The Pat Kenny Show

Grolschevik

Grolschevik wrote: »

It is notable, I think, that many of the Trumpechaun illiberal texters use identical language, for example "lefty liberal snowflakes". Language I have never heard in real life, only in radio texts and on Boards.

Reminds me of the first person I ever muted on Twitter. From what I could gather, he lives somewhere in rural Ireland, but keeps going on about "cucks", and posting 'unflattering' pictures and .gifs of Hillary Clinton saying 'Hillary doesn't want anyone to see this picture'. Somehow I don't think Hillary (apparently we're all on first names now) Clinton cares.

I have this mad image in my head of all some lone alt-righter, gathering around a glass of JD in a bar Lahinch, thinking he's Paul Newman, calling the local college kids 'cucks' and 'snowflakes', while he grapples with life on the frontier of town in an ESSO service station; or alone in his bedroom, watching countless videos of Milo Yiannopoulos as if he were a teen popstar.

I'm exaggerating, of course, but such bizarre 'affiliation' with 'The Donald' is clearly to be seen and heard here, and I regularly hear such views being opined by texters and other correspondents to Irish radio. Nobody is shutting them down, as they might like to think; I think most people just find the whole thing bemusing.

There definitely is a lack of Irish business, academic and media figures who express support for Donald Trump, I totally accept that. But it isn't because the 'MSM' is censoring them -- if anything, most radio producers would love to get someone like that on-air to provoke their listenership. I don't believe they exist in any great number, because they have better things going on in their lives than to take up their banner and get behind Trump.

Grolschevik

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote:

I'm exaggerating, of course, but such bizarre 'affiliation' with 'The Donald' is clearly to be seen and heard here, and I regularly hear such views being opined by texters and other correspondents to Irish radio. Nobody is shutting them down, as they might like to think; I think most people just find the whole thing bemusing.

Exactly. It is bizarre.

Loafing Oaf

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm exaggerating, of course, but such bizarre 'affiliation' with 'The Donald' is clearly to be seen and heard here, and I regularly hear such views being opined by texters and other correspondents to Irish radio. Nobody is shutting them down, as they might like to think; I think most people just find the whole thing bemusing.

Especially as the guy himself is such a blatant phony, and will sell out his 'alt-right' boosters at the first opportunity, if he hasn't already done so...

monstermag

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Especially as the guy himself is such a blatant phony, and will sell out his 'alt-right' boosters at the first opportunity, if he hasn't already done so...

How will Pat stick 7 more years of Trump?

ThisRegard

quintana76 wrote: »

It is not about Trump per sui. It is about dismissing alternative opinions.

He wasn't dismissing alternative opinions, they weren't providing any, just complaining anytime there's coverage of Trump.

First thing I thought of was boardsies wasting their money again on text messages.

quintana76

monstermag wrote: »

How will Pat stick 7 more years of Trump?

Don't think he can keep up his daily anti Trump diatribe for 7 long bitter years. The good man has to retire at some stage. Shouldn't have sued his neighbour over that land. Cost him a pretty penny. I mean a pretty penny.

Ol' Donie

Don't worry, dear, there will always be someone willing to continue pointing out the nonsense of the Trump administration.

Even in seven years time, four years after the pillock gets turfed out.

quintana76

Ol' Donie wrote: »

Don't worry, dear, there will always be someone willing to continue pointing out the nonsense of the Trump administration.

Even in seven years time, four years after the pillock gets turfed out.

Wishful thinking is one of life's pleasurable distractions.

quintana76

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Reminds me of the first person I ever muted on Twitter. From what I could gather, he lives somewhere in rural Ireland, but keeps going on about "cucks", and posting 'unflattering' pictures and .gifs of Hillary Clinton saying 'Hillary doesn't want anyone to see this picture'. Somehow I don't think Hillary (apparently we're all on first names now) Clinton cares.

I have this mad image in my head of all some lone alt-righter, gathering around a glass of JD in a bar Lahinch, thinking he's Paul Newman, calling the local college kids 'cucks' and 'snowflakes', while he grapples with life on the frontier of town in an ESSO service station; or alone in his bedroom, watching countless videos of Milo Yiannopoulos as if he were a teen popstar.

I'm exaggerating, of course, but such bizarre 'affiliation' with 'The Donald' is clearly to be seen and heard here, and I regularly hear such views being opined by texters and other correspondents to Irish radio. Nobody is shutting them down, as they might like to think; I think most people just find the whole thing bemusing.



There definitely is a lack of Irish business, academic and media figures who express support for Donald Trump, I totally accept that. But it isn't because the 'MSM' is censoring them -- if anything, most radio producers would love to get someone like that on-air to provoke their listenership. I don't believe they exist in any great number, because they have better things going on in their lives than to take up their banner and get behind Trump.

Going against the media consensus requires courage especially from people working in the media itself or academia. They risk their reputations and also advancement in their careers if they are seen to have the 'wrong' opinions. Therefore self censorship is the norm. A sad sign of our intolerant times. Intolerance in the name of tolerance. You couldn't make it up.

Grolschevik

It's one of the paradoxes in liberal political philosophy: how can liberalism be tolerant of illiberal ideology?

A bit like, should a democratic vote be allowed to abolish democracy?

quintana76

quintana76 wrote: »

Going against the media consensus requires courage especially from people working in the media itself or academia. They risk their reputations and also advancement in their careers if they are seen to have the 'wrong' opinions. Therefore self censorship is the norm. A sad sign of our intolerant times. Intolerance in the name of tolerance. You couldn't make it up.

So when the vast majority of Irish people indicated that they supported Clinton's presidential bid, and only 6% indicated preference for Trump, were there lots of people simply cowering in fear of the pollsters? You seem to paint Trump supporters as a very nervous and fearful bunch of people.

And I wouldn't necessarily disagree. I just think those fearful people only exist in small numbers on this island, and if we extrapolate from U.S. data, they exist in even smaller numbers in the urban demographic, and among 4th-level college graduates - i.e. the pools which academics and media commentators typically belong in.

monstermag

The DNC have far bigger problems than Donald Trump. Their base is fragmenting, u have the Bernie wing who want to drag the party further left, which will alienate more than it brings on board. Alot of African Americans have become disillusioned with the party, while still the vast majority will still vote Dem, but the party won't want any slippage. Maybe I'm watching the wrong podcasts or something, but any black or Hispanic channels l watch, they think it's patronising to think that people of colour should only vote left and if the don't they're branded Uncle tom's or coons.
Then u have the problem of fundraising, which has gone down the toilet since the election, alot of big players got burnt.
All in all the DNC have a hell of alot of work to do.
If Trump gets tax reform through and puts money back in people's pockets, he'll have a good chance of getting re elected.
I think Pat is the best broadcaster in Ireland by a mile. I don't have a problem with him criticising or questioning Trump, it's kinda fun, but would love if he got a pro Trump person on from time to time, just for a little balance or even a big row.

bloodless_coup

Oh cool, another Trump segment.

constitutionus

this boys and girls is what a mental breakdown looks like



fuk me.

remember lads this is coming from a shower that didnt want to report a thousand strong rape gang wandering around koln one new years eve because of who was doing the raping.

delaad

constitutionus wrote: »

this boys and girls is what a mental breakdown looks like



fuk me.

remember lads this is coming from a shower that didnt want to report a thousand strong rape gang wandering around koln one new years eve because of who was doing the raping.

And Trump is a champion of women's bodily integrity?

constitutionus

this bit on "de wall" is hilarious.

can you imagine the mush on pat kenny if he came into his bathroom and found a romanian shaving and having a shower ?

doubt you'd be getting the report on air this biddy just gave.

Ol' Donie

Hm.

Now, I'm a man, and I've been asked if I'm married and have kids in a job interview. Thought nothing of it.

I think this movement, such as it is, might be getting a bit carried away with itself.

ThisRegard

It's not part of 'this movement'. It's a long standing etiquette that you don't ask such questions in interviews as despite the best intentions it can cloud judgement against a woman with kids (or even a father with kids) when it comes to expectations such as coming in early/working late if the needs be.

It's hard to avoid asking though as it's a conversation you might have upon meeting a stranger in other situations.

meeeeh

Ol' Donie wrote: »

Hm.

Now, I'm a man, and I've been asked if I'm married and have kids in a job interview. Thought nothing of it.

I think this movement, such as it is, might be getting a bit carried away with itself.

You mean the 40 years old movement that is called legalisation. Halligan is not the only person landing in this sort of a mess. But when it's minister whi is in charge of jobs portfolio or whatever it is called it's actually embarrassing.

Btw I know of company that were brought in front of tribunal because they did not choose an applicant with African background for an interview. Nothing came out of it but anyone who did a bit of hiring is aware what a minefield it can be and not to ask about kids and marriage is basic stuff.

Del.Monte

Why is she to receive €7,500 because of Halligan's enquiries - was she emotionally traumatised? Did she not get the job? How was the figure arrived at or was it picked out of somebody's arse?

suicide_circus

Del.Monte wrote: »

Why is she to receive €7,500 because of Halligan's enquiries - was she emotionally traumatised? Did she not get the job? How was the figure arrived at or was it picked out of somebody's arse?

Because a big wad of sweaty money cures all ills.

hotmail.com

Del.Monte wrote:

Why is she to receive €7,500 because of Halligan's enquiries - was she emotionally traumatised? Did she not get the job? How was the figure arrived at or was it picked out of somebody's arse?

Employers will think twice about asking irrelevant personal questions in an interview in future.

sligojoek

hotmail.com wrote: »

Employers will think twice about asking irrelevant personal questions in an interview in future.

Employers will be afraid to ask someone the time soon.

Grolschevik

Christ, I hate this watered-down, **** piano covers of classic songs segment. It just stinks of giving an old crony a gig.

Ol' Donie

Grolschevik wrote: »

Christ, I hate this watered-down, **** piano covers of classic songs segment. It just stinks of giving an old crony a gig.

In principle I kinda like the idea.

But that tune today was not to my taste, if I may be as diplomatic as possible.

jobbridge4life

Why in discussion with National Women's Council representative did PK refer to the 'so-called pro-life side' but just the 'pro-choice' side?

Roger_007

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Why in discussion with National Women's Council representative did PK refer to the 'so-called pro-life side' but just the 'pro-choice' side?

I assume it's because the term 'pro-life' implies that all those who do not agree with their stance are anti-life, which is untrue. Pro-choice means exactly what it says:- supporting the freedom to choose.
I think someone suggested that a more accurate term for the 'pro-life' side would be 'anti-choice'.

Grolschevik

Roger_007 wrote:

I assume it's because the term 'pro-life' implies that all those who do not agree with their stance are anti-life, which is untrue. Pro-choice means exactly what it says:- supporting the freedom to choose. I think someone suggested that a more accurate term for the 'pro-life' side would be 'anti-choice'.

Also, many of those who self identify as 'pro life' are simultaneously in favour of stuff like the death penalty, especially in the States.

applehunter

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Why in discussion with National Women's Council representative did PK refer to the 'so-called pro-life side' but just the 'pro-choice' side?

Because Pat knows best.

Roger_007

Roger_007 wrote: »

I assume it's because the term 'pro-life' implies that all those who do not agree with their stance are anti-life, which is untrue. Pro-choice means exactly what it says:- supporting the freedom to choose.
I think someone suggested that a more accurate term for the 'pro-life' side would be 'anti-choice'.

I agree, but if we're going down that road, neither are the pro-life side opposed to choice in general. It would be fairer to describe both sides along the lines of 'pro abortion-rights' and 'anti abortion-rights', but those arent neat sound bytes...