Sean O'Rourke Today Show

Technocentral

Haven't listened to RTE since PK took his show over to Newstalk, surprised everyone else didn't switch as well, Kenny owns intelligent morning talk radio, O'Rourke et all are mere minnows.

Brendan Bendar

Technocentral wrote: »

Haven't listened to RTE since PK took his show over to Newstalk, surprised everyone else didn't switch as well, Kenny owns intelligent morning talk radio, O'Rourke et all are mere minnows.

Pity the same can't be said about that post:rolleyes:

Callan57

Ah Holy God "our water" the parish pump is alive and well in Tipp

Brendan Bendar

Callan57 wrote: »

Ah Holy God "our water" the parish pump is alive and well in Tipp

Shinners want to charge for untreated water out of Tipp and won't pay for treated potable water:D:D

You couldn't make it up.

BarryD

Fighting talk from yer man in Tipp - charge the Dubs 1c a litre for Shannon water!! He has a point in that Irish Water would ideally like to charge consumers by metering (which I fully agree with) but the same IW don't want to be metered themselves!!

O'Rourke with a ridiculous comment that 'all the water (in Lough Derg) is from Leitrim'..... you'd think he'd know a little more about primary school Irish geography than that.

touts

BarryD wrote: »

Fighting talk from yer man in Tipp - charge the Dubs 1c a litre for Shannon water!! He has a point in that Irish Water would ideally like to charge consumers by metering (which I fully agree with) but the same IW don't want to be metered themselves!!

And he wants to bring hurling to American School Children......

sligojoek

"Welcome to the home of hurling." Feck off Kelly.

Callan57

sligojoek wrote: »

"Welcome to the home of hurling." Feck off Kelly.

Did he think he was in Kilkenny or what?

P. Breathnach

I know the adage that "all politics is local", but I was still flabbergasted by just how parochial today's slate of candidates showed themselves to be.

Do the voters of Tipperary not care about anything outside the county?

Brendan Bendar

BarryD wrote: »

Fighting talk from yer man in Tipp - charge the Dubs 1c a litre for Shannon water!! He has a point in that Irish Water would ideally like to charge consumers by metering (which I fully agree with) but the same IW don't want to be metered themselves!!

O'Rourke with a ridiculous comment that 'all the water (in Lough Derg) is from Leitrim'..... you'd think he'd know a little more about primary school Irish geography than that.

Barry you are a hard taskmaster,that was a throwaway remark.

Ok it's Cavan,but hey, jeez a bit of slack:D

Who owns the water in Lough Derg, the frikken State do, and that gimp in Tipp would do well to remember that.

BarryD

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I know the adage that "all politics is local", but I was still flabbergasted by just how parochial today's slate of candidates showed themselves to be.

Do the voters of Tipperary not care about anything outside the county?

No, not really I guess. But wouldn't that be true of all constituencies? I mean the good people of Dublin West hardly bother too much worrying about hospitals in Kiltimagh or jobs in Jenkinstown

BarryD

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Who owns the water in Lough Derg, the frikken State do, and that gimp in Tipp would do well to remember that.

This is an interesting point, who owns the water that falls from the sky? I collect water in rain barrels - should I be paying the State for this ..hmm. And what about water that falls in the Republic and flows into the North and vice versa. Gets very complicated, which is why the ridiculous idea of enshrining the ownership of the water in our constitution is just about as batty an idea as the 8th amendment.

Brendan Bendar

BarryD wrote: »

No, not really I guess. But wouldn't that be true of all constituencies? I mean the good people of Dublin West hardly bother too much worrying about hospitals in Kiltimagh or jobs in Jenkinstown

That's why it's good to have the discerning voter who sees the big picture,rather than the 'they are all clowns brigade'.

Gotta look at the big picture sometimes.

Get The fundamentals right.

touts

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I know the adage that "all politics is local", but I was still flabbergasted by just how parochial today's slate of candidates showed themselves to be.

Do the voters of Tipperary not care about anything outside the county?

We do but we can only vote for the people put on the ballot paper in front of us. Tippearary is basically a pack of independents. Of the declared candidates Healy, Lowry, Mattie, Hoffman and Dillon are all officially independents. Kelly is a maverick in his party and is basically an independent in the cabinet at this point. Cahill is the ICMSA candidate more than an Fianna Fail candidate and that is reflected in his posters and campaign so far. Smith voted for himself for deputy Mayor against the Fianna Fail whip and is running less on the FF ticket and more on the My Daddy was a TD so I should be also ticket (his campaign slogan is "Vote Young Smith"). Would love to see a "none of the above" on the ballot paper but for the moment there isn't much quality on the Tipperary ballot paper.

P. Breathnach

touts wrote: »

We do but we can only vote for the people put on the ballot paper in front of us....

I know your pain: I have difficulty in making choices between the people who offer themselves for election where I live. And I am one of those people who wants to go right down the ballot sheet.

There was a vox pop in the constituency to which I couldn't pay full attention because of distractions. I got the impression that some voters knew there was a world beyond Tipperary.

Callan57

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

That's why it's good to have the discerning voter who sees the big picture,rather than the 'they are all clowns brigade'.

Gotta look at the big picture sometimes.

Get The fundamentals right.

Ah THE FUNDAMENTALS ... didn't hear a mention of them for years :rolleyes:

SEPT 23 1989

This does not bode well if there is an actual large scale terrorist attack in this country

BarryD

You get the impression that these various left wing factions are solely interested in increasing their vote and keeping their bums on their seats. They're as bad as the rest in terms of making lubricious promises which they can never deliver I wouldn't believe a word from any of the jockeying parties.

Harry Angstrom

BarryD wrote: »

You get the impression that these various left wing factions are solely interested in increasing their vote and keeping their bums on their seats. They're as bad as the rest in terms of making lubricious promises which they can never deliver I wouldn't believe a word from any of the jockeying parties.

Coppinger is so easy to wind up. Sean almost had her saying she'd nationalise Starbucks.

Callan57

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

Coppinger is so easy to wind up. Sean almost had her saying she'd nationalise Starbucks.

You could be walking in the gates of Heaven & Coppinger would convince you you were starving, discriminated against and most definitely not getting your "entitlements".

Is it a requirement for "left wing politics" that you never, ever, under any circumstances, not matter the provocation crack a smile? :rolleyes:

Brendan Bendar

Callan57 wrote: »

You could be walking in the gates of Heaven & Coppinger would convince you you were starving, discriminated against and most definitely not getting your "entitlements".

Is it a requirement for "left wing politics" that you never, ever, under any circumstances, not matter the provocation crack a smile? :rolleyes:

But Coppinger you can be sure is getting her entitlement.

Probably still paying into the teachers pension and a nice job to walk back to if she is not elected.


Talk about having your cake and eating it......

Callan57

Is Paul Williams a PR person for the GRA?

IvyTheTerrible

Is it just me, or does Paul Williams sound positively orgasmic talking about these gangland murders?

Callan57

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

Is it just me, or does Paul Williams sound positively orgasmic talking about these gangland murders?

Handy page filler for the next few weeks for Paul .... expect over the top outrage and many radio & tv interviews

Callan57

"Sure, sure, absolutely" .... cut it out Roisin & answer the question

neris

Callan57 wrote: »

You could be walking in the gates of Heaven & Coppinger would convince you you were starving, discriminated against and most definitely not getting your "entitlements".

Is it a requirement for "left wing politics" that you never, ever, under any circumstances, not matter the provocation crack a smile? :rolleyes:

id never seen that Coppinger one before until a few weeks ago when I saw her on the news spouting some drivel in the dail. She looked liked she been on the lash and dragged through a bush backwards. She made Mick Wallce look resepectable

padd b1975

Social Democrats- populist policies with vague, almost non existent costings.

You could almost be listening to a Shinner/looney leftist.

padd b1975

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

Coppinger is so easy to wind up. Sean almost had her saying she'd nationalise Starbucks.

What exactly is her problem with the takeaway coffee business??

She must be a pain in the hole to live with.

P. Breathnach

neris wrote: »

id never seen that Coppinger one before until a few weeks ago when I saw her on the news spouting some drivel in the dail. She looked liked she been on the lash and dragged through a bush backwards. She made Mick Wallce look resepectable

She looks okay on the radio.

Callan57

The Noise of Time by Julian Barnes

Brendan Bendar

P. Breathnach wrote: »

She looks okay on the radio.

Might look ok, but doesn't sound ok, Pee

As soon as I hear her say "The Gooverment have reuined this cuuntrie"

I shuffle across to the off button .

BarryD

Sympathise to some extent with the Labour party but really the trenchant nonsense about promises trotted out by Joan Burton and Alan Kelly etc., do them a very considerable disservice.

They need to give up this pretence that Labour will ever be in a position to fulfill these ideas. At best, they'll be a minor partner in some government and all this guff goes out the window.

BarryD

Sympathise to some extent with the Labour party but really the trenchant nonsense about promises trotted out by Joan Burton and Alan Kelly etc., do them a very considerable disservice.

They need to give up this pretence that Labour will ever be in a position to fulfill these ideas. At best, they'll be a minor partner in some government and all this guff goes out the window.

A bit of honesty and humility would serve them better..

Brendan Bendar

BarryD wrote: »

Sympathise to some extent with the Labour party but really the trenchant nonsense about promises trotted out by Joan Burton and Alan Kelly etc., do them a very considerable disservice.

They need to give up this pretence that Labour will ever be in a position to fulfill these ideas. At best, they'll be a minor partner in some government and all this guff goes out the window.

A bit of honesty and humility would serve them better..

Thought she came across well, emphasised that there were no 'promises' it was policy and programme if the funds were there,and the projections are accurate

Seems relatively sensible to me.

You can't spend irregardless of the underlying economic situation.

How people believed the 'promises' given at the worst stage we ever were economically, is beyond this poster.

BarryD

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

How people believed the 'promises' given at the worst stage we ever were economically, is beyond this poster.

Agreed and I'd be very dubious about them now. So why do the parties and media keep shoveling them out??

We all like to know where people stand and what they propose to do but surely they can manage to convey this without endless meaningless commitments to scrap this, cut that and pay the other.

Brendan Bendar

BarryD wrote: »

Agreed and I'd be very dubious about them now. So why do the parties and media keep shoveling them out??

We all like to know where people stand and what they propose to do but surely they can manage to convey this without endless meaningless commitments to scrap this, cut that and pay the other.

Agreed too, but I suppose they should attach tangible conditions to these 'promises' conditions the electorate can understand.

Bit like the parent promising the kid the trip to Disney Orlando next year and then loses his job and income and the poor kid still expects the trip!!!

In fact kids would have a better grasp of reality than some of the contributors here, so I may be doing them a disservice,

Brendan Bendar

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Thought she came across well, emphasised that there were no 'promises' it was policy and programme if the funds were there,and the projections are accurate

Seems relatively sensible to me.

You can't spend irregardless of the underlying economic situation.

How people believed the 'promises' given at the worst stage we ever were economically, is beyond this poster.

Agree that Joan did as well as could be expected, but she really was skewered by SOR because of the ridiculous Labour campaign in the last election.

Also I wish she'd stop saying "as a woman", she seemed to be claiming that women care more about education than men at one stage, which came across as a little bizarre.

But I think she's done very well so far given the position the party is in the polls and coping with Alan Kelly.

Brendan Bendar

Deleted User wrote: »

Agree that Joan did as well as could be expected, but she really was skewered by SOR because of the ridiculous Labour campaign in the last election.

Also I wish she'd stop saying "as a woman", she seemed to be claiming that women care more about education than men at one stage, which came across as a little bizarre.

But I think she's done very well so far given the position the party is in the polls and coping with Alan Kelly.

Yes, agree with your evaluation there.

Harry Angstrom

Deleted User wrote: »

Agree that Joan did as well as could be expected, but she really was skewered by SOR because of the ridiculous Labour campaign in the last election.

Also I wish she'd stop saying "as a woman", she seemed to be claiming that women care more about education than men at one stage, which came across as a little bizarre.

But I think she's done very well so far given the position the party is in the polls and coping with Alan Kelly.

It's probably something she's been told to emphasise by her clueless PR gurus. It's right up there with every other Fine Gael candidate saying "Let me be clear". It's all stuff and nonsense.

sligojoek

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

It's probably something she's been told to emphasise by her clueless PR gurus. It's right up there with every other Fine Gael candidate saying "Let me be clear". It's all stuff and nonsense.

That's why I can't take them seriously . None of them seem to use their own words. Same phrases and soundbites coming from them all

Harry Palmr

SOR is in full "teacher with unruly class" mode today! Impossibly to imagine why anyone would actually waste something as precious as a vote on this lot - any of them.

PeterTheEighth

Did Chris Andrews get asked about his Tweeting? I've never heard anybody tackle him on this, it's like he's got a free pass.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/husband-unmasked-former-ff-td-chris-andrews-after-phantom-tweets-targeted-wife-26887866.html

I really dont think he's fit for public office given that sort of behaviour. That's not saying I think he's the only one who's not fit for public office but actually IS in public office.

BarryD

Chris Andrews - the sort of politician that beings that trade into complete disrepute. What does he stand for, himself is all I can think of?

BarryD

I wonder what happens if Lucinda's party ends up as part of a coalition after the election. Will she veto any referendum to repeal the 8th? Or allow her party a free vote? Split her group asunder? She gets a very easy ride on this matter. It's a fundamental fault line in Renua.

Harry Angstrom

PeterTheEighth wrote: »

Did Chris Andrews get asked about his Tweeting? I've never heard anybody tackle him on this, it's like he's got a free pass.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/husband-unmasked-former-ff-td-chris-andrews-after-phantom-tweets-targeted-wife-26887866.html

I really dont think he's fit for public office given that sort of behaviour. That's not saying I think he's the only one who's not fit for public office but actually IS in public office.

No surprise that he was so readily accepted into the Shinner fold.

Callan57

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

No surprise that he was so readily accepted into the Shinner fold.

I'd safely say on his performance this morning SF are more than welcome to him .... frankly I thought his was a pathetic performance.
As for Luncinda! Does she really believe that a fertilised egg and a sentient human being are the same thing????
Ah but sure rest easy Lucinda & Co we have the good old mainland to take care of our "difficult" problems and not be troubling our little consciences. :rolleyes:

PeterTheEighth

Callan57 wrote: »

Ah but sure rest easy Lucinda & Co we have the good old mainland to take care of our "difficult" problems and not be troubling our little consciences. :rolleyes:

I heard one of those other clowns this morning saying "But you voted with that Lucinda" and she responded with "Well, actually I wasnt there that day".. To guffaws from the rest of them. I mean, she gave up a Ministry for her principles.

Most of the rest of the people in Irish politics leave their party so that they can run as independents (and as such not be responsible for what their party did) and keep their seat, but she actually had something to LOSE by leaving her party. And for that alone, though I dont agree with her on everything, she is head and shoulders above most of the 165 others.

Still can't understand why she aligned herself with such a divisive figure as Eddie Hobbs though.

Callan57

PeterTheEighth wrote: »

I heard one of those other clowns this morning saying "But you voted with that Lucinda" and she responded with "Well, actually I wasnt there that day".. To guffaws from the rest of them. I mean, she gave up a Ministry for her principles.

Most of the rest of the people in Irish politics leave their party so that they can run as independents (and as such not be responsible for what their party did) and keep their seat, but she actually had something to LOSE by leaving her party. And for that alone, though I dont agree with her on everything, she is head and shoulders above most of the 165 others.

Still can't understand why she aligned herself with such a divisive figure as Eddie Hobbs though.

Isn't it funny though how none of the "rights" of those actually born were worth resigning over ... not health, not housing, not education, not the morality of handing the tax take of the country over to bankers and sleeveens. :rolleyes:
Call me cynical but IMO Lucinda was pandering to a niche constituency, parish pump politics at it's worst. Looking after No 1 - no different from any of the rest.

sligojoek

Misery time.

Who else but RTE would send someone to a graveyard on Valentines day?

BarryD

Watched the 'debate' last night. I thought it was turgid stuff - predictable hackneyed questions, predictable hackneyed answers, predictable audience reaction.

Learnt nothing new and there wasn't even any argy bargy to add a bit of entertainment value. I don't think I'll vote for any of them.

I wonder have RTE actually checked to see what their audience thinks of their debate rather than slapping themselves on the back and rehashing the cliches.