Fine Gael's Next Top Model 2017

Phoebas

C Montgomery Gurns II wrote: »

Indeed I am angry. In my life the only things I ever got off the state was a few weeks of dole and the occasional X Ray.

You must be a recent immigrant yourself if you didn't benefit from the free primary and secondary education system when you were growing up. Or the generous universal child benefit.

Not to mention the transport infrastructure or the gardai ...

C Montgomery Gurns II

Phoebas wrote: »

You must be a recent immigrant yourself if you didn't benefit from the free primary and secondary education system when you were growing up. Or the generous universal child benefit.

Not to mention the transport infrastructure or the gardai ...

Touche, you got me there :pac::pac:

These, however, are essential services. RayM hasn't yet explained why I owe bums and lowlifes half of the weekly minimum wage per week, plus extras. While there aren't nearly as many of them as there was pre recession, every time I go into a McDonald's or a KFC there is always at least one or two foreigners working there. How can Radek from Katowice fly here and get a job in KFC but your dole buddys can't? Certainly back in the CT days there was an awful problem whereby foreign store managers would only hire their friends from home but this has changed drastically since then, most of these places have majority Irish staff.

Out of interest is there any county by county figures available for unemployment rates? Dublin must surely be way below the 4 percent rate that counts as full employment (because, across the Western world, nearly every country has a hardcore four percent of the population who are completely unemployable)

RayM

C Montgomery Gurns II wrote: »

Indeed I am angry. In my life the only things I ever got off the state was a few weeks of dole and the occasional X Ray. There are people from Syria who get more off the state in a few weeks than most Irish working class people will get in a lifetime.

You completely ignored the point. What do the rest of society owe people who point blank refuse to work? My earlier suggestion of food stamps and clothing vouchers every quarter is too much, but at least it might curtail them shoplifting to some extent..

I'd hate to be that angry on a Sunday afternoon. I'd also hate to be the kind of poster who thinks its acceptable to dredge up personal stuff from old threads while making whatever point I'm completely ignoring. Take a few deep breaths.

Conservative

Nothing is free.

Not education, not infrastructure nor transport. Somebody is paying for it either now or down the line.

Last time I checked a hospital visit wasn't free either unless you are work shy of course!

Conservative

RayM wrote: »

C Montgomery Gurns II wrote: »

Indeed I am angry. In my life the only things I ever got off the state was a few weeks of dole and the occasional X Ray. There are people from Syria who get more off the state in a few weeks than most Irish working class people will get in a lifetime.

You completely ignored the point. What do the rest of society owe people who point blank refuse to work? My earlier suggestion of food stamps and clothing vouchers every quarter is too much, but at least it might curtail them shoplifting to some extent..

I'd hate to be that angry on a Sunday afternoon. I'd also hate to be the kind of poster who thinks its acceptable to dredge up personal stuff from old threads while making whatever point I'm completely ignoring. Take a few deep breaths.

Probably has work in the morning.

RayM

Conservative wrote: »

Probably has work in the morning.

If he's that unhappy about it, he should hand his notice in and hit his local SW office. The pay (€188 a week) may be crap, but the hours are great.

Conservative

RayM wrote: »

Conservative wrote: »

Probably has work in the morning.

If he's that unhappy about it, he should hand his notice in and hit his local SW office. The pay (€188 a week) may be crap, but the hours are great.

You are a waste of space.

RayM

Conservative wrote: »

You are a waste of space.

Another one that needs to take a few deep breaths...

_Whimsical_

C Montgomery Gurns II wrote: »

I actually took a re read of that.

Who are "those who don't work" as opposed to those who can't find work (certainly, there are rural communities where the cost of commuting would leave some unemployed people at a financial loss with some minimum wage jobs). "Those who don't work" seems to imply people who have taken a conscientious decision to claim the dole and avoid and disrupt all and any attempts by the DSP to force them back into the workforce.

I don't think Varadkar is going to be going about cutting the amount people on disability are paid, so in Dublin that really only leaves those who choose not to work. What do I owe these people? (I'm fairly sure you mentioned in a previous thread that you don't work)

I hope you are right and that Varadkar intends to create an inclusive and unified society where those who can, do and those who genuinely can't are taken care of.

However, that's not what he said.

I don't believe he's politically naive or chooses his words without thinking. He made it very clear who he intends to embrace in his vision of Ireland. The most positive interpretation of his carefully crafted soundbites would be to say he left enough ambiguity around those who can't "contribute" to create division between classes and those on social welfare, for whatever reason, and those working. I don't think for a second that was an accident. Combined with his recent social welfare cheats campaign I'd feel that silence indicates an element of contempt to all those who are on social welfare.

I know people on social welfare who have severe physical and mental health issues. I know people who are on it because they've gone from ambitious professionals to seriously depressed and exhausted carers of sick babies that need 24hr supervision the state doesn't provide.I know some in his early 30s who's a carer for his wife of the same age who needs him to do everything for her and cannot work.

We all know someone in those awful situations. Leo knows all those people exist too, he should know better than most. However he's not worried about mentioning them. He's content to leave them to hope their exclusion is an oversight and to hope the public in general have the good sense not to discriminate against those who Leo's Ireland intends to prize and those it leaves to wonder if they'll be the charity cases scrounging for leftovers.

This is the same man who coined the phrase "Keep the Recovery Going", while so many wondered "what recovery?". We have enormous problems still, a huge swathe of people needing help, homelessness, a mental health crisis, people the health service is failing who are turning to kickstarters etc to fund lifesaving treatment for their kids. I don't believe he's in touch with the experience of ordinary people at all or that he wants to be.

It gives me a shiver that so many TDs have chosen to support him even before husting or debates on policy differences have been aired.

Social division does not serve anyone, history, sociology, criminology will all point toward the problems it brings. I think Leo's happily just planted a seed of what could very well be a divisive element in our country and one that's counter to the social inclusion that a lot of us have worked towards.

ToddyDoody

If I was Leo Bad Car, I'd give Coveney an "opportunity" in the department of health.

(I hear the department of health is in fact just a building full of screaming monkies)

Conservative

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

C Montgomery Gurns II wrote: »

I actually took a re read of that.

Who are "those who don't work" as opposed to those who can't find work (certainly, there are rural communities where the cost of commuting would leave some unemployed people at a financial loss with some minimum wage jobs). "Those who don't work" seems to imply people who have taken a conscientious decision to claim the dole and avoid and disrupt all and any attempts by the DSP to force them back into the workforce.

I don't think Varadkar is going to be going about cutting the amount people on disability are paid, so in Dublin that really only leaves those who choose not to work. What do I owe these people? (I'm fairly sure you mentioned in a previous thread that you don't work)

I hope you are right and that Varadkar intends to create an inclusive and unified society where those who can, do and those who genuinely can't are taken care of.

However, that's not what he said.

I don't believe he's politically naive or chooses his words without thinking. He made it very clear who he intends to embrace in his vision of Ireland. The most positive interpretation of his carefully crafted soundbites would be to say he left enough ambiguity around those who can't "contribute" to create division between classes and those on social welfare, for whatever reason, and those working. I don't think for a second that was an accident.

I know people on social welfare who have severe physical and mental health issues. I know people who are on it because they've gone from ambitious professionals to seriously depressed and exhausted carers of sick babies that need 24hr supervision the state doesn't provide.I know some in his early 30s who's a carer for his wife of the same age who needs him to do everything for her and cannot work.

We all know someone in those awful situations. Leo knows all those people exist too, he should know better than most. However he's not worried about mentioning them. He's content to leave them to hope their exclusion is an oversight and to hope the public in general have the good sense not to discriminate against those who Leo's Ireland intends to prize and those it leaves to wonder if they'll be the charity cases scrounging for leftovers.

This is the same man who coined the phrase "Keep the Recovery Going", while so many wondered "what recovery?". We have enormous problems still, a huge swathe of people needing help, homelessness, a mental health crisis, people the health service is failing who are turning to kickstarters etc to fund lifesaving treatment for their kids. I don't believe he's in touch with the experience of ordinary people at all or that he wants to be.

It gives me a shiver that so many TDs have chosen to support him even before husting or debates on policy differences have been aired.

Social division does not serve anyone, history, sociology, criminology will all point toward the problems it brings. I think Leo's happily just planted a seed of what could very well be a divisive element in our country and one that's counter to the social inclusion that a lot of us have worked.

Oh come on. Do you think it's in anyway politically viable to abandon those who are genuinely in need? Almost every person in this country knows somebody in that situation.

Politicians are beholden to those who elect them and while in some ways it's a problem it's also a great thing when it comes to the wellbeing of people who genuinely need help. I encourage and welcome that. I would prefer double the welfare for those people than to see layabouts getting undeserved handouts.

It's an endless cycle of wasters fathering/mothering more wasters with no ambition or opportunity. Policy is needed to discourage or enable those people and a free pass is not it.

I tend to believe that people that become nurses/doctors are mostly people with ambition but also good intentions. His parents are a doctor and a nurse.

His father has said in a public interview that he is probably more to the left than his son but what are you trying to say he stands for? Some kind of elite super race?

It's laughable. Its easy to blame the people who have worked hard and tried to make a difference.

_Whimsical_

Conservative wrote: »

Oh come on. Do you think it's in anyway politically viable to abandon those who are genuinely in need? Almost every person in this country knows somebody in that situation.

Politicians are beholden to those who elect them and while in some ways it's a problem it's also a great thing when it comes to the wellbeing of people who genuinely need help. I encourage and welcome that. I would prefer double the welfare for those people than to see layabouts getting undeserved handouts.

It's an endless cycle of wasters fathering/mothering more wasters with no ambition or opportunity. Policy is needed to discourage or enable those people and a free pass is not it.

I tend to believe that people that become nurses/doctors are mostly people with ambition but also good intentions. His parents are a doctor and a nurse.

His father has said in a public interview that he is probably more to the left than his son but what are you trying to say he stands for? Some kind of elite super race?

It's laughable. Its easy to blame the people who have worked hard and tried to make a difference.

Who is blaming anyone who has worked hard for anything? Infact when has that ever happened?
Are you pointing to his dad's recommending him as a character reference, I mean, if we are talking laughable...

As for his status as a doctor...so was James Reily.
Are you suggesting he also deserving of a halo too?
Interest in obtaining a medical degree does not make you an angel, some doctors are just people who want a good career with a high income and the social spoils that come with a highly respected position.
You could say for those so inclined interest in a position in politics might not be too much of a leap.
I'm not saying that's the truth about Leo's interest in medicine but I certainly wouldn't make assumptions about his character solely on the basis of his family background or choice of career. I'm much more interested in what he says and what he does.

As minister for health Leo presided over giving the greenlight to the new Children's Hospital despite countless drs, nurses, parents, children's health charities, protesting it's location as woefully unsuitable and bound to cause serious hardship to get to for sick children. I'm not sure if you've followed that story but it's deeply disturbing for anyone with an ill child. That was the issue that made me sit up and take notice of Leo and wonder where his genuine convictions lay, I think the Children's hospital alone indicates that it's not with the most vulnerable. His recent musings on welfare and his vision for the country yesterday leave me honestly concerned. I don't think that is without foundation.

I'm not suggesting he's trying to create an "elite super race" at all, I'm just I'm concerned he's either not wise enough to recognise the value of social inclusion and the importance of promoting that or it just isn't one of his values. The dangers of leaving certain people behind or creating a two tier society where the government defines those valuable to it and those not valuable to it are frightening for vulnerable indivuals but also for social cohesion as a whole.

Conservative

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

Conservative wrote: »

Oh come on. Do you think it's in anyway politically viable to abandon those who are genuinely in need? Almost every person in this country knows somebody in that situation.

Politicians are beholden to those who elect them and while in some ways it's a problem it's also a great thing when it comes to the wellbeing of people who genuinely need help. I encourage and welcome that. I would prefer double the welfare for those people than to see layabouts getting undeserved handouts.

It's an endless cycle of wasters fathering/mothering more wasters with no ambition or opportunity. Policy is needed to discourage or enable those people and a free pass is not it.

I tend to believe that people that become nurses/doctors are mostly people with ambition but also good intentions. His parents are a doctor and a nurse.

His father has said in a public interview that he is probably more to the left than his son but what are you trying to say he stands for? Some kind of elite super race?

It's laughable. Its easy to blame the people who have worked hard and tried to make a difference.

Who is blaming anyone who has worked hard for anything? Infact when has that ever happened?
Are you pointing to his dad's recommending him as a character reference, I mean, if we are talking laughable...

.

How is what I said about his father a reference? If anything it's the complete opposite and everything he is criticised for?

You take one side and I take the other. Never the twain shall meet.

_Whimsical_

Conservative wrote: »

How is what I said about his father a reference? If anything it's the complete opposite and everything he is criticised for?

You take one side and I take the other. Never the twain shall meet.

Ok, I misread you on the point regarding his father. Though I wouldn't take the fact is father is a Dr as a reassuring reflection of his character.

I absolutely agree with you that people shouldn't be dodging work in order to avail of the dole and make no effort...100%. However those people are a small minority. It's easy to single those people out in speeches without including everyone else in need of support too. My point really I don't know why such a clever politician would take that route and leave any ambiguity. I think it reflects something worrying in his outlook.

C Montgomery Gurns II

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

Ok, I misread you on the point regarding his father. Though I wouldn't take the fact is father is a Dr as a reassuring reflection of his character.

I absolutely agree with you that people shouldn't be dodging work in order to avail of the dole and make no effort...100%. However those people are a small minority. .

At the height of the CT we still had circa 4 percent unemployment. Most of that lot are still on the scratch- a motley crew of alcos who got laid off in the 80's, junkies, members of a certain native ethnic community with upwards of 87 percent unemployment, and so on.

We currently have 6.5 percent IIRC.

Two thirds is not a small minority by anybody's count.

koumi

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

My point really I don't know why such a clever politician would take that route and leave any ambiguity. I think it reflects something worrying in his outlook.

I think it's probably more a case of this than anything else. I don't believe he is inherently bad, might just be a bit green around the gills, but hey..he's popular with the yung uns. Bit too much ego stroking going on.

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

I'm not suggesting he's trying to create an "elite super race" at all, I'm just I'm concerned he's either not wise enough to recognise the value of social inclusion and the importance of promoting that or it just isn't one of his values. The dangers of leaving certain people behind or creating a two tier society where the government defines those valuable to it and those not valuable to it are frightening for vulnerable indivuals but also for social cohesion as a whole.

As an aside, Coveney seems to be carrying him to the throne on a velvet cushioned sedan but has at least restored my faith in the process.

flutered

suicide_circus wrote: »

While "rewarding work" is a nice sound bite I hope it dosnt mean dropping taxes. The kind of ireland I want to live in needs a serious infrastructure upgrade and so will need a steady supply and indeed increase in public money. however, this is a goal everyone needs to contribute to. EVERYONE. From the lowest income, to the highest.

with all adding to according to their means, we have read recently of one of fg's rich uncles, sutherland taking advantage of a tax loophole advailable only to the wealthy, where he gifted a couple of houses to some kin so as to avoid taxes on them when they were to be inheretied, hidden in amoungst the details of iw when founded was that the domestic supplier was to be paying for 81% of the cost of iw, the tax law brought in by noonan a few short years ago which enabled obrien another of fg's rich uncles to advail of a cool €30m in the first month of its impletation, any one who who believes that all will be contributing evenly to irelands future need to think long and hard as to how this will come about, the average worker cannot compete with the high paid worker and their ability to use high paid accountants to advail of every loophole advailable, look back at the implementation of the lpt, all of every ones property was to be taking into account when calculating their their bill, then suddenly it became clear that this required changing to one house and a half an acre (roughly), remember kennys hue and cry about having to pay lpt on his second home in dublin, he argued that politicio's etc should be exempt, sudeenly they were as they could claim it against their expenses, now craftilly hidden behing the official secrects act by howlin, remember when farmers grants were adavilable to be seen by all similarly to anyone on welfare has their income seen by all, this was changed because the farmers claimed the public should not be allowed to see what grants were advailable to them

RayM

At the height of the Celtic Tiger, long-term unemployment (i.e. unemployed for a year or longer) fell to a record low of 1.3 percent. The vast majority of people on the dole back then were literally "in between jobs" for short periods of time.

I don't know why (some) people get so annoyed about this topic, and insist upon using such nasty, dehumanising language ("oxygen thieves", "bums", "lowlifes", "wasters", "a waste of space", "junkies", "alcos", etc). Not to mention the thinly-veiled racism against the Travelling community in this post. It's almost like a competition to see who can post in the most odious manner. If it wasn't so bleak, it'd be comical.

NinetyTwoTeam

Hey Gurns and Conservative,

If the dole was abolished tomorrow, where do you think the government would send the savings? Back to your pocket? If so I've got a bridge to sell you.

Plenty of people still genuinely unable to find work. I'm on of them unfortunately, and I hate it. I'd love to move to Dublin where the jobs are but the rents are insane and ironically, the only way I'd have the means to save for relocating to the capital would be if I had a job! People stuck in this kind of rut don't deserve to be called nasty names. And unlike what you hear, we don't all get rent allowance and extras. I'm stuck in the county with the highest unemployment, lowest disposal income and paying rent and all bills out of 193 a week. These KFC jobs you say are everywhere, are in fact, not.

koumi

RayM wrote: »

At the height of the Celtic Tiger, long-term unemployment (i.e. unemployed for a year or longer) fell to a record low of 1.3 percent. The vast majority of people on the dole back then were literally "in between jobs" for short periods of time.

I don't know why (some) people get so annoyed about this topic, and insist upon using such nasty, dehumanising language ("oxygen thieves", "bums", "lowlifes", "wasters", "a waste of space", "junkies", "alcos", etc). Not to mention the thinly-veiled racism against the Travelling community in this post. It's almost like a competition to see who can post in the most odious manner. If it wasn't so bleak, it'd be comical.

If Leo Varadkar had children...

RayM

koumi wrote: »

If Leo Varadkar had children...

After harvesting and freezing a young Margaret Thatcher's eggs.

koumi

RayM wrote: »

After harvesting and freezing a young Margaret Thatcher's eggs.

best of luck to them (I'm sure he's a proud daddy)

C Montgomery Gurns II

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

Hey Gurns and Conservative,

If the dole was abolished tomorrow, where do you think the government would send the savings? Back to your pocket? If so I've got a bridge to sell you.

Plenty of people still genuinely unable to find work. I'm on of them unfortunately, and I hate it. I'd love to move to Dublin where the jobs are but the rents are insane and ironically, the only way I'd have the means to save for relocating to the capital would be if I had a job! People stuck in this kind of rut don't deserve to be called nasty names. And unlike what you hear, we don't all get rent allowance and extras. I'm stuck in the county with the highest unemployment, lowest disposal income and paying rent and all bills out of 193 a week. These KFC jobs you say are everywhere, are in fact, not.

I have said repeatedly that I hold no grudge against people in rural areas where the cost of commuting would make employment at near minimum wage a loss making exercise. Not to mention that the living conditions that most of these foreign workers would live in are likely unobtainable to an Irish citizen (how many Daft ads are put up by an Irishman willing to share a bedroom with a few other men?) You are not who I am after, believe me.

RayM wrote: »

At the height of the Celtic Tiger, long-term unemployment (i.e. unemployed for a year or longer) fell to a record low of 1.3 percent. The vast majority of people on the dole back then were literally "in between jobs" for short periods of time.

I trust that you have a source for this? As if people were on the dole sporadically for only a few weeks at a time holding at a rate of 3 percent, that would surely mean that throughout the course of the year around one third of the workforce had spent some period on the dole, no?

I don't know why (some) people get so annoyed about this topic, and insist upon using such nasty, dehumanising language ("oxygen thieves", "bums", "lowlifes", "wasters", "a waste of space", "junkies", "alcos", etc). Not to mention the thinly-veiled racism against the Travelling community in this post. It's almost like a competition to see who can post in the most odious manner. If it wasn't so bleak, it'd be comical.

Give this a read.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angry_white_male

You have three groups in Irish society these days.

- the class that want to do nothing. They have become institutionalised from unemployment and, instead of conceding that "keep the recovery going" is a fairly accurate representation of Ireland since 2012 (gradually, mind) they prefer to sit on the sidelines claiming that the government is shafting them left right and centre, their gripes and moans being supported by the AAA PBP and, to a lesser but significant extent, Sinn Fein. You see them on Facebook on the news comments, a shower of morons completely incapable of posting anything remotely positive when there is a story about, for example, 200 new jobs, or the allocation of 200 new social housing units. Whatever it is, all it will draw is cries of too little too late, not enough, wah wah utter bollocks. They get a subsidised house, a medical card, the lot.

- the working class. The actual working class. They pay a lot of tax, they graft, and they seem to get very little back in return for it. They are either single and eligible for social housing support that they will never get, or are a working couple and are over the threshold for it, stuck paying double per month in rent for what their mortgage would be if they could save enough for a deposit (which they can't, because of the rent costs). They live on the same estate as the first group mentioned and wonder why the **** they bother their holes. Why if the children need a doctor's visit they need to make up for the missing 60 euro from somewhere, while they see the dole lifers down the surgery with their medical cards.

And they are the lucky ones. The unlucky ones are their Dublin born friends who commute daily from Cavan and Kilkenny while either trying to save for a Dublin house or biding their time in hope that the rent market stagnates 5 years from now due to over supply, wondering how a foreign family without a breadwinner acquired a house next door to where they grew up..

- the upper class. The younger ones are often strangely leftist, primarily because they can never understand what a kick in the balls it is when the working class have to break their bollocks to achieve what dole lifers and certain pet minorities get handed to them on a plate.

Not to mention the thinly-veiled racism against the Travelling community in this post. It's almost like a competition to see who can post in the most odious manner. If it wasn't so bleak, it'd be comical.

Are you denying that somewhere near 88 percent of travellers are unemployed, mostly by choice?

I don't know exactly how it constitutes veiled racism, so I'll try another one. The Dublin school where the vast majority of the mostly foreign parents are on the scratch.

https://www.fiannafail.ie/most-disadvantaged-school-in-west-dublin-refused-deis-status-ff/

Typical rent is 1500 plus in that area. Sit down lads, this one's on me and the other suckers.


I hope Varadkar takes these shower of wasters to the cleaners.

C Montgomery Gurns II

This hive of activity thread of a post every 3 minutes seems to have died a death once I outlined why the working class people aren't a pile of racist hate filled scumbags but simply want a fair share of the pie that they heavily contribute to.

Says it all really.

Billy86

satguy wrote: »

We can then vote in that FF/SF government we all wanted in the first place !

RayM

C Montgomery Gurns II wrote:

I trust that you have a source for this? As if people were on the dole sporadically for only a few weeks at a time holding at a rate of 3 percent, that would surely mean that throughout the course of the year around one third of the workforce had spent some period on the dole, no?

I'm sure you could have found it yourself, but here you go:

"During the boom years, the long-term unemployment rate - the percentage of the total workforce out of work for more than a year as measured by the Quarterly National Household Survey - fell to a record low of 1.3 per cent."

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/analysis-stellar-growth-reduces-problem-of-long-term-joblessness-1.2713654

As for the rest of your diatribe, I'd rather not get into a long, pedantic "debate" with some racist on the internet. It's Sunday night, ffs.

Grueller

Sosurface wrote: »

A useless conniving mucksavage. Lived his entire life on the taxpayers back after being handed Daddys seat out of sympathy. Epitomises everything thats wrong with this state. Will live out his retirement in luxury, guess who's funding that.

Who'll lead Fine Gael? Who cares. Cant see many being sold on either one. Dya fancy our own Gay brown Maggie Thatcher or another altar boy from Cork? Thought not.

Misread you username as sourface.

C Montgomery Gurns II

RayM wrote: »

I'm sure you could have found it yourself, but here you go:

"During the boom years, the long-term unemployment rate - the percentage of the total workforce out of work for more than a year as measured by the Quarterly National Household Survey - fell to a record low of 1.3 per cent."

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/analysis-stellar-growth-reduces-problem-of-long-term-joblessness-1.2713654

As for the rest of your diatribe, I'd rather not get into a long, pedantic "debate" with some racist on the internet. It's Sunday night, ffs.

Surely it is trolling to throw out terms like racist with no evidence?

Get a job Ray. I'd love a lie in but I'm up at 615 to pay your way.

Sosurface

Grueller wrote: »

Misread you username as sourface.

ok. thanks hun. x

RayM

C Montgomery Gurns II wrote: »

Surely it is trolling to throw out terms like racist with no evidence?

Get a job Ray. I'd love a lie in but I'm up at 615 to pay your way.

It's not trolling if it's a sincerely-held belief, based on what you've posted in this very thread. I know how people react when they're accused of racism, so I would never throw the term around without evidence.

You probably shouldn't go around telling people who you believe to be unemployed to "get a job" because that's just a generally unpleasant way to behave. That's the thing about the far-right... it's never just their opinions that are bad.

please helpThank YOU

Leo ran 5 miles today wow.

Ulysses Gaze

satguy wrote: »

If our only choice is Leo, then maybe we can delete some of the "mild criticism" we posted on this and other threads, and ask him to hang on for a while longer.

We can then vote in that FF/SF government we all wanted in the first place !

C Montgomery Gurns II

RayM wrote: »

It's not trolling if it's a sincerely-held belief, based on what you've posted in this very thread. I know how people react when they're accused of racism, so I would never throw the term around without evidence.

You probably shouldn't go around telling people who you believe to be unemployed to "get a job" because that's just a generally unpleasant way to behave. That's the thing about the far-right... it's never just their opinions that are bad.

Far right? I'm a centre right conservative. UKIP, Trump and Wilders would represent my politics- I'd find the likes of Nick Griffin as bad as Corbyn, Murphy and Ruth.

I wouldn't like Marine Le Pen, but given the choice of her and Macron I would have voted for her. I guess it's a bit like the hard left- although they dislike ISIS for their homophobia and misogyny,they still prefer them to the EDL seeing as they are fighting American imperialism.

FixdePitchmark

The whole 5K/5 miles - was trying too hard.

To be honest his hand action running, was - can you say these days, too gay.

koumi

please helpThank YOU wrote: »

Leo ran 5 miles today on his hands wow.

I can't get that image out of my head now

FixdePitchmark

I think Coveney is useless and Leo is very overrated - the whole waking up early is the type of brainless idiotic sound bite that Leo goes for. But when you are the leader of a country from a fairly upper middle class background - it is typically a sign of Irish class when you show humility for your position - not a cheap jab at a part of your nation.

If you are going for Taoiseach you are the Taoiseach for all - not your own class , ideal and life.

You know what Leo - many of the people not up at 5 in the gym and reading right wing journals and news - voted for marriage equality at 10am.

A very clever guy said to me once - show a bit of ****ing humility.

Beta Ray Bill

Is it me, or does Leo Varadkar looks very terminatoresque on the Front page of the Indo?

Maybe he's rocking his inner cyborg!



He'd get my vote, we could do with cyberneticly enhanced Taoiseach

pedigree 6

This thing for Leo to be the next leader of FG was all decided months ago if not even 2 years ago.
Listening to Simon Coveney on radio I think he's just playing along to make a bit of an election and deflect any attention away the government for a while.
I was talking to a very conservative rural uncle of mine and the "Gay" question came up. Even he didn't care and rightly so. It's not an issue anymore.

Leo's our next taoiseach.

koumi

terminator 1 or terminator 2, it's very important that I know which movie because the protagonist is a bit of a different character in both. He does have lovely legs though.

jimmycrackcorm

grahambo wrote:

He'd get my vote, we could do with cyberneticly enhanced Taoiseach

It would be cool if he did robot actions during his speeches.

Ken.

Mod-Threads merged.

koumi

I'll just be going with the one who is promising to make establishing an anti corruption agency a mandate, same party so hope it will carry through regardless of who becomes leader. Leave em off now to fight amongst themselves. (Coveney gave a rousing speech in Cork the other day, anyone outside of Dublin would be glad of it)

also, my parasympathetic system has reached full Leo capacity and has turned itself off now

RabbleRouser2k

I find it bizarre that Leo, when invited on Prime Time to talk about his plans as a leader, didn't go.

On the other hand, Coveney did. If Leo can't answer questions about his proposed leadership, sounds like he won't be much of a talker. I personally don't care if Leo's gay either, but he's just soooo not who I think should be leader.
Coveney tho-yeah, he'd be a disaster-would probably give a high ranking job to his inept brother.

dcm22

I don't think 'too gay' is a good way of putting it. 'gay' is fine tho.

_Whimsical_

dcm22 wrote: »

I don't think 'too gay' is a good way of putting it. 'gay' is fine tho.

Fine GAYl.

Is him being gay an issue at all though? I haven't heard anyone mention it except in a positive light...an "oh look how progressive we are with a gay handsome taoiseach, bulladh bus for everyone" sort of way, or ala Eamonn Dunphy about how Leo should understand being in a minority and be more empathetic than he is.

I haven't heard anyone have the slightest problem with his sexuality though.

_Whimsical_

Leo was back on the news tonight singing from the same hymn sheet. Asked directly if he was going to be a Taoiseach for those who work and contribute he said yes, but he could include carers in that bracket.
He did not say anything about being leader for those who can't work, disabled, homeless, ill, victims of the health service left in tatters. Think of all those with depression who'd be back at work much faster if they could avail of mental health services like counselling etc or hospitalisation to get meds right for example. That's only one small section of the ridiculous vista we have atm.

Those people who genuinely can't "contribute" were not an accidental omission from his speech, it was very clear that he's embracing only SOME of Irish society.

He also included in his speech the line "the country is divided into those who work and are entitled to nothing and those who don't work and think they should be entitled to everything for free".
He's forgetting that 70% of those not working are pensioners and disabled and most unemployed are genuinely desperate for work but forced into that position.
That kind of divisive talk from a potential Taoiseach frightens me. We haven't had that kind of society that throws all vulnerable people on a scrap heap of losers and layabouts in casual conversation.

We're looking square in the face now of a Tory like right being in charge, where old people who get Alzheimers can look forward to "dementia tax".

Even more than that though we've seen this year in the US and UK what happens when you leave some people out of your plans for your society and pretend they and their issues don't exist. You create a nice little breeding ground for some extreme element to sweep in and take hold and then the whole country suffers.

I really hope anyone who isn't happy with that outlook writes to the FG representative and says so before this plan for all our future goes unchallenged. I realise some people are delighted with it, but those who are not, please act.

red ears

Which on of them are up at 8 o clock mass that's what id like to know.

BoatMad

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

Leo was back on the news tonight singing from the same hymn sheet. Asked directly if he was going to be a Taoiseach for those who work and contribute he said yes, but he could include carers in that bracket.
He did not say anything about being leader for those who can't work, disabled, homeless, ill, victims of the health service left in tatters. Think of all those with depression who'd be back at work much faster if they could avail of mental health services like counselling etc or hospitalisation to get meds right for example. That's only one small section of the ridiculous vista we have atm.

Those people who genuinely can't "contribute" were not an accidental omission from his speech, it was very clear that he's embracing only SOME of Irish society.

He also included in his speech the line "the country is divided into those who work and are entitled to nothing and those who don't work and think they should be entitled to everything for free".
He's forgetting that 70% of those not working are pensioners and disabled and most unemployed are genuinely desperate for work but forced into that position.
That kind of divisive talk from a potential Taoiseach frightens me. We haven't had that kind of society that throws all vulnerable people on a scrap heap of losers and layabouts in casual conversation.

We're looking square in the face now of a Tory like right being in charge, where old people who get Alzheimers can look forward to "dementia tax".

Even more than that though we've seen this year in the US and UK what happens when you leave some people out of your plans for your society and pretend they and their issues don't exist. You create a nice little breeding ground for some extreme element to sweep in and take hold and then the whole country suffers.

I really hope anyone who isn't happy with that outlook writes to the FG representative and says so before this plan for all our future goes unchallenged. I realise some people are delighted with it, but those who are not, please act.

The only flaw in your argument is the current reality in the U.K. Where the " dispossessed " will be voting Tory. The clear evidence is they are fed up with left wing politicians who promise the planet and deliver an Apple

Are Am Eye

Fair play to Leo for giving Alicia Florrick a job at his law firm after her husband went to jail.

_Whimsical_

BoatMad wrote: »

The only flaw in your argument is the current reality in the U.K. Where the " dispossessed " will be voting Tory.

They might be right now due to lack of any credible alternative, but Brexit has shown that they're ripe for the picking for ANY political element going to really acknowledge their situation and their fears. The US too. They're leaving the door open to something potentially dangerous in my opinion and we will do likewise. Infact we've seen in the last few years that the current climate has left a good number of our own people vulnerable to populist movements too. Intensifying that won't be good in the long term.