Ahern considers presidency bid

bamboozle

how a man who has yet to receive a Tax Clearance Certificate from the Revenue Commissioners, who has been investigated by State Tribunals, whose legacy as Taoiseach sees the state burdened for years with the debts related to Anglo and the other banks considers himself fit for office just amazes me.

He is either completely dillusional or thinks there are enough idiots out there who will vote him into Aras An Uachtaran.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0908/breaking28.html

Cookie_Monster

****ing chancer, but many will be of the opinion that "he's a great man, he brought us all the Celtic tiger success" and that kind of drivel.

Can we vote -1 for him by any chance?

Nijmegen

Freudian slip, his quote is that he "accept his share of the blame for our economic crises", caption writer has it as "shame"

As if.

If he polled in contention for the Aras, it would say enough about Ireland and her people.

mike65

Somone will probably try to kill him on the campaign trial. Beware Bertie Beware!

Biggins

Well I'm contacting George Hook to lend him my support, what little is it then....

See: http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67897202&postcount=162

The Davestator

Yawn - another bertie bashing thread. zzzzzzz

The people giving out about Bertie are the very same people who gave out that there was not enough hand outs, tax reductions during the boom years.

If the opposition had of got their way about giveaway budgets, we'd be in a lot worse a situation.

Laminations

Bertie Ahern wrote:

"Of course the banking thing was wrong and of course they shouldn't have been using the wholesale interbank rate to get the money that they did," he said.

The banking thing? Makes it sound both trivial and poorly understood, ah shure begorrah its only the banking thing, whatever that is


And the dirty cvnt is still blaming Lehmans?

Bertie wrote:

"The reality is I left this country in a state where we had low national debt, where we had full employment, low taxes and I didn't foresee Lehman's coming down and the rules changing," he said.

Liam Byrne

The Davestator wrote: »

Yawn - another bertie bashing thread. zzzzzzz

Yawn - yet another post that inexplicably terms "justified objections & criticisms" as "bashing". :rolleyes:

The Davestator wrote: »

The people giving out about Bertie are the very same people who gave out that there was not enough hand outs, tax reductions during the boom years.

Well, I can't speak for others who have posted, but now that I've posted, the above observation is false.

Mind you, considering that the same Ahern reassured people who were worried about the strong possibility of an oncoming crash, why wouldn't they ask for more handouts and giveaways ? After all, unless Ahern was lying, there was nothing wrong and the "boom was just going to get boomier" ?

So the buck stops with him *.

* Indeed, quite a few of them did, apparently

"Of course the banking thing was wrong and of course they shouldn't have been using the wholesale interbank rate to get the money that they did," he said.

Hmmmm.....people getting money that they shouldn't have......odd for Ahern to object to that......maybe he has changed ?

"The reality is I left this country in a state where we had low national debt, where we had full employment, low taxes and I didn't foresee Lehman's coming down and the rules changing," he said.

Plenty scope for a decent audio editor to ditch the bull**** spin and correct his statement - just by pressing stop at the right time.

Persiancowboy

He won't even get the Fianna Fáil nomination.....

Biggins

I love the way in that nice article that Bertie manages to never mention his own personal antics - like they didn't happen or exist and to be non-mentioned and glossed over!

Sorry Bertie, someone us are not the sheep you want us to be and we do not forget EVERY aspect of your time as an elected person.

bamboozle

The Davestator wrote: »

Yawn - another bertie bashing thread. zzzzzzz

The people giving out about Bertie are the very same people who gave out that there was not enough hand outs, tax reductions during the boom years.

If the opposition had of got their way about giveaway budgets, we'd be in a lot worse a situation.[/QUOTE]

could we be in a worse situation??????

Biggins

bamboozle wrote: »

...could we be in a worse situation??????

Stop keeping an eye on FF and its members - we'd soon find out!

Wolfe Tone

Would rather him than Norris. Hopefully Gerry Adams will go for it.

Bjorn Bored.

this shyster has some cheek,honestly he is not teflon bertie,this stuff has well and truly stuck, such a wan..r

Liam Byrne

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Would rather him than Norris.

Why ? Norris might be a bit too camp for my liking and have an irritating accent, but at least he's not a dodgy con-man and hasn't led us into ruin.

PeterIanStaker

The trouble is, as I've said before, there would be people stupid enough to vote for him, and also he has paid cheerleaders/jesters in the Seanad to mount a PR campaign and smear rivals. Democracy FF-Style.

Nijmegen

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Would rather him than Norris. Hopefully Gerry Adams will go for it.

Would rather Ahern to Norris? Why? Because Norris seemingly has a head on his shoulders and has a bank account like the rest of us?

Wolfe Tone

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Why ? Norris might be a bit too camp for my liking and have an irritating accent, but at least he's not a dodgy con-man and hasn't led us into ruin.

Nijmegen wrote: »

Would rather Ahern to Norris? Why? Because Norris seemingly has a head on his shoulders and has a bank account like the rest of us?

Solely because of his views on the 1916 men and the role the president will play in the 2016 celebrations(it will be the biggest thing the next president will have to do) will not be one suited to Norris.

apoeiguq3094y

Biggins wrote: »

I love the way in that nice article that Bertie manages to never mention his own personal antics - like they didn't happen or exist and to be non-mentioned and glossed over!.

Yes, especially after those tribunals concluded that he was corrupt. Oh wait, they didn't.

Funny the way all these claims faded away as soon as the media pushed him out of office.

Noffles

There are thousands of IDIOTS that'll vote for him simply because they recognise his name... mindless plebs!

Biggins

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Solely because of his views on the 1916 men and the role the president will play in the 2016 celebrations(it will be the biggest thing the next president will have to do) will not be one suited to Norris.

You mean Bertie and his party? The supposed "Republican party" that they used to stick on their posters (when it was a PR winner) till it became not politically correct and inconvenient?
(Then they reduced the font size and in some cases dropped it altogether)

Yes, these are the people I want to stand as president of our state - NOT!

FF, Bertie and his ilk have mastered the art of telling us what we want to hear, when we want to hear it - then doing the exact opposite themselves.

This man representing the state - if we see him elected, we deserve to be the laughing stock of Europe for his office term.

Liam Byrne

apoeiguq3094y wrote: »

Yes, especially after those tribunals concluded that he was corrupt. Oh wait, they didn't.

Now that you mention it, it's funny how those tribunals didn't actually conclude at all despite promises that they'd report "in early 2010".

apoeiguq3094y wrote: »

Funny the way all these claims faded away as soon as the media pushed him out of office.

He was guilty of conduct unbecoming and had put the office into disrepute. Personally speaking (and actually, legally speaking, since he doesn't have a tax clearance cert) he shouldn't even be a TD, so they should have kept pushing.

Biggins

apoeiguq3094y wrote: »

Yes, especially after those tribunals concluded that he was corrupt. Oh wait, they didn't.

Funny the way all these claims faded away as soon as the media pushed him out of office.

Aaa... if you bother to check your facts, you will learn that the tribunals were restricted by those in power by they tightening the terms of reference so that other areas could not be investigated further (I wonder why! :rolleyes: )

...And besides, there was enough in the Tribunals exposed already to showed the schite type of character Bertie was/is!


Go try spin that FF PR crap elsewhere. It don't wash on some of us here.

Wolfe Tone

Biggins wrote: »

You mean Bertie and his party? The supposed "Republican party" that they used to stick on their posters (when it was a PR winner) till it became not politically correct and inconvenient?
(Then they reduced the font size and in some cases dropped it altogether)

Yes, these are the people I want to stand as president of our state - NOT!

FF, Bertie and his ilk have mastered the art of telling us what we want to hear, when we want to hear it - then doing the exact opposite themselves.

This man representing the state - if we see him elected, we deserve to be the laughing stock of Europe for his office term.

We wont be a laughing stock if we elect a man who hates the founding fathers of our state and blasts them as terrorists? Who wants to rejoin the commonwealth? And ask that man to lead the country in celebrating the 2016 celebrations?

Now I admit Bertie aint the best pick, but I would rather him over Norris. Not that I want Bertie at all, but if it came down to a straight pick....

Biggins

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

...if it came down to a straight pick....

Is that a gay thing?

Can you say exact why not Norris beside maybe a gay issue you might have?

I take it you want the best for your state, such is your patriotism.
Why in gods name then would you EVER want to put at its head, a VERY questionable, person who clearly operates with two faces!

kmick

Boringly he would probably win. I am already hearing lines from FF supporters like "I'll probably vote for FF because I want them to clean up the mess they made themselves". FFs greatest weapon is still Enda Kenny.

Norris is too politically vocal for president. They have to pick someone who has a strong opinion on nothing. I mean Robinson was considered a radical before she made president.

Wolfe Tone

Biggins wrote: »

Is that a gay thing?

Can you say exact why not Norris beside maybe a gay issue you might have?

I take it you want the best for your state, such is your patriotism.
Why in gods name then would you EVER want to put at its head, a VERY questionable, person who clearly operates with two faces!

Clear off with that implication. I meant a straight pick between either Ahern or Norris.

Solely because of his views on the 1916 men and the role the president will play in the 2016 celebrations(it will be the biggest thing the next president will have to do) will not be one suited to Norris

Miss that bit in your attempt to label me a homophobic? I expected better Biggins. How dare you. Thats absolute bullsh!t.

I don't want a man who labels the 1916 men as terrorists and a person who hates them to be leading the nation during the centenary celebrations.
Understand?

charlemont

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Would rather him than Norris. Hopefully Gerry Adams will go for it.

gerry adams would make a great president but the establishment would hate him

Liam Byrne

The centenary of this country is 2049.

charlemont wrote: »

gerry adams would make a great president but the establishment would hate him

How a man who doesn't even recognise the country as a country, with his "twenty-shix-contease" bull, could be a candidate for president of it is beyond me.

jmayo

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Would rather him than Norris. Hopefully Gerry Adams will go for it.

So lets see you would rather a guy who lied, ran the country into the ground, hid behind the skirt of a woman than Norris.
Then to add insult to injury you would like a supporter and condoner of murder to get the job.

BTW it wasn't just murder of supposed legitimate targets like the awful "foreign invaders", the British army or their "puppet regime's forces", RUC and UDR, but it was the murder of peace officers of this very state.

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Solely because of his views on the 1916 men and the role the president will play in the 2016 celebrations(it will be the biggest thing the next president will have to do) will not be one suited to Norris.

I believe you are a young poster so I will forgive you.
With the way this state is going there won't be the money for your big anticipated 1916 celebrations.

The biggest thing the president will be doing is disolving the Dáil after it falls due to us defaulting.

timespast

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Clear off with that implication. I meant a straight pick between either Ahern or Norris.



Miss that bit in your attempt to label me a homophobic? I expected better Biggins. How dare you. Thats absolute bullsh!t.

I don't want a man who labels the 1916 men as terrorists and a person who hates them to be leading the nation during the centenary celebrations.
Understand?

I hadn't given thought on 2016 and Norris......He'd probably demand to wear a poppy.

Thinking on this a bit more.......there isn't a chance of Norris being elected as President.

Biggins

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Clear off with that implication. I meant a straight pick between either Ahern or Norris.

Miss that bit in your attempt to label me a homophobic? I expected better Biggins. How dare you. Thats absolute bullsh!t.

It wasn't attempt to call you homophobic and if it appeared that way, I apologise unreservedly.

I was worried however by your wording, the way it came across - thus my wondering about it.
Thats all!

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I don't want a man who labels the 1916 men as terrorists and a person who hates them to be leading the nation during the centenary celebrations.
Understand?

I didn't know he did that - and if that hold to be true, nor would I want him to be president because of that fact, either.
(Some of my past relatives died in 1916 by the way)

No argument there.

Mr.Micro

Leaving the post of President vacant would be far better than voting for that vile little man Ahern.....who would have his pals and his circle wining and dining at our expense and the country would truly become a banana republic. It makes me go cold at the prospect.

woysworld

bamboozle wrote: »

how a man who has yet to receive a Tax Clearance Certificate from the Revenue Commissioners, who has been investigated by State Tribunals, whose legacy as Taoiseach sees the state burdened for years with the debts related to Anglo and the other banks considers himself fit for office just amazes me.

He is either completely dillusional or thinks there are enough idiots out there who will vote him into Aras An Uachtaran.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0908/breaking28.html

"He is either completely dillusional or thinks there are enough idiots out there who will vote him into Aras An Uachtaran"

the problem is both of the above. he is SO out of touch wit the "real world", AND there just may be enough IDIOTS in this country who would vote for him..:mad::mad::mad::mad:
v

Wolfe Tone

jmayo wrote: »

So lets see you would rather a guy who lied, ran the country into the ground, hid behind the skirt of a woman than Norris.
Then to add insult to injury you would like a supporter and condoner of murder to get the job.

BTW it wasn't just murder of supposed legitimate targets like the awful "foreign invaders", the British army or their "puppet regime's forces", RUC and UDR, but it was the murder of peace officers of this very state.

I know perfectly well what the troubles involved. Perhaps you also know the huge role Gerry Adams played in pulling the vast majority of his followers away from the armalite?

I believe you are a young poster so I will forgive you.
With the way this state is going there won't be the money for your big anticipated 1916 celebrations.

The biggest thing the president will be doing is disolving the Dáil after it falls due to us defaulting.

Thats right, because in 1966 we were rolling in the cash.

Biggins wrote: »

It wasn't attempt to call you homophobic and if it appeared that way, I apologise unreservedly.

I was worried however by your wording, the way it came across - thus my wondering about it.
Thats all!

It did appear that way Biggins, I accept the apology lets say no more about it

I didn't know he did that - and if that hold to be true, nor would I want him to be president because of that fact, either.
(Some of my past relatives died in 1916 by the way)

No argument there.

He did do that and it is unfortunately true, hence I do not want him as the president. What I was saying was if I was FORCED to pick one or the other I would pick Ahern. Not that I want either of them!

Biggins

So besides Bertie and Norris.... Who is there as real possible alternatives?

mikemac

Michael D Higgins will get support

I do reckon he'll be a candidate and will do well in the election

imme

The Davestator wrote: »

Yawn - another bertie bashing thread. zzzzzzz

The people giving out about Bertie are the very same people who gave out that there was not enough hand outs, tax reductions during the boom years.

If the opposition had of got their way about giveaway budgets, we'd be in a lot worse a situation.

I guess we were lucky to be blessed with such a genius, when you think about it.:pac:
Pull the other one, please.:rolleyes:

What are these giveaways of the Opposition of which you refer. Here's an article from the Examiner in the aftermath of Budget 2005. Now, who's fooling who?
http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2005/12/08/story510278099.asp

Wolfe Tone

Biggins wrote: »

So besides Bertie and Norris.... Who is there as real possible alternatives?

I don't know Biggins, I would like Gerry Adams to go for it, but there is no way he could win unless what SF have called for(people in Ulster being allowed to vote for the president) happens. Which is unlikely.

j1974

that makes me so angry that my rage affects my verbal capacity to articulate feelings into acceptable grammer. the fvckin cvnt!!!! And the tubridys of this world pat him on the back and tell'em, "ah dats our bertie, sure you're an awfull chancer just the same, ah ta be sure ta be sure"

I need to lie down. I'd love hook to give it to him live on air. ahhhhh hookey, the lesser of many evils!

Coillte_Bhoy

Liam Byrne wrote: »

The centenary of this country is 2049.

In your opinion. Many see it as 1916, 1921 or 1937. I fail to see why you need to bring that up in this thread anyway.

mikemac

Liam Byrne wrote: »

The centenary of this country is 2049.

Tbh you could just as easily say 2048 as the relevant bill was Government of Ireland Act 1948

Yes, introduced in 1949 but legislation takes time and John A Costello declared the governments intention in 1948

So 1949 in your opinion and other people are going to pick 1916

timespast

feelingstressed wrote: »

Michael D Higgins will get support

I do reckon he'll be a candidate and will do well in the election

15% for Higgins and he would be doing well.

I've discussed with many the idea of him being President....... all I usually get is a grin and a shake of the head.

Biggins

feelingstressed wrote: »

Tbh you could just as easily say 2048 as the relevant bill was Government of Ireland Act 1948

Yes, introduced in 1949 but legislation takes time and John A Costello declared the governments intention in 1948

So 1949 in your opinion and other people are going to pick 1916

We going off topic but to surmise, its all down to lack of lazy clarity.

The centenary of the Rising is...
The centenary of the official legal founding of the state is...
Etc...

When these things are spoken of, more clarity should be used.

Anyway, back to Bertie and "sure he's a grand chap..." :pac:

stbrennan

David Norris all the way...

bamboozle

it'll be interesting who FG will nominate for presidency,

i'd vote for O'Higgins, Hook or Norris or anyone from FG ahead of Bertie.

although as said above i can already see bertie being wheeled out onto the late late show where tubridy will portray him as santa claus with pathetic pandering questions

mikemac

Well I was responding to "The centenary of this country is "
Yep, off topic

Michael D all the way! :pac:

bamboozle wrote: »

i'd vote for O'Higgins

Ah come on, that's not his name

Biggins

bamboozle wrote: »

it'll be interesting who FG will nominate for presidency,

i'd vote for O'Higgins, Hook or Norris or anyone from FG ahead of Bertie.

although as said above i can already see bertie being wheeled out onto the late late show where tubridy will portray him as santa claus with pathetic pandering questions

Maybe a poll is called for with a few viable names?
Can I vote for Dustin?

Wolfe Tone

Biggins wrote: »

Maybe a poll is called for with a few viable names?

Good idea.

raymon

The Davestator wrote: »

The people giving out about Bertie are the very same people who gave out that there was not enough hand outs, tax reductions during the boom years.

.

Dont include me in your theory - I dislike bertie because he is a old dishonest failed politician with a track record of dodgy acts

I work for my money and I hate bertie more than anyone on handouts .

In fact Ivor and Bertie were sponging off my taxes for years - straight into their pockets

Scumbags

Guy:Incognito

Biggins wrote: »

I love the way in that nice article that Bertie manages to never mention his own personal antics - like they didn't happen or exist and to be non-mentioned and glossed over!

Sorry Bertie, someone us are not the sheep you want us to be and we do not forget EVERY aspect of your time as an elected person.

How many politicians running for any office mention the bad stuff they've done