Tonight With Vincent Browne Thread v3.0 (07/04/13 - 08/07/14)

Lady Chatterton

Callan57 wrote: »

For sure they need him but they have never wanted good men (or women)

Well hopefully he was elected by his peers for a reason. He was actually shortlisted the last time but he let Benedict go forward.

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

Too much change too quickly, Catholics will resist it. He'll have to be silenced.

I hope not, if he is given a chance, he could be a force for good and the church might redeem itself.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

I hope not, if he is given a chance, he could be a force for good and the church might redeem itself.

He could start by not wearing a white frock every where he goes. Mad looking thing.

Oh yeah, force for good all the way there. Good luck with that.

Callan57

MrsD007 wrote: »

Well hopefully he was elected by his peers for a reason. He was actually shortlisted that last time but he let Benedict go forward.

He more or less confirmed what Fr Brian D'arcy said about the ultra conservative spys reporting back to the Vatican .. more or less gave them a rap of the Crozier. Good on him I say but I would be concerned for his safety - that crowd have form when it comes to getting rid of undesirables.
Dan Brown could have the makings of another Vatican book before too long

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

He could start by not wearing a white frock every where he goes. Mad looking thing.

Oh yeah, force for good all the way there. Good luck with that.

To be fair to him, he is trying to get away from the extravagance and waste that goes with the papacy but it will take time for the Vatican to get used to his low key ways.

COYW

Laois_Man wrote: »

What was it happened to Pope John Paul I about 30 days after taking the hot seat?

An accidental overdose or something wasn't it?

Died of a heart attack in his sleep according to wiki, so it must be true.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

To be fair to him, he is trying to get away from the extravagance and waste that goes with the papacy but it will take time for the Vatican to get used to his low key ways.

The white frock and the white hat are very low key.

hotmail.com

JonathanAnon wrote: »

A 62 year old man stumbles getting off a plane?? And this is indicative of what an "eejit" he is? Come on..

Someone has an Enda Kenny crush.

Lady Chatterton

Callan57 wrote: »

He more or less confirmed what Fr Brian D'arcy said about the ultra conservative spys reporting back to the Vatican .. more or less gave them a rap of the Crozier. Good on him I say but I would be concerned for his safety - that crowd have form when it comes to getting rid of undesirables.
Dan Brown could have the makings of another Vatican book before too long

I really hope you're wrong, I believe that he could turn things around for the church if he was given a chance. I know people who haven't been to mass for twenty years or more and they're paying attention to this pope and are liking his way of doing things.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

I really hope you're wrong, I believe that he could turn things around for the church if he was given a chance. I know people who haven't been to mass for twenty years or more and they're paying attention to this pope and are liking his way of doing things.

Why do you care if the Catholic Church is popular or not or if people go back to mass?

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

Why do you care if the Catholic Church is popular or not or if people go back to mass?

I would like to see my gay and separated friends to be welcomed into the church that they want to be part of for a start.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

I would like to see my gay and separated friends to be welcomed into the church that they want to be part of for a start.

Really?

Ah sure they probably don't care. Once people stop going to mass, they realise they're missing nothing. God being everywhere and all that they teach.

COYW

MrsD007 wrote: »

I would like to see my gay and separated friends to be welcomed into the church that they want to be part of for a start.

Are gay people allowed to attend RC services? Can they receive communion? I know they cannot get married but what are they allowed to do? How much of an issue would the removal of the restrictions be for the average Sunday service attending RC? Ditto, for women priests? I cannot grasp the issue with women priests at all.

hotmail.com

Is there no #vinb Seanad debate tv special?

Oh suppose Enda is busy.

Lady Chatterton

Now that you mention Enda......

Did he do a runner yesterday before the Dubs were presented with the Sam Maguire? I was looking out for him but he was no where to be seen.

BlaasForRafa

I see the token german, Ursula "you know ze way" is on tonight. Is there no-one else that Vinnie's researchers can find to represent the teutonic viewpoint?

take everything

Is it wrong that i find Ursula's accent hot.

Busted Flat.

MrsD007 wrote: »

Now that you mean Enda......

Did he do a runner yesterday before the Dubs were presented with the Sam Maguire? I was looking out for him but he was no where to be seen.

He seen his future, and the future of FG under his leadership.

Hitchens

take everything wrote: »

Is it wrong that i find Ursula's accent hot.

dominatrix hot?

take everything

hotmail.com wrote: »

Is there no #vinb Seanad debate tv special?

Oh suppose Enda is busy.

Enda doesn't wanna embarrass Vinny, no doubt.

hotmail.com

Is there any point to the FG backbencher?

Busted Flat.

Hitchens wrote: »

dominatrix hot?

Think uniforms and whips.

Roger_007

Busted Flat. wrote: »

Think uniforms and whips.

Think Helga in Allo Allo:D

BlaasForRafa

take everything wrote: »

Is it wrong that i find Ursula's accent hot.

This is you in the chair is it?

take everything

I've just rated Moody's at junk status.

Roger_007

take everything wrote: »

I've just rated Moody's at junk status.

'Moody' is not a great name for a ratings agency.

COYW

take everything wrote: »

Is it wrong that i find Ursula's accent hot.

Not at all. Ursula is adorable. You just want to give her a big hug. I think she is a good panelist on VB.

hotmail.com wrote: »

Is there any point to the FG backbencher?

He came across as being a bit confused when it came to the economics of the country. I think he needs to read the manifesto again.

Realt Dearg Sec

Roger_007 wrote: »

'Moody' is not a great name for a ratings agency.

Neither is Standard and Poor, now you mention it.

alaimacerc

Good loser wrote: »

You make about as much sense as Vincent.

I'll take that most days of the week, thanks.

Oh wait, sadly, there's more...

The question was outrageously long in the context of a short discussion programme with four panelists.

New to the show, then, I take it. (And never had to listen to a Dave Fanning question... much less a Pat Kenny one.)

Further it was all too familiar from this host as he advances the same rubbish again and again. The initial thrust is always the same 'Everyone should be paid the same' which then metamorphoses into 'The highest should get four times the pay of the lowest'. There is a 400% difference between the two so why does he not short circuit to the seond proposition if he holds the latter view? Or does he hold both at the same time?

That's drivel. One of the panelists (possibly McGurk, I don't recall at this remove) whinged about "people are always complaining about income inequality being too high, when would it ever be enough?" (Never mind that the complaints are generally in the context of it getting greater: you'll wait a long time waiting for a situation to get good enough, when it's progressively getting worse.) VB's "four times as much" was his response to that.

I don't recall the exact context for the musing on what would happen if everyone were paid the same, but it certainly wasn't Vin saying "go into the Dail tomorrow morning and legislate for this immediately", and much more of the character of "well, so what if if were?" Your apparent mystification about his supposed "doublethink", if not merely disingenuous, seems to indicate profound inattention.

As for McGurk among a myriad of examples he choose a medical example - he could for instance have choosen pop stars, jockeys, footballers, engineers +++. Vincent knows his theory is going to be blown in short order (yes he does) so he jumps in to head it off with the Cuban stuff. Nobody in Ireland has much of a clue about the accuracy of that. Plus the example was only that.

So your central objection is, in essence, that Browne answered the point McGurk made. (Granted, you won't be getting that on the Pat Kenny show, as it implies ever listening to the answers.) As opposed to... what? The answer he might eventually have given had he been allowed to pontificate on indefinitely? The answer you think he might have intended to give? Give over.

Your own examples, frankly, are vastly worse. As you feel deprived of Vinnie giving them a kicking, inspired by your recommendation of me as a stand-in, I'll do my best to fill in. Engineers? You must be living in Gunther's parallel universe. Not generally paid on any sort of vastly inflated basis. (Yes, sure, there will be the odd few on more than 4*median income, but hardly so many that the entire basis of the profession would look to be in danger of collapse if they weren't.) Your others are of a piece with each other: you'll hardly get much sympathy with an appeal to "we have to be paid millions or we won't warble on stage, ride around a bit on a horse, or kick a ball about", and people are hardly going to feel that society is in imminent danger of collapse if they weren't. They're supping on the overinflated froth of unfettered capitalism, not its "motivating example".

ObLastShow: OK, I missed the start as usual, watching Newsnight from Another Place. If VB wasn't at the ploughing, where was he, then? Galloping cough clearing a few more fences than usual?

coolhull

Sam told Vinnie was definitely not at the ploughing contest, he was down in Cork at a friend's funeral