So Michael D IS running again!

ligerdub

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Sexuality and gender identity are entirely separate issues.

Trans young people do exist. What you are suggesting is that children who identify as trans should be forced not to identify as trans. Can you not see the potential damage to the child in that?

I never claimed sexuality and gender identity to be dependent of each other, the poster I was responding to made that link not me.

No, what I am suggesting is that children who identify as trans should have no legal standing to do so, as they have no legal standing to do plenty of other things. You see the law protects children in that way, as they should do here. They have not matured physically, emotionally or psychologically to be considered reliable enough to make such an agreement or decision. Can you not see the potential damage to the CHILD in allowing them in pursuing a potentially dangerous course of action they subsequently regret and could not have been expected to make a mature decision on? All the while that persons parents or guardian (clue is in the title), who should be considered wiser and responsible, step aside and do nothing.

It's the same way we shouldn't be obliged to recognise their potential imaginary friends when we are conducting the census.

If you have a problem with that then you should go out and protest everything else they legally aren't considered mature enough to do,decide upon or be legally considered an adult in. You shouldn't of course, because that would be incredibly irresponsible.

To counter your claim in the other post which said that it was transphobic because Gemma likened the policy to paedophilia, well that's also rubbish. She was using that claim as it was potentially abuse to a child, which while not exactly polished or advisable language, is a potentially fair accusation if you believe that there are valid risks to the child from a laissez-faire policy regarding children.

Anyway, I'll leave it there because it's no longer on-topic.

Trasna1

nc6000 wrote: »

Pay Kenny did us a favour there. Gallagher was a spoofer who would have been a terrible president.

I didn't think it was RTÉs role to sabotage a candidate so the establishments choice would be elected.

There is no knowing how good or bad Gallagher would have been. To be honest it's not a terribly difficult gig.

I'm fairly sure Gallagher wouldn't have been eulogising Castro though.

Strazdas

Bradlin wrote: »

Even if he was the best President we have had, and I completely disagree that he was better that either Robinson or McAleese, he is too old to serve another 7 years (I'm not interested in having an 82 year old President) and his playing the electorate for fools by promising to only stay for 7 years destroys his credibility.

He's had his time in the House and he should retire gracefully, as he promised he would do.

I'd agree with you on the age factor. Not many 77 year olds would be in the running for a seven year job. He should have given serious consideration to getting off the stage and letting someone younger take over.

Mary McAleese is ten years younger and has been an ex-President for seven years.

Water John

Yes Alice Mary Higgins letter is for me. Amazing that she is reaching out at this point, real coincidence.
Maeve Higgins if she's 35 would be a fine candidate. But then they'll start hounding her for the dog viz issue.

AGC

yrreg0850 wrote: »

I think Mr Higgins was trying to pull a fast one by not making known his intention to seek a second term until the last minute.
Surely he knew long before July that he wanted a second term. We probably would not know yet only for the media pestering him.

He didn’t leave it till the last minute, if he wanted he still wouldn’t have to have made his intentions known.

He has been quite clear in saying he would say it by a certain date and he did.

People fully entitled to their opinion but when the 2 main points against him to date are that he said he would only serve 1 term and an unfounded 3k a night hotel room from a bitter former rival the President is doing ok.

The pub story did make me laugh though...a lot different to the great reception he gets wherever he goes in the country from the Fleadh to LOi matches.

Beechwoodspark

AGC wrote: »

He didn’t leave it till the last minute, if he wanted he still wouldn’t have to have made his intentions known.

He has been quite clear in saying he would say it by a certain date and he did.

People fully entitled to their opinion but when the 2 main points against him to date are that he said he would only serve 1 term and an unfounded 3k a night hotel room from a bitter former rival the President is doing ok.

The pub story did make me laugh though...a lot different to the great reception he gets wherever he goes in the country from the Fleadh to LOi matches.

Laugh all you like from now until the day the votes are counted for all I care. I know what I saw and i know that when the campaign proper starts all the other candidates will be gunning for him. If he wins after all that fair play to him. But give the people a choice.

AGC

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Laugh all you like from now until the day the votes are counted for all I care. I know what I saw and i know that when the campaign proper starts all the other candidates will be gunning for him. If he wins after all that fair play to him. But give the people a choice.

When did he not give people a choice? People will get their chance to vote.

The only viable opposition to the president at present is the unknown Sinn Fein candidate

Beechwoodspark

AGC wrote: »

When did he not give people a choice? People will get their chance to vote.

The only viable opposition to the president at present is the unknown Sinn Fein candidate

Long way to go between now and polling day

Hotblack Desiato

Water John wrote: »

Freeman has reasonable credientals.

A heavy duty god-botherer and pro-lifer linked to the Iona Instutute.

Ehhh no thanks.

Drifter50

VinLieger wrote: »

Zero evidence to support such a statement

I think the evidence on this thread supports that or maybe you have`nt been following it. For me,I thought he was a reasonable president but now that he has reneged on his promise to step down after 7 years plus the fact that he is 77 at the min will result in support for him draining away.

I for 1 will vote for anyone before him and I don`t think I`m in the minority from speaking to my peers, family and friends about it

Bradlin

AGC wrote: »

He didn’t leave it till the last minute, if he wanted he still wouldn’t have to have made his intentions known.

He has been quite clear in saying he would say it by a certain date and he did.

People fully entitled to their opinion but when the 2 main points against him to date are that he said he would only serve 1 term and an unfounded 3k a night hotel room from a bitter former rival the President is doing ok.

The pub story did make me laugh though...a lot different to the great reception he gets wherever he goes in the country from the Fleadh to LOi matches.

The President of Ireland gets a great reception wherever he or she goes. That comes with the office, not with the person. Dustin the Turkey would get a great reception if he was President.

Hang on, there's an idea!! After doing us proud in the Eurovision ..................!!

Water John

I know Freeman's sister Lowe was involved in the No campaign but her daughter voted yes, maybe campaigned for it?
Don't know if she was actively involved herself? Please detail.

I would consider voting 1 for Higgins if no better candidate is on the ballot sheet.

VinLieger

Drifter50 wrote: »

I think the evidence on this thread supports that or maybe you have`nt been following it. For me,I thought he was a reasonable president but now that he has reneged on his promise to step down after 7 years plus the fact that he is 77 at the min will result in support for him draining away.

I for 1 will vote for anyone before him and I don`t think I`m in the minority from speaking to my peers, family and friends about it

Ohh so were back to hearsay and boards being an accurate representation of the electorate?

Pathetic how twisted up in their own agendas and bias people can get.

He may be unpopular as you say but until the first poll results come in theres zero evidence to support those claims so when your called out on it stop being so defensive as you have nothing to back them up with

blackwhite

Water John wrote: »

I know Freeman's sister Lowe was involved in the No campaign but her daughter voted yes, maybe campaigned for it?
Don't know if she was actively involved herself? Please detail.

I would consider voting 1 for Higgins if no better candidate is on the ballot sheet.

From what I’ve heard, Freeman has said she voted No herself, but doesn’t seemed to have been involved in any of the campaigns

Her “links” to the Iona Institute is that Maria Steen is her niece. She herself doesn’t seem to have any involvement, but the “liberals” of boards seem to think it’s very progressive to condemn people based on the unconnected actions of their relatives.
She has co-sponsored legislation to prohibit “conversion” therapy, which would put her at odds with the Iona hardliners - but again our “liberal” posters choose to ignore that, and try to imply she’s a paid up member :rolleyes:


I wouldn’t agree with her view on the 8th, but I’ve a lot of admiration for what she has done with Pieta House.

That said - I haven’t seen anything in her time in the Senate to convince me to elevate her to higher office.

batgoat

Another doozy from Gemma O'Doherty...
https://twitter.com/andgoseek/status/1031637065149173761

Linked McCann kidnapping back to Mary Boyle.... She definitely is not the voice Ireland needs......

Water John

Thanks Blackwhite, for your fair and balanced reply.

blackwhite

batgoat wrote: »

Another doozy from Gemma O'Doherty...
https://twitter.com/andgoseek/status/1031637065149173761

Linked McCann kidnapping back to Mary Boyle.... She definitely is not the voice Ireland needs......

It’s a pity that she’s such a gullible nut job, because behind it all she does (every now and again) hit on something worth highlighting..

But her embracing of every crackpot conspiracy theory that comes along makes it so easy for everything she does to be dismissed - including the odd bit of valuable insight she has highlighted.


She’s become so obsessed with being anti-establishment that she has abandoned any hint of a journalistic filter, and instead will leap on anything that’s “sticking it to the man” instead of having the wit to focus on the actual stories (which end up getting lost in the fog of crazy that she can’t seem to stay away from)

makeorbrake

Water John wrote: »

Thanks Blackwhite, for your fair and balanced reply.

blackwhite wrote: »

It’s a pity that she’s such a gullible nut job,

More disinformation but what else would you expect in Ireland.

She said he gave them preferential treatment. What of it?

She's a damn fine journalist - shows guts and courage. Has gone up against the likes of Dennis O'Brien and an arrogant $$$$ of a Garda Commissioner.

She has been reporting on corruption, coverup and lack of accountability and transparency in Ireland. Anyone who doesn't think these are central to all that goes on in this country either has their head in the sand or is part of the problem.

Jim2007

makeorbrake wrote: »

She has been reporting on corruption, coverup and lack of accountability and transparency in Ireland. Anyone who doesn't think these are central to all that goes on in this country either has their head in the sand or is part of the problem.

But an Irish presidency is not about any of that! An Irish president has only one responsibility to the people and that is to uphold their wishes as expressed in the constitution, everything else is optional. The last thing the country needs is a president who thinks they have a mandate to carry out their agenda and as a result starts refusing to sign bills into law, not because they are unconstitutional, but because they don't agree with them. Or refuse to dissolve the Dail for similar reasons. That would cause a constitutional crisis - the government elected by the people unable to carry out it's policy. And we have no mechanism in the constitution to deal with such an issue.

The place for agendas is the Dail. And most of the people expressing a wish to run for the presidency right now, should be heading to Leinster House not the park.

Try_harder

I feel a lot are only doing it to raise their profile. Not a hope of getting into the park!

realdanbreen

Water John wrote: »

Still shocking poor judgement by PK. journalist using uncollaborated tweet.

It may well have been but I'd much rather have PK interviewing them than having to endure an eyelash fluttering banal question interview by Miriam O'Callaghan!

realdanbreen

Bradlin wrote: »

The President of Ireland gets a great reception wherever he or she goes. That comes with the office, not with the person. Dustin the Turkey would get a great reception if he was President.

Hang on, there's an idea!! After doing us proud in the Eurovision ..................!!

See there you go! assuming Dustin is a he! You obviously are anti LGBTIU? people:mad:

makeorbrake

Jim2007 wrote: »

But an Irish presidency is not about any of that! An Irish president has only one responsibility to the people and that is to uphold their wishes as expressed in the constitution, everything else is optional. The last thing the country needs is a president who thinks they have a mandate to carry out their agenda and as a result starts refusing to sign bills into law, not because they are unconstitutional, but because they don't agree with them. Or refuse to dissolve the Dail for similar reasons. That would cause a constitutional crisis - the government elected by the people unable to carry out it's policy. And we have no mechanism in the constitution to deal with such an issue.

The place for agendas is the Dail. And most of the people expressing a wish to run for the presidency right now, should be heading to Leinster House not the park.

So Jim - you think that we should pass up any opportunity to free this country from corruption on the basis that 'this is not the format for a presidency'?

Firstly, we are talking about a symbolic statement from the irish people that they're not going to put up with cronyism any longer. It has to start somewhere - why not here? Why can't this be the starting point of a momentum shift that filters through to other mechanisms of the irish state - inclusive of DE? Secondly, who said anything about 'carrying out an agenda'? Perhaps it's a case of getting this out into a national conversation? Lets remember that between DOB and RTE, we don't have a free media.

Lastly, what you are proposing is that we have the equivalent of (yet another) a 'lovely girls' competition where the winner has nothing tangible to offer - nor are they encouraged to have a conversation with the public about anything with substance? You want to pretend that everything is fine in Ireland when it's rotten to the core?

Please...

Jim2007

makeorbrake wrote: »

So Jim - you think that we should pass up any opportunity to free this country from corruption on the basis that 'this is not the format for a presidency'?

I never said that, I said the presidency is not the place to do it.

makeorbrake wrote: »

Firstly, we are talking about a symbolic statement from the irish people that they're not going to put up with cronyism any longer.

The presidency is not the place for symbolic statement, the is the kind of think got the UK to where it is today. How do you actually handle a situation where a ProLife president refuses to sign a bill into law because that is now what they were elected to do? Or the they refuse to sign a revenue bill because they want taxes lowered etc... There is no mechanism in the constitution to deal with such a situation so the whole process comes to stop - constitutional crisis. Even a bill to change the constitution starts with the presidents signature, so it is not as if you can go back and fix it after the fact.

Go read up on the arms trial and the difficulties facing the civic service when they were not sure how they could go to when they discovered certain members of the government and the Dail where conspiring to import arms into the country, or Brian Lenihan (Snr.)'s attempt to influence the president on the dissolution of the Dail and the subsequent threads on the career of Col Ollie Barbour.

The president plays an important role in our democracy, it requires a willingness to put politics and personal interests aside and concentrate on upholding the wishes of the people as expressed in the constitution. It no place for a clown with an agenda.

Be very careful what you wish for, because you might get it!

makeorbrake wrote: »

Lastly, what you are proposing is that we have the equivalent of (yet another) a 'lovely girls' competition where the winner has nothing tangible to offer - nor are they encouraged to have a conversation with the public about anything with substance? You want to pretend that everything is fine in Ireland when it's rotten to the core?

I did not say a single word of that! That is entirely your interoperation. I said the the Dail is the place for that, there is where the power and the responsibility lies. And it is up to the voters to hold their elected representatives accountable.

makeorbrake

Jim2007 wrote: »

I never said that, I said the presidency is not the place to do it.

It amounts to the same difference, Jim.

Jim2007 wrote: »

The presidency is not the place for symbolic statement, the is the kind of think got the UK to where it is today. How do you actually handle a situation where a ProLife president refuses to sign a bill into law because that is now what they were elected to do? Or the they refuse to sign a revenue bill because they want taxes lowered etc... There is no mechanism in the constitution to deal with such a situation so the whole process comes to stop - constitutional crisis. Even a bill to change the constitution starts with the presidents signature, so it is not as if you can go back and fix it after the fact.

Go read up on the arms trial and the difficulties facing the civic service when they were not sure how they could go to when they discovered certain members of the government and the Dail where conspiring to import arms into the country, or Brian Lenihan (Snr.)'s attempt to influence the president on the dissolution of the Dail and the subsequent threads on the career of Col Ollie Barbour.

The president plays an important role in our democracy, it requires a willingness to put politics and personal interests aside and concentrate on upholding the wishes of the people as expressed in the constitution. It no place for a clown with an agenda.

This has got NOTHING to do with a BREXIT scenario - we are not talking about a protest vote. Furthermore, who has said that they won't sign bills into law?

As regards the last sentence - aside from it being disgusting, it's inaccurate. You go on about 'personal interests' and 'agendas' when it's quite obvious it's anything but those things that are implicated here.

Jim2007 wrote: »

I did not say a single word of that! That is entirely your interoperation. I said the the Dail is the place for that, there is where the power and the responsibility lies. And it is up to the voters to hold their elected representatives accountable.

Of course it's my interpretation - and to me, that's exactly what you said. What all is the President supposed to represent then? Nod and smile? What would we even bother with the expense of an election for something like that? To what end?

Sierra Oscar

batgoat wrote: »

Another doozy from Gemma O'Doherty...
https://twitter.com/andgoseek/status/1031637065149173761

Linked McCann kidnapping back to Mary Boyle.... She definitely is not the voice Ireland needs......

Let's not forget her complete hatchet job on a number of individuals with her Mary Boyle documentary.

Asking leading questions, editing the footage to make it seem people were making accusations which they did not make and passing off absolute conjecture as facts. People are quick to ignore articles such as this.

Some people are easily misled. The sad thing is they believe they are somehow more enlightened than everyone else after viewing and listening to conspiracy theory nonsense. We live in an age where fake news and disinformation is passed off as real journalism.

optogirl

makeorbrake wrote: »

So Jim - you think that we should pass up any opportunity to free this country from corruption

How exactly are we going to do that by voting someone into professional picniccer in the park?

makeorbrake

optogirl wrote: »

How exactly are we going to do that by voting someone into professional picniccer in the park?

Well, what's the worst that can happen? ....which is that it is another 'lovely girls' competition.

It could set the stage as a statement by the people of Ireland that they won't put up with the cronyism, corruption, lack of accountability and transparency that we've currently got. These things have to start somewhere. Furthermore, that conversation is being stymied by a DOB/RTE media. So lets start here.

makeorbrake

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Asking leading questions, editing the footage to make it seem people were making accusations which they did not make and passing off absolute conjecture as facts. People are quick to ignore articles such as this.

Firstly your link is from an INM publication. Secondly, it's there in video what he stated. Explain to me how his words are taken out of context? Otherwise, you don't think it's possible that others in AGS can exert pressure (regardless of whether he's retired or not). Must be a great little bubble you're living in.

optogirl

makeorbrake wrote: »

Well, what's the worst that can happen? ....which is that it is another 'lovely girls' competition.

It could set the stage as a statement by the people of Ireland that they won't put up with the cronyism, corruption, lack of accountability and transparency that we've currently got. These things have to start somewhere. Furthermore, that conversation is being stymied by a DOB/RTE media. So lets start here.

I agree that there are huge levels of corruption in this country but I just don't think Gemma O'D or the presidency are vehicles through which we can change that. If anything, Gemma would be better off continuing in her journalistic endeavours. If she does run, I wont be voting for her as there are just a few things that turn me off - I love a good conspiracy theory myself but am wearied by people who see & seek conspiracy everywhere and can't enjoy the simplest of things without viewing it through that lens. Plenty of them about and plenty of them loving and liking everything Gemma tweets.

batgoat

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Let's not forget her complete hatchet job on a number of individuals with her Mary Boyle documentary.

Asking leading questions, editing the footage to make it seem people were making accusations which they did not make and passing off absolute conjecture as facts. People are quick to ignore articles such as this.

Some people are easily misled. The sad thing is they believe they are somehow more enlightened than everyone else after viewing and listening to conspiracy theory nonsense. We live in an age where fake news and disinformation is passed off as real journalism.

She was blocking Boyle's family members on twitter. Members who initially supported her but became uncomfortable with behaviour.

Sierra Oscar

makeorbrake wrote: »

Firstly your link is from an INM publication. Secondly, it's there in video what he stated. Explain to me how his words are taken out of context? Otherwise, you don't think it's possible that others in AGS can exert pressure (regardless of whether he's retired or not). Must be a great little bubble you're living in.

Do your own research. It's on the public record that both Gardaí have stated their comments were taken out of context. She refused to publish any factual information that went against her narrative and refused people the right of reply to defend themselves when they had evidence which disputed her nonsense narrative. That's not how a proper journalist works. I'm not going to play your games of having to find never ending 'evidence' to back up conspiracy theory nonsense.

The latest conspiracy this morning is that someone is interfering with Gemma's tweets. I suppose someone other than herself posted the insensitive LGBT tweets and so on? :rolleyes:

The Irish people aren't going to buy into this nonsense.

https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1031831092930781184

makeorbrake

batgoat wrote: »

She was blocking Boyle's family members on twitter. Members who initially supported her but became uncomfortable with behaviour.

You want to evidence that?...as in all elements of it.

batgoat

makeorbrake wrote: »

You want to evidence that?...as in all elements of it.

Going in search of them now. Was years back.

makeorbrake

optogirl wrote: »

I agree that there are huge levels of corruption in this country but I just don't think Gemma O'D or the presidency are vehicles through which we can change that. If anything, Gemma would be better off continuing in her journalistic endeavours.

I don't think there's an ideal starting point for a pushback against corruption. It's where-ever it can get traction in my book.
Irish media is very much part of the problem. There's plenty that's been spun off in a certain way or goes unreported. As regards Gemma being better off reporting, she's been doing that to the best of her ability from what I can see. However, this provides an opportunity to raise a national conversation.

optogirl wrote: »

If she does run, I wont be voting for her as there are just a few things that turn me off - I love a good conspiracy theory myself but am wearied by people who see & seek conspiracy everywhere and can't enjoy the simplest of things without viewing it through that lens. Plenty of them about and plenty of them loving and liking everything Gemma tweets.

Up to yourself - but I don't do 'conspiracy theories' and I don't see much to tie GoD with same....but each to their own.

makeorbrake

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Do your own research. It's on the public record that both Gardaí have stated their comments were taken out of context.

Thanks for the prompt re. research - I'm well aware of what you claim. We're going round in circles - see above. How are the words that they spoke in those interviews taken out of context? Once they're said, it's a little hard to take them back (regardless of what sort of pressure was put on them). They're there in VIDEO interview!

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

That's not how a proper journalist works. I'm not going to play your games of having to find never ending 'evidence' to back up conspiracy theory nonsense.

An award winning journalist that isn't afraid to report. We don't have a free media in this country otherwise - particularly so when it comes to the DOB/RTE axis.

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The latest conspiracy this morning is that someone is interfering with Gemma's tweets.

What of it?

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

I suppose someone other than herself posted the insensitive LGBT tweets and so on? :rolleyes:

How insensitive? To suggest that under 16's lacked the maturity to make their own decision on something so important? GTF!

batgoat

Here's some of her dodgier stuff that I found.

https://twitter.com/MolloyCampaign/status/1031290802742407168?s=19

https://twitter.com/MolloyCampaign/status/704679685142122496?s=19

https://twitter.com/MolloyCampaign/status/773190125849313281?s=19

makeorbrake

batgoat wrote: »

Here's some of her dodgier stuff that I found.

Dodgier how? You're just throwing crap at a wall and hoping some of it will stick. What is there here to suggest any wrongdoing by GoD?

batgoat

makeorbrake wrote: »

Dodgier how? You're just throwing crap at a wall and hoping some of it will stick. What is there here to suggest any wrongdoing by GoD?

Her being incredibly threatening towards a person assisting with her investigation at time. And how anyone who works with her seems to not be positive about the relationship. Here's the family member of Boyle she blocked.

https://twitter.com/joecraig79/status/773228412500582401?s=19

makeorbrake

batgoat wrote: »

Her being incredibly threatening towards a person assisting with her investigation at time. And how anyone who works with her seems to not be positive about the relationship. Here's the family member of Boyle she blocked.

It's laughable. You present tweets from someone with no context as to what went on between them - and why GoD blocked them on twitter.

As regards the last one, it's priceless. If you knew anything about the Mary Boyle case, you would know that for the whole time, the family have been split - and it's Ann Boyle that is of the same mind as GoD.

batgoat

makeorbrake wrote: »

It's laughable. You present tweets from someone with no context as to what went on between them - and why GoD blocked them on twitter.

As regards the last one, it's priceless. If you knew anything about the Mary Boyle case, you would know that for the whole time, the family have been split - and it's Ann Boyle that is of the same mind as GoD.

Cool, so anything negative is propaganda. There's a lot of negative though..

makeorbrake

batgoat wrote: »

Cool, so anything negative is propaganda. There's a lot of negative though..

I didn't say that 'anything' negative is propaganda. However, your last sentence is telling. A lot of negative means it all must be true?...That's what you'd have us believe? Very easy to sully someones reputation then I would think.

What evidence backed morsel have you got so far?

Water John

I would say DOB and GOD were well met. A pity they fell out.

batgoat

makeorbrake wrote: »

I didn't say that 'anything' negative is propaganda. However, your last sentence is telling. A lot of negative means it all must be true?...That's what you'd have us believe? Very easy to sully someones reputation then I would think.

What evidence backed morsel have you got so far?

Burned relationships where she's clearly behaved inappropriately or like a dick. Transphobia, weekly conspiracies including about McCanns and hpv conspiracies. That's a fair bit plus more evidence than she herself seems to rely on these days.

Hotblack Desiato

blackwhite wrote: »

From what I’ve heard, Freeman has said she voted No herself, but doesn’t seemed to have been involved in any of the campaigns

Her “links” to the Iona Institute is that Maria Steen is her niece. She herself doesn’t seem to have any involvement, but the “liberals” of boards seem to think it’s very progressive to condemn people based on the unconnected actions of their relatives.

Theresa Lowe is her sister, who was a barrister, then a "consultant" for the No campaign and appeared in the second TV3 debate.

You have to remember how the anti-choice/religious social conservatism movement here operates. It's a handful of extended families, who are all intermarried with each other. It would be rather strange for a conservative catholic who has not one but two close relatives involved with Iona etc. at the highest level to not be anti-choice.

With abortion legislation coming down the track, that should be a deal-breaker for any Yes voter.

I wouldn’t agree with her view on the 8th, but I’ve a lot of admiration for what she has done with Pieta House.

Including that video where she said she made god its financial director? Wonder what the charities regulator would make of that!

makeorbrake

batgoat wrote: »

Burned relationships where she's clearly behaved inappropriately or like a dick.

What burned relationships and how has she behaved inappropriately or like a dick? Remember - this is supposed to be evidence backed.

batgoat wrote: »

Transphobia,

Suggesting that under 16 year olds are not mature enough or developed enough to make the enormous decision with regard to sexuality on their own is NOT transphobia!

batgoat wrote: »

weekly conspiracies including about McCanns

She said that Blair gave them preferential treatment - because he knew them. What's so outlandish? How do you classify as conspiracy?

batgoat wrote: »

and hpv conspiracies.

That the HSE as an organisation should stand up to scrutiny, accountability and transparency? That the HSE have form when it comes to breaches of trust and all of the above?

batgoat wrote: »

That's a fair bit plus more evidence than she herself seems to rely on these days.

So whilst I don't agree with you in any way, shape or form - you are suggesting here that you have NO evidence to back any of your claims...but it's alright for you to do so as you believe (wrongly) that O'Doherty doesn't present any evidence in her investigations. Yeah, that all checks out! :rolleyes:

blackwhite

makeorbrake wrote: »

More disinformation but what else would you expect in Ireland.

She said he gave them preferential treatment. What of it?

She's a damn fine journalist - shows guts and courage. Has gone up against the likes of Dennis O'Brien and an arrogant $$$$ of a Garda Commissioner.

She has been reporting on corruption, coverup and lack of accountability and transparency in Ireland. Anyone who doesn't think these are central to all that goes on in this country either has their head in the sand or is part of the problem.

Anyone who doesn't blindly accept every conspiracy theory espoused by O'Doherty is now "part of the problem"?
That's some incredibly strong cool-aid you've been drinking

In a few cases, GOD highlights important issues and does a public service by raising them. However, in far too many cases, she either invents conspiracies where none exists, or jumps to outlandish conclusions without any evidence (and often does both).
The second failing makes it far too easy for her work as a whole to be discredited, because it makes it hard to trust when she is reporting actual findings as opposed to reporting stuff she's dreamed up herself.

makeorbrake

blackwhite wrote: »

Anyone who doesn't blindly accept every conspiracy theory espoused by O'Doherty is now "part of the problem"?
That's some incredibly strong cool-aid you've been drinking

Twist words much? I said that anyone who doesn't want to tackle corruption, coverup, lack of accountability and transparency in Ireland is part of the problem.

blackwhite wrote: »

However, in far too many cases, she either invents conspiracies where none exists, or jumps to outlandish conclusions without any evidence (and often does both).
The second failing makes it far too easy for her work as a whole to be discredited, because it makes it hard to trust when she is reporting actual findings as opposed to reporting stuff she's dreamed up herself.

What are these 'conspiracies' and what has she 'dreamed up'?

blackwhite

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Theresa Lowe is her sister, who was a barrister, then a "consultant" for the No campaign and appeared in the second TV3 debate.

You have to remember how the anti-choice/religious social conservatism movement here operates. It's a handful of extended families, who are all intermarried with each other. It would be rather strange for a conservative catholic who has not one but two close relatives involved with Iona etc. at the highest level to not be anti-choice.

With abortion legislation coming down the track, that should be a deal-breaker for any Yes voter.




Including that video where she said she made god its financial director? Wonder what the charities regulator would make of that!

I prefer to judge people on their own actions (like for example, co-sponsoring legislation that flies in the face of what Iona are trying to promote) - and not on the actions of their brothers or sisters, or nieces or nephews.

But each to their own I guess :rolleyes:


It's a worrying trend how certain posters on here, and elements of Irish political discourse in general, seems to see character assassination by proxy as a legitimate way of trying to silence anyone who doesn't 100% agree with them.

I'd expect any fair-minded person to judge Freeman (and all of the other candidates) on her own actions - not on the actions of other people.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

You have to remember how the anti-choice/religious social conservatism movement here operates. It's a handful of extended families, who are all intermarried with each other. It would be rather strange for a conservative catholic who has not one but two close relatives involved with Iona etc. at the highest level to not be anti-choice.

I can only the imagine the hysteria of you and some others on here if a post such as this was made with crass generalisations about any other religious grouping (or ethnic grouping).

batgoat

There we go, justifying anything she says.. Apparently her 96fm interview this morning was a carcrash. Claimed her tweets were interfered with. Tried to justify relating paedophilia to trans issue.