Question for FF supporters

Liam Byrne · 07-06-2010 2:23pm #1

I've read a few posts by FF supporters here, and while some of them are downright ridiculous and delusional, some of them are relatively on-the-ball, with people admitting that lots of the stuff at the top is objectionable and that they're hoping to realign the party; they just want to change it from within.

So here's three quick questions :

1) Why do they think that Callely, Ahern, O'Dea and O'Donoghue (to name but 4 high-profile ones) are still members ? Why doesn't Cowen kick them out in order to set a new benchmark that stroke-pulling was the "old" FF and is no longer tolerated ?

2) What level of corruption would have happen in order for them to actually give up trying to change FF from within, and maybe start a new party which stands for the same decent objectives but without the association with corruption ?

Let's acknowledge also that FF contains thousands of members, and there have been only a relatively small few rotten apples (e.g. the above plus Haughey, Lawlor and Burke would, in reality, only make 7 out of those thousands)......my concern is that rotten apples aren't meant to float to the top, and that no-one has stopped them in their tracks or been able to trigger the grassroots or leadership to shout stop and kick them out so that the whole party doesn't get tainted by association.

3) Assuming FF can be changed from the bottom up, as they hope, when is this process likely to start, and when will it be completed ?

And - 100% hand on heart - the above are genuine questions, not baiting or looking for an argument or anything like that.

ninty9er · 07-06-2010 6:23pm

Interesting thread topic. So laying it out as it is:

1) They haven't been removed most likely because of the Cooper-Flynn experience where expulsion split the party at local level. There is also probably a recognition that these people are democratically elected. I suppose one angle could be that if they're good enough for their constituents, they're good enough for the party. Not necessarily a valid reason, but one that could be behind it. Ultimately these things are for the Ardchomhairle to decide if they are to be legally watertight. That's why the expenses issue is being dealt with by HQ rather than Brian Cowen.

2)You'd be bringing most of the same people if you were to do it successfully. It would have to be institutional corruption. This doesn't happen in Ireland to any great extent, corruption is on an individual level and is not representative of the official view or policy of any organisation.

3)I'd imagine change from the bottom up will take 15-20 years to complete. It's a slow process with such a large organisation, and at all levels there are slackers as well as those who work their arses off. The process has been kickstarted by Gerry Collins and Chris Flood at the request of Brian Cowen when he became President of the party.

Denerick · 07-06-2010 6:39pm

Party politics is so very tiring. The most realistic future course for the party will be a modest drubbing in the next election, a 5 year FG/Labour term, with not very much changing within the Irish political system. After FG/Labour had their fun doing the exact same thing FF is doing now, the voters will re-elect FF for another generation, and the dull grudgery of Irish life will continue.

Liam, with all your posts you constantly overlook one thing. The Irish people quite like the parish pump corruption of the Fianna Fáil party. Not only is there a great appetitie for 'jobs for the lads' and all the rest, the Irish people are corrupt. Unless that changes, the high political culture will never change.

galwayrush · 07-06-2010 6:44pm

Not saying the 4 people mentioned are any way involved, but i would imagine a lot of people in FF know too much **** about each other, one eg ,people involved in scandals like the Golden Circle with Anglo Irish Bank, That might explain why some people weren't booted out of the party years ago.

Laminations · 07-06-2010 7:04pm

ninty9er wrote: »

3)I'd imagine change from the bottom up will take 15-20 years to complete

I'll consider voting for your party in 15-20 years so, until then I'll remain a constituent that doesn't tolerate waste remaining in a party

Eliot Rosewater · 07-06-2010 9:00pm

A good topic indeed!

Would it be fair to say that a lot of the 20% still voting FF do so solely out of party loyalty? For example, my grandmother would still vote FF if they established a dictatorship, and I think this is big part of the older generation. In the years to come, such party loyalties may become less of a factor as people vote for policy rather than party. Do you think this will spark a cultural change in FF? If they can't rely on the loyal supporters, they may have to adopt a tougher stance on corruption.

And otherwise, what sort of changes do you think will happen within FF?

Liam Byrne · 07-06-2010 9:08pm

ninty9er wrote: »

Interesting thread topic. So laying it out as it is:

Firstly, thanks for replying.

ninty9er wrote: »

1) They haven't been removed most likely because of the Cooper-Flynn experience where expulsion split the party at local level.

So does that mean that protecting "the party" is indeed coming before ethics and the good of the country ?

ninty9er wrote: »

There is also probably a recognition that these people are democratically elected. I suppose one angle could be that if they're good enough for their constituents, they're good enough for the party. Not necessarily a valid reason, but one that could be behind it.

Firstly, those people were democratically elected before their actions were well-known.

Secondly, speaking personally, if someone was as unethical as some of those have been, and the leader refused to act, then I would view it as an indication that corruption was acceptable, and leave before I was tainted with that brush.

If the leadership dealt with it appropriately and got them out, then fair enough (there might have been no forewarning of what they were like) but leaving them in would make me leave.

ninty9er wrote: »

2)You'd be bringing most of the same people if you were to do it successfully.

Why ?

If you were objecting to corruption, then you'd be leaving the corrupt ones behind.

ninty9er wrote: »

...corruption is on an individual level and is not representative of the official view or policy of any organisation.

I agree, which is why I was as fair as I could be earlier pointing out the small relative number; the issue is that those people are at the top, and are condoned and supported by the leadership, which indicates a serious problem.

ninty9er wrote: »

3)I'd imagine change from the bottom up will take 15-20 years to complete. It's a slow process with such a large organisation, and at all levels there are slackers as well as those who work their arses off.

It's not about the amount of work, it's about the ethics.

And it also appears that it hasn't started, because Cowen is supporting those named above (and Cooper-Flynn as well).....so when will it start ?

Then, whenever the process does start, what you've said would imply that it might be possible to consider FF for election in another 15 - 20 years......

If it's not representative organisation-wide to view corruption as acceptable - as you said above - then surely the organisation is democratic enough to turn around to Brian Cowen and say "here's what needs to be done - do it. Now."

Even Cowen trots out the line that they're unpopular because of "tough but necessary decisions", when in reality at least half of their unpopularity is based on the above issue.

N.B. I'm also completely avoiding allocating any blame for the crash in this thread, and I'd appreciate if everyone else did likewise. There are 4 issues in politics : corruption, accountabilty, competence and policies, and this thread is solely about the first of those only please.

Telling corrupt individuals that they're not welcome because they have seriously damaged whatever "good name" the party might have had can't be that difficult ?

Denerick · 07-06-2010 10:00pm

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

A good topic indeed!

Would it be fair to say that a lot of the 20% still voting FF do so solely out of party loyalty? For example, my grandmother would still vote FF if they established a dictatorship, and I think this is big part of the older generation. In the years to come, such party loyalties may become less of a factor as people vote for policy rather than party. Do you think this will spark a cultural change in FF? If they can't rely on the loyal supporters, they may have to adopt a tougher stance on corruption.

And otherwise, what sort of changes do you think will happen within FF?

A friend of mine hails from one of these FF families (as do I by the way, but they do tend to mix their vote up every now and then) but is a staunch Fianna Fáiler. Something to do with his father and family loyalty as far as I can see.

goose2005 · 07-06-2010 10:41pm

ninty9er wrote: »

here is also probably a recognition that these people are democratically elected. I suppose one angle could be that if they're good enough for their constituents, they're good enough for the party.

So what you mean is, you'll take anyone so long as they're elected, because holding office is FF's only real aim?

Permabear · 07-06-2010 10:52pm

This post has been deleted.

Mrmoe · 08-06-2010 1:38am

I think it all comes back to the saying that all politics is local. People generally vote for their best local candidate because they usually work on local issues. Problems such as NAMA, EU policy and budgeting are a bit more abstract and would not necessarily effect people directly on a day to day basis. I personally votes for the best local candidate and that happens to be FF. I think if you start voting for some based solely upon what party they represent you are going to dilute the quality of candidate that will be elected. This has a ripple effect all the way up the line to those forming the government which yields a poor government and poor opposition.

The four FF members that you mentioned only O'Dea and Ahern would be involved in the next general election and are generally high vote getters. It would be politically unwise to get rid of them.

FF will be reformed if they lose the next election which almost certainly will happen. It make take 2 government terms to complete that reform though as younger candidates arrive and the current older ones either retire or are voted out.

T runner · 08-06-2010 10:57am

Denerick wrote: »

Party politics is so very tiring. The most realistic future course for the party will be a modest drubbing in the next election, a 5 year FG/Labour term, with not very much changing within the Irish political system. After FG/Labour had their fun doing the exact same thing FF is doing now, the voters will re-elect FF for another generation, and the dull grudgery of Irish life will continue.

Liam, with all your posts you constantly overlook one thing. The Irish people quite like the parish pump corruption of the Fianna Fáil party. Not only is there a great appetitie for 'jobs for the lads' and all the rest, the Irish people are corrupt. Unless that changes, the high political culture will never change.

That is rather simplistic nonsense Im afraid.

"Irish people are corrupt". Are you corrupt? Im sure youre the self-righteous sanctimonious exception!

Pleased tell me the credible alternatives on the poll cards to the current incumbents?

The results reflect the quality on the poll cards. Yet simplistic observers continually conclude that "you get the government you deserve" as if the poll cards were some sort of blank canvass with which the public can create a perfect government.

How can you improve the names on the poll cards? The Dail will only be as good as the people who make the poll cards.

scr123 · 08-06-2010 11:57am

Never knew until last November there was an outlet on internet for Irish political discussion. The previous 11 years had been in Yahoo and Paltalk political chatrooms and message boards. Still spend a couple of hours a week on those sites and still see them as a word game to be enjoyed, slightest sign of getting wound up and not having a twinkle in the eye I disconnect the computer. The Irish message boards are a different kettle of fish, the passion and animosity on display make the Yahoo and Paltalk scene look very tame and believe me there is some heavy hitters there ! During the years was glad to be in Ireland as some of the threats from the extreme left and right was scarey.
After discovering the Irish message boards the amazing revelation is the incredible obsession with FF. Without FF these these political boards would die an instant death and a lot of people would have a void in their lives that cannot be replaced. Over the weekend I logged in to a message board for a few minutes and there was a thread with the title "Lying FF scumbags" Opened another thread and every single person ever associated with FF was described as corrupt and evil in some way. Now I open this board and a thread wants to know if FF can cure its problem with corruption. Whats the point ? Haughey and Lawlor are dead, Burke did time. The others mentioned are not under criminal investigation and the accusations against can be levelled at politicians from every party. I notice there is no thread opened on the allegations against O Reilly of FG.
Between our Garda and Politicians I believe overall we have been extremely lucky in this country. Naturally, FF as the longest serving party in government we are open to more problems than the other parties who have been rejected by the people so often the pain they are feeling manifests itself in a permanent siege mentality against FF. They have lost the last 6 elections and at present the polls suggest 2012 could be 7Up, of course that is far from guaranteed as the alternative government is very shy about telling us whats on offer from them.

FF will deal with its own problems and will face the electorate with its usual confidence. Its time the opposition stopped worrying about FF and started thinking about how on earth they are going to shift the immovable giant that is FF. Sneering and smearing FF will not be enough, the people want workable policies and I for one am afraid the opposition hold a blank sheet

Liam Byrne · 08-06-2010 12:17pm

scr123 wrote: »

[ Off-topic waffle deleted ]

Over the weekend I logged in to a message board for a few minutes and there was a thread with the title "Lying FF scumbags". Opened another thread and every single person ever associated with FF was described as corrupt and evil in some way.

Then this thread should have been a breath of fresh air, since I explicitly avoided tarring the whole association and its members with the same brush.....the title you mentioned is perfectly valid for Ahern, Callely and O'Dea, but not the whole organisation, as I already pointed out.

scr123 wrote: »

Now I open this board and a thread wants to know if FF can cure its problem with corruption. Whats the point ? Haughey and Lawlor are dead, Burke did time. The others mentioned are not under criminal investigation and the accusations against can be levelled at politicians from every party.

"What's the point?" :mad: The point is that corruption doesn't have to involve a " criminal investigation", so that excuse is just an attempt to swat away the issue and not deal with it. The point is that I was wondering whether those trying to improve FF and make it acceptable again would succeed, and how they would achieve that.

I mean, I've had run-ins with ninety9er, and - while I don't agree with their reasoning - at least they answered straightfowardly and didn't try to ignore the facts.

scr123 wrote: »

Naturally, FF as the longest serving party in government we are open to more problems than the other parties who have been rejected by the people so often the pain they are feeling manifests itself in a permanent siege mentality against FF.

Absolute and 100% bull****. It doesn't matter how long you've been in power if you're ethical and stick to that. So - yet again - you're making excuses for those who are corrupt. Sickening!

Advisor : "Taoiseach, O'Donoghue has ripped off the taxpayer"
Cowen : "Ah sure, if 'twas one of the youngfellas that was only elected the last election, we'd kick him out, but sure O'Donoghue is in power nearly as long as Ahern - we'll stick by him"

:rolleyes:

Whatever about differing views expressed by others, your mindset is the very reason I fear that FF won't change, because even if ninety9er and hallelujahjordan do try to change FF from within, the mindset that says "why change, sure they're only taking pot-shots at us, us poor victims" will over-ride them.

As for the siege mentality, you're again missing the point. I'm not in any party, and have no allegiance, so I have never been rejected. I'm dealing in 100% facts in this thread and completely avoiding any possibly subjective stuff like the level of blame, etc.

scr123 wrote: »

FF will deal with its own problems and will face the electorate with its usual confidence.

The first step in dealing with problems is to acknowledge them. Something others in FF appear to be able to do, but your stance on this is pretty obvious from the sentence above which says "What's the point ?"

scr123 wrote: »

Sneering and smearing FF will not be enough, the people want workable policies and I for one am afraid the opposition hold a blank sheet

Who's "smearing" FF, exactly ? All I've done is point out the facts, and fair play to ninety9er they answered without completely dodging and deflecting by claiming that objecting to corruption is somehow underhand or just sour grapes.

Personally, I couldn't care less whether FF fix their corruption issues; if they do, great; if they don't and aren't in power, great. Makes no difference to me.

I just asked a straightforward question because - at the moment - the FF leadership is standing 100% by at least 4 objectionable characters who have done wrong, and I cannot understand that, because if they were seen to weed out corruption their job of getting everyone to "share the pain" would be easier.

As it is, loads of people around the country are saying that they object to paying taxes so that Ahern and Callely and O'Donoghue & co can waste it living the high life.

And that is a 100% fair comment.....which has nothing to do with any of your - frankly somewhat deluded - victimisation theories.

Het-Field · 08-06-2010 1:06pm

scr123 wrote: »

Never knew until last November there was an outlet on internet for Irish political discussion. The previous 11 years had been in Yahoo and Paltalk political chatrooms and message boards. Still spend a couple of hours a week on those sites and still see them as a word game to be enjoyed, slightest sign of getting wound up and not having a twinkle in the eye I disconnect the computer. The Irish message boards are a different kettle of fish, the passion and animosity on display make the Yahoo and Paltalk scene look very tame and believe me there is some heavy hitters there ! During the years was glad to be in Ireland as some of the threats from the extreme left and right was scarey.
After discovering the Irish message boards the amazing revelation is the incredible obsession with FF. Without FF these these political boards would die an instant death and a lot of people would have a void in their lives that cannot be replaced. Over the weekend I logged in to a message board for a few minutes and there was a thread with the title "Lying FF scumbags" Opened another thread and every single person ever associated with FF was described as corrupt and evil in some way. Now I open this board and a thread wants to know if FF can cure its problem with corruption. Whats the point ? Haughey and Lawlor are dead, Burke did time. The others mentioned are not under criminal investigation and the accusations against can be levelled at politicians from every party. I notice there is no thread opened on the allegations against O Reilly of FG.
Between our Garda and Politicians I believe overall we have been extremely lucky in this country. Naturally, FF as the longest serving party in government we are open to more problems than the other parties who have been rejected by the people so often the pain they are feeling manifests itself in a permanent siege mentality against FF. They have lost the last 6 elections and at present the polls suggest 2012 could be 7Up, of course that is far from guaranteed as the alternative government is very shy about telling us whats on offer from them.

FF will deal with its own problems and will face the electorate with its usual confidence. Its time the opposition stopped worrying about FF and started thinking about how on earth they are going to shift the immovable giant that is FF. Sneering and smearing FF will not be enough, the people want workable policies and I for one am afraid the opposition hold a blank sheet

That is an appalling response. How the hell are we lucky to have Mary Coughlan, who didnt create a single job over two years ? How can we be lucky to have Brian Cowen who was willingly complicit in Irish attempts to live off VAT, Stamp Duty and Cpaital Gains Tax. How can we be lucky to have a politican like Bertie who destroyed his own party and contributed heavily to Irealdn's current plight, and then crapped on it on several occasions after he departed ? How can we be lucky to have Eamonn Gilmore, who is virtually lying to the public about his manifesto, and refusing to be draw on the semantics of his cuts ? How can we be lucky to have Enda Kenny as leader of the opposition, when the only people who want him gone more then the government, are his own party ?. How can we be lucky to have a Green party in Government, when they are ideologically driven to destroy this country in expensive and unsustainable agendas such as the electric car, and the carbon tax ? How can we be lucky to have Martin Ferris (Jailbird), JAckie Healy Rae (Gombeen), Michael Lowry (Moriarity Tribunal) ?

Nationally we are bankrupt. Economically we are bankrupt. Socially we are bankrupt. FF's house is not in order, and I know that for a fact. Iv been involved in the party and the anxiousness to go out and knock on doors is second to none. If FF fight the next campaign on pointing fingers at FG/Lab, they will be mauled.

I respect a post like NintyNiners above. It answers the questions. Your's is the same drivel which is seen, and has been transplanted from Politics.ie.

T runner · 08-06-2010 5:22pm

scr123 wrote: »

Never knew until last November there was an outlet on internet for Irish political discussion........
..............Over the weekend I logged in to a message board for a few minutes and there was a thread with the title "Lying FF scumbags" Opened another thread and every single person ever associated with FF was described as corrupt and evil in some way. Now I open this board and a thread wants to know if FF can cure its problem with corruption. Whats the point ? Haughey and Lawlor are dead, Burke did time. The others mentioned are not under criminal investigation and the accusations against can be levelled at politicians from every party. I notice there is no thread opened on the allegations against O Reilly of FG.
..........

I have to agree with the sentiment here. The opposition is absolutely dreadul.

Maybe on the back of this government's relatively successful strategy on the financial crises so far.....it may just be: better the devil you know.

No doubt this will be answered with just another tirade of anti FF sneering....accusations of being delusional etc...

bmaxi · 08-06-2010 5:34pm

FF are corrupt, fact.
Myriad FF supporters have come on this forum and trotted out the same old line.
"If FG/Lab. were in power they would have done the same"
Pure conjecture, fact is, they weren't and they didn't, FF were and they did. No amount of posturing and protesting will change that.
It can't have escaped notice that every FF leader since Seán Lemass has had a question mark over them and if the public thought they had seen the worst in Haughey. they have had their eyes opened since.
I can't even hazard a guess as to why people have this blind allegiance to FF, I can only assume it is similar to the allegiance they once felt for the equally corrupt Catholic church, as some sort of champion of the common man. These two organisations have, both singly and together since the formation of the state, sought only to serve themselves and to c*ap on the common man.
In Diarmuid Martin, at least, there is some hope for the Church, I see no equivalent in FF, whose current leadership is so bogged down in corruption and ineptitude, that any attempt to free themselves only drags them further into the mire.
FF needs major change, there is no point in going on blaming everyone but themselves. They are at fault and the people know it.

Liam Byrne · 08-06-2010 6:41pm

T runner wrote: »

Maybe on the back of this government's relatively successful strategy on the financial crises so far.....it may just be: better the devil you know.

No doubt this will be answered with just another tirade of anti FF sneering....accusations of being delusional etc...

Well, if the cap fits and you reckon it's been a "successful strategy" :rolleyes: then.....

But I'd bring you back to the fact that I was not discussing policies or strategies or anything else; I explicitly started a fair discussion about how the genuine people who are in FF are aiming to deal with existing, well-known and condoned corruption, and prevent a recurrence.

So please don't drag my thread off topic.

I explicitly refrained from discussing failures, so if you can't comment on the topic at hand, please start a separate thread.

T runner · 08-06-2010 6:59pm

bmaxi wrote: »

FF are corrupt, fact.
Myriad FF supporters have come on this forum and trotted out the same old line.
"If FG/Lab. were in power they would have done the same"
Pure conjecture, fact is, they weren't and they didn't, FF were and they did. No amount of posturing and protesting will change that.
It can't have escaped notice that every FF leader since Seán Lemass has had a question mark over them and if the public thought they had seen the worst in Haughey. they have had their eyes opened since.
I can't even hazard a guess as to why people have this blind allegiance to FF, I can only assume it is similar to the allegiance they once felt for the equally corrupt Catholic church, as some sort of champion of the common man. These two organisations have, both singly and together since the formation of the state, sought only to serve themselves and to c*ap on the common man.
In Diarmuid Martin, at least, there is some hope for the Church, I see no equivalent in FF, whose current leadership is so bogged down in corruption and ineptitude, that any attempt to free themselves only drags them further into the mire.
FF needs major change, there is no point in going on blaming everyone but themselves. They are at fault and the people know it.

Firstly there was no FF at the foundation of the State. It could be argued that Cumann na Gael's Alliance with the equally conservative Catholic church and its policy of putting down of any liberal or radical thinking (in the name of nation building) was adopted by every government since.

It is extremely worrying that people, even now, arent sure whether a Fine Gael opposition would be in reality better or not. Imagine, after the worst crash in the history of the state the opposition is so inept it cant capitalise.

Im sure this is FF's fault too, ofcourse.

Liam Byrne · 08-06-2010 7:04pm

T runner wrote: »

Firstly there was no FF at the foundation of the State. It could be argued that Cumann na Gael's Alliance with the equally conservative Catholic church and its policy of putting down of any liberal or radical thinking (in the name of nation building) was adopted by every government since.

It is extremely worrying that people, even now, arent sure whether a Fine Gael opposition would be in reality better or not. Imagine, after the worst crash in the history of the state the opposition is so inept it cant capitalise.

Im sure this is FF's fault too, ofcourse.

For the second time, if you're not going to discuss the actual topic, then go start your own.

I know I'm not a moderator, but since I started this thread to deliberately avoid anything subjective and discuss it in a sensible way, I believe I'm entitled to object to it being dragged off-topic.

Hopefully a mod will pick up on your constant attempts to drag this off-topic to ensure that it cannot be discussed.

Anyone else, please discuss only the corruption question and how to deal with it, and ignore any other posts.

T runner · 08-06-2010 7:08pm

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Well, if the cap fits and you reckon it's been a "successful strategy" :rolleyes: then.....

But I'd bring you back to the fact that I was not discussing policies or strategies or anything else; I explicitly started a fair discussion about how the genuine people who are in FF are aiming to deal with existing, well-known and condoned corruption, and prevent a recurrence.

So please don't drag my thread off topic.

I explicitly refrained from discussing failures, so if you can't comment on the topic at hand, please start a separate thread.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

For the second time, if you're not going to discuss the actual topic, then go start your own.

I know I'm not a moderator, but since I started this thread to deliberately avoid anything subjective and discuss it in a sensible way, I believe I'm entitled to object to it being dragged off-topic.

Hopefully a mod will pick up on your constant attempts to drag this off-topic to ensure that it cannot be discussed.

Anyone else, please discuss only the corruption question and how to deal with it, and ignore any other posts.

I was answering a post which included an assertion that FF and the catholic church were the worst etc. etc since the foundation of the state.

Very inaccurate and also tenhnically off topic. No giving out by you there?

Liam Byrne · 08-06-2010 7:13pm

T runner wrote: »

I was answering a post which included an assertion that FF and the catholic church were the worst etc. etc since the foundation of the state.

Very inaccurate and also tenhnically off topic. No giving out by you there?

Technically on-topic, since the sentence says :

bmaxi wrote: »

I can only assume it is similar to the allegiance they once felt for the equally corrupt Catholic church, as some sort of champion of the common man.
:
:
It can't have escaped notice that every FF leader since Seán Lemass has had a question mark over them.

bmaxi was still talking about corruption which is the topic of this thread.

So no, no giving out by me there, because it was on-topic on both counts.

Scofflaw · 08-06-2010 7:13pm

T_runner, you've been asked a couple of times to stay on topic by the OP - let me reiterate his request with a warning that it's not optional to stay on topic.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Het-Field · 09-06-2010 1:16am

T runner wrote: »

I have to agree with the sentiment here. The opposition is absolutely dreadul.

Maybe on the back of this government's relatively successful strategy on the financial crises so far.....it may just be: better the devil you know.

No doubt this will be answered with just another tirade of anti FF sneering....accusations of being delusional etc...

With due respect, small upturns in our econonomic fortunes will not equate to overall national inprovements. While the rhetoric is not delusional, it is certainly misleading. It is proffered in a manner which would seem to be an attempt to quell any complaints.

The strategy has been relatively successful on the back of one budget which makes sense. The Jobs strategy is non existent, the competitivness strategy is yet to kick into play, and the banking strategy is unclear whether it will be successful or not. I would also point that NAMA has only been tried in places where the state is already in ownership of the banks, which makes it even more unclear.

oppenheimer1 · 09-06-2010 2:46am

bmaxi wrote: »

FF are corrupt, fact.
Myriad FF supporters have come on this forum and trotted out the same old line.
"If FG/Lab. were in power they would have done the same"
(...)

How quickly one forgets eh. One of the reasons Labour did so badly in 1997 was because of allegations of cronyism and abusing the privileges of state office.

No party in Ireland is above it (thats not saying its right, but people in glasshouses shouldn't throw stones)

starbelgrade · 09-06-2010 2:56am

scr123 wrote: »

Never knew until last November there was an outlet on internet for Irish political discussion.

After discovering the Irish message boards the amazing revelation is the incredible obsession with FF.

Hello and welcome to the real world.

bmaxi · 09-06-2010 11:55am

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

How quickly one forgets eh. One of the reasons Labour did so badly in 1997 was because of allegations of cronyism and abusing the privileges of state office.

No party in Ireland is above it (thats not saying its right, but people in glasshouses shouldn't throw stones)

I'm not a supporter of Labour or FG, I was just repeating the line that is continually trotted out.
The difference, as you point out and which may or may not be the case, is that Labour did poorly because of perceived wrongdoing. FF, on the other hand, have a hard core support which seemingly is prepared to accept any excess of corruption or criminality perpetrated by their representatives.

T runner · 09-06-2010 12:55pm

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Technically on-topic, since the sentence says :

bmaxi was still talking about corruption which is the topic of this thread.

So no, no giving out by me there, because it was on-topic on both counts.

OK. In my opinion FG are just as corrupt as FF, just a little less power. If you want to find out how to cure corruption in FF, ask yourself how you would do it in FG. Youll get your answer.

Liam Byrne · 09-06-2010 1:03pm

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

How quickly one forgets eh. One of the reasons Labour did so badly in 1997 was because of allegations of cronyism and abusing the privileges of state office.

No party in Ireland is above it (thats not saying its right, but people in glasshouses shouldn't throw stones)

T_runner wrote: »

OK. In my opinion FG are just as corrupt as FF, just a little less power.

Just allegations and opinion, or actual, obvious corruption ?

And what's with the "No party is above it" bull ? The people that you claim are in glasshouses are ordinary people like me - not guilty of anything - and therefore perfectly entitled to object!

And I would refer you once again to a certain Michael Lowry, who was kicked out by FG as soon as he was found out (and wasn't sneaked back in the back door like Cooper-Flynn); so even re the party politics bull, you haven't a leg to stand on, because no individual might be immune, but if that's how they handle it once it's found out, then that's all they can do.

Mind you, Lowry's website says :

In 1996, Michael stood down from Government and resigned from the Fine Gael Party. He continued his political career as an Independent T.D.

....no admission of dodgy deals there....and guess whose government he is currently propping up ?

I haven't seen that "kick out once found out" happen ONCE in FF - have you ?

And - as I said from the start of this thread - THAT is the reason FF are despised.....not because everyone else is somehow immune to corruption, but because FF refuse point blank to acknowledge it for what it is and deal with it in an acceptable fashion.

I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if Ray Burke was still a member of FF.

rugbyman · 09-06-2010 3:14pm

Liam,,
I have never voted FF and am not likely to do so, but I have some regard for some of its Reps and some of its members.

re your question as to why the wrong doers are not ejected, it is quite simple, their names on the attendance sheets are needed, despite the fact the decent souls in FF would like to be rid of them.(but not yet)

There would also be a feeling in FF(or indeed in any party) that expelling a former leader would be a step too far. It would also reflect badly on the fact that he had been elected leader.

From reading the newspapers since the fall of Ivor Callely, there are few in FF who pity him.

I believe that FFs long periods in control and the calibre of some of its members/Reps, strokes and/ or hands in till were the likely outcome.
It is often argued that some element of this(strokery) could have evolved if FG had been in power but in my opinion it is less likely.
This belief is usually put forward by FF ers. This opinion of mine has been formed over 25 years of watching/viewing/being part of the political system.

I believe that FG reps are less likely to have gotten involved in hookery, by virtue of their very make up, and that their free thinking supporters would be more likely to have walked away, had that hookery happened.

This is my opinion, nothing more , not a thesis.

regards ,Rugbyman

Scofflaw · 09-06-2010 6:35pm

T runner wrote: »

OK. In my opinion FG are just as corrupt as FF, just a little less power. If you want to find out how to cure corruption in FF, ask yourself how you would do it in FG. Youll get your answer.

T_Runner, it seems to me that you've decided that this thread should not be allowed to debate its original questions, because you disagree with the premise on which they're founded. While I obviously have no objection to you indicating your objection to the premise as you've done above, the rest of your posts here have been too largely an attempt to prevent the discussion of the questions by those who do agree with their premise.

That's not acceptable. Infracted, and if you continue this derailing attempt you'll also pick up a ban.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Question for FF supporters

Comments