Is it just me or have SF vanished?

Hamsterchops

Hamsterchops wrote: »

Would it be an exaggeration to call them a Cult?

Yes

People are allowed hold politically different views to you....shinnerz built theirs at a snails pace and were mocked for not capitalising more in austrity in polling.figures


Like how gemma odoherty and national party are building at a snails pace now,but in 10 years to 20 years could easily be a force to be recognised in irish politics.....

May you live in interesting times

markodaly

McMurphy wrote: »

I haven't read the article, so no idea what it contains, but to summarise - you found an article written by a raging homophobic conservative, which you seem to agree with?

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

You realise that instead of building social we are entering into 25 year leases with vulture funds, to house the very same people right? So the options are hotels, 25 year leases, private landlords or social housing.



We have a society and we must deal with everyone at some level. If you push for evictions, cool, then we need pay for a hotel.

This is some really confused thinking where you are mixing up short, medium and long-term solutions and comparing them to each other.

Hotels and B&Bs are immediate short-term solutions which will always be needed to help people become newly homeless or homeless for a short period.

blanch152

McMurphy wrote: »

I haven't read the article, so no idea what it contains, but to summarise - you found an article written by a raging homophobic conservative, which you seem to agree with?

Is there more to this exciting tale or is that it?

You used an 11-year old article to suggest that somebody is currently a raging homophobic conservative?

Is there nothing from say the last year to show that her views have or haven't changed?

She wrote that shortly after Paul Quinn's murder, so I assume you agree that makes his murder topical to today's politics?

Runaways

blanch152 wrote: »

You used an 11-year old article to suggest that somebody is currently a raging homophobic conservative?

Is there nothing from say the last year to show that her views have or haven't changed?

She wrote that shortly after Paul Quinn's murder, so I assume you agree that makes his murder topical to today's politics?

You’re forever bringing up events from decades ago to hold against sf today

But Breda gets a pass as this was written 11 years ago


You’re gas


Ps shes written several openly homophobic articles over the years

maccored

markodaly wrote: »

dictionary for you young man. the poster didnt attack you in the slightest. the poster summarised that 'you found an article written by a raging homophobic conservative, which you seem to agree with'

Hows that attacking you personally? you DID link to the article

blanch152

Runaways wrote: »

You’re forever bringing up events from decades ago to hold against sf today

But Breda gets a pass as this was written 11 years ago


You’re gas


Ps shes written several openly homophobic articles over the years

I didn't give Breda Power a pass (and I wouldn't give her a pass), I just noted the fact that events of over a decade ago are now ok to be referred to.

markodaly

maccored wrote: »

dictionary for you young man. the poster didnt attack you in the slightest. the poster summarised that 'you found an article written by a raging homophobic conservative, which you seem to agree with'

Hows that attacking you personally? you DID link to the article

I never said, he attacked me, he attacked the character of the author who wrote the article, rather than the content of the article itself.

A classic case of an Ad Hominem

blanch152

markodaly wrote: »

I never said, he attacked me, he attacked the character of the author who wrote the article, rather than the content of the article itself.

A classic case of an Ad Hominem

It is normal practice among republicans - label the opposition in order to dehumanise them (e.g. partitionists, West Brits etc.) and use that to ignore their valid views.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

It is normal practice among republicans - label the opposition in order to dehumanise them (e.g. partitionists, West Brits etc.) and use that to ignore their valid views.

Poster labels people as 'republicans' generalises about them and then complains about others using labels.

Hmmmm.

markodaly

blanch152 wrote: »

It is normal practice among republicans - label the opposition in order to dehumanise them (e.g. partitionists, West Brits etc.) and use that to ignore their valid views.

Well, there has been more mentioned of FG in this thread than SF, which tells you all you need to know.

Any pointed criticism of SF policy or lack of it is met with, 'Ah but Leo/Dinny/FG/Homelessness/<insert-random-tweet>' which passes of as debate.

Runaways

blanch152 wrote: »

It is normal practice among republicans - label the opposition in order to dehumanise them (e.g. partitionists, West Brits etc.) and use that to ignore their valid views.

And anyone disagrees with you is a shinner or republican tho I fail to see how that’s a bad thing and I wonder if you know what the word means

Hint. We live in a Republic

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Poster labels people as 'republicans' generalises about them and then complains about others using labels.

Hmmmm.

Are you not a Republican? I thought that was a nessesary badge of honour for SF and their supporters.

The stuff about FG, the 'West-Brit', 'Tory' etc...etc.. is just nonsense more suited to Facebook. It's used as a pejorative.

jm08

blanch152 wrote: »

It is normal practice among republicans - label the opposition in order to dehumanise them (e.g. partitionists, West Brits etc.) and use that to ignore their valid views.

I didn't label her as anything (though I do think she has very conservative views on social issues), but I thought that was made up nonsense. She claims that everyone who attacked Sean Cavanagh for saying ''up here in the UK'' were sinnerbots when its just as likely they could have been any number of bots whose allegiance is to the dissident republican groups and who absolutely hate SF.

She then continues to slag off Eoin O Broin for cooking a fancy meal and putting it on Twitter/Instagram. I believe she had a bit of a spat with him on twitter/instagram over this and seems to now have brought it to her column in the ST.

All rather pathetic.

blanch152

Runaways wrote: »

And anyone disagrees with you is a shinner or republican tho I fail to see how that’s a bad thing and I wonder if you know what the word means

Hint. We live in a Republic

I do understand the difference between republicans and "republicans".

There are lots of people who disagree with me on lots of different issues.

jm08

markodaly wrote: »

Are you not a Republican? I thought that was a nessesary badge of honour for SF and their supporters.

The stuff about FG, the 'West-Brit', 'Tory' etc...etc.. is just nonsense more suited to Facebook. It's used as a pejorative.

Are you not a republican (bearing in mind you actually live in a republic)?

Runaways

If you live in a Republic and use Republican as a pejorative
Does that mean you’re a monarchist??

Asking for a friend who is me

markodaly

jm08 wrote: »

Are you not a republican (bearing in mind you actually live in a republic)?

Interesting question. I guess I am, as I believe in the rule of law first and foremost, which is the original meaning of the term, not the bastardised 'Up da Ra/Wolfe Tones' version we use in our current vernacular.

Runaways

markodaly wrote: »

Interesting question. I guess I am, as I believe in the rule of law first and foremost, which is the original meaning of the term, not the bastardised 'Up da Ra/Wolfe Tones' version we use in our current vernacular.

I’ve only ever seen it used that way by a ccohort here that have problems with sf or anyone they suspect support them


Funny that

FrancieBrady

markodaly wrote: »

Are you not a Republican? I thought that was a nessesary badge of honour for SF and their supporters.

The stuff about FG, the 'West-Brit', 'Tory' etc...etc.. is just nonsense more suited to Facebook. It's used as a pejorative.

Are you and blanch not partitionists?

markodaly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Are you and blanch not partitionists?

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Are you and blanch not partitionists?

As you well know, the answer is in the negative.

maccored

markodaly wrote: »

I never said, he attacked me, he attacked the character of the author who wrote the article, rather than the content of the article itself.

A classic case of an Ad Hominem

what, by proxy? You (the opponent) aren't the author of the article. get a dictionary

markodaly

markodaly wrote: »

Well, there has been more mentioned of FG in this thread than SF, which tells you all you need to know.

Any pointed criticism of SF policy or lack of it is met with, 'Ah but Leo/Dinny/FG/Homelessness/<insert-random-tweet>' which passes of as debate.

What pointed critism of policy has occured??

Going on about someone killed in a shed,yonks ago,which is essentially what this thread has decended into,has nothing to do with policy??


Like if FFG dont like homeless and housing/health issues,coming againest them,maybe they should have sorted them.by now???

Seems fairly obvious to me,that their mantra of market sort itself,simply deosnt work

markodaly

Deleted User wrote: »

Seems fairly obvious to me,that their mantra of market sort itself,simply deosnt work

I often hear that narrative attributed against FF or FG but can you get me a quote from any high ranking FG TD or minister which says in effect, that the 'market will sort itself out'?

Rent pressure zones, planning laws reform are not indicative of being hands-off, nor is the target of adding 12,000 houses to the social housing stock per annum.

Mortelaro

https://twitter.com/skearon/status/1263223891184496644?s=19

FrancieBrady

Mortelaro wrote: »

https://twitter.com/skearon/status/1263223891184496644?s=19

They should receive the same punishment as Harris and Leo got for breaking the rules in the hospital or at that infamous photoshoot.

Seriously, Louise should put her hand up here and accept that she let the guard slip. Turn it into something valuable - a reminder to the population that it isn't over yet.

McMurphy

Mortelaro wrote: »

https://twitter.com/skearon/status/1263223891184496644?s=19

Was it this shot or a different (definitely not for PR purposes) one you had all kinds of excuses for, including camera angles and tricks of the light?

Mortelaro

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They should receive the same punishment as Harris and Leo got for breaking the rules in the hospital or at that infamous photoshoot.

Seriously, Louise should put her hand up here and accept that she let the guard slip. Turn it into something valuable - a reminder to the population that it isn't over yet.

But Harris and Leo didnt break the rules
That was zoom lens illusion in that hospital like the sign language people at every daily conference beside professor Holahan where they look right beside Holahan but they are not

With Louise above,we can see the bench they are sitting on
No Question on the breach
No expensive journalist camera used,just a phone camera by the looks of it

Mortelaro

McMurphy wrote: »

Was it this shot or a different (definitely not for PR purposes) one you had all kinds of excuses for, including camera angles and tricks of the light?

That's a zoom lens Mc
Same as at the Holahan conferences