Being Devils advocate

K_user

Ok, please don’t start a flame war attack on me!

FG haven’t really been in power for many years. And for most of that time all they’ve done is try and discredit FF. Can they handle the pressure of being in office?

The best example is our nearest neighbours in the UK, who have just gone through a similar government swap around. People expected one side to be slaughtered in the election and they weren’t. They expected things to get better once the new lads were in charge…well we’ve watched student riots, VAT increases, people having to leave their governmental posts…and that is just in the past few months.

The thing is that its easy being in opposition. You can say what you want. You can play to the media. But its very different once you are in the hot seat.

I know that there are people out there that fully blame FF for every problem in the country, and they are entitled to that opinion, but its simply not the case. The banks, the huge mortgages, multinationals moving to places like China, the huge loans given out to the g*b****he developers, the general world recession, will still exist no matter who is in charge.

If FG and Labour do take over, then they will have to make good on their promises. They will have to make changes. And the first thing they try to cut will result in strikes and bad press. Just look at England.

The Volt

Both parties have been very clear that due to the monumental mess made by the current crowd, tough decisions have to be made. neither will be promising the sun, the moon and the stars to the electorate.

dango

K_user wrote: »

Ok, please don’t start a flame war attack on me!

FG haven’t really been in power for many years. And for most of that time all they’ve done is try and discredit FF What else could they do?. Can they handle the pressure of being in office? We'll find out soon enough. But for what reasons would they not? Couldn't get much worse.

The best example is our nearest neighbours in the UK, who have just gone through a similar government swap around. People expected one side to be slaughtered in the election and they weren’t. They expected things to get better once the new lads were in charge…well we’ve watched student riots, VAT increases, people having to leave their governmental posts…and that is just in the past few months. How could things get so much better immediately? Cleaning up the mess after previous governments takes time and requires certain measures. It can't happen overnight. I see FF as an extremely corrupt self-serving political party who put their interests ahead of the wellbeing of the country. I don't believe they should run the country.

The thing is that its easy being in opposition. You can say what you want. You can play to the media. But its very different once you are in the hot seat. Seriously what could FG do that's worse than what FF have done to the country?

I know that there are people out there that fully blame FF for every problem in the country, and they are entitled to that opinion, but its simply not the case. The banks, the huge mortgages, multinationals moving to places like China, the huge loans given out to the g*b****he developers, the general world recession, will still exist no matter who is in charge.

If FG and Labour do take over, then they will have to make good on their promises. I should hope so They will have to make changes Bloody right. And the first thing they try to cut will result in strikes and bad press. Just look at England. Sorting out disasterous policy decisions takes a lot of time, People are so quick to pounce when in reality they're trying to bring the country back to economic stability. But people get notions and decide that the new crowd are useless without considering the situation and then myopically bring back the old crowd.

.

Leiva

The first party that tells me they are placing experts into certain portfolios have my vote.
Barrack is doing exactly this in the States .

These "experts" don't need to have any political clout but I want to see a party get as much professional advisors in key positions (eg) finance, and not be listening to the old guard of civil servants that have seen numerous Govt come and go.

M

Gael23

No party can wave a magic wand and sort all the countrys problems, thats for certain. But with the right policies and people things will begin to change. Fine Gael will do what mixednut said and appoint experts to certain ministries. For instance, the minister for health woud be a doctor.

K_user

ryanf1 wrote: »

For instance, the minister for health woud be a doctor.

GOD FOR BID!!!!!

That would be like putting a banker in charge of the banks!

The higher up the food chain a doctor goes the more they get paid and the less they actually do. But a nurse in charge, they are used to hard graft.

ryanf1 wrote: »

No party can wave a magic wand and sort all the countrys problems, thats for certain. But with the right policies and people things will begin to change. Fine Gael will do what mixednut said and appoint experts to certain ministries. For instance, the minister for health woud be a doctor.

But its finding the right policies. Technically, and for all we know, FF may have had the right policies, but it hasn't worked in the long term.

Just comparing Ireland to England leaves a bad taste in my mouth - and they weren't in as much do-do as our goodselves. Perhaps I'm being a little "glass half full" here, but I do wonder if in a years time we will be watching strikes, protests and red faces...

K_user

mixednuts wrote: »

The first party that tells me they are placing experts into certain portfolios have my vote.
Barrack is doing exactly this in the States .

These "experts" don't need to have any political clout but I want to see a party get as much professional advisors in key positions (eg) finance, and not be listening to the old guard of civil servants that have seen numerous Govt come and go.

M

There are already a raft of "experts" and "advisers" involved in the Government, they didn't exactly do a sterling job did they?

K_user

dango wrote: »

"Couldn't get much worse"

Well actually yes, it could, it could get alot worse.

dango wrote: »

Cleaning up the mess after previous governments takes time and requires certain measures

Well politics is a funny thing. Anything that the previous party did right is ignored and taken for granted, anything thing that they did wrong is blown up and displayed for all to see.

Expect many months of "its not our fault, blame the last lot". Which is to be expected. But thats really not where I'm coming from.

Buceph

ryanf1 wrote: »

For instance, the minister for health woud be a doctor.

What clue would a doctor, whose expertise is in treating medical concerns, have in regard to operating a hospital of hundreds of staff, medical and non-medical, ranging from interns, consultants, surgeons, nurses, rehab nurses, pharmacists, occupational therapists, psychiatrists, inventory control specialists, cleaners, cafeteria workers, porters, receptionists, etc. or a Health Service with multiples of a singles hospitals staff. Doctors wouldn't have the training or experience to deal with that. It'd appease the Joe Duffy brigade, but when a doctor who knows how to treat acute appendicitis screws up the billions set aside for the health service it'll be the same story all over again.

What is needed is experts in management, experts from private industry who have a proven track record in restructuring industries where they have to be successful or everyone loses their job. And government is there to make sure that these experts are kept grounded in public concerns.

I somehow doubt there's many doctors who would want to run a hospital, they'd be smart enough to know they're not capable of it.

iamwhoiam

Look at the mess a doctor made of the HSE.Drumm was a great consultant but that gave him no insight into the running of a business .

K_user

Buceph wrote: »

What is needed is experts in management, experts from private industry who have a proven track record in restructuring industries where they have to be successful or everyone loses their job. And government is there to make sure that these experts are kept grounded in public concerns.

Couldn't agree more. Unfortunately these people come at a cost. And there will be up roar if some businessmen are getting paid a fortune when there are closed wards in the hospitals.

Its the same old trap that they always fall into.

Magi11

Voltwad wrote: »

Both parties have been very clear that due to the monumental mess made by the current crowd, tough decisions have to be made. neither will be promising the sun, the moon and the stars to the electorate.

If FF were in opposition, they would be promising the sun, moon and stars. It's in their DNA. But it's only because it always worked for them and they regard the electorate as a bunch of muppets. The proposed Cabinet reshuffle is proof of this.

jmayo

K_user wrote: »

Ok, please don’t start a flame war attack on me!

FG haven’t really been in power for many years. And for most of that time all they’ve done is try and discredit FF. Can they handle the pressure of being in office?


The best example is our nearest neighbours in the UK, who have just gone through a similar government swap around. People expected one side to be slaughtered in the election and they weren’t. They expected things to get better once the new lads were in charge…well we’ve watched student riots, VAT increases, people having to leave their governmental posts…and that is just in the past few months.

The thing is that its easy being in opposition. You can say what you want. You can play to the media. But its very different once you are in the hot seat.

I know that there are people out there that fully blame FF for every problem in the country, and they are entitled to that opinion, but its simply not the case. The banks, the huge mortgages, multinationals moving to places like China, the huge loans given out to the g*b****he developers, the general world recession, will still exist no matter who is in charge.

If FG and Labour do take over, then they will have to make good on their promises. They will have to make changes. And the first thing they try to cut will result in strikes and bad press. Just look at England.

So I guess you will be voting ff. :rolleyes:

BTW you forgot to mention Lehmans in your list of excuses

K_user

jmayo wrote: »

So I guess you will be voting ff. :rolleyes:

BTW you forgot to mention Lehmans in your list of excuses

And the flaming begins?

Did you read the opening line?

Did you read any of the post in fact, or did you just focus one one line, draw your own conclusions and then leap in guns blazing?

It would be nice if you could restrain from putting words in my mouth. :rolleyes:

Let us all remember a golden rule here on politics: Attack the post, not the poster

elguapo

K_user wrote: »

I know that there are people out there that fully blame FF for every problem in the country, and they are entitled to that opinion, but its simply not the case. The banks, the huge mortgages, multinationals moving to places like China, the huge loans given out to the g*b****he developers, the general world recession, will still exist no matter who is in charge.

The banking problem exists at least in part because the government used the oul' "light touch/f**k all" regulation to ensure the banks could do what they wanted. That, in turn, lead to the huge mortgages and the loans given out to gob****e developers. Those problems exist because the government aided and abetted the banks in their gross irresponsiblity.

By the way when you say these problems "will still exist no matter who would be in charge", it's the equivalent of Biffo saying "we are where we are".

jmayo

K_user wrote: »

And the flaming begins?

Did you read the opening line?

Did you read any of the post in fact, or did you just focus one one line, draw your own conclusions and then leap in guns blazing?

It would be nice if you could restrain from putting words in my mouth. :rolleyes:

Yes I did and then I read your post which contains some of the usual ff claptrap that is aimed at FG/Labour and some of it aimed at all us non ffers.

K_user wrote: »

...
FG haven’t really been in power for many years. And for most of that time all they’ve done is try and discredit FF. Can they handle the pressure of being in office?

Ok first typical ff attack.
"They haven't done anything bar attack us and our policies." meaning that they have no policies.
FFS you use the word discredit.
ff have done that all by themselves and only ffer would fail to see that.

K_user wrote: »

The thing is that its easy being in opposition. You can say what you want. You can play to the media. But its very different once you are in the hot seat.

Oh once again bring in fear of FG & Labour having no experience of government and how they are playing to media, which is probably aimed at Gilmore and Labour.
You forgot the line how "ff have been making the hard decisions".

K_user wrote: »

I know that there are people out there that fully blame FF for every problem in the country, and they are entitled to that opinion, but its simply not the case. The banks, the huge mortgages, multinationals moving to places like China, the huge loans given out to the g*b****he developers, the general world recession, will still exist no matter who is in charge.

Ah yes lets try and make sure we drag everything into this to make it look less likely that ff were primarily at fault.
The only truth in your statement is that yes we will still be in sh** no matter who wins and it is an uphill struggle.
But that comment reads like some of the list of excuses trotted out by ff about everything/everyone bar themselves conspired to create our problems.

K_user wrote: »

If FG and Labour do take over, then they will have to make good on their promises. They will have to make changes. And the first thing they try to cut will result in strikes and bad press. Just look at England.

Again the questioning doubtful tone about FG and Labour.
Then try and drag in how the new guys in UK did not revolutionise things overnight, but things have gotten worse for some.
Of course play on the fear factor about riots and such.

Now forgive me for being skeptical and cynical about your post when it has a lot of the hallmarks of the usual tripe being pedalled by ffers around here. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

One of the things I will do around here is try and highlight all the supposed objective "not a ff supporter, but" posters who try and palm themselves off as objective yet are still spouting the party line in an effort to influence opinion for the party.

I actually have more respect for the ones who state their preference rather than sneakly try and pass themselves off as something else.

Maybe I am wrong about you, but your writing style leads to me think otherwise.
Maybe I am seeing ffers under the bed ?
Maybe not.

You may call that flaming, I call it questioning the motive.

T runner

jmayo wrote: »

Yes I did and then I read your post which contains some of the usual ff claptrap that is aimed at FG/Labour and some of it aimed at all us non ffers.
.......You may call that flaming, I call it questioning the motive.

2 Questions: Why did FG promise economic growth of 4.5% in the 2007 electiona nd how could they hope to achieve this without sustaining the property bubble?

Very interested in an honest reply with integrity.

K_user

elguapo wrote: »

The banking problem exists at least in part because the government used the oul' "light touch/f**k all" regulation to ensure the banks could do what they wanted. That, in turn, lead to the huge mortgages and the loans given out to gob****e developers. Those problems exist because the government aided and abetted the banks in their gross irresponsiblity.

I would completely agree with that, apart from one small thing.

Had FF interjected with how people where getting loans and how the loans where being handled, they would have been told to F** off and mind their own business.

K_user

jmayo wrote: »

Ok first typical ff attack.
....
...
...
You may call that flaming, I call it questioning the motive

So basically you have come made up your mind on what I believe and are attacking based on that fact alone.

Could it possibly be that I, here on a chat forum, could be looking at our nearest neighbours, who have recently gone through a similar change over and are now going through hard hard times, and I felt like talking about it?

Logically speaking going from opposition to being in control is difficult. Its like going from being a babysitter, to being a parent.

Logically speaking there will be massive pressure on whoever takes over.

Logically speaking there is always more to a problem than the easiest thing to spot.

My "writing style" is more to do how you choose to read things and nothing to do with my intentions or motives.

I asked for no "flaming" to avoid this exact sort of conversation. Guess it was a bit much to ask for.

jmayo

T runner wrote: »

2 Questions: Why did FG promise economic growth of 4.5% in the 2007 electiona nd how could they hope to achieve this without sustaining the property bubble?

Very interested in an honest reply with integrity.

Are you quesitioning my integrity ?
I have never been a ff voter so that might say something about my integrity, what about yourself ?

Right to try to answer your questions.

I think you'll find that most parties manifestos were based on figures provided by the DoF and stipulated on certain expected growth rates.

Trying to find copy of old manifestos is hard, but one snippet from their (and Labours) manifesto was to have some pro-active approaches to using tax incentives to drive innovation in Irish economy.
"We will introduce further tax measures to make investment in high-tech, export-oriented Irish firms more attractive to investors. We will increase direct State support for the development of the Irish venture capital (VC) industry through Enterprise Ireland,"

I don't recall anything about sustaining building industry.
I do know FG wanted to drop stamp duty for FTBs, but that was to help FTBs on ladder rather than keep the invesment craze in property going.

Sadly the 2007 election became an indulgment in auction politics as ff and the newly socialist convert bertie had been firing money at everything in an effort to get relected after the 2004 locals/Europeans.
FG and the others started trying to out bid them to a degree in an effort to compete, hence some of the proposals.
I would also say that a lot of the electorate did not want to hear warnings and thus any party that would have issued warnings would have been ignored and have lost seats.

Anyway I get where you are going and once again it is whataboutery.
Fact is, no matter how you or anyone else spins it, ff were in control of our economy during the bubble and during the meltdown.

Trying to claim FG, Labour, SF or anyone else would have done the same or worse is engaing in what ifs, without any conclusive proof.
If you just engage in facts then ff are the political party primarily to blame for the mess we now find ourselves in and the opposition parties are way down the pecking order with regard blame.

And no I don't hold them responsible for every single thing, but they have to take the lions share of the blame since it has been on their watch, no one elses.

T runner

jmayo wrote: »

Are you quesitioning my integrity ?
I have never been a ff voter so that might say something about my integrity, what about yourself ?

By "integrity and honest" i meant answering the question directly about FG without attacking FF or their supporters.

Are you implying that anybody who has ever voted for FF has no integrity?
How dare you! What self righteous arrogance.

I think you'll find that most parties manifestos were based on figures provided by the DoF and stipulated on certain expected growth rates.

FGs growth rate was actually greater than figures provided. There are also plenty of independent sources of data. The figures showing the extent of the property bubble were there for all to see. It made little impression on FG. This means that they no more saw the danger than the government did.

Trying to find copy of old manifestos is hard, but one snippet from their (and Labours) manifesto was to have some pro-active approaches to using tax incentives to drive innovation in Irish economy.

"We will introduce further tax measures to make investment in high-tech, export-oriented Irish firms more attractive to investors. We will increase direct State support for the development of the Irish venture capital (VC) industry through Enterprise Ireland,"

Reducing taxes meant that they would still rely on taxes from the property boom which meant that they were relying on the property bubble to continue to supply the bulk of the states revenue. Ergo they saw no danger in continuing the property bubble.

I don't recall anything about sustaining building industry.
I do know FG wanted to drop stamp duty for FTBs, but that was to help FTBs on ladder rather than keep the invesment craze in property going.

And it would have the effect of encouraging more house purchases, making Irish banks borrow more to lend to developers, excarbating the upcoming crises.

There is no soft landing from a property bubble never.
It is not a question of not sustaining the bubble. To avert the crises it was a question of bursting it. Otherwise you ahve an identical policy of FFs hoping for a soft landing obliviuous to the tsunami approaching.

Sadly the 2007 election became an indulgment in auction politics as ff and the newly socialist convert bertie had been firing money at everything in an effort to get relected after the 2004 locals/Europeans.

All the parties indulged in this. Including integrity bulging FG?

FG and the others started trying to out bid them to a degree in an effort to compete, hence some of the proposals.

So FG LIED to the Irish people? Wheres the integrity in that?

I would also say that a lot of the electorate did not want to hear warnings and thus any party that would have issued warnings would have been ignored and have lost seats.

Ah. It wasnt FG being misleading people it was the irish people forcing FG into it.

Anyway I get where you are going and once again it is whataboutery.

No, we have an election coming up. Why should people vote for a party whose policies in 2007 would have us in a deeper pickle than FFs policies?

I know you view anything other than outright insults on FF and their supporters as whataboutery but FG must show us that they can do better. Their policies in 2007 indicate the opposite. This puts the integrity of FGs position in question and demonstrates that at best they lied to the Irish people in 2007 and at worst they would have pursued even more disastrous policies than FF had they been el;ected then.

Fact is, no matter how you or anyone else spins it, ff were in control of our economy during the bubble and during the meltdown.

And FGs policies indicate that had they been in charge they would have pursued similar if not worse policies.

Trying to claim FG, Labour, SF or anyone else would have done the same or worse is engaing in what ifs, without any conclusive proof.

FGs predictions for growth and policies in 2007 indicate that they did not see the crises coming either and would have pursued equally disastrous policies as the economy fell over the cliff.

FF were in charge and must be punished. It seems FG got a lucky escape by not winnning the last election and their self righteous pontifications about the crises seem disingenuos given their policies in 2007.

If you just engage in facts then ff are the political party primarily to blame for the mess we now find ourselves in and the opposition parties are way down the pecking order with regard blame.

Because they were in power. But according to FGs own policies Ireland would have fallen over the cliff no matter who was in power. That indicates that the problem may not have been particular to FF and that FG should also be punished for proposing policies of government that would have equally ruined Ireland.

And no I don't hold them responsible for every single thing, but they have to take the lions share of the blame since it has been on their watch, no one elses.

If FG proposed policies similar to FF then they should not be in power either.
The fact taht they are acting in such a self rightoeus manner about the crash indicates dishonesty and more hoodwinking of the Irish people.

jmayo

T runner wrote: »

By "integrity and honest" i meant answering the question directly about FG without attacking FF or their supporters.

Are you implying that anybody who has ever voted for FF has no integrity?
How dare you! What self righteous arrogance.

FGs growth rate was actually greater than figures provided. There are also plenty of independent sources of data. The figures showing the extent of the property bubble were there for all to see. It made little impression on FG. This means that they no more saw the danger than the government did.




Reducing taxes meant that they would still rely on taxes from the property boom which meant that they were relying on the property bubble to continue to supply the bulk of the states revenue. Ergo they saw no danger in continuing the property bubble.



And it would have the effect of encouraging more house purchases, making Irish banks borrow more to lend to developers, excarbating the upcoming crises.

There is no soft landing from a property bubble never.
It is not a question of not sustaining the bubble. To avert the crises it was a question of bursting it. Otherwise you ahve an identical policy of FFs hoping for a soft landing obliviuous to the tsunami approaching.



All the parties indulged in this. Including integrity bulging FG?


So FG LIED to the Irish people? Wheres the integrity in that?



Ah. It wasnt FG being misleading people it was the irish people forcing FG into it.



No, we have an election coming up. Why should people vote for a party whose policies in 2007 would have us in a deeper pickle than FFs policies?

I know you view anything other than outright insults on FF and their supporters as whataboutery but FG must show us that they can do better. Their policies in 2007 indicate the opposite. This puts the integrity of FGs position in question and demonstrates that at best they lied to the Irish people in 2007 and at worst they would have pursued even more disastrous policies than FF had they been el;ected then.



And FGs policies indicate that had they been in charge they would have pursued similar if not worse policies.



FGs predictions for growth and policies in 2007 indicate that they did not see the crises coming either and would have pursued equally disastrous policies as the economy fell over the cliff.

FF were in charge and must be punished. It seems FG got a lucky escape by not winnning the last election and their self righteous pontifications about the crises seem disingenuos given their policies in 2007.




Because they were in power. But according to FGs own policies Ireland would have fallen over the cliff no matter who was in power. That indicates that the problem may not have been particular to FF and that FG should also be punished for proposing policies of government that would have equally ruined Ireland.



If FG proposed policies similar to FF then they should not be in power either.
The fact taht they are acting in such a self rightoeus manner about the crash indicates dishonesty and more hoodwinking of the Irish people.

#Since you are doing such a good job of defending ff, I take then you are going to vote ff.


Oh and BTW, if you voted for a party led by haughey or ahern then I do claim you do not have integrity.
I have never questioned why people voted for a lynch, Lemass or even reynolds led ff, but the other two had enough of a stench attached.

T runner

jmayo wrote: »

#Since you are doing such a good job of defending ff, I take then you are going to vote ff.

Oh here we go! Criticise FG and sure you must be an evil FF supporter! I will not be voting FF in this election. I wont be voting FG for similar reasons.

Ofcourse all this means you can deliberately avoid answering the issues addressed in my post, namely that in 2007 FG had policies which if elected would have landed Ireland in an equal worse situation than FFs policies.

It means that their self righteous slamming of FF policies at that time amounts to nothing more than hypocrisy and hood winking teh public and shows NO integrity.

Oh and BTW, if you voted for a party led by haughey or ahern then I do claim you do not have integrity.

How dare you! There were no allegations against Ahern when i would have voted for FF. What a nasty self righteous assertion to make!

Did you ever vote for Fitzgerald? Are you even aware that all his assets were transferred to his sons name for tax reasons? Does this show integrity, patriotism ot is it tax avoidance?
Does everyone who voted for Fitzgerald now lack integrity according to yoru self righteous philosophy?


Sligo for Sam

jmayo

T runner wrote: »

Oh here we go! Criticise FG and sure you must be an evil FF supporter! I will not be voting FF in this election. I wont be voting FG for similar reasons.

Ofcourse all this means you can deliberately avoid answering the issues addressed in my post, namely that in 2007 FG had policies which if elected would have landed Ireland in an equal worse situation than FFs policies.

It means that their self righteous slamming of FF policies at that time amounts to nothing more than hypocrisy and hood winking teh public and shows NO integrity.

How dare you! There were no allegations against Ahern when i would have voted for FF. What a nasty self righteous assertion to make!

Did you ever vote for Fitzgerald? Are you even aware that all his assets were transferred to his sons name for tax reasons? Does this show integrity, patriotism ot is it tax avoidance?
Does everyone who voted for Fitzgerald now lack integrity according to yoru self righteous philosophy?


Sligo for Sam

No it is you who is being self righteous and claiming, yes claiming that FG would have made as big a bags of the country as ff because you pull something out of their election manifesto.

How much of the ff manifesto or more particularly the green manifesto was implemented post 2007 election.
You don't quiet get election manifestos if you think that they are implemented in full once a party is elected.

BTW if one voted for ahern's party in 2002, 2004, 2007 then I do hold someone as not having integrity.
Don't forget this man promoted a politican who had question marks over his suitability, only for them to be sarcastically dismissed by ahern.
Subsequently we found through an expensive tribunal that guy was given his house as a bribe of some sort.

As regards Fitzgerald my estimation of him went down once it became known that some of his AIB loans had been written off.
As for the rest I don't know enough to comment.

BTW if you believe Sligo are going to win Sam then you are one being deluded.

sdanseo

Can we please not compare our political system to the UK - their system is a total joke in just about every way, regardless of who wins the election.

I think the only reason the current UK coalition is floundering is because they're not used to being IN coalition - it's like an alien concept there and the press (especially the sensationalits, irresponsible pricks in Sky) are jumping on the weakness. True, they've made unpopular decisions too and I think any government that has been elected recently is facing more upheavel than would be expected without a recession.

nesf

jmayo wrote: »

BTW if one voted for ahern's party in 2002, 2004, 2007 then I do hold someone as not having integrity.

Don't insult people like this please. You may think that but really keep it to yourself, it's just flamebait on a thread like this.

jmayo

nesf wrote: »

Don't insult people like this please. You may think that but really keep it to yourself, it's just flamebait on a thread like this.

Sorry but if people are willing to vote for a party led by a person who has promoted a party member that ends up in jail for corruption I do think they are complicit in the dodgy behaviour.

Too many times people bitch and moan about ff, but don't want to mention how many people actually voted for them even though a lot of their top members were embroiled in legal wrangles trying to hide their dodgy questionable past deeds.
The only reason we have the type of ff we have today, is because a large chunk of the Irish voting population allow it to exist.
Hell there could be still 20% of the voting population who haven't a problem with them. :mad:

The only reason a lot of ex ff voters are now dropping them is because it now hurts their own pockets, it has shag all to do with the dodgy inept cr** they have been pulling for years.

It is exactly because of the Irish lax attitude to the sh** our politicans, in particular those from ff, pull that we currently are in the mess we are in.

And I don't think it is a holier than thou attitude, it is the bloody truth.

No matter what proposed parliamentary changes are brought in by the next government, not matter how much the public are now clamouring for better politicans, it will matter diddly squat if the electorate go back out and vote for parties led by the berties of this world and candidates like ahern, bev flynn, lowry, o'dea, etc. :mad:

There is a lot to be said for the statement that we get the politicans we deserve.
Only thing I would say is some of us deserve a hell of a lot better, but that is democracy for you. :mad:

T runner

jmayo wrote: »

No it is you who is being self righteous and claiming, yes claiming that FG would have made as big a bags of the country as ff because you pull something out of their election manifesto.

How much of the ff manifesto or more particularly the green manifesto was implemented post 2007 election.
You don't quiet get election manifestos if you think that they are implemented in full once a party is elected.

Their election manifesto and thi=eir time as opposition. The whole thrust of FGs manifesto was a 4.5% growth. Are you saying that they knew about the impending property crises and had secret plans to avert it. Nothing in their manifesto OR in their time in opposition in the dail seems to indicate this. It is not cherrypicking something out of their manifesto. It is the thrust of the whole of their manifesto. They were as clueless about the impending crash as FF were.

BTW if one voted for ahern's party in 2002, 2004, 2007 then I do hold someone as not having integrity.
Don't forget this man promoted a politican who had question marks over his suitability, only for them to be sarcastically dismissed by ahern.
Subsequently we found through an expensive tribunal that guy was given his house as a bribe of some sort.

So voting for a party leader who promotes a man with question marks means you ahve no integrity? Self righteous claptrap.

As regards Fitzgerald my estimation of him went down once it became known that some of his AIB loans had been written off.

As

And by your own self righteous calculations this means YOU have no integrity

BTW if you believe Sligo are going to win Sam then you are one being deluded.

Weve a better chance than the yahoos, gombeens and slobbering boghoppers in your county though, i guess.

jmayo

T runner wrote: »

Their election manifesto and thi=eir time as opposition. The whole thrust of FGs manifesto was a 4.5% growth. Are you saying that they knew about the impending property crises and had secret plans to avert it. Nothing in their manifesto OR in their time in opposition in the dail seems to indicate this. It is not cherrypicking something out of their manifesto. It is the thrust of the whole of their manifesto. They were as clueless about the impending crash as FF were.

From memory didn't FG continually complain we were losing competitiveness and real jobs ?
Thus they knew the way the economy was becoming over reliant on one industry i.e. construction.
Now no politican came out and said we are going to be in serious sh** when this bursts and not one would have been thanked electorally for such a statement.
But that does not excuse ff who were in control from trying to take the heat out of the bubble economy by varying taxes for instance.

T runner wrote: »

So voting for a party leader who promotes a man with question marks means you ahve no integrity? Self righteous claptrap.

Yes it does, when the man you are voting for dismisses the concerns about the corrupt politican they are promoting.
Then it transpires the same politican you are voting for, did not have a bank account even though he was on a high salary and received wads of cash in dubious circumstances.
People voted for ahern and his party in 2007 even though this was known about him.
If one choses to vote for such a person and by extension the party he leads it must be questioned what integrity one has and what is their stance on seriously unethical behaviour.

T runner wrote: »

And by your own self righteous calculations this means YOU have no integrity

I never had the chance to vote for Fitzgerald or the party he led.
I would have reservations about why he let AIB write off some of his debts, but I don't think anyone can ever state that he did anything dodgy or unethical.
Of course you claim he moved his assets to his family ?

T runner wrote: »

Weve a better chance than the yahoos, gombeens and slobbering boghoppers in your county though, i guess.

Maybe you will win the Connacht title again or the All Ireland for insulting your neighbours ?
BTW are you going to vote for the two "independent" ffers over in Sligo ?

nesf

jmayo wrote: »

Sorry but if people are willing to vote for a party led by a person who has promoted a party member that ends up in jail for corruption I do think they are complicit in the dodgy behaviour.

Too many times people bitch and moan about ff, but don't want to mention how many people actually voted for them even though a lot of their top members were embroiled in legal wrangles trying to hide their dodgy questionable past deeds.
The only reason we have the type of ff we have today, is because a large chunk of the Irish voting population allow it to exist.
Hell there could be still 20% of the voting population who haven't a problem with them. :mad:

The only reason a lot of ex ff voters are now dropping them is because it now hurts their own pockets, it has shag all to do with the dodgy inept cr** they have been pulling for years.

It is exactly because of the Irish lax attitude to the sh** our politicans, in particular those from ff, pull that we currently are in the mess we are in.

And I don't think it is a holier than thou attitude, it is the bloody truth.

No matter what proposed parliamentary changes are brought in by the next government, not matter how much the public are now clamouring for better politicans, it will matter diddly squat if the electorate go back out and vote for parties led by the berties of this world and candidates like ahern, bev flynn, lowry, o'dea, etc. :mad:

There is a lot to be said for the statement that we get the politicans we deserve.
Only thing I would say is some of us deserve a hell of a lot better, but that is democracy for you. :mad:

I don't care. I'm telling you not to insult people based on their voting history. There is no room for argument here.