IRISH PRESIDENT MICHAEL D.HIGGINS ATTACKS TEA PARTY IN DEBATE

poeticseraphim

Whole debate


http://www.newstalk.ie/2012/featured-5-slideshow-homepage/michael-d-higgins-vs-michael-graham-on-newstalk/


Michael D. Higgins clip short version


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5OWRRJh-PI

It has gone viral !

It is from two years ago.
What do you think?


Fiery Michael D!!!!

In the longer verssion he really had him on Gaza ...hey it would be great to make the longer version go Viral too :-)

GO MICHAEL D HIGGINS!!

mosstin

poeticseraphim wrote: »

Whole debate


http://www.newstalk.ie/2012/featured-5-slideshow-homepage/michael-d-higgins-vs-michael-graham-on-newstalk/


Michael D. Higgins clip short version


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5OWRRJh-PI

It has gone viral !

It is from two years ago.
What do you think?


Fiery Michael D!!!!

In the longer verssion he really had him on Gaza ...hey it would be great to make the longer version go Viral too :-)

GO MICHAEL D HIGGINS!!

"a wanker whipping up fear"

Never. A. Truer. Word.

Fr Tod Umptious

mosstin wrote: »

"a wanker whipping up fear"

Never. A. Truer. Word.

I havemot seen the video but I find the use of the word 'wanker' to be an odd choice from one as articulate as Michael D

poeticseraphim

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I havemot seen the video but I find the use of the word 'wanker' to be an odd choice from one as articulate as Michael D

Please you have to watch the longer clip...and yes he is artiuclate in the whole debate...

Manic Moran

Well, points for passion, I would say, though detracted for manner and style.

karma_

Manic Moran wrote: »

Well, points for passion, I would say, though detracted for manner and style.

His manner and style were impeccable.

juan.kerr

Very unstatesman like language though, particularly from a spokesman for Foreign Affairs.

I wonder what impact (if any) this would have had on the presidential compaign.

MagicMarker

juan.kerr wrote: »

Very unstatesman like language though, particularly from a spokesman for Foreign Affairs.

I wonder what impact (if any) this would have had on the presidential compaign.

Well none, as this was doing the rounds before he was president.

juan.kerr

MagicMarker wrote: »

Well none, as this was doing the rounds before he was president.

Fair enough, this week was the first I heard of it. Was its dissemination as widespread in Ireland as it is this week, covered in all the mainstream media (that you parents might see) as opposed to boards.ie or other forums and forwarded emails etc.

Pawwed Rig

Michael Graham (the protagonist in this clip) is on George hook regularly. He is a controversial 'shock jock' from the US that George uses to fire up the listeners. He has right wing American views and was a big supporter of George Bush. He is an interesting man in that he represents the views of many Americans whose opinions we don't get to hear much.

This was a couple of years ago though. this is the third post I have seen on this in the last 3 days. Not sure why it has surfaced again all of a sudden.

poeticseraphim

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

Michael Graham (the protagonist in this clip) is on George hook regularly. He is a controversial 'shock jock' from the US that George uses to fire up the listeners. He has right wing American views and was a big supporter of George Bush. He is an interesting man in that he represents the views of many Americans whose opinions we don't get to hear much.

This was a couple of years ago though. this is the third post I have seen on this in the last 3 days. Not sure why it has surfaced again all of a sudden.

I actually thin we hear them a lot...they are quite loud after all. Really i thinnk they are represented in equal numbers compared to any other voice or group.

It has urfaced again because the clip has gone viral in the past coupe of days getting in the US press ...it has gone beyond Ireland.

Richard Dawkins had high praise for Michael D Higgins regarding the full interview and debate which i think people need to hear to really understand the full impact either side had regardless of what opinion you had of either them you should hear it all.

To manyare just getting the snippet which is edited from biits of what Michael D higgins said. Which is unfair maybe to both parties.


Let face it Richard Dawkins rarely praises anyone or anything so it's noteworthy:)

Sound of Silence

This was posted on Reddit a while back. Other than that, I'm not sure how it's become viral.

Some other posters have talked about his unstatesman like language potentially having a negative affect on his image. I think we would be deluded to believe that many people outside of Ireland or the UK would even know who our President is, let alone be interested in how he portrays himself.

As such, I would encourage the President to continue to speak his mind in, as at the very least it gives us the hope that even some of our Politicians continue to be interested and passionate about Politics.

rugbyman

I like Michael D, the short version of the clip sounds good ,as he is a good speaker as if P.Flynn(yes) and George Galloway, but the message is the same old stuff that is their own favourite stuff, appealing to the masses.
somewhat low brow. ( ok ,will listen to it all later)

Regards Rugbyman

Pawwed Rig

Well I am talking about mainstream media such as Irish radio, RTE, BBC. I like listening to Michael Graham. He has entertainment value. Whereas I don't agree with 90% of what he says it is interesting to hear the extreme points of view every now and again.

The Dagda

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I havemot seen the video but I find the use of the word 'wanker' to be an odd choice from one as articulate as Michael D

I think Mickey D's choice of word was partly down to having earlier been accused by, that clown, Graham, as being anti-semetic , and supporting "baby killing terrorists".

Graham is an uninformed idiot who should't be given any airtime here to peddle his bigotry, whatever about the states, George Hook is, for some unknown reason, dazzled by his celebrity in America, and seems to think having him on his show is enlightening, as it allows us to hear views that we might not otherwise hear. George is wrong, Graham's views do not add anything sensible to any debate.

mosstin

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I havemot seen the video but I find the use of the word 'wanker' to be an odd choice from one as articulate as Michael D

Well, look at it this way, only a wanker would have called him an onanist.

juan.kerr

mosstin wrote: »

Well, look at it this way, only a wanker would have called him an onanist.

Surprised Higgins didn't use the term onanist then...

Pawwed Rig

The Dagda wrote: »

Graham is an uninformed idiot who should't be given any airtime here to peddle his bigotry, whatever about the states, George Hook is, for some unknown reason, dazzled by his celebrity in America, and seems to think having him on his show is enlightening, as it allows us to hear views that we might not otherwise hear. George is wrong, Graham's views do not add anything sensible to any debate.

I respectfully disagree. Freedom of speech is there so people with alternative opinions to ours can be heard. Whether he is an uninformed idiot or not does not lessen the fact that many Americans think like this.

joseph brand

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I havemot seen the video but I find the use of the word 'wanker' to be an odd choice from one as articulate as Michael D

If there's one thing that irks me across the forums, it's people commenting on a video/ audio clip without watching/ listening to it first. Same goes for print.

Step 1. Check it out for yourself.
Step 2. Express your opinion.

Don't skip step 1. and fall unwanted into step 2. I thought we all knew this?

juan.kerr

Why should we have to watch / listen to his tripe? The issue at hand is the use of the word wanker. Context is not relevant.

matthew8

Most unpresidential. Michael Graham's a fun guy to listen to. Higgins seems to have let him under his skin. I wonder what the reaction would have been if Gay Mitchell had called a left wing presenter a wanker.

The Dagda

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

I respectfully disagree. Freedom of speech is there so people with alternative opinions to ours can be heard. Whether he is an uninformed idiot or not does not lessen the fact that many Americans think like this.

I would respectfully disagree with this. The freedom of speech is fine and dandy, but when you are broadcasting your views, you owe the listener the courtesy of telling the truth. Graham does not always tell the truth, either through not knowing it, or only telling part of the story. He may do this because he's simply thick, or he may do it on purpose to further his own agenda, only he knows. The problem is that some people will believe what he says, and that is dangerous.

I'm confident that there are not as many people that think the same way as Graham, and his like, would like us to believe. The fact that he has an audience in America only confirms there are some. In any case, my point is that George Hook should not be giving him a platform in Ireland for him to spread his bullsh1t.

Pawwed Rig

That is politics. People don't tell the truth. Labour for example (Michael D's Party) said that they would not introduce third level fees, FG said they would pay back Eircom share owners etc etc. We don't need to look beyond our own shores for people who lie because it is the popular thing to do at the time. M Graham is first and foremost an entertainer. It is common on American TV and radio to make outlandlish statements to get a reaction from the public/guests. It is not how radio/TV works over here so maybe it is just we are not used to it. As I said what Graham says resonates with many people in the US so I think the platform should be there for someone like him to give an alternative point of view. As with everything you get the alternatives and make up your own mind

joseph brand

juan.kerr wrote: »

Why should we have to watch / listen to his tripe?

What?? Nobody forced you to listen to it, but in order to comment on it, it's kinda helpful.

juan.kerr wrote: »

The issue at hand is the use of the word wanker. Context is not relevant.

Go listen to the clip would ya?

Honestly, it's like your reviewing a movie you've never seen. I can't spell out it any simpler. Sigh.

juan.kerr

joseph brand wrote: »

What?? Nobody forced you to listen to it, but in order to comment on it, it's kinda helpful.



Go listen to the clip would ya?

Honestly, it's like your reviewing a movie you've never seen. I can't spell out it any simpler. Sigh.

Just because the Higgins apologists are trying to justify his degrading language doesn't make it acceptable. I don't need to hear the clip to form an opinion on the appropriateness.

To compare this to a film reviewer not seeing the film is laughable.

Next you'll say I'm not entitled to an opinion on NAMA as I didn't read the legislation.

Channel Zero

A very eloquent orator is Michael D.

It seems he chooses his words carefully..

therewillbe

poeticseraphim wrote: »

Whole debate


http://www.newstalk.ie/2012/featured-5-slideshow-homepage/michael-d-higgins-vs-michael-graham-on-newstalk/


Michael D. Higgins clip short version


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5OWRRJh-PI

It has gone viral !

It is from two years ago.
What do you think?


Fiery Michael D!!!!

In the longer verssion he really had him on Gaza ...hey it would be great to make the longer version go Viral too :-)

GO MICHAEL D HIGGINS!!

Respect to OUR President.The whole version is classic.

poeticseraphim

juan.kerr wrote: »

Just because the Higgins apologists are trying to justify his degrading language doesn't make it acceptable. I don't need to hear the clip to form an opinion on the appropriateness.

To compare this to a film reviewer not seeing the film is laughable.

Next you'll say I'm not entitled to an opinion on NAMA as I didn't read the legislation.

Yes you need to hear the clip to form a knowledged based belief or opinion on the context and appropriateness. Context and subtext are relevant. How do you know unless you listen...infact how would you even know he even really used the word wanker and that we are not lying to you?

You don't seem to understand the difference between an opinion and knowledge and fact based judgement.

You can have an opinion on epistemology and think it means something to do with horses. It just means that we would be unwise to listen to you.

You are not entitled to have an opinion unchallenged ....that is what saying 'it's my opinion' full stop argument over means...

You are having a knee jerk rection over something you have never heard...

Why is the comparison between reviewing a film you have not seen and giving an opinion on a debate you never heard so out there?

It is like condemning a man for taking his clothes off in public because you heard he did and never checking facts then condeming himbefore learning years later he took his clothes off and left his trunks on , on the beach.


Context IS important.

If you want to condemn or chastise Micheal D Higgins for what he said...then at least you owe him the curtesy of listening to he said.


Unless you do you really have no idea what you are talking about and seem silly.

I could easily have said right this thread contains the word wanker....i am not reading the thread but i think it is inappropriate....REPORT!

You have made your opinion pretty worthless to any reasonable debate.

And yes in order to have informed opinion on Nama you need to have read legislation.

And an uninformed and uneducated opinion deserves to be rebutted ignorance isthe device by which unenlightened men preserved the unjust social order.

You are just like Graham....all uninformed uneducated rightous opinion.

If you are going to give out about Higgins you have a duty to listen to the debate. Otherwise admit you don't know enough to pass judgement.

Amerika

I watched the shorter version, and figure it is a highlighted look at his views. In my opinion: As a member of the Tea Party, I found his rant of righteous indignation rather entertaining. It truly represents the misinformed view of the Tea Party from those on the outside looking in.

Sorry to burst some bubbles, but most here have no wishes to go down the path of Europe.

The Tea Party is a grassroots movement who's core principles support a limited federal government, individual freedoms, personal responsibility, free markets, an returning political power to the states and the people. We are not a political party, but rather a group of average people looking to reform all political parties and government back to the core principles of our Founding Fathers.

Sometimes its good to remember what this 'party', who's actions are responsible for the destruction of American and the potential fall of western civilization, according to some, really looks like.

karma_

Amerika wrote: »

Well done in finding the one photograph of a tea party crowd that has a single Black lady in it.

That is certainly not the norm. Good effort though.

Denerick

I laughed really loudly when Amerika posted the photo of the tea partiers with a very ostentious African American presence. Uncle Tom's aside, the tea party are an extreme populist group that will bring about the downfall of the American Republic if they ever come to power (Which is quite possible in 2012). America is on a precipice. Its military is overstretched in too many foreign entanglements, its population is in decline relative to the new rising world powers, Its class system looks more like 1910 than 2010, its economy is sclerotic, mostly caused by bad government policy. The wealthy pay too little tax and most government programmes are underfunded. Social security is a timebomb that will only be solved by funding it through general taxation. The healthcare system benefits the insurance companies above all else and its legislature is on sale to the highest bidder. IN SHORT, it bears all the hallmarks of a civilisation in decline, reminiscent of Ancient Greece, Rome, Jerusalem under Herod, and Babylon. These tea partiers will goosestep the Republic right over a cliff.

Duiske

juan.kerr wrote: »

Just because the Higgins apologists are trying to justify his degrading language doesn't make it acceptable. I don't need to hear the clip to form an opinion on the appropriateness.

lol. You moan about Higgins using that word even though you refuse to listen to the clip. So, you feel the word is inappropriate in any context ? Bit rich considering your own username.

Amerika

karma_ wrote: »

Well done in finding the one photograph of a tea party crowd that has a single Black lady in it.

That is certainly not the norm. Good effort though.

Interesting how people on different sides of the fence look at things. I thought the picture was pretty representative of a Tea Party rally. The occasional African American in a crowd of mostly Whites comprised of primarily middle-aged to seniors in age.

poeticseraphim

Amerika wrote: »

I watched the shorter version, and figure it is a highlighted look at his views. In my opinion: As a member of the Tea Party, I found his rant of righteous indignation rather entertaining. It truly represents the misinformed view of the Tea Party from those on the outside looking in.

Sorry to burst some bubbles, but most here have no wishes to go down the path of Europe.

The Tea Party is a grassroots movement who's core principles support a limited federal government, individual freedoms, personal responsibility, free markets, an returning political power to the states and the people. We are not a political party, but rather a group of average people looking to reform all political parties and government back to the core principles of our Founding Fathers.

Sometimes its good to remember what this 'party', who's actions are responsible for the destruction of American and the potential fall of western civilization, according to some, really looks like.

Wow ...sorry but erm...not the prettiest picture .:( America pizza is NOT a vegetable.

Anyway
You have to watch the whole of the debate to do justice to BOTH speakers.

No one says America has to do things the European way...By the way this includes countries like Germany (one of the most socialized welfare systems in Europe) Sweden, Finland, Holland and Great Britain. Then there are some countries not doing well...the ones who embraced SOFT regulation portugal Spain ..Ireland..(we are doing a lot better now though)

No one is objecting to the American way of doing things...it is the fact that Tea Partiers don't seem to acknowledge the racism and agression in SOME of their members.

Tea Party Memebers seem to be preparing for a civil war if Romney loses. It seems they hate their fellow Americans...no scratch that...they HATE the left worldwide ...and i mean they hte the people not just the ideas

The Obama administration has been flawed....but but reffering to the administration with terms like 'cotton picking hands' is trashy.

America has the right to do things it's own way....if it could get on with it's own people it would be a grteat start though.

poeticseraphim

By tbhe way on the 'Outside looking in comment'....agreed we are outsiders in Europe..but we get a lot more info than Americans get about Europe.

TRUST ME ...when Americans comment about Europe even on major new stations they get basic geography wrong and basic laws incorrect and have NO concept of the culture or how it is on the ground.

You would do well to remember the 'Outside looking in' comment yourselves....

I have been to America...if you have not been to Europe it i difficult to understand

So the next time Americans hap hazardly go on foreign world tours make sure not to step your foot in it as Romeny and many Tea Partiers do...You are on the oustide..and Romeny does not even look before he comments.

SamHarris

A nice bit of demagougary, a little low brow, but I cant blame him for getting frustrated if Graham had accused him of being those things.

With regard to people not wanting to hear from people of a different political pursasion in our media I really find it startling how many people in Ireland hate to hear any views that challenge them to any great extent. Obviously Michael Graham is not exactly an intellectual able to carefully articulate his views but really the media here has little in the way of fair discusion on any number of international issues.

When organisations DO decide to actually broadcast a voice that breaks from the Irish mainstream to any real extent they choose someone like Michael Graham, an extremist. Its sad how many people in Ireland are perfectly pleased with one dimensional, lowest common denominator, reductionist public debate we have on any number of given subjects.

When Im looking for debates or discussions on a high intellectual level concerning policy I nearly always end up using stuff broadcast first in the US, or UK. Given the amount of times Ive searched for the material its shocking I am yet to find one from Ireland. Does anyone know of one in particular?

Manic Moran

karma_ wrote: »

His manner and style were impeccable.

You have your debating manner, I have mine. I would not conduct myself in such a manner.

NTM

SamHarris

poeticseraphim wrote: »

By tbhe way on the 'Outside looking in comment'....agreed we are outsiders in Europe..but we get a lot more info than Americans get about Europe.

TRUST ME ...when Americans comment about Europe even on major new stations they get basic geography wrong and basic laws incorrect and have NO concept of the culture or how it is on the ground.

You would do well to remember the 'Outside looking in' comment yourselves....

I have been to America...if you have not been to Europe it i difficult to understand

So the next time Americans hap hazardly go on foreign world tours make sure not to step your foot in it as Romeny and many Tea Partiers do...You are on the oustide..and Romeny does not even look before he comments.

I find Irish people have similiar holes in knowledge, merely in different areas. And not merely in areas where people dont have a storng opinion, quiet the contrary in fact. GM foods is one that jumps to mind.

Culturaly it is the case that what is common knowledge in one area is not in another. The sooner you learn this, the better to be honest.

People here really need to lose the idea that they / Europeans are intrinsicly more clever than any other group. We succeed averagly (given our population and wealth) in intelectual endeavors, no more, no less.

A small island in the atlantic with average universities, average business acumen and middling scientific output but who's populace are convinced of their superiority is embarrassing, to say the least. I dont mind people being proud of their country, at all, but this attitude is just plain ignorant and those that hold it need to grow up - if you go abroad everyone is not going to be dazzled by your levels of knowledge.

poeticseraphim

SamHarris wrote: »

I find Irish people have similiar holes in knowledge, merely in different areas. And not merely in areas where people dont have a storng opinion, quiet the contrary in fact. GM foods is one that jumps to mind.

Culturaly it is the case that what is common knowledge in one area is not in another. The sooner you learn this, the better to be honest.

People here really need to lose the idea that they / Europeans are intrinsicly more clever than any other group. We succeed averagly (given our population and wealth) in intelectual endeavors, no more, no less.

A small island in the atlantic with average universities, average business acumen and middling scientific output but who's populace are convinced of their superiority is embarrassing, to say the least. I dont mind people being proud of their country, at all, but this attitude is just plain ignorant and those that hold it need to grow up - if you go abroad everyone is not going to be dazzled by your levels of knowledge.

Europeans are generally better educated. That does not mean 'better'.

Just more educated for instance we have much higher literacy rates than the us
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate

Europe has more University graduates per capita than the US.

University is largely free and driven by competing acedemically you have to compete on an acedemic basis with everyone in your country rich and poor.

When it comes to measurable statistics Europeans are on average more educated.

It is like saying continental Europeans are better at languages than Britain and Ireland. It is not Spin, they are. It does not mean they are more intelligent it is just a competitive market and they need languages to have the edge.

I don't accept the of 60 % of American kids cannot point to America on a map guff.

But when it comes to statistics, it shows.

Americans have first class universities but they are prohibitively expensive for some. And entry is gained not through acedemic achievement soley but having money and often influence.

Americans are not stupid and it is a lazy stereoptype i agree.

But it's public school system is apalling.

And i have been to America ..they were impressed :cool:


But the point is not simply made up the facts substanstiate it.

But i accept it may be a gross generalization.

But they have states that don't teach evolution and 50% of Americans don't believe in Global warming.

And just a few days ago a prominent republican politicians claimed that pregnancy through rape was a biological impossibilty. You can hardly blame us for jumping to conclusions.


If you wish to look at some who would disagree with me and feel Americans are more educated. Look here.:)

http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=72318

The above is meant to be a joke by the way.

And i know Americans are not stupid.

Let the lesson be take people as you find them.

Michael Graham was a good example of an idiot. Perhaps Michael D Higgins is not a rapier bearing orator of excellence. But he had more factual argument in the extended clip than Graham.

And whatever else is said Republican rhetoric (including Tea Partier) would match the Sun for style and tone. It is aimed at a primary /grade school reading level . NOT because the people it is aimed at are stupid they are not but rather to engage them at a lower level at which their critical thinking processes are disarmed.

The left has a lot to answer for too , like Europeans sometimes they assumed superiority and lost an ongoing argument simply by refusing to engage and refute the rightist ideologies.

It would have perhaps raised the level of debate.

And yes Europe has it's morons too. George Galloway said some rather disturbing things about rape which quite frankly re far worse than Todd Akin's comments in many ways.

Fr Tod Umptious

joseph brand wrote: »

If there's one thing that irks me across the forums, it's people commenting on a video/ audio clip without watching/ listening to it first. Same goes for print.

Step 1. Check it out for yourself.
Step 2. Express your opinion.

Don't skip step 1. and fall unwanted into step 2. I thought we all knew this?

I just listened to it.

To be honest it sounds like a baords.ie type rant from Michael D, he seems to be shouting.

As for the 'wanker' reference I think Michael D was being the 'cute hoor' here.
Wanker is not a term that is widely used or understood in the US, so Michael D just decided to throw that in there, knowing he would get a reaction from the audience and leave Michael G wonder 'what did he just call me, what's a wanker?'

Oh and I don't believe that 'US visitors are more welcome now that Obama is president' line either, it's BS.

20Cent

Its interesting what people find offensive, was watching a tv show the other day and there was a bit where F you was written on a piece of paper it was blurred out. Other parts of the show contain extreme violence and drug taking but the bad word was blurred!

Michael Graham rants once a week on George Hooks show, he is not interested in what other people think, speaks over them, mocks people, is disingenuous, rude, Euro weenies etc etc he supports wars, taking healthcare from tens of millions of people, slags off the people millions voted for but calling him a name is offensive! Best thing for people like Graham is to turn the radio off which is what I do when he's on. Fair play to Michael D he was right.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

20Cent

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'd disagree he just got a bit angry understandable when trying to have a debate with someone like Michael Graham who only likes hearing his own voice.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

First of all, as to why it's popped up again now. There's a website called "upworthy" (i think) that aim to get important things to go viral in as big a way as cats in boxes and what have you. One of them obviously stumbled across this the other day and uploaded it and off it went.

As far as it's content goes, I think the main issue it raises is that a lot of US politics is just people shouting headlines. Granted Higgins doesn't give him a lot of opportunity to reply, but when he does all Graham does is shout about missiles from Palestine, or guns on aid ships etc. etc. When asked for specific examples or more information he has none. Now I'm not saying that this makes Higgins correct just because he actually knows what he's talking about, but it's a worrying trend in US politics that voters don't actually seem to care whether what they're being told has any real facts or figures to back it up. They just take the headline as gospel and don't bother to educate themselves on it any further.

To me Higgins hasn't even really stated his opinion on anything there, other than his dislike for the Tea Party. He just makes Graham look like an idiot who has no idea what he's talking about.

As for Higgins saying "wanker" well I agree it seemed a little unnecessary and maybe took away a little from the rest of what he had said, but not in a major way.

If you listen to the whole thing I don't think Graham was expecting a debate. He was all jokes at the start and then Hook asked about Gaza and it took off from there. Graham was the one who weighed in on it and I don't think he was expecting Higgins to get quite so animated about it. I do think though that if you're going to be on a show like Hook's or discussing any kind of politics like this then you should have all the facts.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

karma_

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Perhaps you should go back and listen to the full version that was included in the original post, instead of attempting pedantry.

20Cent

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Did you listen to the whole thing?
Higgins did it once after much provocations. Graham does it all the time week in week out. That's the difference.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Pawwed Rig

Graham does it all the time on George Hooks show and his own programme. If you don't talk over him in a forceful manner it will be a Michael Graham monologue for 30 mins.

The Dagda

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

That is politics. People don't tell the truth. Labour for example (Michael D's Party) said that they would not introduce third level fees, FG said they would pay back Eircom share owners etc etc. We don't need to look beyond our own shores for people who lie because it is the popular thing to do at the time. M Graham is first and foremost an entertainer. It is common on American TV and radio to make outlandlish statements to get a reaction from the public/guests. It is not how radio/TV works over here so maybe it is just we are not used to it. As I said what Graham says resonates with many people in the US so I think the platform should be there for someone like him to give an alternative point of view. As with everything you get the alternatives and make up your own mind

Graham is not a politician, he is a social commentator, opinions are formed from listening to these people, therefore he should be as truthful as possible. My point was that he shouldn't be on the Irish airwaves, the Americans can do what they like.