No right wing alternative= No alternative

Mad_maxx

alastair wrote: »

Nah - she’s doing no such thing. The names were not released for legal reasons - one of the convicted being a minor at the time of the crime. What she is doing however is equating criminality with ethnicity, and not even in a subtle fashion. Plain old racism.

Are David quinn and John mcguirk "far right" in your opinion?

Clarence Boddiker

alastair wrote: »

The post was blatantly racist. How can you possibly imagine it’s not? Who exactly do you imagine is supposed to be coming to your village? The convicted and imprisoned French lads?

And not my type - I like a bit of humanity in folk.

You don't seem concerned at all with the victims of brutal torture murder but rather you're concerned with protecting the identity of the perpetrators..speaks volumes..like ocean size volumes.

alastair

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

You don't seem concerned at all with the victims of brutal torture murder but rather you're concerned with protecting the identity of the perpetrators..speaks volumes..like ocean size volumes.

Strange you arrived at this conclusion. The names of convicted minors are never released - that’s just as true for the killers of Anna Kriegel as it is for these people. That’s the nature of the law. But feel free to ignore the elephant in the room.

Sonic_exyouth

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

You don't seem concerned at all with the victims of brutal torture murder but rather you're concerned with protecting the identity of the perpetrators..speaks volumes..like ocean size volumes.

You seem far more concerned about the ethnicity of the perpetrators and not at all about the victim.

In fact, it would appear that if the perpetrators were white you wouldn't care at all about the victim.

Which is where the racism charge comes from

alastair

Sonic_exyouth wrote: »

You seem far more concerned about the ethnicity of the perpetrators and not at all about the victim.

In fact, it would appear that if the perpetrators were white you wouldn't care at all about the victim.

Which is where the racism charge comes from

That, and the rather strange notion that a couple of convicted French people in France have anything to do with asylum seekers in Ireland. Last I heard we were not inundated with French citizens in DP.

Rigor Mortis

marieholmfan wrote: »

The right wing believe that the better you do the more you should get; the left believe in share and share alike.


That's what it means. You're mixing it up with conservative an liberal.

You're definition of right wing is unnecessarily narrow and the OPs is perfectly valid. Right wing is frequently and correctly used to describe a conservative ethos in policy making. Virtually every policy position he describes can be reasonably described as right wing.

rossie1977

People of Ireland overwhelming voted in abortion referendum so not sure why op thinks any government going forward can change that unless he is proposing a fascist dictatorship or something.

OP then goes on to say he wants smaller government while enforcing stronger borders, cleaning up homeless, stronger policing/penal sentences on top of stopping abortion. All that obviously would require vastly increase in government size.

Sonic_exyouth

rossie1977 wrote: »

People of Ireland overwhelming voted in abortion referendum so not sure why op thinks any government going forward can change that unless he is proposing a fascist dictatorship or something.

Wellllllll - they didn't.
They voted to take power away from the people, and give that power to the Government.
They did this, knowing that there was pending legislation liberalizing abortion.

Any future government can prohibit abortion without a referendum

*edit - Any future Dail

rossie1977 wrote: »

OP then goes on to say he wants smaller government while enforcing stronger borders, cleaning up homeless, stronger policing/penal sentences on top of stopping abortion. All that obviously would require vastly increase in government size.

Yeah, A lot of people mistake smaller Government for lower taxes.
And the Irish want huge resource spends for less taxes.
Left want social supports, right want Law and Order - all the same, bigger public spending.

Rigor Mortis

rossie1977 wrote: »

People of Ireland overwhelming voted in abortion referendum so not sure why op thinks any government going forward can change that unless he is proposing a fascist dictatorship or something.

OP then goes on to say he wants smaller government while enforcing stronger borders, cleaning up homeless, stronger policing/penal sentences on top of stopping abortion. All that obviously would require vastly increase in government size.

I should preface this by saying I am a proud pinko liberal.

But, the original point is an interesting one in terms of the failure of a serious right wing alternative to ever develop in Ireland.

As for your argument, referenda are overturned by future referenda frequently. We have done it on numerous occasions in Ireland. I dont think this will happen in relation to any of the recent referenda, but we could. I think his original point was not to ignore referenda but rather that there is no party in Ireland that represents those of a morally, socially and economically conservative perspective. So despite one third of voters being against passing the referenda, only a significant number of FF members were vocal in saying they opposed it. While many in FF are socially conservative, they arent as far right on other issues as the OP would want.

Your second point is not true. You could almost certainly have smaller government in Ireland by reducing state involvement in provision of many services. Again, I think its a bad idea, but it is possible.

Where he is almost certainly wrong is that leaving the EU would lead to less Government. It would lead to some fewer regulations but not many. It would significantly increase state employment to manage the new reality. It would also decimate our economy.

Idbatterim

facehugger99 wrote: »

If you're a workshy layabout who believes the world owes you a living, wants a free house and doesn't want to pay for anything, you've probably got half a dozen different political parties vying for your vote.

If you're in favour of prudent management of the economy, small Government and policies which support private sector workers, you've literally nobody to vote for.

The only reason I cast a ballot is to ensure the lunatic fringes are kept as far away from the levers of power as possible.

its absolutely mind blowing, many of those people, will bitch " me 4eva home for me angles"! many wont vote, the left is a crowded market place, there isnt one centre or centre right credible option, for the people that pay for everything and most of whom would vote and more would certainly vote if they felt there was a party that actually represented them, fraudadkar certainly doesnt!

I mean its nearly a coin flip over whether it will be FG or FF as biggest party after the election, FG have put themselves in that position, to bend over for the likes of margaret cash etc, people who would despise FG and never ,ever vote for them. Despite them being showered with ridiculous amount of taxpayer largesse! Shows you how spineless FG really are!

alastair

Idbatterim wrote: »

its absolutely mind blowing, many of those people, will bitch " me 4eva home for me angles"! many wont vote, the left is a crowded market place, there isnt one centre or centre right credible option, for the people that pay for everything and most of whom would vote and more would certainly vote if they felt there was a party that actually represented them, fraudadkar certainly doesnt!

I mean its nearly a coin flip over whether it will be FG or FF as biggest party after the election, FG have put themselves in that position, to bend over for the likes of margaret cash etc, people who would despise FG and never ,ever vote for them. Despite them being showered with ridiculous amount of taxpayer largesse! Shows you how spineless FG really are!

Middle ground parties dominate electoral wins shocker!

Idbatterim

READ THIS **** BELOW! the "poor" " most vulnerable" the outrageous allocation of money they get, has many hard working poor people in actual "vulnerable" positions! If those a**holes paid appropriate rent, we could build far more social and affordable housing! Lets raise income tax and throw them a hundred euro weekly m and s voucher while we are at it!

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/sleepout-to-be-held-outside-south-dublin-co-co-to-protest-rise-in-council-housing-rents-977430.html

A sleepout will take place outside the offices of South Dublin County Council calling on representatives to reverse a decision to raise rents for council housing tenants.

The proposal to raise the rent by €3 a week across the board was passed in November last year.

The demonstration is being held to highlight what they feel to be the local authority's lack of urgency on tackling the housing crisis.

Patrick Nelis, a member of the South West Dublin Housing Action, says the increase is "cruel".

"The budget was proposed by the Chief Executive and supported by the ruling alliance of Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, the Green Party and two Independents," said Mr Nelis.

"It includes a rent increase of €3 per week on all council tenant households and we are doing this because the increase is cruel."

Mr Nelis said that the fact it doesn't take people's income into account is very unfair.

"The council can't attack the most vulnerable in our society so we are urging the council to reverse the decision on raising the rent.

"We deal with some of these families and individuals who are struggling with bills and food.

"This is going to be another struggle to add to what these families cannot afford."

Idbatterim

Mr Nelis said that the fact it doesn't take people's income into account is very unfair.

very interesting, who takes into account many people on about 30,000k a year in dublin, and many landing out 800-1000 a month, to rent a bedroom! Is that "fair" Mr Nelis? and the irony that they are paying thousands a year in income tax, so that your "vulnerable" can get as good as free accommodation and pay for it with the free money they get every week! (if they bother paying the rent obviously )

Rodin

The real inequality in this country is with those on lower wages who are entitled to nothing.

Those who pay for everything and get nothing.

Raising HAP payments put a false floor in the rental market and those on the margins are footing the bill.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Sonic_exyouth wrote: »

Wellllllll - they didn't.
They voted to take power away from the people, and give that power to the Government.
They did this, knowing that there was pending legislation liberalizing abortion.

Any future government can prohibit abortion without a referendum

*edit - Any future Dail



Yeah, A lot of people mistake smaller Government for lower taxes.
And the Irish want huge resource spends for less taxes.
Left want social supports, right want Law and Order - all the same, bigger public spending.

I'd argue they voted to give the power to the people - specifcially the women contemplating the abortion.

And if you bring in the social supports, maybe you won't have as many people resorting to crime?

Mongfinder General

Idbatterim wrote: »

very interesting, who takes into account many people on about 30,000k a year in dublin, and many landing out 800-1000 a month, to rent a bedroom! Is that "fair" Mr Nelis? and the irony that they are paying thousands a year in income tax, so that your "vulnerable" can get as good as free accommodation and pay for it with the free money they get every week! (if they bother paying the rent obviously )

All income, earned or unearned should be subject to income tax. If you're pulling in €30k in benefits then it should be taxed like €30k that has been earned by a wage slave.

Sonic_exyouth

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I'd argue they voted to give the power to the people - specifcially the women contemplating the abortion.

And if you bring in the social supports, maybe you won't have as many people resorting to crime?

Thats a right. not a legal power. It's actually not even a right - it's a provision granted in a piece of legislation, an Act.
We had the chance to make it a right, and instead handed the power to the Lower House.

The legal power that previously wrested with the people was ceded to the Dail.

Any future law on Abortion, including prohibition, will not require any referendum

Clarence Boddiker

Sonic_exyouth wrote: »

You seem far more concerned about the ethnicity of the perpetrators and not at all about the victim.

In fact, it would appear that if the perpetrators were white you wouldn't care at all about the victim.

Which is where the racism charge comes from

Eh? don't try and turn this around, I never mentioned anything about the ethnicity of the perpetrators. Don't make assumptions.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Sonic_exyouth wrote: »

Thats a right. not a legal power. It's actually not even a right - it's a provision granted in a piece of legislation, an Act.
We had the chance to make it a right, and instead handed the power to the Lower House.

The legal power that previously wrested with the people was ceded to the Dail.

Any future law on Abortion, including prohibition, will not require any referendum

It was a right - the right to choose - that is what was democratically chosen.

Furthermore, any furture law will be based on public opinion, unless we go down the line of fascist government, which, as has been stated numerous times, is not even onthe table.

nkl12xtw5goz70

Most would classify me as "right-wing" but I don't see the point in arguing over same-sex marriage or abortion up to 12 weeks. Those trains have left the station. The Church of England recently came out with a proclamation that only married heterosexual couples should be having sex, which in the year 2020 just sounds stupid.

On asylum seekers, I have no issue with giving refugee status to anyone who genuinely needs it, but most asylum seekers to Ireland are not fleeing war and persecution; they're economic migrants seeking a better life. We need rapid processing so that asylum cases are heard within days or even hours of individuals' arrival in the country. Keep a tribunal in Dublin Airport if necessary. No endless legal appeals à la Pamela Izebekhai to enrich solicitors, and no asylum seekers kept in the country for years at the taxpayer's expense. If they aren't legitimate, put them on the next plane home.

What we do need in this country is a party to combat extortionate taxes, rapacious public-sector unions, grossly wasteful state spending, rampant cronyism, and the €20 billion welfare state. A party that would genuinely represent the "squeezed middle" who pay for everything and get little in return.

sabat

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

It was a right - the right to choose - that is what was democratically chosen.

Furthermore, any furture law will be based on public opinion, unless we go down the line of fascist government, which, as has been stated numerous times, is not even onthe table.

You're just repeating the marketing slogan of the repeal campaign. I've tried on numerous occasions here to explain the ramifications of the 36th amendment, which was rarely if ever discussed in the media at the time and which many (most even?) people hadn't even heard about. No new rights-"to choose", "reproductive" or otherwise accrued to any citizen as a result of the referendum. If some future government decides to outlaw abortion (or in extremis, make it compulsory) they now have the supreme legal ie constitutional right to do so and the only way to reverse this would be another referendum.
Here's the text:

"Provision may be made by law for the regulation of termination of pregnancy."

Where is the "right"?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

sabat wrote: »

You're just repeating the marketing slogan of the repeal campaign. I've tried on numerous occasions here to explain the ramifications of the 36th amendment, which was rarely if ever discussed in the media at the time and which many (most even?) people hadn't even heard about. No new rights-"to choose", "reproductive" or otherwise accrued to any citizen as a result of the referendum. If some future government decides to outlaw abortion (or in extremis, make it compulsory) they now have the supreme legal ie constitutional right to do so and the only way to reverse this would be another referendum.
Here's the text:

"Provision may be made by law for the regulation of termination of pregnancy."

Where is the "right"?

... which brings us back to the initial arguement: other than a fascist dictatoriship, how do you see such an outcome coming about?

Idbatterim

My brother was renting , has partner with two kids. Owners want to sell house , fine. He doesn’t want to rent again , for obvious reasons. Goes and luckily they can borrow from several family members. And had to pull out all the stops to get it all over the line. Got a promotion and fifty percent of that money is gone up in smoke. Of his money, he certainly needs it a hell of a lot more then those government wasters ! Thieveving fifty percent of income over 35k. Lads surely on 35 k in Dublin , you can be deemed “ poor and vulneable “ somebody please give me the cut off from where you go from that to comfortable? Paying a marginal tax rate over a pittance , like your the wolf of wall street , when you’re probably just managing to keep the wolf from the door !

Then to hear a planned protest over a three euro rent rise , on property literally given away. Paid for by many of us , stuck renting paying a fortune. It’s a fcucking cheek. Get off your useless h*les and do what the rest of us do. “ vulnerable” a great term to hide behind !

alastair

Clarence Boddiker wrote: »

Eh? don't try and turn this around, I never mentioned anything about the ethnicity of the perpetrators. Don't make assumptions.

Bit late to the whole ‘don’t make assumptions’ train there pal. And still doing a remarkable job of avoiding the issue to hand.

pjohnson

Idbatterim wrote: »

My brother was renting , has partner with two kids. Owners want to sell house , fine. He doesn’t want to rent again , for obvious reasons. Goes and luckily they can borrow from several family members. And had to pull out all the stops to get it all over the line. Got a promotion and fifty percent of that money is gone up in smoke. Of his money, he certainly needs it a hell of a lot more then those government wasters ! Thieveving fifty percent of income over 35k. Lads surely on 35 k in Dublin , you can be deemed “ poor and vulneable “ somebody please give me the cut off from where you go from that to comfortable? Paying a marginal tax rate over a pittance , like your the wolf of wall street , when you’re probably just managing to keep the wolf from the door !

But you want to keep this great government in power?
Remember?

sabat

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

... which brings us back to the initial arguement: other than a fascist dictatoriship, how do you see such an outcome coming about?

How is it fascist? By acting in accordance with the constitution and having a democratically elected parliament vote on it? There were literally crowds of people in Dublin Castle celebrating that the government and every future government had a new right to legalise or ban abortion if they want.

alastair

Andy Angry Woodpecker wrote: »

Most would classify me as "right-wing" but I don't see the point in arguing over same-sex marriage or abortion up to 12 weeks. Those trains have left the station. The Church of England recently came out with a proclamation that only married heterosexual couples should be having sex, which in the year 2020 just sounds stupid.

On asylum seekers, I have no issue with giving refugee status to anyone who genuinely needs it, but most asylum seekers to Ireland are not fleeing war and persecution; they're economic migrants seeking a better life. We need rapid processing so that asylum cases are heard within days or even hours of individuals' arrival in the country. Keep a tribunal in Dublin Airport if necessary. No endless legal appeals à la Pamela Izebekhai to enrich solicitors, and no asylum seekers kept in the country for years at the taxpayer's expense. If they aren't legitimate, put them on the next plane home.

What we do need in this country is a party to combat extortionate taxes, rapacious public-sector unions, grossly wasteful state spending, rampant cronyism, and the €20 billion welfare state. A party that would genuinely represent the "squeezed middle" who pay for everything and get little in return.

You don’t seem to understand what an asylum claim investigation involves. The initial claimant interview does happen quickly, but the notion that an asylum investigation could take place at the airport is just daft. There’s no endless appeals process either. There’s a singular appeal available to the asylum determination, and then the possibility of taking a case claiming an unfair adjudication. That’s it.

alastair

sabat wrote: »

How is it fascist? By acting in accordance with the constitution and having a democratically elected parliament vote on it? There were literally crowds of people in Dublin Castle celebrating that the government and every future government had a new right to legalise or ban abortion if they want.

The democratic will of the people supports abortion provision. Unless that changes, the only legislative route to the removal of abortion would be a totalitarian/fascist government. It’s the electoral mandate which is the bulwark - as already pointed out. It was no different under the constitutional scenario.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

sabat wrote: »

How is it fascist? By acting in accordance with the constitution and having a democratically elected parliament vote on it? There were literally crowds of people in Dublin Castle celebrating that the government and every future government had a new right to legalise or ban abortion if they want.

Tell me, where in my post did I say anything WAS fascist?

I asked what - other than a fascist regiem could, in the FUTURE - bring about the scenario where your scenario plays out?

enricoh

alastair wrote: »

You don’t seem to understand what an asylum claim investigation involves. The initial claimant interview does happen quickly, but the notion that an asylum investigation could take place at the airport is just daft. There’s no endless appeals process either. There’s a singular appeal available to the asylum determination, and then the possibility of taking a case claiming an unfair adjudication. That’s it.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/asylum-claims-by-georgians-and-albanians-brought-to-abrupt-halt-1.4149447?mode=amp

From today's Irish times- over 300 Albanians and Georgians applied for asylum last September alone!! absolute scam. They are sending them back on the next plane now, doesn't seem to daft to me!
If I was on the gravy train that is the asylum spoofer industry I'd be seething at this development though!