Mayor Long on Newstalk - Going Forward

Kess73

allimac wrote: »

I don't care what you think of the Mayor, he was elected by due process. The system is what it is and it is open to anyone qualifications or not to stand for election, including yourself. As a matter of fact you would be an ideal candidate, you have a talent for twisting facts around to suit your own argument no matter how pointless it is. You know everything that is wrong with the system and how to play it to your own ends. If the rest are just space fillers then you should make the best politician ever. I predict you to be elected by a landslide by the idiots who voted for the current batch.

Personal attack?

I have not tried to insult you on a personal level so why the need to do so with me? Can you not debate it with me without resorting to insults?

As for the Mayor. I know the man, right back to when he was earning a living by selling tyres, but I am not commenting on him on a personal basis, just as a politician, so don't be getting upset by thinking it is a personal attack on him which you seem to be given that you have already made comments like "Doesn't matter that he had only 1 vote more than your guy", whoever my guy is meant to be.


If you disagree with my posts in this thread, then rubbish my posts and/or debate them if you have an interest, but cut out your personal attacks especially as they seem to be only focused on me despite others in the thread making direct comments about the Mayor which you chose to ignore, in fact it looks as though you only have one target in the thread and are happy to ignore what anyone else says about your mayor.

allimac

Personal attack?

I have not tried to insult you on a personal level so why the need to do so with me? Can you not debate it with me without resorting to insults

You're very thin skinned indeed if you consider that a personal attack,seems to be that you're twisting the facts to suit your own agenda again.

Kess73

allimac wrote: »

Personal attack?

I have not tried to insult you on a personal level so why the need to do so with me? Can you not debate it with me without resorting to insults

You're very thin skinned indeed if you consider that a personal attack,seems to be that you're twisting the facts to suit your own agenda again.

fair enough, you don't want to debate anything and just want to try to troll or bait me. I am more than happy to debate with you, and/or agree to differ, but I won't waste time on someone who is baiting/flaming, who is trying to make thinly veiled insults and accusations of some agenda that I am meant to have.

But seeing as you are so smart and know what this so called agenda of mine is, and since you have come out and said that I have an agenda. You can spell out exactly what this agenda is, otherwise you are flaming/baiting me and have broken one of the rules in the charter for this forum.

And just to help you out, if you claim I have an anti Jim Long agenda and that you are just arguing against that, well you have ignored all the posts that have called Long an embarrassment and an idiot, so surely you cannot be pulling me up on an Anti Long agenda when you had no problem with any derogatory comments made elsewhere in the thread about the man.

allimac

Kess73 wrote: »

fair enough, you don't want to debate anything and just want to try to troll or bait me. I am more than happy to debate with you, and/or agree to differ, but I won't waste time on someone who is baiting/flaming, who is trying to make thinly veiled insults and accusations of some agenda that I am meant to have.

But seeing as you are so smart and know what this so called agenda of mine is, and since you have come out and said that I have an agenda. You can spell out exactly what this agenda is, otherwise you are flaming/baiting me and have broken one of the rules in the charter for this forum.

And just to help you out, if you claim I have an anti Jim Long agenda and that you are just arguing against that, well you have ignored all the posts that have called Long an embarrassment and an idiot, so surely you cannot be pulling me up on an Anti Long agenda when you had no problem with any derogatory comments made elsewhere in the thread about the man.

1.You don't debate,you try to twist everything around to suit your own viewpoint.(For instance,you say that the election of the Mayor is an example of quantity over quality and then whinge that he was elected with so few votes!!!).
2.Your agenda from the start of this thread was to put down our political system and everyone in it, going as far as to call the electorate idiots who elect spoofers.(You are included in the electorate yourself,so basically you are calling yourself an idiot).If that's baiting or flaming you then so be it.
3.You then try the bully tactic claiming that I have broken some charter rules, hinting at a ban.(You're the one belittling our political system,whom else would I address my replies to)
4.I put it to you that you are the one who doesn't want debate,you just want everyone to agree with your neat little version of events and by and large everyone on here does,maybe the size of your post count intimidates them.(Speaking of quantity over quality).

Kess73

allimac wrote: »

1.You don't debate,you try to twist everything around to suit your own viewpoint.(For instance,you say that the election of the Mayor is an example of quantity over quality and then whinge that he was elected with so few votes!!!).
2.Your agenda from the start of this thread was to put down our political system and everyone in it, going as far as to call the electorate idiots who elect spoofers.(You are included in the electorate yourself,so basically you are calling yourself an idiot).If that's baiting or flaming you then so be it.
3.You then try the bully tactic claiming that I have broken some charter rules, hinting at a ban.(You're the one belittling our political system,whom else would I address my replies to)
4.I put it to you that you are the one who doesn't want debate,you just want everyone to agree with your neat little version of events and by and large everyone on here does,maybe the size of your post count intimidates them.(Speaking of quantity over quality).

Yes I criticised the system in Ireland. I think it is a system riddled with flawes and corruption, and that it is a system that does not even follow through on it's own set up.

I do think it is a system that promotes quantity over quality and the current Mayor of Limerick is an example of that seeing as he failed by a massive distance to even get the minimum set quota to get voted in, and had to rely on scraping in after numerous rounds of surplus votes from other politicians being handed down despite not having the backing of the general public (something that was made clear by his 280 or so votes of his own).

The Irish political system at local and national level is a corrupt backward system that sees various people grease wheels to further their own agendas, and it is a system that sees the elction of men and women who are pretty much clueless when it comes to many of the things they end up having a major say in deciding.

The Mahon report just highlighted yet again the corruption at national level, and the current investigation into planning irregularities by Limerick city council (one of many local councils under investigation) and the utter failure of Limerick city council to even manage to reply to the investigation on time shows up the current lot at local level to have a number that would be incompetent at best, and corrupt at worst.

If you think the Irish system, local and national, is a good system, one that gets the best people in, one that does not get tweaked to make up numbers and what not, then so be it.

You will see that I have again replied to you without any veiled insults or accusations unlike yourself you cannot help but to throw in bully comments and a childish comment about intimidation.

vkid

allimac wrote: »

1.You don't debate,you try to twist everything around to suit your own viewpoint.(For instance,you say that the election of the Mayor is an example of quantity over quality and then whinge that he was elected with so few votes!!!).
2.Your agenda from the start of this thread was to put down our political system and everyone in it, going as far as to call the electorate idiots who elect spoofers.(You are included in the electorate yourself,so basically you are calling yourself an idiot).If that's baiting or flaming you then so be it.
3.You then try the bully tactic claiming that I have broken some charter rules, hinting at a ban.(You're the one belittling our political system,whom else would I address my replies to)
4.I put it to you that you are the one who doesn't want debate,you just want everyone to agree with your neat little version of events and by and large everyone on here does,maybe the size of your post count intimidates them.(Speaking of quantity over quality).

Sorry to interrupt, but if anyone sounds like they don't want real debate, its yourself. People are agreeing with Kess because most people, actually..you know, do agree with him/her. Local Government in Ireland, but specifically Limerick city is nothing short of a disgrace and how anyone could be blinkered enough to think that its working well is beyond me. Look around you...the city is an absolute shambles and Limerick City Council have to shoulder quite a bi of the blame for that

flutered

now folks i argued long and hard to get a person from boards to contest the said election, nobody offered themselves as a candidate, or was anybody put forward as a suggested candidate, limerick boards could have now now have the mayor as a regestered user, forget your handbagging get organised, get elected, get us boardies a voice on the corpo table, the dosh is not bad, the trips away are even better, WAKE up fast.