michael d, have the voters enough

flutered

are the populance saying enough is enough, that having some one who will be amost eighty year old when their term is up is not good enough, some one who will be entitled to six pensions is enough, that what was taken for granted in the past is enough, that the snout looking for another trough is enough, are they saying that so much emigration enough, that as we are a young population it is time to get a younger vibrant modern thinking president in position, not the usual snout sniffing type of individual being imposed by various vested interist is enough.

BQQ

LOL


What's the alternative? Gallagher who got fat off the FF building boom, and now his company is gone belly up needs a new trough for his FF snout?

foggy_lad

flutered wrote: »

are the populance saying enough is enough, that having some one who will be amost eighty year old when their term is up is not good enough, some one who will be entitled to six pensions is enough, that what was taken for granted in the past is enough, that the snout looking for another trough is enough, are they saying that so much emigration enough, that as we are a young population it is time to get a younger vibrant modern thinking president in position, not the usual snout sniffing type of individual being imposed by various vested interist is enough.

What is this whole "snout/trough" thing that has appeared in many threads? i have not heard it referred to in the media. If you are saying Michael D is some kind of animal feeding from a trough? it is not particularly nice and shows how seriously some people take this election.

Seth Brundle

foggy_lad wrote: »

What is this whole "snout/trough" thing that has appeared in many threads? i have not heard it referred to in the media. If you are saying Michael D is some kind of animal feeding from a trough? it is not particularly nice and shows how seriously some people take this election.

Anyone who is a career politician could be referred to as having their snout in the trough. Generous payments over the years. Generous pensions going forward. How many current TDs or TDs claiming pensions can't pay the bills?

As for taking the election seriously, how can we? IMO, there is not one candidate suitable for the position (which in itself is overpaid).

norrie rugger

kbannon wrote: »

Anyone who is a career politician could be referred to as having their snout in the trough. Generous payments over the years. Generous pensions going forward. How many current TDs or TDs claiming pensions can't pay the bills?

As for taking the election seriously, how can we? IMO, there is not one candidate suitable for the position (which in itself is overpaid).

Career politician because people elected him.
If he were not respected then he would not have had a "career"

Seth Brundle

norrie rugger wrote: »

Career politician because people elected him.
If he were not respected then he would not have had a "career"

Whilst, I'm not comparing him to them he is as much as career politician as the likes of Ivor Callely, Bertie Ahern, Ray Burke, etc.
Does the respect argument stand with them? Having grown up in Clontarf, not many people would claim to respect Ivor but they still voted for him.

ei.sdraob

foggy_lad wrote: »

What is this whole "snout/trough" thing that has appeared in many threads? i have not heard it referred to in the media. If you are saying Michael D is some kind of animal feeding from a trough? it is not particularly nice and shows how seriously some people take this election.

Ha Animal Farm springs to mind, some pigs are more important than others and all that

I hope the hypocrisy of someone who preaches Marxist "redistribution" collecting 120K in public pensions and about to get another pay packet and pension, doesn't go unnoticed

cornbb

The fact that Michael D. is entitled to numerous pensions is a problem with the system, not with Michael D.

ei.sdraob

cornbb wrote: »

The fact that Michael D. is entitled to numerous pensions is a problem with the system, not with Michael D.

You think that someone who preaches "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" principles

would say "No, I would like my pensions redistributed to those in need"

The problem some people have is the hypocrisy of him AND yes the system is broken too, no one should be able to milk public money so much, whether its Bertie or Micheal D

Seth Brundle

cornbb wrote: »

The fact that Michael D. is entitled to numerous pensions is a problem with the system, not with Michael D.

True, but it's hard to digest when his website is full of talk about his past looking for "social justice", "hunger for equality" and how "social exclusion, emigration and poverty that he experienced and witnessed led Michael D to more direct political involvement, where he could argue and advocate for real change, both social and economic", etc..

foggy_lad

kbannon wrote: »

Anyone who is a career politician could be referred to as having their snout in the trough. Generous payments over the years. Generous pensions going forward. How many current TDs or TDs claiming pensions can't pay the bills?

As for taking the election seriously, how can we? IMO, there is not one candidate suitable for the position (which in itself is overpaid).

I just find it is a vulgar way to describe people who may have done a lot for the country but I also understand the anger many people have towards anyone that seems to have more than they need given the current climate. At the end of the day we all have access to the information about their pensions etc so it is up to people to organise and protest in great numbers if they want the current system to change, but this should be done in a civilised manner.

Manach

Whilst I will not be voting for Mr. Higgins, I believe that his age is a positive factor. He would have experience of the Irish body politic and maturity to know when to use this experience to the benefit of the people.

dvpower

flutered wrote: »

... having some one who will be amost eighty year old when their term is up is not good enough [...]

Why?

cornbb

ei.sdraob wrote: »

You think that someone who preaches "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" principles

would say "No, I would like my pensions redistributed to those in need"

The problem some people have is the hypocrisy of him AND yes the system is broken too, no one should be able to milk public money so much, whether its Bertie or Micheal D

The fact that he has promised not to draw down those pensions if elected says a lot. The average man on the street would be considered insane not to draw down money that he was legally entitled to. Its not like he's been ripping the piss with expenses claims like Bertie or Calally...

kbannon wrote: »

True, but it's hard to digest when his website is full of talk about his past looking for "social justice", "hunger for equality" and how "social exclusion, emigration and poverty that he experienced and witnessed led Michael D to more direct political involvement, where he could argue and advocate for real change, both social and economic", etc..

Why are someone's words/actions on social justice somehow diluted if they happen to be high-earning individuals? Only low-earning individuals can honestly fight for social justice?

I agree that Michael D's pensions should be slashed significantly (along with everyone else in the Oireachtas) but I don't see how the fact that he is receiving them is a black mark against him. He really doesn't strike me as a man who entered public life to get rich.

anymore

Manach wrote: »

Whilst I will not be voting for Mr. Higgins, I believe that his age is a positive factor. He would have experience of the Irish body politic and maturity to know when to use this experience to the benefit of the people.

How exactly is he to use this experience ?
The president's role is so lomited and circumstribed that the reality is that they play very little role in irish life !

Seth Brundle

cornbb wrote: »

Why are someone's words/actions on social justice somehow diluted if they happen to be high-earning individuals? Only low-earning individuals can honestly fight for social justice?

I didn't say that. However, he is on a large pension funded by the taxpayer - the same taxpayer that is struggling as a result of political incompetence.

cornbb wrote: »

I agree that Michael D's pensions should be slashed significantly (along with everyone else in the Oireachtas) but I don't see how the fact that he is receiving them is a black mark against him. He really doesn't strike me as a man who entered public life to get rich.

I didn't say it was a black mark. I did however clarify the view that some may judge him by wilfully accepting an outrageously large pension from the taxpayer as having their snout in the trough.

Of all the candidates, how anyone can even suggest that Michael D's character represents anything but integrity is beyond me.

A man who served Ireland, not to enrich himself, but because he is an ideologue who wanted to make this country a better place to live.

And he's only sitting on just over 20% of the vote, half of what SG is on. Pathetic from a country who has just been rode in the hole by SG's mates, but then again, what did I expect?

thebman

So far the only things against him that people bring up are his age, his height, his anti-war/anti-American/anti-capitalism views and that we would have to pay him to do the job.

That still puts up about 40 miles ahead of everyone else.

jimmycrackcorm

dvpower wrote: »

Why?

Because he makes working into your eighties acceptable. Would you accept having your own aged grandparents having to earn a living?

Unless, of course, being president really isn't work.

Liam Byrne

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

dvpower wrote: »

Why?

Because he makes working into your eighties acceptable. Would you accept having your own aged grandparents having to earn a living?

Unless, of course, being president really isn't work.

Well considering that others prefer not allowing them live into their eighties it's certainly an improvement.

And so what if he wants to work into his 80s and is capable ?

If that was what made your grandparents happy, would you deny them that option ?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

flutered

anymore wrote: »

How exactly is he to use this experience ?
The president's role is so lomited and circumstribed that the reality is that they play very little role in irish life !

i would like to praise the above statement, is ireland so short of some one to become a highly paid figure head that a seventy year old with a penchant for collecting pensions, an ex member of the failures who one is lead to believe is a failed buisness man, a man with a rather gorey past, a quango figure head, a religious fanatic and a grey unappealing political profesional who also has a penchant for collecting pensions, and lasty a person who it seens to have no qualms about collecting disibility payments while being a parlimentarian, and using parlimanty privilage to vouch for a person being tried for the rather dubious honour of under age rape, no wonder we are where we and what we are.

flutered

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted. cv it SHOUTS vote for me.

flutered

Which of the candidates would you describe as "not the usual snout sniffing type of individual"?[/QUOTE]
not one of them.

flutered

Mary McAleese, the youngest president in the history of the state, presided over a litany of political and economic disasters.

she was nominated by what i think history will judge to be the most corrupt ill concieved and hapazzard collection of politicians that decimated my country.

Gregor Samsa

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Because he makes working into your eighties acceptable. Would you accept having your own aged grandparents having to earn a living?

My grandfather worked into his 80s, as a rent collector for Lisneys in some of Dublin's roughest areas at the time (Sherriff St, East Wall). Entirely by his own choice, because he enjoyed working and being active - and luckily his health allowed it.

Surely Michael D working at 80 would merely show us that older people can still contribute to society if they're able and willing. A positive message, I would have thougth.

flutered

thebman wrote: »

So far the only things against him that people bring up are his age, his height, his anti-war/anti-American/anti-capitalism views and that we would have to pay him to do the job.

That still puts up about 40 miles ahead of everyone else.

i have not mentioned his anti american and anti war views, i would assume these would make a visit to the oval office each and every 17th of march embarrising,
not to mention my countrys need for foregin investment being under a cloud, last but not least how can an anti capitalist reconcile their viers with having a job part of whos payment is unvouched expenses while collecting four yes four pensions.

Liam Byrne

flutered wrote: »

i have not mentioned his anti american and anti war views, i would assume these would make a visit to the oval office each and every 17th of march embarrising,

I find the opposite more embarrassing, whereby we're somehow unable to speak out against the atrocities in Iraq and sweep the obvious under the carpet.

flutered

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I find the opposite more embarrassing, whereby we're somehow unable to speak out against the atrocities in Iraq and sweep the obvious under the carpet.

the president of my country is the president of a nuteral country which as such should and can not comment on such affairs, also cannot comment personally on them.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jimmycrackcorm

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Because he makes working into your eighties acceptable. Would you accept having your own aged grandparents having to earn a living?

Unless, of course, being president really isn't work.

My grandmother worked past retirement age because she wanted to.
People don't magically just become useless just because they've past 65. Or 70.

norrie rugger

flutered wrote: »

the president of my country is the president of a nuteral country which as such should and can not comment on such affairs, also cannot comment personally on them.

So damned if he does and damned if he does not??

flutered

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.at with the aid of a cane.

flutered

bluewolf wrote: »

My grandmother worked past retirement age because she wanted to.
People don't magically just become useless just because they've past 65. Or 70.

no they are not, in the african continent they are revered.