in a well paid, unvouched expenses role = 'Trinity offered'.

Is there any point in the whole Norris 'my life is an open book' ongoing drama where personal responsibility comes into play ?

...But when MMG orders innocent people to get shot in the knees = He didn't really, if you have proof why don't you go to the police

efb

ebbsy wrote: »

If it means that we can all get disability when tired then Im voting for Norris.:D

If you are employed by trinity and the medical professionals decide so, yes.

Otherwise, sign here.

seamus

Morlar wrote: »

Is there any point in the whole Norris 'my life is an open book' ongoing drama where personal responsibility comes into play ?

Around about the time where he gave a public press conference where he took personal responsibility?

I guess you wouldn't remember that though because your blinkers don't allow you to see anything past the faux outrage the media want you to have.

Seachmall

Paparazzo wrote: »

...But when MMG orders innocent people to get shot in the knees = He didn't really, if you have proof why don't you go to the police

One is an unfounded accusation, the other is admitted by the party involved.

See the difference?

Not saying Norris has done anything wrong here, but there's no comparison to your point.

farna_boy

seamus wrote: »

That's exactly what happened. He was declared permanently unable to lecture for the college, so the college told him that they were going to continue to pay him, insisting that he would not lecture for them despite being paid.

So you don't have any problems with your politicians essentially exploiting the system and getting paid twice? Especially in a time of economic crisis?

He may not be a welfare cheat but it is morally wrong, especially when you are a representative of the country and supposed to be leading the citizens by example.

I wonder if you would be so forgiving if a Fianna Fail member was doing the same thing.

Paparazzo

Seachmall wrote: »

One is an unfounded accusation, the other is admitted by the party involved.

See the difference?

Yeah, as head of the IRA he just sat around not talking to anyone, never told anyone to do anything. He didn't even know what was going on :rolleyes:

Seachmall

Paparazzo wrote: »

Yeah, as head of the IRA he just sat around not talking to anyone, never told anyone to do anything. He didn't even know what was going on :rolleyes:

"if you have proof why don't you go to the police"

MMG accusations = Speculative
Norris accusations = Openly admitted.

efb

farna_boy wrote: »

So you don't have any problems with your politicians essentially exploiting the system and getting paid twice? Especially in a time of economic crisis?

He may not be a welfare cheat but it is morally wrong, especially when you are a representative of the country and supposed to be leading the citizens by example.

I wonder if you would be so forgiving if a Fianna Fail member was doing the same thing.

He can't be a welfare cheat because they were not welfare payments!

Blazer

farna_boy wrote: »

I wonder if you would be so forgiving if a Fianna Fail member was doing the same thing.

god no....people would be screaming blue murder..
the only reason people aren't is because despicable two faced Norris and his blinkered supporters would claim it's a homophobic attack etc...

cowzerp

Well said farma boy-cronyism at it's worst and exploiting the system at it's best

hooradiation

Still voting for Norris.

Problem?

seamus

farna_boy wrote: »

So you don't have any problems with your politicians essentially exploiting the system and getting paid twice? Especially in a time of economic crisis?

He may not be a welfare cheat but it is morally wrong, especially when you are a representative of the country and supposed to be leading the citizens by example.

Your claims of exploitation and moral wrongness presume that Norris set out to be deliberately disingenuous.

He had a genuine disability. He received the payment in all moral rightness, and apparently at the insistence of the college.

I'm really wondering what did you expect him to do when this happened? Give up the senate too and sit and home pining about his illness?

It's an ingrained problem where they are, and I would like Norris to comment on it in the wider context of insane money-wasting practices in the public service.
In reality it is no worse than our Taoiseach occupying a teaching job that he can return to at any time, even though he's been a politician for the vast length of his career. I don't see anyone foaming at the mouth about that.
How is that any less wrong than Norris being given a payment legitimately by a state body because he could no longer physically perform work for them?

farna_boy

efb wrote: »

He can't be a welfare cheat because they were not welfare payments!

Someone earlier referred to him as a welfare cheat, I was responding to that.