Government's Accusations of "Scaremongering" Hypocritical??

turgon

In all the interviews I have seen of Brian Cowen about Lisbon, his message is always the same: We must vote YES or else be isolated from Europe. Now, this is just me, but I have not seen him, or any other Irish TD, talking about the issues in Lisbon, its all the same: Vote NO and we will be isolated.

And yet these are the same people who accuse the no campaign of scaremongering. Is it just me or is this blatantly hypocritical?

Irish and Proud

turgon wrote: »

In all the interviews I have seen of Brian Cowen about Lisbon, his message is always the same: We must vote YES or else be isolated from Europe. Now, this is just me, but I have not seen him, or any other Irish TD, talking about the issues in Lisbon, its all the same: Vote NO and we will be isolated.

And yet these are the same people who accuse the no campaign of scaremongering. Is it just me or is this blatantly hypocritical?

Bull's-eye Mate!!! :):)

To me, it seems like blatant hypocrisy on the part of the 'Yes' camp in general!

By relying on scaremongering, both sides insult the intelligence of the voting public.

sink

Both sides have got this completely wrong. Scare tactics don't work and they just piss people off and they're more likely to vote the other way out of spite.

Which way would that be?

sink

Good question. The no side definitely pisses me off more, with their abortion, harmonised taxes etc. bull****. But scare tactics don't sway me one way or the other. I'm voting yes purely because of the substance of the treaty and it won't do any harm to our relations in Europe either.

turgon

Deleted User wrote: »

By relying on scaremongering, both sides insult the intelligence of the voting public.

I must agree.

An one point that is very relevant: the YES side are far more visible then the NO side. I for one haven't heard much of the supposed scaremongering by the NO side, and if I have its only cause I actually sought it out on the net.

I think Fianna Fail, Fine Gael etc are threading a fine line between making a point and overwhelming voters in negativeness. And to be honest, I think the taoiseach is pushing this tactic too much.

orangetictac

Is anyone who votes "no" a seudointellectual???:pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

Many seem to think so:p:p:p:p:p

turgon

orangetictac wrote: »

Is anyone who votes "no" a seudointellectual???:pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

Many seem to think so:p:p:p:p:p

I dont get it

orangetictac

ya, you would be:p

turgon

Im as confused at orangetictac's posts as a standard voter is at the Lisbon Treaty

Scofflaw

turgon wrote: »

I must agree.

An one point that is very relevant: the YES side are far more visible then the NO side. I for one haven't heard much of the supposed scaremongering by the NO side, and if I have its only cause I actually sought it out on the net.

I think Fianna Fail, Fine Gael etc are threading a fine line between making a point and overwhelming voters in negativeness. And to be honest, I think the taoiseach is pushing this tactic too much.

Oh, come now. The idea that the Yes side are the only people scaremongering isn't tenable for a second.

Look at the facts. It's not true that Lisbon will bring in abortion, but people are claiming it. They may either be deranged (COIR), or they may be scaremongering (Libertas). The same goes for every other scary issue that's being falsely brought up: Lisbon = EU Army; Lisbon = microchipping; Lisbon = loss of tax rate; Lisbon = rabid monkeys will eat your babies.

In every case there's a couple of people who actually believe these things, and then there's higher-profile groups like Sinn Fein and Libertas who don't believe them at all, but are happy to promote them because they might scare people into voting No.

That's scaremongering - and that's without even pointing out that it's equally possibly Cowen et all actually think that a No vote will be disastrous. It has been explained several times, after all, why they might think that.

cordially,
Scofflaw

orangetictac

turgon wrote: »

Im as confused at orangetictac's posts as a standard voter is at the Lisbon Treaty

dodgy phrasing.


Everyone knows Turgon just regurgetates everything Cathy Sinnott says!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:BURN

turgon

Scofflaw wrote: »

Oh, come now. The idea that the Yes side are the only people scaremongering isn't tenable for a second.

I know the NO side scaremonger Scofflaw - I know as a well as everyone!!!! I mean, the Cork Independant (in all its glory) proclaimed that a sub-clause of a sub-clause in the treaty allowed for execution! How ridiculous!

What im saying is that the NO scaremongering isnt there for everyone to see all the time!!! I know it is worse but its not as vocal.

The YES side aren't half as bad - but their problem is the Brian Cowen is on RTE NEWS every night saying the same thing. So although not as bad, it is getting into people heads slowly and their more likely to be affected by it.

As well, when people claim that Lisbon introduces a one child policy you can brush it off easily, but when Cowen says we will be the bane of Europe, well that just sticks.

turgon

orangetictac wrote: »

dodgy phrasing.


Everyone knows Turgon just regurgetates everything Cathy Sinnott says!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:BURN

Wheres a mod with banning abilities when you need them!!!! only messing of course!!!!!

Kathy Sinnott has some good points, and she has some atrocious points. But as an independent she is allowed do what most politicians cant - speak her mind and not get demoted for it.

orangetictac

turgon wrote: »

I know the NO side scaremonger Scofflaw - I know as a well as everyone!!!! I mean, the Cork Independant (in all its glory) proclaimed that a sub-clause of a sub-clause in the treaty allowed for execution! How ridiculous!

.

Did you know "As of April 1, 2008, the Death Penalty was authorized by 37 states, the Federal Government, and the U.S. Military."



Not relevant but sure :pac:

ps i will no longer be bothering ye!

Scofflaw

turgon wrote: »

I know the NO side scaremonger Scofflaw - I know as a well as everyone!!!! I mean, the Cork Independant (in all its glory) proclaimed that a sub-clause of a sub-clause in the treaty allowed for execution! How ridiculous!

What im saying is that the NO scaremongering isnt there for everyone to see all the time!!! I know it is worse but its not as vocal.

The YES side aren't half as bad - but their problem is the Brian Cowen is on RTE NEWS every night saying the same thing. So although not as bad, it is getting into people heads slowly and their more likely to be affected by it.

Ah - fair enough. I would miss that, since I don't have a TV and my choice of radio (Lyric) is apolitical to say the least.

turgon wrote: »

As well, when people claim that Lisbon introduces a one child policy you can brush it off easily, but when Cowen says we will be the bane of Europe, well that just sticks.

Well, "bane of Europe" is a bit of an exaggeration. Tell me something, though - if the government, being rather closer to the Eu than the rest of us, genuinely felt that a No vote would have serious repercussions for Ireland, what would they be saying that is different from what they are saying?

cordially,
Scofflaw

turgon

Scofflaw wrote: »

Ah - fair enough. I would miss that, since I don't have a TV and my choice of radio (Lyric) is apolitical to say the least.

Are you serious or being sarcastic??? Its just your well informed...

Scofflaw wrote: »

Well, "bane of Europe" is a bit of an exaggeration. Tell me something, though - if the government, being rather closer to the Eu than the rest of us, genuinely felt that a No vote would have serious repercussions for Ireland, what would they be saying that is different from what they are saying?

"bane" is a bit harsh, but you know what I mean.

Well If the Government didn't agree with Lisbon, then they wouldn't have signed it last year. But even Government ministers have claimed that the treaty is "not perfect". I'm just saying that the way in which Cowen is pursuing his campaign, relentlessly pulling the "isolation card", one gets the impression that he is under pressure. Also, if the Treaty was gods gift to earth, why doesn't he talk about that?

Ok, maybe it is boring. Well in that case the EU leaders should have negotiated a really promising liberal Treaty, and made some huge leaps towards full and open democracy. Some of the stuff in this Treaty is dodgy. I mean you could talk about the "Citizens Initiative" 'til the cows come home. Until you realize (rather unsurprisingly) that the commission is only obliged to "consider" it.

Vinegar Hill

This would actually be funny if it were not so sad. Brian Cowen afterall is the man to say shortly after becoming Taoiseach that he would expel any FF TD that broke ranks with his stance (a YES vote) on Lisbon.

Is this actually how an elected official (My TD) supposed to act in an elected democracy? This sounds more like a dictatorship now. Who is doing the scaremongering here?

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cowen-to-kick-out-ff-treaty-rebels-1373861.html

oscarBravo

It's called a party whip. I'm not particularly enamoured of the idea, but it's nothing new or exclusive to Lisbon.

thebman

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

This would actually be funny if it were not so sad. Brian Cowen afterall is the man to say shortly after becoming Taoiseach that he would expel any FF TD that broke ranks with his stance (a YES vote) on Lisbon.

Is this actually how an elected official (My TD) supposed to act in an elected democracy? This sounds more like a dictatorship now. Who is doing the scaremongering here?

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cowen-to-kick-out-ff-treaty-rebels-1373861.html

You don't think Sinn Fein would kick out a party member for coming out and saying vote yes?

I'd say that's the least they would do and same for most of the other parties for members that go against what the party stance is.

The only difference is Brian cowen said it to the media IMO.

Vinegar Hill

brim4brim wrote: »

You don't think Sinn Fein would kick out a party member for coming out and saying vote yes?

I'd say that's the least they would do and same for most of the other parties for members that go against what the party stance is.

The only difference is Brian cowen said it to the media IMO.

The party stance? Cowen admits in the article that he hadn't even read the treaty yet or was familiar with it. So he seems to adapted an opinion from who knows where but what are the views of our elected TDs? I guess we will not know as Cowen has taken a stance and there will not be any debate on it.

oscarBravo

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

Cowen admits in the article that he hadn't even read the treaty yet or was familiar with it.

That's a pretty serious distortion of what he actually said.

... there will not be any debate on it.

Within the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party, no. There will be plenty of debate outside that rather small group of people.

turgon

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

This would actually be funny if it were not so sad. Brian Cowen afterall is the man to say shortly after becoming Taoiseach that he would expel any FF TD that broke ranks with his stance (a YES vote) on Lisbon.

Is this actually how an elected official (My TD) supposed to act in an elected democracy? This sounds more like a dictatorship now. Who is doing the scaremongering here?

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cowen-to-kick-out-ff-treaty-rebels-1373861.html

Yes, party TD's are quite tied down. I think its a cultural problem - if one big party allowed dissent it might go away. The greens certainly don't do business this way - I was at a meeting where Dan Boyle (Green Senator) was advocating yes while Chris O'Leary (Green Councilor) was pushing for a no. They're a good democratic party, but tainted by their image as "greenies"

Vinegar Hill

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's a pretty serious distortion of what he actually said. Within the Fianna Fáil parliamentary party, no. There will be plenty of debate outside that rather small group of people.

How is that a distortion of what he said? Here is the quote from the article when he made the threat.

He admitted he had not read the treaty "cover to cover", but insisted it was "not impenetrable".

So he chastised the TDs before he even knew what was said in the treaty.

Vinegar Hill

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

So he chastised the TDs before he even knew what was said in the treaty.

You are taking a huuuuuuuge leap there and an incorrect one.
Not having read the treaty as a finished book and knowing what is in the treaty when you are a government minister and cabinet member and especially finance minister are mutually exclusive concepts.

As a senior member of cabinet Cowen would have been there right through and privy to the negotiation process for Lisbon and the "constitution" for that matter.
Ergo it's incredible and wrong to suggest that he doesn't know what it's in it or the nitty gritty of what it's about.

oscarBravo

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

Cowen admits in the article that he hadn't even read the treaty yet or was familiar with it.

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

How is that a distortion of what he said? Here is the quote from the article when he made the threat.

He admitted he had not read the treaty "cover to cover", but insisted it was "not impenetrable".

So he chastised the TDs before he even knew what was said in the treaty.

Where did he say he wasn't familiar with it? Where did he say he didn't know what was said in the treaty?

You are aware that he was heavily involved in the drafting of the original Constitution when he was minister for foreign affairs?