Irish Language Act in the North: Have Sinn Fein scored a major own goal?

FrancieBrady

FG allowing a free vote is just a form of cowardice.
They know there would be a damaging revolt if they didn't allow it.

I curiously enough, understand that, it is not an easy issue for anyone.

I also understand a party wanting legislative change on the issue and taking a 'party' position on it. That is ideally how political party's work.

Free votes mean you are just a collection of independents.

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

FG allowing a free vote is just a form of cowardice.
They know there would be a damaging revolt if they didn't allow it.

I curiously enough, understand that, it is not an easy issue for anyone.

I also understand a party wanting legislative change on the issue and taking a 'party' position on it. That is ideally how political party's work.

Free votes mean you are just a collection of independents.

No, like everyone else they, and the other parties allowing a free vote, recognise what a complex issue it is and the fairest thing is to allow people to vote their conscience.

Suggesting that something as deep, personal and complex as abortion can be expressed as a party political position is, frankly, ridiculous - but there again, as SF repeatedly demonstrate, the reidiculous is where they eat their breakfast, lunch and dinner.

FrancieBrady

Jawgap wrote: »

No, like everyone else they, and the other parties allowing a free vote, recognise what a complex issue it is and the fairest thing is to allow people to vote their conscience.

Suggesting that something as deep, personal and complex as abortion can be expressed as a party political position is, frankly, ridiculous - but there again, as SF repeatedly demonstrate, the reidiculous is where they eat their breakfast, lunch and dinner.

But, it is about legislation. And legislation that will allow the choice you are talking about.


Is that not what a political party should be primarily interested in?

McMurphy

Jawgap wrote: »

yes, really -



....and where does the link you posted say whe was expelled from FG?

It says she was expelled from the PP.....



.....but losing a party whip doesn't automaticatically mean loss of membership of the wider party.

You're engaging in word play.

She was expelled from the P.P, and (she says)

Taoiseach asked me to resign:

Speaking via video link from Leinster House to TV3′s Tonight With Vincent Browne, Creighton said that she gave her letter of resignation to the Taoiseach immediately after her vote, saying:

When probed by Browne why she had done that

Quite frankly because I was asked to. I had already lost the whip of the party so the consequences were pretty apparent to me and I didn’t really want to drag it out.”

blackwhite

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

You're engaging in word play.

She was expelled from the P.P, and (she says)

Taoiseach asked me to resign:

No Johnny. It's actually you engaging in wordplay.

You know perfectly well that for all Irish parties there's a world of difference between the Parliamentary Party and the party itself.
Being expelled from the PP (otherwise referred to a "losing the party whip") for a period of time is a standard enough punishment across all parties when a TD votes against a stated party position. And similarly - anyone losing the party whip is going to be expected to give up any ministries or positions they have by virtue of their position within their party.

The vast majority of TDs simply wait out their time, and are re-instated after a period (see Toibin in SF as an example on the same issue as Lucinda). Lucinda chose otherwise and decided to leave the party. Very different from actually being expelled - but why bother with the truth when you can make some petty digs instead sure?

McMurphy

blackwhite wrote: »

No Johnny. It's actually you engaging in wordplay.

You know perfectly well that for all Irish parties there's a world of difference between the Parliamentary Party and the party itself.
Being expelled from the PP (otherwise referred to a "losing the party whip") for a period of time is a standard enough punishment across all parties when a TD votes against a stated party position. And similarly - anyone losing the party whip is going to be expected to give up any ministries or positions they have by virtue of their position within their party.

Firstly, what petty digs?

Secondly, when the Taoiseach and leader of your own party asks for you to tender your resignation, that is pretty much your marching orders in any other industry.

In contrast - let's look at the Frances Fitzgerald incident.

The (during that incident) Taoiseach and leader of FG stated quite clearly that he wouldn't seek her resignation, nor accept it If she offered it.

See the difference?

The vast majority of TDs simply wait out their time, and are re-instated after a period (see Toibin in SF as an example on the same issue as Lucinda). Lucinda chose otherwise and decided to leave the party. Very different from actually being expelled

The difference is Creighton was asked to resign.

Toibin was not.

but why bother with the truth when you can make some petty digs instead sure?

Satire?

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

No Johnny. It's actually you engaging in wordplay.

You know perfectly well that for all Irish parties there's a world of difference between the Parliamentary Party and the party itself.
Being expelled from the PP (otherwise referred to a "losing the party whip") for a period of time is a standard enough punishment across all parties when a TD votes against a stated party position. And similarly - anyone losing the party whip is going to be expected to give up any ministries or positions they have by virtue of their position within their party.

The vast majority of TDs simply wait out their time, and are re-instated after a period (see Toibin in SF as an example on the same issue as Lucinda). Lucinda chose otherwise and decided to leave the party. Very different from actually being expelled - but why bother with the truth when you can make some petty digs instead sure?

So what is Jawgap's point then?

SF have not expelled anyone from the party for their position on the 8th.

Yet plenty of insinuation that they have.

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So what is Jawgap's point then?

SF have not expelled anyone from the party for their position on the 8th.

Yet plenty of insinuation that they have.

I'm sure then you can quote where I made such a claim or insinuation?


Or this a case of your trying to insinuate I've posted something that I never did?

blackwhite

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Firstly, what petty digs?

Secondly, when the Taoiseach and leader of your own party asks for you to tender your resignation, that is pretty much your marching orders in any other industry.

In contrast - let's look at the Frances Fitzgerald incident.

The (during that incident) Taoiseach and leader of FG stated quite clearly that he wouldn't seek her resignation, nor accept it If she offered it.

See the difference?

A politician being asked to resign as minister very rarely leads to them leaving the party (whether deciding to jump or being pushed).


But then again - we're in a thread where Francie is now claiming that giving party members a free vote is "cowardice" - so it's fairly obvious that blind-party politics is all that the usuals on here have any interest in :rolleyes:

McMurphy

blackwhite wrote: »

A politician being asked to resign as minister very rarely leads to them leaving the party (whether deciding to jump or being pushed).

But in this case it did.

So what's your point

But then again - we're in a thread where Francie is now claiming that giving party members a free vote is "cowardice" - so it's fairly obvious that blind-party politics is all that the usuals on here have any interest in :rolleyes:

We're also in a thread were posters accuse others of petty digs because they point out some home truths.

I asked for an example of where this was happening - but alas all I got was more irrelevancies.......

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

I'm sure then you can quote where I made such a claim or insinuation?


Or this a case of your trying to insinuate I've posted something that I never did?

Did I not ask very clearly 'So what was Jawgap's point'?

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

A politician being asked to resign as minister very rarely leads to them leaving the party (whether deciding to jump or being pushed).


But then again - we're in a thread where Francie is now claiming that giving party members a free vote is "cowardice" - so it's fairly obvious that blind-party politics is all that the usuals on here have any interest in :rolleyes:

Well, how is it not cowardice?

It was only done on this issue because they feared more Lucinda style revolt.

A party willing to give it's members a free vote to take free choice away from the electorate, strikes me as a bit hypocritical as well.

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Well, how is it not cowardice?

It was only done on this issue because they feared more Lucinda style revolt.

A party willing to give it's members a free vote to take free choice away from the electorate, strikes me as a bit hypocritical as well.

Democracy is cowardice then? Gotcha :rolleyes:

Free votes on matters of conscience are fairly common, especially in cases where there's no clear majority leaning one way or another within a party.

Not every party believes that the central "council" should dictate every single thing to their membership

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

Democracy is cowardice then? Gotcha :rolleyes:

Free votes on matters of conscience are fairly common, especially in cases where there's no clear majority leaning one way or another within a party.

Not political parties that take their job of legislating seriously>
The 8th Repeal is not about abortion, it is about choice. Abortion happens wholesale already in the country and these lily livers couldn't give a hoot about it.

Not every party believes that the central "council" should dictate every single thing to their membership

I wondered how long it would take for the beardy men to be brought down from the hills of South Armagh :rolleyes:

blackwhite

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

But in this case it did.

So what's your point



We're also in a thread were posters accuse others of petty digs because they point out some home truths.

I asked for an example of where this was happening - but alas all I got was more irrelevancies.......

The point is that Lucinda made the decision to resign from FG on her own - plenty of other policitians can handle being asked to resign a ministry, or having the party whip suspended, without feeling the need to leave the party as well.
You've been at great pains to pretend that the party leader asking someone to resign a ministry means they are being forced out of the party - simply to get play the usual petty point-scoring.

The disingenuous attempts from the usual cabal on here to portray it as her being pushed from the party are just that - disengenuous. But then I should know better than to be surprised at that by now :rolleyes:

McMurphy

blackwhite wrote: »

Democracy is cowardice then? Gotcha :rolleyes:

Free votes on matters of conscience are fairly common, especially in cases where there's no clear majority leaning one way or another within a party.

Not every party believes that the central "council" should dictate every single thing to their membership

Well said - hindsight though.

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has shown far greater political maturity in his handling of the abortion issue than Enda Kenny, according to a former Fine Gael senator expelled from the party by Mr Kenny.

Former senator Paul Bradford from North Cork was expelled from Fine Gael along with his wife, Lucinda Creighton when they voted against the Protection of Life in Pregnancy Bill in July 2013.

The couple were among seven members of the Fine Gael parliamentary party who were expelled when they defied a party whip and voted against the bill in the D and Seanad.

Mr Bradford has welcomed the approach being adopted by Mr Varadkar who has said Fine Gael will allow dissent on any vote to repeal the Eighth Amendment on abortion.

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Not political parties that take their job of legislating seriously>
The 8th Repeal is not about abortion, it is about choice. Abortion happens wholesale already in the country and these lily livers couldn't give a hoot about it.



I wondered how long iot would take for the beardy men to be brought down from the hills of South Armagh :rolleyes:

Who made any mention of South Armagh? SF have a well documented history of central council being incredibly controlling in comprison to most democratic parties - all the way down to the "election" of MON as leader in the north.

Honest debate out the window as always - try debating what's actually posted for a change instead of the non-stop strawmanning and bluster/

McMurphy

blackwhite wrote: »

The point is that Lucinda made the decision to resign from FG on her own - plenty of other policitians can handle being asked to resign a ministry, or having the party whip suspended, without feeling the need to leave the party as well.
You've been at great pains to pretend that the party leader asking someone to resign a ministry means they are being forced out of the party - simply to get play the usual petty point-scoring.

The disingenuous attempts from the usual cabal on here to portray it as her being pushed from the party are just that - disengenuous. But then I should know better than to be surprised at that by now :rolleyes:

That's not what she said.

LUCINDA Creighton was forced to resign her ministry by the Taoiseach.

LUCINDA Creighton was forced to resign her ministry by the Taoiseach.

The former Minister for European Affairs has described the moment that she was pushed from office by Enda Kenny.

Ms Creighton said she handed in her letter of resignation last night following a direct instruction from Enda Kenny.

The instruction almost immediately followed her decision to vote against the Government during the debate on the controversial abortion bill.

Apt username though.

blackwhite

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Well said - hindsight though.

Again - the difference between the Parliamentary Party and the larger party has been repeatedly explained.

Pretending not the know the difference just to try and wind people up is, quite frankly, pathetic - but unspurpising :rolleyes:

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

Who made any mention of South Armagh? SF have a well documented history of central council being incredibly controlling in comprison to most democratic parties - all the way down to the "election" of MON as leader in the north.

Honest debate out the window as always - try debating what's actually posted for a change instead of the non-stop strawmanning and bluster/

Where did their policy on the 8th originate?

Was there an Ard Fheis vote on it?

Rumours are not facts btw

blackwhite

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

That's not what she said.

LUCINDA Creighton was forced to resign her ministry by the Taoiseach.


Apt username though.

And yet again - personal digs to try and wind people up. Standard from the usual gang. Good to show how little interest in honesty in debate there is from you :rolleyes:


If you are incapable of understanding the difference between resigning from FG and being forced to resign her ministry (maybe try reading your own links) than that's your problem and nobody elses

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

And yet again - personal digs to try and wind people up. Standard from the usual gang. Good to show how little interest in honesty in debate there is from you :rolleyes:


If you are incapable of understanding the difference between resigning from FG and being forced to resign her ministry (maybe try reading your own links) than that's your problem and nobody elses

'Digs' you say?

McMurphy

blackwhite wrote: »

And yet again - personal digs to try and wind people up. Standard from the usual gang. Good to show how little interest in honesty in debate there is from you :rolleyes:

Can you make a "personal dig" about an internet pseudonym I meant no offence, just pointed out the ironyof your username.

If you are incapable of understanding the difference between resigning from FG and being forced to resign her ministry (maybe try reading your own links) than that's your problem and nobody elses

I understand quite well, I even gave you examples of how she was in effect given her marching orders by Enda, and how has case differed from Fitzgeralds.

You went on to say that resigning from ministerial positions rarely resulted in a party member being leaving , either by jump or by push.

I said that it did result in this particular case - leaving.

It's quite clear in this case she was pushed.

blackwhite

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Can you make a "personal dig" about an internet pseudonym I meant no offence, just pointed out the ironyof your username.



I understand quite well, I even gave you examples of how she was in effect given her marching orders by Enda, and how has case differed from Fitzgeralds.

You went on to say that resigning from ministerial positions rarely resulted in a party member being leaving , either by jump or by push.

I said that it did result in this particular case - leaving.

It's quite clear in this case she was pushed.

It’s clear in your head maybe - but anyone who isn’t grasping at straws to back up their earlier claim that she was “expelled” will tend to look at the facts instead.

She was told to resign as a minister or else be sacked. Something that has happened to plenty of politicians in the past.
She was most likely told that she wouldn’t be offered any future ministerial positions whilst Kenny was in charge - again, something that isn’t exactly uncommon for politicians.
Instead of doing what the vast majority of politicians in similar situations do, and hunkering down to wait for the next leader, Lucinda thought she could capitalise on pro-life sentiment, go it alone, and possibly be in a king-maker position at the next election and get herself back into a position of power in a faster manner.

But no - it’s definitely a conspiracy and Kenny was going to boot her out of Fine Gael (despite him no having the power to do so).

Maybe if Enda Kenny wanted her out of the party he should have taken the approach favoured by the parties that have are exempt from your criticism, and gotten a few supporters to start a social media campaign to spread. A few rumours and blacken her name.

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

It’s clear in your head maybe - but anyone who isn’t grasping at straws to back up their earlier claim that she was “expelled” will tend to look at the facts instead.

She was told to resign as a minister or else be sacked. Something that has happened to plenty of politicians in the past.

No she wasn't, she was 'automatically' expelled from the PP.

WinnyThePoo

blackwhite wrote: »

It’s clear in your head maybe - but anyone who isn’t grasping at straws to back up their earlier claim that she was “expelled” will tend to look at the facts instead.

She was told to resign as a minister or else be sacked. Something that has happened to plenty of politicians in the past.
She was most likely told that she wouldn’t be offered any future ministerial positions whilst Kenny was in charge - again, something that isn’t exactly uncommon for politicians.
Instead of doing what the vast majority of politicians in similar situations do, and hunkering down to wait for the next leader, Lucinda thought she could capitalise on pro-life sentiment, go it alone, and possibly be in a king-maker position at the next election and get herself back into a position of power in a faster manner.

But no - it’s definitely a conspiracy and Kenny was going to boot her out of Fine Gael (despite him no having the power to do so).

Maybe if Enda Kenny wanted her out of the party he should have taken the approach favoured by the parties that have are exempt from your criticism, and gotten a few supporters to start a social media campaign to spread. A few rumours and blacken her name.

I wouldn't worry about alf. It Was just the way they thought him.

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No she wasn't, she was 'automatically' expelled from the PP.

Cut the fake ignorance - if you’ve no interest in being honest they why bother (unless you’re only trying to wind people up :rolleyes:)

It’s been explained multiple times - being expelled from the PP is not the same as being expelled from the party itself. Being expelled from the parliamentary party is the standard punishment in all political parties when someone votes against the whip. Its been explained multiple times already - but please pretend not to know any better - it shows exactly what you are at

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

Cut the fake ignorance - if you’ve no interest in being honest they why bother (unless you’re only trying to wind people up :rolleyes:)

It’s been explained multiple times - being expelled from the PP is not the same as being expelled from the party itself. Being expelled from the parliamentary party is the standard punishment in all political parties when someone votes against the whip. Its been explained multiple times already - but please pretend not to know any better - it shows exactly what you are at

I never said it was mate. I was just keeping you straight, nobody told her to do anything it was an automatic explusion from the PP from party central/constitution.

FG have expelled people for 'uncomradely behaviour' was my point.
That fact had nothing to do with the thread before Jawgap introduced it in his broad unfocused swipe.

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I never said it was mate. I was just keeping you straight, nobody told her to do anything it was an automatic explusion from the PP from party central/constitution.

FG have expelled people for 'uncomradely behaviour' was my point.
That fact had nothing to do with the thread before Jawgap introduced it in his broad unfocused swipe.

Withdrawing the party whip from someone is not the same thing as expelling them from the party - which was the original claim.

Surprise surprise, you then try to shift the goalposts when called or on it.

And if you can provide an example of anything I’ve posted that’s untrue then please show some evidence - otherwise you can explain what exactly I’ve posted that needs to be kept “straight” (more unsubstantiated personal slurs from Francie - what a shocker)

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

Withdrawing the party whip from someone is not the same thing as expelling them from the party - which was the original claim.

Surprise surprise, you then try to shift the goalposts when called or on it.

And if you can provide an example of anything I’ve posted that’s untrue then please show some evidence - otherwise you can explain what exactly I’ve posted that needs to be kept “straight” (more unsubstantiated personal slurs from Francie - what a shocker)

She was told to resign as a minister or else be sacked.

This is untrue. ^^
Expulsion is automatic once she defied the whip. By central party decree.

Now race away back through the thread and find where I said that she had been expelled from FG as opposed to the PP. I will save you your time, I didn't say it at any point.

Dishonesty you say? Personalised slurs you say? :rolleyes:

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This is untrue. ^^
Expulsion is automatic once she defied the whip. By central party decree.

Now race away back through the thread and find where I said that she had been expelled from FG as opposed to the PP. I will save you your time, I didn't say it at any point.

Dishonesty you say? Personalised slurs you say? :rolleyes:

What’s untrue? - Lucinda herself says she was forced to resign her ministry - I.e. resign or be sacked. Maybe things are different in whatever political party you want to claim not to have anything to do with whatsoever this week, but in any normal political party being “forced to resign” me as resign or be sacked.



Below so you claiming that “parties” - not PPs which are a grouping within a party - have expelled people - dotted in between multiple posts referring to Lucinda. I’m sure we’ll ge the usual weaselinf to try and claim now that you actually meant something completely different - but that’s par for the course at this stage

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Have they expelled anyone over their 8th position?

All parties have to expel members for 'uncomradely behaviour'.

Do we need to go into the lists again? :rolleyes:

McMurphy

blackwhite wrote: »

Maybe if Enda Kenny wanted her out of the party he should have taken the approach favoured by the parties that have are exempt from your criticism,

No idea what you're referring to here tbh.

and gotten a few supporters to start a social media campaign to spread. A few rumours and blacken her name.

Why go to that effort when a few of the "grassroots" in her locality could do the same job?

You're over thinking things BW.

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

What’s untrue? - Lucinda herself says she was forced to resign her ministry - I.e. resign or be sacked. Maybe things are different in whatever political party you want to claim not to have anything to do with whatsoever this week, but in any normal political party being “forced to resign” me as resign or be sacked.

Never trust a politician trying to make political capital..

Mr Kehoe said in letters to the four rebels that their failure to accept the party whip meant that the rule in the Fine Gael constitution that provides for the automatic loss of the whip was being applied forthwith.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/fine-gael-expels-four-tds-for-voting-against-abortion-bill-1.1450809

Below so you claiming that “parties” - not PPs which are a grouping within a party - have expelled people - dotted in between multiple posts referring to Lucinda. I’m sure we’ll ge the usual weaselinf to try and claim now that you actually meant something completely different - but that’s par for the course at this stage

Hold on here a minute.

Even Jawgap has said that 'uncomradely behaviour' was not a reference to defying the whip on abortion.

All parties have expelled members for criminal and other wrong doing.


I at no point claimed that she was expelled from the party. And you cannot find the honour to admit you simply got that wrong.

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This is untrue. ^^
Expulsion is automatic once she defied the whip. By central party decree.

Now race away back through the thread and find where I said that she had been expelled from FG as opposed to the PP. I will save you your time, I didn't say it at any point.

Dishonesty you say? Personalised slurs you say? :rolleyes:

Really, automatic you say.......

......not according to rule 50(i) of the FG constitution.......

Where, following a complaint the Whip has been withdrawn from a member of the Parliamentary Party, the Disciplinary Committee may if it thinks fit consider that complaint to see whether it wishes to proceed to consider the expulsion of that member from the Party and where it wishes to proceed as aforesaid the provisions of Rule 44B1. (iv) shall apply.

FrancieBrady

Jawgap wrote: »

Really, automatic you say.......

......not according to rule 50(i) of the FG constitution.......

Why didn't you read what Kehoe said, it was a 'code of conduct' violation which the rules state:

Party Central Fine Gael wrote:

Where any member of the Parliamentary Party is in
breach of the Code of Conduct or Party Pledge or fails to
make the contribution provided for in 44A (xvii) he or she
shall automatically lose the Party Whip. Questions of fact
as to whether the Pledge or Code of Conduct has been
breached or the contribution specified has been made
shall be determined by the Parliamentary Party.

Give it up lads. That hole is getting deeper and deeper.

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why didn't you read what Kehoe said, it was a 'code of conduct' violation which the rules state:



Give it up lads. That hole is getting deeper and deeper.

Yeah, lose the whip....

.......not automatically expelled from the party.

Honestly even SF should be able to understand this.

FrancieBrady

Jawgap wrote: »

Yeah, lose the whip....

.......not automatically expelled from the party.

Honestly even SF should be able to understand this.

:D

Move the goalposts now.



I NEVER said she was expelled from the party, anywhere on this thread.

If I did, quote it there Jawgap.

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

:D

Move the goalposts now.



I NEVER said she was expelled from the party, anywhere on this thread.

If I did, quote it there Jawgap.

Well I never said you did, unless you took the reference to SF to include yourself, which I'd be surprised at given you're not a member.........apparently.

FrancieBrady

Jawgap wrote: »

Well I never said you did, unless you took the reference to SF to include yourself, which I'd be surprised at given you're not a member.........apparently.

Pathetic attempt to salvage something there.

Yeah, lose the whip....

.......not automatically expelled from the party.

Here you are ^^^ correcting me for something I never said.

Keep digging.

blanch152

Getting back on topic.....


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/mary-lou-mcdonald-i-dont-feel-snubbed-by-donald-trump-36705505.html

"Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald has said she does not feel she was snubbed by US President Donald Trump after she did not receive an invite to attend the annual St Patrick’s Day ceremony in the White House."


If I don't invite her to my 60th birthday party, will she also feel she wasn't snubbed, because she certainly was? :D:D It certainly would be a waste of not inviting her, although it is still a small number of years away.

Seriously, no amount of spin can take away from the fact that the White House snubbed both sectarian parties. Of course, while the SF money making machine is raising money for the party in the US, she has to put a good spin on it.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Getting back on topic.....


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/mary-lou-mcdonald-i-dont-feel-snubbed-by-donald-trump-36705505.html

"Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald has said she does not feel she was snubbed by US President Donald Trump after she did not receive an invite to attend the annual St Patrick’s Day ceremony in the White House."


If I don't invite her to my 60th birthday party, will she also feel she wasn't snubbed, because she certainly was? :D:D It certainly would be a waste of not inviting her, although it is still a small number of years away.

Seriously, no amount of spin can take away from the fact that the White House snubbed both sectarian parties. Of course, while the SF money making machine is raising money for the party in the US, she has to put a good spin on it.

Did Trump invite Micheál Martin, Brendan Howlin, or any other Irish political party leader ?

Fann Linn

blanch152 wrote: »

Getting back on topic.....


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/mary-lou-mcdonald-i-dont-feel-snubbed-by-donald-trump-36705505.html

"Sinn Fein leader Mary Lou McDonald has said she does not feel she was snubbed by US President Donald Trump after she did not receive an invite to attend the annual St Patrick’s Day ceremony in the White House."


If I don't invite her to my 60th birthday party, will she also feel she wasn't snubbed, because she certainly was? :D:D It certainly would be a waste of not inviting her, although it is still a small number of years away.

Seriously, no amount of spin can take away from the fact that the White House snubbed both sectarian parties. Of course, while the SF money making machine is raising money for the party in the US, she has to put a good spin on it.

One fool is enough in the White House already from Ireland. The Shinners were probably better off giving that place a wide berth today.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

Did Trump invite Micheál Martin, Brendan Howlin, or any other Irish political party leader ?

Quite a red herring. Were they ever invited?

The White House has traditionally invited the leaders of the two main political parties in the North to the 17th March functions. This year, they were snubbed.

What that has to do with others who were never invited is beyond me.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Quite a red herring. Were they ever invited?

The White House has traditionally invited the leaders of the two main political parties in the North to the 17th March functions. This year, they were snubbed.

What that has to do with others who were never invited is beyond me.

We know they were snubbed, that is the White House doing what it does.

And no politician is ever going to admit that.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We know they were snubbed, that is the White House doing what it does.

And no politician is ever going to admit that.

Yes, but keeping quiet about it is surely a better path to take than mouthing all over national media that you weren't snubbed.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, but keeping quiet about it is surely a better path to take than mouthing all over national media that you weren't snubbed.

I think another politician will be remembered much more for 'mouthing off' as a result of the trip myself.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Quite a red herring. Were they ever invited?

The White House has traditionally invited the leaders of the two main political parties in the North to the 17th March functions. This year, they were snubbed.

What that has to do with others who were never invited is beyond me.

Sounds as if you are attempting to make a mountain out of a molehill tbh.
I doubt Foster felt snubbed either.

In fact after the past few days Varadkar probably envies McDonald and Foster, in wishing he hadn`t been invited either.
You must be pleased the leader of your party the Greens is threatening to tear him a new one when he gets back to the auld sod.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Yes, but keeping quiet about it is surely a better path to take than mouthing all over national media that you weren't snubbed.

Varadkar perhaps would have been better off not doing a bit of mouthing off before he went.
Embarrassed himself in that regards imo.

FrancieBrady

charlie14 wrote: »

Varadkar perhaps would have been better off not doing a bit of mouthing off before he went.
Embarrassed himself in that regards imo.

Own goal maybe?

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

Sounds as if you are attempting to make a mountain out of a molehill tbh.
I doubt Foster felt snubbed either.

In fact after the past few days Varadkar probably envies McDonald and Foster, in wishing he hadn`t been invited either.
You must be pleased the leader of your party the Greens is threatening to tear him a new one when he gets back to the auld sod.

charlie14 wrote: »

Varadkar perhaps would have been better off not doing a bit of mouthing off before he went.
Embarrassed himself in that regards imo.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Own goal maybe?

Is this the Leo thread?

Oh no, it's not.

We are discussing the implications of the snubbing of the two sectarian parties in the North, but somehow, Leo becomes the main subject. Puzzled, I am.