FF/FG/Green Government - part 2

FrancieBrady

christy c wrote: »

So what level of numbers are you talking about? We were already in the hundreds when re opening.

1200 by Christmas day. 1400 in hospitals by mid January. Letterkenny hospital almost went under last night christyc on the 11th of January and our case numbers are in the 5-6000 range.

christy c

FrancieBrady wrote: »

1200 by Christmas day. 1400 in hospitals by mid January. Letterkenny hospital almost went under last night christyc on the 11th of January and our case numbers are in the 5-6000 range.

No ,I meant what sort of numbers would you have considered "balanced"? Obviously not 1200, so 1000, 800?

RandomViewer

blanch152 wrote: »

Struggling to understand the bit in bold.

Which part of the Road Traffic Act allows for this?

Have you any idea of how complicated that Act is, and how often it is challenged in court?

If Revenue turned Keelings upside down last April, what food would you have eaten in May? Of all the things suggested on here, stopping essential workers from doing their job is probably one of the silliest.

Everything but strawberries, and even then I could've got Spanish ones

Bannasidhe

This has happened on FF/FG/GP's watch. Bicker all ye like about whataboutSF/NI/personal responsibility etc etc etc it won't change the fact that THIS is happening now under the current FF/FG/GP policies and as we are no longer contact testing we are flying blind.

https://twitter.com/newschambers/status/1348631336383340544?s=20

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Yeah, I must say I have also been disappointed with the lack of investigation on Covid, on how the sh!tstorm up North has increased the figures down South. Some real investigation of why the numbers here are better than the North and better than the UK is needed. If it wasn't for Britain and Northern Ireland, could we be doing much better?

You've no interest in how things are in the south, it's more important to deflect to save FF/FG blushes.

James Brown

christy c wrote: »

I'll happily challenge your stupidity and waffle, regardless of what anyone else has done.

Strong words considering you claim begrudgingly voting for the best of a bad lot.

FrancieBrady

christy c wrote: »

No ,I meant what sort of numbers would you have considered "balanced"? Obviously not 1200, so 1000, 800?

I disagree with the 'balanced' approach as previously said.

I think if the health experts advise then we should act. It is as we are seeing the only way.

christy c

Bowie wrote: »

Strong words considering you claim begrudgingly voting for the best of a bad lot.

I've no interest in what you think of my voting habits.

James Brown

Gooey Looey wrote: »

I see the FG spin machine is in full swing....
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/it-needed-to-be-said-public-praise-for-varadkar-s-criticism-of-nphet-1.4454683

That's a disgusting piece of spin. It's PR for Varadkar and nothing more. The 'journalist' should be ashamed. They ignored the many societal crises in the run up to the last election. Paper of record my arse.

RandomViewer

Bowie wrote: »

That's a disgusting piece of spin. It's PR for Varadkar and nothing more. The 'journalist' should be ashamed. They ignored the many societal crises in the run up to the last election. Paper of record my arse.

Wonder how many of the 55 still have the same view?

piplip87

Pat Kenny gave Micheal a grilling on the radio today. First question, Are you ashamed of your handling of the pandemic...... Notice how FF supporters are not calling for media bias when their leader gets asked tough questions.

James Brown

smurgen wrote: »

Established leaker that defended own leaking disgusted at leaking.

https://twitter.com/Elaine_Loughlin/status/1348567737149349888?s=19

The Tánaiste doth protest too much, methinks.

McMurphy

piplip87 wrote: »

Pat Kenny gave Micheal a grilling on the radio today. First question, Are you ashamed of your handling of the pandemic...... Notice how FF supporters are not calling for media bias when their leader gets asked tough questions.

Are they still a thing?

They're not exactly vocal on these threads anyway.

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

That's a disgusting piece of spin. It's PR for Varadkar and nothing more. The 'journalist' should be ashamed. They ignored the many societal crises in the run up to the last election. Paper of record my arse.

How so?

The journalist used the FOI Act to get the information, probably hoping for a stick to beat Varadkar with, but ended up with different information and told the truth.

How is telling the truth, spin?

You need a new definition of spin.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

How so?

The journalist used the FOI Act to get the information, probably hoping for a stick to beat Varadkar with, but ended up with different information and told the truth.

How is telling the truth, spin?

You need a new definition of spin.

Varadkar criticised and took a strop with NPHET publicly during a pandemic. He was roundly and rightly criticised.

Why print it at all so? 'It's my duty as a journalist to print what I find on this nothing story'? Give over.

Editor of the Irish Times allows an article defending Varadkar based on 55 alleged emails to say they thought he was right.
Not an important story. 55 people. Therefore IMO, printing such PR is spin on behalf of Varadkar because it serves no other purpose, unless of course it's veiled sarcasm that only 55 people in the world agreed with him?

I'll work off this one:

In public relations and politics, spin is a form of propaganda, achieved through knowingly providing a biased interpretation of an event or campaigning to influence public opinion about some organisation or public figure. ... Spinning is typically a service provided by paid media advisors and media consultants.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

How so?

The journalist used the FOI Act to get the information, probably hoping for a stick to beat Varadkar with, but ended up with different information and told the truth.

How is telling the truth, spin?

You need a new definition of spin.

The identities of the people emailing the Tánaiste’s Oireachtas email address in response to his TV appearance on October 5th were not disclosed by his office when they were released to The Irish Times under the Freedom of Information Act.

So they released emails that no one can identify the authors of? How does that work exactly? Copy and paste random pieces of text and send it on to a journalist where he or she haven't the foggiest as to whether or not it's authentic, or made up crap?

Reads to me like they could be entirely made up/works of fiction by a few YFG members, and cultists from these boards tbh.

Reminds me in the time Leo conducted an internal review of a certain TD who was pursuing a fairly dodgy insurance claim, then told us the review exonerated everyone, but no one was allowed to see it.

Get up the yard FFS.

James Brown

McMurphy wrote: »

So they released emails that no one can identify the authors of? How does that work exactly? Copy and paste random pieces of text and send it on to a journalist where he or she haven't the foggiest as to whether or not it's authentic, or made up crap?

Reads to me like they could be entirely made up/works of fiction by a few YFG members, and cultists from these boards tbh.

Reminds me in the time Leo conducted an internal review of a certain TD who was pursuing a fairly dodgy insurance claim, them told us the review exonerated everyone, but no one was allowed to see it.

Get up the yard

Or when they looked into Noonan's dodgy 'inappropriate behaviour'.

Floppybits

McMurphy wrote: »

Reminds me in the time Leo conducted an internal review of a certain TD who was pursuing a fairly dodgy insurance claim, then told us the review exonerated everyone, but no one was allowed to see it.

Get up the yard FFS.

They just love those internal reviews, no one ever seems to find anything. Remember the time Bertie was looking up every tree in North Dublin I think it was investigating Lawlor and he never found anything.

McMurphy

Bowie wrote: »

Or when they looked into Noonan's dodgy 'inappropriate behaviour'.

I got an email from Varadkars office when I enquired about the story on the time.

I'm not giving you a screenshot of the sender's email address or name of the author, I'll just copy and paste the content.

Dear Mr McMurphy,

The story in today's Times is a pile of made up arse biscuit.

Yours etc etc....

Looks legit, right?

Bowie

Bowie wrote: »

Or when they looked into Noonan's dodgy 'inappropriate behaviour'.

Even.more remarkably no photos ever emerged from golfgate....

Yous would imagine after all.scams pulled to.get their man in as supreme court judge,they would have at least produced an image corroborating the claim of being in a different room

blanch152

McMurphy wrote: »

So they released emails that no one can identify the authors of? How does that work exactly? Copy and paste random pieces of text and send it on to a journalist where he or she haven't the foggiest as to whether or not it's authentic, or made up crap?

Reads to me like they could be entirely made up/works of fiction by a few YFG members, and cultists from these boards tbh.

Reminds me in the time Leo conducted an internal review of a certain TD who was pursuing a fairly dodgy insurance claim, then told us the review exonerated everyone, but no one was allowed to see it.

Get up the yard FFS.

That is silly nonsense. Do you have any clue how FOI works?

blanch152

Floppybits wrote: »

They just love those internal reviews, no one ever seems to find anything. Remember the time Bertie was looking up every tree in North Dublin I think it was investigating Lawlor and he never found anything.

It was Ray Burke.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

That is silly nonsense. Do you have any clue how FOI works?

Ah so you have established this article was the result of a FOI request. Gwan and post some back up for that?

Floppybits

[PHP][/PHP]

blanch152 wrote: »

It was Ray Burke.

Thanks for that for some reason I thought it was Lawlor then again it is FF so it could have been any of them.

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

Varadkar criticised and took a strop with NPHET publicly during a pandemic. He was roundly and rightly criticised.

Why print it at all so? 'It's my duty as a journalist to print what I find on this nothing story'? Give over.

Editor of the Irish Times allows an article defending Varadkar based on 55 alleged emails to say they thought he was right.
Not an important story. 55 people. Therefore IMO, printing such PR is spin on behalf of Varadkar because it serves no other purpose, unless of course it's veiled sarcasm that only 55 people in the world agreed with him?

I'll work off this one:

Wow, just wow.

Poster claims to be against spin.
Paper publishes truthful article that justifies Leo Varadkar
Poster questions why article was published because it couldn't be spun against Varadkar and was therefore "not an important story".

The truth here is that at the time, those people who were bothered enough by the issue thought Leo was right. That sticks in your gullet, fair enough, you are entitled to that, but to try and censor the information because it doesn't fit your worldview is the ultimate of spin.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ah so you have established this article was the result of a FOI request. Gwan and post some back up for that?

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/it-needed-to-be-said-public-praise-for-varadkar-s-criticism-of-nphet-1.4454683

"The identities of the people emailing the Tánaiste’s Oireachtas email address in response to his TV appearance on October 5th were not disclosed by his office when they were released to The Irish Times under the Freedom of Information Act."

Elementary, my dear Watson.:D:D:D

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Wow, just wow.

Poster claims to be against spin.
Paper publishes truthful article that justifies Leo Varadkar
Poster questions why article was published because it couldn't be spun against Varadkar and was therefore "not an important story".

The truth here is that at the time, those people who were bothered enough by the issue thought Leo was right. That sticks in your gullet, fair enough, you are entitled to that, but to try and censor the information because it doesn't fit your worldview is the ultimate of spin.

Do you think spin is lies?
Spin is putting a spin on something. Lying is lying. Tough for FG folk to distinguish I know.
Did you not read the definition I posted? You can be truthfully biased, if being truthful. Did they have a number on emails calling him an ejit? How about after he leaked or cited 'Mean Girls'? Did they ****. That's spin Blanch.
55 emails is not news worthy, unless it's one email the then minister for justice saw and didn't think it important

I've explained my view twice now. It's PR spin.

blanch152

Bowie wrote: »

Do you think spin is lies?
Did you not read the definition I posted? You can be truthfully biased, if being truthful. Did they have a number on emails calling him an ejit? How about after he leaked or cited 'Mean Girls'? Did they ****. That's spin Blanch.
55 emails is not news worthy, unless it's one email the then minister for justice saw and didn't think it important

I've explained my view twice now. It's PR spin.

The article is a simple factual account of the FOI request, as far from spin that you can go.

You have a blind spot with Leo, never more exposed than your response to this.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/it-needed-to-be-said-public-praise-for-varadkar-s-criticism-of-nphet-1.4454683

"The identities of the people emailing the Tánaiste’s Oireachtas email address in response to his TV appearance on October 5th were not disclosed by his office when they were released to The Irish Times under the Freedom of Information Act."

Elementary, my dear Watson.:D:D:D

Fair enough. Just keeping you honest here.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

The article is a simple factual account of the FOI request, as far from spin that you can go.

You have a blind spot with Leo, never more exposed than your response to this.

Is it fully factual? Did it give the numbers of emails calling him a gilly? No. That's biased one sided spin.

As shown, when Leo isn't in the news, he doesn't appear on here.

I would never expose myself Blanch