Barry Cowen sacked

McMurphy

RandomName2 wrote: »

I am no huge fan of whataboutery. However I think it's no surprise that Sinn Fein supporters are loudest calling for the resignation or sacking of the FF minister. In general I think that that's clearly hypocritical.

Motivation and honesty is important. I am not putting [insert random PIRA murder here] because it's not relevant. Now that would be whataboutery.

Ok, I already directed you to my very first post in this thread. You obviously didn't do so, so I'll oblige.

McMurphy wrote: »

Don't agree with him losing his position, he was obviously on the lower end of the scale hence why he only got banned for 3 months, plus four years ago, so what?

What I cannot understand though is how the press didn't report on it at the time. Jesus, sure you only have to read the local paper to see how they run with any auld shyte to fill the pages from a local yobbo caught peeing on the street, people with no NCT/not wearing seatbelts, speeding etc etc etc.

I'd have thought a serving td having his day in court and losing the license would have been unable to escape print.

Guess it depends on who you know.

Now,.tell me again (in light of a the new evidence, where when his own party leader felt the need to jettison him) that I give some sort of a shiny sh1t what party Barry belongs to.

Events dear boy events.

mariaalice

mariaalice wrote: »

There are poster in any discussion on Irish politics or politicians, who seem to think politicians anointed themselves TD instead of being elected and once the poster consider the fact that the TD was actually elected they decide the electorate in the TD constituency are gombeens.

Its insulting to a lot of people.

Well Biffo Snr was a such a thundering disaster that it was an affront to most of the other people in Ireland that a constituency would actually vote his brother in as a TD.

In the light of these events seems like they were right.

Plumbthedepths

If mental gymnastics was a sport we would have multiple Olympic class athletics here to choose from. It's hilarious .
To the defenders of Cowen , he's gone lads. Back bench nobody.

awec

RandomName2 wrote: »

Drunk driving is a spectrum, as is clear in the legislation. If you have 12 penalty points you receive twice the length of ban that Cowen received. This is not because drunk driving is not a serious offense, but because the details matter, legally. These details matter because they are used to assess the danger that the person poses.

Is everyone who receives penalty points or a temporary driving ban unfit to hold office? I doubt it. Does this mean I condone the behavior? Hardly. But I think that most people banging the drum are just doing it as an excuse. Indeed the story was discovered as an excuse. Now if there's more to this story than meets the eye (which is perfectly possible) then that's a different matter. Naturally it is at Martin's discretion who he hires and fires, such is the position.

Filtering through all the rest of the waffle on your post, drink driving has a spectrum, and even the most minor drink driving offence is an automatic driving ban.

Drink driving is a serious offence, again as evidenced by the fact that if you're caught, it doesn't matter if you've never had a single point on your license before, you will automatically lose your license and your right to drive.

RandomName2

Deleted User wrote: »

i. he was sacked for a minor offence and not his behaviour in the past week

His threatening to sue was an odd one alright, as one the disclosure in the first place. But that disclosure means one of three things:

1. It is a lie by the newspaper. There was no source. This is clearly libelous
2. There was a disclosure by the police, but it was a lie. This is worse than the above.
3. The disclosure was true, and Cowen wasn't charged for evading a checkpoint due to some sort of corruption.

Only in the third instance does this become not only worse, but completely damning for Cowen. I honestly don't know which of the scenarios is correct and think that the truth is important in this regard.

Deleted User wrote: »

ii. that a ministerial role was like any other job vis a vis how your boss will react to a minor offence

The offense occurred years before he became a minister. Either you would tell your boss about the offense at the time or you wouldn't at all. I can't see any scenario where someone would say 'hey boss, thanks for the promotion. By the way I got a 3 month driving ban 4 years ago.'

Deleted User wrote: »

nobody can expect to be treated as posting in any sincerity if they are carrying on like they dont get the above

Well there's plenty of insincerity to go around, that much is certain.

awec

awec wrote: »

Filtering through all the rest of the waffle on your post, drink driving has a spectrum, and even the most minor drink driving offence is an automatic driving ban.

Drink driving is a serious offence, again as evidenced by the fact that if you're caught, it doesn't matter if you've never had a single point on your license before, you will automatically lose your license and your right to drive.

that actually wasn't the case on the date when Cowen was caught and the amount he tested for.

Shane Ross subsequently changed the legislation to include a ban on the lower limit of offence for full licence holders.

he only lost his right to drive 'cos he couldn't be arsed do a driving test for over 20 years.

RandomName2

awec wrote: »

all the rest of the waffle

Translates to: I can't counter most of what you are saying but will cling to this one point for dear life

awec wrote: »

Drink driving is a serious offence, again as evidenced by the fact that if you're caught, it doesn't matter if you've never had a single point on your license before, you will automatically lose your license and your right to drive.

Yet not so serious that what he did would be illegal on a full licence.

CrankyHaus

Whatever about Cowen's carry-on, Michael Martin has burned a lot of goodwill from the broader electorate by sticking with him so long and even dropping mealy-mouthed doublespeak afterwards about how the Garda file was "not as described".

FF had been impressing me on some issues in the last year or two and I actually thought they had a decent frontbench. But after this doubling down on the old practice of "Fianna Fail first, country second" I'm not so sure.

awec

RandomName2 wrote: »

Translates to: I can't counter most of what you are saying but will cling to this one point for dear life



Yet not so serious that what he did would be illegal on a full licence.

But he wasn't on a full license?

I don't really want to engage on the rest of your waffle because to be honest, having a discussion with someone who is downplaying drink driving and passing off a convicted drink driver as "of the people" or "an ordinary person" because they were unlucky enough to be caught is beneath me and a waste of my time.

maestroamado

Snow Garden wrote: »

No my post had nothing to do with Cowen. Read it again.
Cowen deserves everything he gets. He is not telling the truth.

You seemed to be diverting attention away from what the OP about.
I read your post, nothing to do with this one...

Acosta

Just another FF rogue that pushed his luck because he was probably used to getting the nod and the wink from enough Gaurds in his time

BillyBiggs

Use him for ideas on reopening bars, getting them going again?

RandomName2

McMurphy wrote: »

Ok, I already directed you to my very first post in this thread. You obviously didn't do so, so I'll oblige.

I'll hold to my assertion that what I said is by and large true. Most people here don't give two shíts about Cowen's two pints. I recognize some of the people who are anti-Cowen as being dyed in the wool SF supporters, and I consider, with justification, that their position is hypocritical.

McMurphy wrote: »

Events dear boy events.

Forgive my lack of tenacity for wading through post histories. What part of Cowen's slightly off the wall behavior in the last week tipped the balance for you? If he did evade a garda checkpoint surely that would in itself be illegal, or do you think that undue influence was exerted to quash that? If the garda leaked information or the paper lied, either of those would be illegal as well (varying degrees of seriousness).

dundalkfc10

RandomName2 wrote: »

Translates to: I can't counter most of what you are saying but will cling to this one point for dear life



Yet not so serious that what he did would be illegal on a full licence.

But he didn't have a full licence.

You know what would have not been illegal, not drinking and driving

eagle eye

Deleted User wrote:

nobody can expect to be treated as posting in any sincerity if they are carrying on like they dont get the above

It all stems from traffic offenses. It should never have got to the stage it did because he was penalised for his offenses like everybody else.

Edgware

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Whatever about Cowen's carry-on, Michael Martin has burned a lot of goodwill from the broader electorate by sticking with him so long and even dropping mealy-mouthed doublespeak afterwards about how the Garda file was "not as described".

FF had been impressing me on some issues in the last year or two and I actually thought they had a decent frontbench. But after this doubling down on the old practice of "Fianna Fail first, country second" I'm not so sure.

Michael will be in touch to discuss your concerns

jacool

glasso wrote: »

that actually wasn't the case on the date when Cowen was caught and the amount he tested for.

Shane Ross subsequently changed the legislation to include a ban on the lower limit of offence for full licence holders.

he only lost his right to drive 'cos he couldn't be arsed do a driving test for over 20 years.

He should have done his driving test then!

His story just seems disingenuous.
"It was the day of the All-Ireland football final. I had two drinks before the game and something to eat after it and drive back to Offaly."
He was stopped in Carbury at 20:18. yet the throw-in for the game was 15:30, some 5 hours earlier.
It just doesn't add up.

Zebra3

RandomName2 wrote: »

I'll hold to my assertion that what I said is by and large true. Most people here don't give two shíts about Cowen's two pints. I recognize some of the people who are anti-Cowell as being dyed in the wool SF supporters, and I consider, with justification, that their position is hypocritical.



Forgive my lack of tenacity for wading through post histories. What part of Cowen's slightly off the wall behavior in the last week tipped the balance for you? If he did evade a garda checkpoint surely that would in itself be illegal, or do you think that undue influence was exerted to quash that? If the garda leaked information or the paper lied, either of those would be illegal as well (varying degrees of seriousness).

There were a whole host of questions that Cowen needed to answer when the revelations of his law breaking came in to the public domain.

Like how did he get about on less than a full licence when he needed an accompanied full licencee with him.

His party and others backed him by disallowing the democratic procedure of an elected representatives being held accountable by other elected representatives.

When further revelations broke, he issued a sham of a statement and went into hiding again.

He chose not to make a clear statement first time around putting all the facts in to the public domain. He chose to hide all of this from his party leader and the people who take part in democratic elections.

He brought it all on himself because he didn't abide by laws even though he is a law maker.

Tough brown stuff.

Former Former

RandomName2 wrote: »

Yet not so serious that what he did would be illegal on a full licence.

But he was caught at Carbury which means he'd been driving probably an hour at that point.

By his own version of events, he was brought from the checkpoint to the garda station and provided another sample which was still over the limit. Allow another 30 mins for that I guess.

So, 90 minutes after getting behind the wheel of his car he was still over the limit for learners.

Which begs the question, if he'd been breathalyzed as soon as he got behind the wheel, would he still have been under the limit for full licensees? It's hard to see how he would have been.

Get Real

jacool wrote: »

He was stopped in Carbury at 20:18. yet the throw-in for the game was 15:30, some 5 hours earlier.
It just doesn't add up.

Exactly this. Every time Cowen opened his mouth, he dug himself a grave. Raising more questions than there were originally.

Every single point he made, casts doubt over his credibility.

2 pint= 4 standard drinks (units of alcohol). The body processing one standard drink per hour. 5 hours later, he should have none left in his system, although I'm no scientist I admit.

Being over the limit 5hours after you stopped drinking, you'd have to have had more than 2pints imo.

Mortelaro

There are degrees of arrogance in all politicians
You see it here with Cowen in not putting country before ministerial position
Similar with Ring over in Mayo and various others over not getting a ministry and obviously in SF's attitude to the Bobby Storey funeral

It is Ireland after all
I think MM only found his feet with this sacking
He better not lose them as there are a lot of decisions to be made soon and they don't need procrastination

BonnieSituation

Abel Ruiz wrote: »

Fair play to sacking the muppet.
He broke the law.

I hate fianna fail with a passion, but well done to Martin and his colleagues.

What took him 10 days to do it?

Why weren't you clamouring for his removal before now?

BonnieSituation

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Would hope that everybody contributing here adopts the same levels of law compliance as seems to be expected from most contributors here.

Some of the posts are disgusting to be honest.

You're a gas man

Cute Hoor

Millionaire only not wrote: »

I think dara should take the opportunity and let it be know to media to tell Michae’l stick his job where the sun don’t shine .
He’s a bigger clown if he accepts it

Agreed, has to be Thomas Byrne

BonnieSituation

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Think the decision was a bit harsh

Yeah?

You prefer your ministers' to be thundering liars and obfuscating schnakes?

BonnieSituation

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Strange decision to sack him for something,that he had done his penalty for,

Either you believe in rehabilition or you dont and we throw away key of anyone convicted of any offence.



The initial coverup was a bit galling,but not illegal imo

Ah blaaz. Cmon now.

Hurrache

Gardai have notified the DPC regarding a potential data breach related to his case. I wonder if the breach was actually Cowen manging to obtain his pulse file so quickly.

jacool

jacool wrote: »

He should have done his driving test then!

His story just seems disingenuous.
"It was the day of the All-Ireland football final. I had two drinks before the game and something to eat after it and drive back to Offaly."
He was stopped in Carbury at 20:18. yet the throw-in for the game was 15:30, some 5 hours earlier.
It just doesn't add up.

because it's obviously yet more complete horsesh1t

he picked two pints as the old ads from the days Healy-Rae wants back used to say "two will do" so probably thought "ah I won't look too bad saying two"

going on the generally accepted fact that a man's body will get through 1 unit of alcohol an hour and that Cowen still tested over the limit at the cop shop probably 1/2 an hour after being stopped then - so 2 units of alcohol still in his system - say 9pm then if he actualy stopped drinking before the match he had at least 4 pints (4x 2 units)

more likely he was drinking much nearer the time that he got into the car and did not have his last alcoholic drink before the match.

whatever the case, two pints before the match is complete codswallop.

Mortelaro

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Yeah?

You prefer your ministers' to be thundering liars and obfuscating schnakes?

A lot of the electorate do
You may take it up with them!

BonnieSituation

hawkwing wrote: »

I never voted for FF or FG in my life and probably won't. Good old Shane Ross another one :

Transport Minister Shane Ross has admitted he got behind the wheel while over the legal alcohol limit in the past.

When asked on 'Prime Time' last night if he had ever driven while over the legal alcohol limit, Mr Ross said: "Of course I have. You see, I haven't had a drink for 30 years or so. So it would have been a very long time ago. But of course I have. And I understand those dangers.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/shane-ross-admits-to-driving-while-over-legal-alcohol-limit-a-long-time-ago-35655084.html

I guess we should sack Gaybo and Ross now?

The day after he's sacked he's still being defended and whataboutery peddled.

The offence that Cowen committed was bad and in imo, and imo he should have been sacked for.

However, i would have understood him staying of it had happened in the event that he clarified the situation the first time 'round last weekend.

He didn't. He tried to cover it up and generally tried to pull a fast one and he had to go.

Admitting to wrongdoing (depending on the issue of course) should never be a sackable offence, but we all know, and I stated at the time, that it will be the coverup and obfuscation that will do him in.

It's ALWAYS the coverup that gets people.

At this point you'd think most would have conceded that much.