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

Lady Chatterton

I hope the DPP appeals the sentence handed down in the Eugene Moloney manslaughter case.

hotmail.com

Lucinda wrestling with her conscience and then voting in favour of the bill is hilarious.

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

Lucinda wrestling with her conscience and then voting in favour of the bill is hilarious.

She is waiting to see if amendments can be made at the Committee stage. She can still vote against the bill.

Happyman42

MrsD007 wrote: »

She is waiting to see if amendments can be made at the Committee stage. She can still vote against the bill.

Her intervention is significant, she could have said nothing. The heave is on!

Lapin

We should grant Snowden assylum here.

Then tell the yanks they can have him if they send Drumm beck here.

A fair swop.

Busted Flat.

MrsD007 wrote: »

She is waiting to see if amendments can be made at the Committee stage. She can still vote against the bill.

Get a grip she is not going to lose her job, Pensions are for life, conscience can be sold.

Roger_007

I'm getting a bit confused about program names on radio and TV e.g. Tonight with Vincent Browne, (without Vincent Browne), The John Murray Show, (without John Murray), The Pat Kenny Show, (without Pat Kenny). I think that these programs should have more generic names and not be tied to the presenters.

Busted Flat.

Roger_007 wrote: »

I'm getting a bit confused about program names on radio and TV e.g. Tonight with Vincent Browne, (without Vincent Browne), The John Murray Show, (without John Murray), The Pat Kenny Show, (without Pat Kenny). I think that these programs should have more generic names and not be tied to the presenters.

As they say,?????

Lady Chatterton

Happyman42 wrote: »

Her intervention is significant, she could have said nothing. The heave is on!

Enda was keen to keep her on side, hence the reason she was given a Junior Ministerial position even though she supported Bruton in the leadership heave. I get the impression that Lucinda doesn't rate Enda though. I'd say she has no intention of supporting the referendum to abolish the Seanad either.

Busted Flat.

MrsD007 wrote: »

I hope the DPP appeals the sentence handed down in the Eugene Moloney manslaughter case.

The Judge decided, on the evidence put before him, and sentenced him. It is now up to the DPP to appeal it, if he has grounds to do so. I am sick of the clowns and the red tops coming out and describing the decisions that Judges make, do not go for sound bites, if you want to know about cases sit in on some, not for a few minutes.

Lady Chatterton

Busted Flat. wrote: »

The Judge decided, on the evidence put before him, and sentenced him. It is now up to the DPP to appeal it, if he has grounds to do so. I am sick of the clowns and the red tops coming out and describing the decisions that Judges make, do not go for sound bites, if you want to know about cases sit in on some, not for a few minutes.

Whatever way you look at it, Eugene Moloney has lost his life and the guy responsible for killing him will serve only 3.5 years. Sentencing in this country is a sick joke.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

She is waiting to see if amendments can be made at the Committee stage. She can still vote against the bill.

She never said that in her speech. People just assumed that's what she meant, but who knows what's really going on in her head. She just said that she is voting with her conscience.

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

She never said that in her speech. People just assumed that's what she meant, but who knows what's really going on in her head. She just said that she is voting with her conscience.

She made it clear that she would be waiting until committee stage, some of her other colleagues also indicated that they would be doing this.

I wouldn't be surprised if she supported the bill in the end and she is just making a fuss to make it look like she was wrestling with her conscience.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

Enda was keen to keep her on side, hence the reason she was given a Junior Ministerial position even though she supported Bruton in the leadership heave. I get the impression that Lucinda doesn't rate Enda though. I'd say she has no intention of supporting the referendum to abolish the Seanad either.

FG only have one senior female minister and they needed to have at least one female junior minister. Lucinda was female and young, so she got the job.

Lady Chatterton

While I'm not a fan of hers, I believe she got her position because she's a capable politician and not because they needed a woman to make up the numbers.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

She made it clear that she would be waiting until committee stage, some of her other colleagues also indicated that they would be doing this.

I wouldn't be surprised if he supported the bill in the end and she is just making a fuss to make it look like she was wrestling with her conscience.

Nope, she didn't make it clear at all. She said she would "follow her conscience" and did not say how she would vote.

Lady Chatterton

This bill is going to be accepted regardless how Lucinda votes so I couldn't care less what she does. I think she is attention seeking. However Enda might be worried if he loses her and other FG TDs. Of course it all could have been avoided if he had allowed a free vote on this issue.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

This bill is going to be accepted regardless how Lucinda votes so I couldn't care less what she does. I think she is attention seeking. However Enda might be worried if he loses her and other FG TDs. Of course it all could have been avoided if he had allowed a free vote on this issue.

I doubt he'll care if he loses her, nor will anyone in the country. Useless backward politician.

The point I'm raising is that her credibility is shattered having talked about her conscience and then voting for the bill!

Roger_007

MrsD007 wrote: »

This bill is going to be accepted regardless how Lucinda votes so I couldn't care less what she does. I think she is attention seeking. However Enda might be worried if he loses her and other FG TDs. Of course it all could have been avoided if he had allowed a free vote on this issue.

Why is everyone avoiding the fundamental issue, i.e. the 1983 amendment is flawed and is the cause of all the uncertainty. Why is nobody on either side of the debate advocating that the amendment simply be deleted from the constitution?

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

I doubt he'll care if he loses her, nor will anyone in the country. Useless backward politician.

The point I'm raising is that her credibility is shattered having talked about her conscience and then voting for the bill!

I don't get your point, this bill has to go through various stages yet and she is hoping that an amendment will be placed in the bill to deal with suicide issue. She has always indicated that she is supportive of the bill but has concerns over the suicide part.

It is too early yet to make a judgement about her credibility, she could still reject the bill.

“I can only hope that logic and verifiable evidence will prevail and substantive amendments will be accepted to ensure that the rights of all human beings are protected with the full vigour of the law.” - Lucinda Creighton

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

I don't get your point, this bill has to go through various stages yet and she is hoping that an amendment will be placed in the bill to deal with suicide issue. She has always indicated that she is supportive of the bill but has concerns over the suicide part.

It is too early yet to make a judgement about her credibility, she could still reject the bill.

“I can only hope that logic and verifiable evidence will prevail and substantive amendments will be accepted to ensure that the rights of all human beings are protected with the full vigour of the law.” - Lucinda Creighton

She basically said she opposed the bill, but voted in favour of it. Her future intentions are irrelevant, the fact is that she voted in favour it.

hotmail.com

Roger_007 wrote: »

Why is everyone avoiding the fundamental issue, i.e. the 1983 amendment is flawed and is the cause of all the uncertainty. Why is nobody on either side of the debate advocating that the amendment simply be deleted from the constitution?

Probably because this country is still pretty conservative on social issues and probably agree that the fetus is more important than the mother.

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

She basically said she opposed the bill, but voted in favour of it. Her future intentions are irrelevant, the fact is that she voted in favour it.

Hotmail, you need to inform yourself properly if you're going to have a debate.

For the very last time - this bill has to go through a number of stages yet. She has asked for amendments to be made to the bill and if these don't happen she may vote against the bill. There are at least two more weeks to run on this before she has to make a decision.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

Hotmail, you need to inform yourself properly if you're going to have a debate.

For the very last time - this bill has to go through a number of stages yet. She has asked for amendments to be made to the bill and if these don't happen she may vote against the bill. There are at least two more weeks to run on this before she has to make a decision.

I don't understand how she made a big speech yesterday about her conscience and then voted in favour of the bill. Her use of political games with the committee stage vote is irrelevant - tonight she voted in favour of the bill which includes a clause on suicide which she says she opposes (and then votes in favour of it). Do you not see the contradiction? If she's truly a conviction politician, she should have voted against the bill all the way along, I would expect nothing else from a politician that made a speech about her conscience!

Busted Flat.

MrsD007 wrote: »

Whatever way you look at it, Eugene Moloney has lost his life and the guy responsible for killing him will serve only 3.5 years. Sentencing in this country is a sick joke.

Tom Nevin was murdered, his wife was sentenced on flimsy evidence for conspiracy in his death. The investigation ended there, she was found in the pub but the car was found in Ranleigh. Judges, senior Gardai, Official IRA, PRIA and politicians attended the opening of the pub. What was the cover up. That is what's called justice in this country is all about. One more, a priest found battered to death in the bedroom of a woman after a wedding, the Judge was a family friend dismissed the case. Remember ? will I go on.

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

I don't understand how she made a big speech yesterday about her conscience and then voted in favour of the bill. Her use of political games with the committee stage vote is irrelevant - tonight she voted in favour of the bill which includes a clause on suicide which she says she opposes (and then votes in favour of it). Do you not see the contradiction? If she's truly a conviction politician, she should have voted against the bill all the way along, I would expect nothing else from a politician that made a speech about her conscience!

There are 90 amendments being proposed to the bill so she has chosen to wait until they've been voted on at the committee stage before she makes a decision. For example: if the suicide part of the bill was removed she'd probably have no difficulty supporting the bill as she has no issue with the rest of the proposed legislation. She was also looking for amendment that gives the unborn legal representation.

Busted Flat.

MrsD007 wrote: »

Hotmail, you need to inform yourself properly if you're going to have a debate.

For the very last time - this bill has to go through a number of stages yet. She has asked for amendments to be made to the bill and if these don't happen she may vote against the bill. There are at least two more weeks to run on this before she has to make a decision.

In other words it is only for show, I will stand up for my beliefs and country, but when push comes to shove as regards my pension well I will obey. Like who really wants too $hit on their own doorstep.

hotmail.com

MrsD007 wrote: »

There are 90 amendments being proposed to bill so she has chosen to wait until been voted on at the committee stage before she makes a decision. For example: if the suicide part of the bill was removed she'd probably have no difficulty supporting the bill as she has no issue with the rest of the proposed legislation. She was also looking for amendment that gives the unborn legal representation.

I know all that, but do you not see the irony of her making a speech opposing the bill and then voting in favour of it. At least the 4 backbenchers went ahead and voted against it. Lucinda is trying to have it both ways.

Lady Chatterton

Busted Flat. wrote: »

Tom Nevin was murdered, his wife was sentenced on flimsy evidence for conspiracy in his death. The investigation ended there, she was found in the pub but the car was found in Ranleigh. Judges, senior Gardai, Official IRA, PRIA and politicians attended the opening of the pub. What was the cover up. That is what's called justice in this country is all about. One more, a priest found battered to death in the bedroom of a woman after a wedding, the Judge was a family friend dismissed the case. Remember ? will I go on.

Catherine Nevin appealed her conviction and took a miscarriage of justice case and lost both. As for the Fr. Molloy case you refer to, I'm was very young when he died so I can't possibly comment on the case as I don't know enough about it.


Edit: Catherine Nevin is currently seeking to have her murder conviction quashed.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/catherine-nevin-supreme-court-appeal-bid-reentered-29235595.html

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

I know all that, but do you not see the irony of her making a speech opposing the bill and then voting in favour of it. At least the 4 backbenchers went ahead and voted against it. Lucinda is trying to have it both ways.

At last we agree on something - she is definitely trying to have it both ways.