FG to just do nothing for the next 5 years.

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

Such Rubbish

Society was divided
A clever tool was used to modernise it
Swift action was taken on two of its recommendations

Up to 2013 Enda Kenny steadfastly refused to say whether he was for or against SSM. A poll was published that showed 55 or so percent of the public supported it and only 30 or so per cent were against it. Kenny gave an interview saying he was in favour of it.
Funny he waited for the balance to tip in favour before he came out n favour.

Jaysus Mort...politics is politics, a blind cow would know what went down there. Stop now.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Up to 2013 Enda Kenny steadfastly refused to say whether he was for or against SSM. A poll was published that showed 55 or so percent of the public supported it and only 30 or so per cent were against it. Kenny gave an interview saying he was in favour of it.
Funny he waited for the balance to tip in favour before he came out n favour.

Jaysus Mort...politics is politics, a blind cow would know what went down there. Stop now.

Rubbish, 55% in a poll could be 49% very quick if the narrative is controlled by conservative groups who held a lot of sway
Allied to that a lot of the oireachtas particularly country members would actively have blocked both referenda
That was a big part of the purpose of the convention

You know this
You're pretending you don't because it exposes the makey uppy notions you've peddled on Leo


As I said earlier MLM has more sense than to be peddling all this sho1te
You don't

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

Rubbish, 55% in a poll could be 49% very quick if the narrative is controlled by conservative groups who held a lot of sway
Allied to that a lot of the oireachtas particularly country members would actively have blocked both referenda
That was a big part of the purpose of the convention

You know this
You're pretending you don't because it exposes the makey uppy notions you've peddled on Leo


As I said earlier MLM has more sense than to be peddling all this sho1te
You don't

So all the gay activists taking exception to Young FG's cheek are wrong too?

I'm running out of gods here.

*I know you are doing your best to pivot the conversation to SF, you can stop that too, it's as see through as Enda and Leo's 'Paulian conversions'...(religion again!)

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So all the gay activists taking exception to Young FG's cheek are wrong too?

I'm running out of gods here.

*I know you are doing your best to pivot the conversation to SF, you can stop that too, it's as see through as Enda and Leo's 'Paulian conversions'...(religion again!)

I'm not pivoting to SF at all
I just said that MLM would have more sense than to be going on with the sho1te about the SSM and abortion referenda like you have since the w/end
Give it up
It's not cool

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

I'm not pivoting to SF at all
I just said that MLM would have more sense than to be going on with the sho1te about the SSM and abortion referenda like you have since the w/end
Give it up
It's not cool

And the censorship attempt now.
The subject wouldn't have come up if not for vainglorious Young Fine Gaelers getting caught telling porkies.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

And the censorship attempt now.
The subject wouldn't have come up if not for vainglorious Young Fine Gaelers getting caught telling porkies.

No censorship,you can be as uncool as you like in your accusations towards SSM,leo,Enda and FG
Just expect curt responses to that sho1te is all

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

No censorship,you can be as uncool as you like in your accusations towards SSM,leo,Enda and FG
Just expect curt responses to that sho1te is all

I think it's the signal word in your post when you are in a hole - 'ShoIte'

Are you calling out all the gay activists who lambasted Young FG for taking credit for something they had little to do with? Are they wrong?

You seem to be strenuously avoiding that point.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think it's the signal word in your post when you are in a hole - 'ShoIte'

Are you calling out all the gay activists who lambasted Young FG for taking credit for something they had little to do with? Are they wrong?

You seem to be strenuously avoiding that point.

I think I said earlier,perhaps you have forgotten with your urges for makey uppy rants on Leo' s coming out,that in common with 98% of the country or more,I don't follow young FG,Ógra SF or FF on twitter,as I could not care less

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

I think I said earlier,perhaps you have forgotten with your urges for makey uppy rants on Leo' s coming out,that in common with 98% of the country or more,I don't follow young FG,Ógra SF or FF on twitter,as I could not care less

:D:D:D And there we have it. How many posts is that by somebody 'who could not care less.

I think we know who's doing the 'makey up' stuff.

smurgen

Mortelaro wrote: »

That's his speech
I'd be interested to hear how he performs under questioning because he got a rough time on morning Ireland
The nursing homes he represents are run for profit
40% of the private nursing homes are owned by multi nationals or investment firms

Funny it seems HIQA seems to be saying the same things.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/hiqa-warned-hse-about-high-risk-nursing-homes-committee-hears-1.4263150

McMurphy

Mortelaro wrote: »

I think I said earlier,perhaps you have forgotten with your urges for makey uppy rants on Leo' s coming out,that in common with 98% of the country or more,I don't follow young FG,Ógra SF or FF on twitter,as I could not care less

That's just another way of dodging a question imo, you were asked if you thought the gay community were wrong in calling out young FG for trying to rob credit on SSM.

Not if you followed YFG on Twitter or had an interest n them.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

:D:D:D And there we have it. How many posts is that by somebody 'who could not care less.

I think we know who's doing the 'makey up' stuff.

But I don't give a sho1te about what's in tiny minority viewing Twitter feeds
Which is what I said,not what you're saying there I said
I do enjoy pointing out your fallacies though
There are many

Mortelaro

smurgen wrote: »

Funny it seems HIQA seems to be saying the same things.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/hiqa-warned-hse-about-high-risk-nursing-homes-committee-hears-1.4263150

some private nursing homes came in for a lot of criticism
They are run for profit

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

But I don't give a sho1te about what's in tiny minority viewing Twitter feeds
Which is what I said,not what you're saying there I said
I do enjoy pointing out your fallacies though
There are many

Sure Mort. You don't loike Twitter when there is shoIte there you don't loike.

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think it's the signal word in your post when you are in a hole - 'ShoIte'

Are you calling out all the gay activists who lambasted Young FG for taking credit for something they had little to do with? Are they wrong?

You seem to be strenuously avoiding that point.

So what if they did, doesent change the fact that FG governments introduced two groundbreaking referendums and passed into law the legislation needed for both.
SF have had their differences with ssm rights activists North of the border and indeed abortion activists also, they only favoured abortion in limited circumstances up there.

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sure Mort. You don't loike Twitter when there is shoIte there you don't loike.

Interesting way of putting it
I've not got a D4 accent
I'd prefer to call it minimizing sh1te

James Brown

Mortelaro wrote: »

No I am giving apple credit for spending billions on wages in Ireland :rolleyes:

For which they get services rendered. They pay their employees. Gents
Hardly pumping billions into the economy. Great that they employ people and we tease them in with tax payer funded grants and services and favourable taxation rates.

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So what if they did, doesent change the fact that FG governments introduced two groundbreaking referendums and passed into law the legislation needed for both.
SF have had their differences with ssm rights activists North of the border and indeed abortion activists also, they only favoured abortion in limited circumstances up there.

Are SF getting lambasted by activists for taking credit for reforms by the activists that actually worked for the reforms?

No they aren't.

Deal with the issue Bishop.

FrancieBrady

smurgen wrote: »

Funny it seems HIQA seems to be saying the same things.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/hiqa-warned-hse-about-high-risk-nursing-homes-committee-hears-1.4263150

Simon Harris using the Frances Fitz defence...he didn't see the letter.

James Brown

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Are SF getting lambasted by activists for taking credit for reforms by the activists that actually worked for the reforms?

No they aren't.

Deal with the issue Bishop.

As we discussed the other day. Call out FG on FG actions, get a discussion on SF and northern Ireland. Someone from FG supporters club will be along in a minute to accuse folk of dragging SF into an FG thread.

James Brown

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Simon Harris using the Frances Fitz defence...he didn't see the letter.

Noonan used that for the Sitesev deal and Paschal used it for the NCH over run.
Didn't Charlie Flanagan have an email he saw but didn't think was important?
Seems FG ministers are all the time not seeing stuff under their remit.

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Are SF getting lambasted by activists for taking credit for reforms by the activists that actually worked for the reforms?

No they aren't.

Deal with the issue Bishop.

I have no issue, just asking the question.
Activists are usually just that, activists, they don't want anyone getting credit for anything they campaign for.
So I wouldn't be over worried about that.
Of course it would beguile them if they didn't get the credit themselves, be it FG or any other political party that claimed credit.
As I said earlier, it takes great politicians to embark on campaigns that might not affect them personally for the greater good of society.
I know you'll cry populism, but that can be levelled at any politician or party who introduce such things.
The fact you are having a go at Enda, Leo and FG for the fact that they were involved in both of these achievements is Laughable.
It's like they can't do right even when they do right.
Laughable gutter juice Francie, you are usually above this.

Mortelaro

Bowie wrote: »

For which they get services rendered. They pay their employees. Gents
Hardly pumping billions into the economy. Great that they employ people and we tease them in with tax payer funded grants and services and favourable taxation rates.

Their salaries since 1980 would amount to Billions

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

I have no issue, just asking the question.
Activists are usually just that, activists, they don't want anyone getting credit for anything they campaign for.
So I wouldn't be over worried about that.
Of course it would beguile them if they didn't get the credit themselves, be it FG or any other political party that claimed credit.
As I said earlier, it takes great politicians to embark on campaigns that might not affect them personally for the greater good of society.
I know you'll cry populism, but that can be levelled at any politician or party who introduce such things.
The fact you are having a go at Enda, Leo and FG for the fact that they were involved in both of these achievements is Laughable.
It's like they can't do right even when they do right.
Laughable gutter juice Francie, you are usually above this.

Again, that isn't the issue. The issue is taking credit for something that they actually only did when it was politically safe to do it.

That is when you wade into trouble and accusations of PR politics.


That is why this topic exists.

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again, that isn't the issue. The issue is taking credit for something that they actually only did when it was politically safe to do it.

That is when you wade into trouble and accusations of PR politics.


That is why this topic exists.

Of course it is.
FG came to power in 2011, when was the ssm marriage referendum, was it within their first Govt?
Where are you going on this, if you want to go back earlier surely its Bertie you need to be after.

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Of course it is.
FG came to power in 2011, when was the ssm marriage referendum, was it within their first Govt?
Where are you going on this, if you want to go back earlier surely its Bertie you need to be after.

The same place as the activists who are criticising Young FG for taking credit that is not FG's due.

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The same place as the activists who are criticising Young FG for taking credit that is not FG's due.

You're a broken record so y'are.
I'll leave you with it on this one, you're like my big brother, if you keep talking till everybody else quits sure you must be right as you're the last one talking:)

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

You're a broken record so y'are.
I'll leave you with it on this one, you're like my big brother, if you keep talking till everybody else quits sure you must be right as you're the last one talking:)

Why haven't you commented on what they had to say...like Mort did as well?
Do you think the activists are wrong to be annoyed? Are they wrong in fact?

Bishop of hope

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why haven't you commented on what they had to say...like Mort did as well?
Do you think the activists are wrong to be annoyed? Are they wrong in fact?

Probably are, imo they are yes.

FrancieBrady

Bishop of hope wrote: »

Probably are, imo they are yes.

At least you are honest.

So the people who put years of work into reform when the likes of Leo was an obstacle to them getting their rights are wrong to be annoyed by Leo's party now taking credit?