nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Stand With Eamon Dunphy

Say Your Number

Haven't listened to much of this so far, but really enjoyed the interview with Damien Duff this week.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

sentient_6

I wasn't going to listen to any of it because im sick to my back teeth with this referendum but I think I will now after the last 2 posts!

jooksavage

Ahaha.... Priceless. John Waters got in possibly the most awful John Waters line ever: "These are angels dancing on the head of a pin while there are tanks coming down the main street". Then he storms off. After the referendum, whatever happens, there's gonna be a lot of reconciliation needed - I think both sides can agree that John Waters is a massive d***head and work from there.

dulpit

Jaysus. Firstly - both Eamon & John Waters were getting abortion pills and morning after pills mixed up. Secondly - it's interesting that Eamon can put forward a pretty even-handed line of questioning (while he was allowed), even though he says at the end he's a no voter. Thirdly - tad extreme reaction at the end...

It's only 15 minutes, and the main points are from ~10 minutes on... Well worth a listen...

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

sentient_6

Just finished up with the two and they're genuinely worth a listen. I did swipe them away first too. Worth taking the time.

storker

jooksavage wrote: »

Ahaha.... Priceless. John Waters got in possibly the most awful John Waters line ever: "These are angels dancing on the head of a pin while there are tanks coming down the main street". Then he storms off. After the referendum, whatever happens, there's gonna be a lot of reconciliation needed - I think both sides can agree that John Waters is a massive d***head and work from there.

Waters is one of those people I can't stand even when I agree with him. I guess it balances out the ones I like even though I disagree with them...

Utopia Parkway

Waters went completely off the deep end amazingly quickly there considering it wasn't even a particularly aggressive line of questioning from Dunphy. It went from a reasonable even friendly chat to Waters storming off in a volley of expletives in about a minute and a half.

I see Waters has since doubled down by saying he's sorry that he ever met Dunphy and hopes he never sees him again lol.

JohnFalstaff

John Waters should have been stopped from aborting that interview and made to carry it to full term.

murpho999

Just listened to both the John Walters and Una Mullally podcasts.

For me both are illustrative of how the campaigns are being run.

John Waters, who remember also advocated a no vote in the marriage referendum, came across as arrogant, , intolerant, petulant and unwilling to listen. He ultimately resorted to lies, temper tantrums and insults when he did not like what was being put to him.

Compare that to the interview with Una Mullaly, who advocated a Yes vote and the discussion was adult, respecftul, dignified and intelligent.

I think Dunphy, as an undecided voter leaning towards a no vote handled both interviews well.

I also think John Waters has given the no campaign a major setback through his behaviour and the media attention it is receiving.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

turbbo

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Who's John Waters? just started listening he sounds like a pure gombeen.

The ending is good though like an x-rated version of father ted - down with that sort of thing now.

EPAndlee

Ah he just called Dunphy what we've all been calling him for years

ligerdub

murpho999 wrote:

John Waters, who remember also advocated a no vote in the marriage referendum, came across as arrogant, , intolerant, petulant and unwilling to listen. He ultimately resorted to lies, temper tantrums and insults when he did not like what was being put to him.

murpho999 wrote:

Compare that to the interview with Una Mullaly, who advocated a Yes vote and the discussion was adult, respecftul, dignified and intelligent.

Hilarious. Mullaly is one of the least adult and respectful debaters around.

VW 1

Did you listen to both interviews?

Someone who can respect an interviewer playing devil's advocate is far better than a childish person who walks out mid-interview.

dulpit

I hadn't really appreciated how good an interviewer Dunphy is until listening to these 2 podcasts. When he's not doing his "showbiz baby" or "it's a disgrace Bill" schticks he's really very very good.

Arghus

Just listened to the John Waters interview there.

It was totally ridiculous. It was obvious right from the off that Waters was wound up and raring to go. Dunphy let him have a preamblatory waffle for a bit about his grandchild, but then tried to bring him back down to planet earth with the basic question - which he posed to him fairly and sincerely - about when we should consider human life to actually begin: fairly fundamental stuff if you want to have any sort of meaningful discussion about the issues!

Waters immediately began to get hot under the collar and more and more emotional, without dealing with the question in any meaningful way and quickly threw a complete tantrum before storming off. It was pretty extraordinary, Dunphy was entirely fair in his questioning and Waters just went totally bananas; the interview hadn't even got properly going and seemingly he wasn't even prepared to properly debate anything. Dunphy wasn't even playing devil's advocate, he was just getting the ball rolling. Surely anyone who is prepared to wade into the debate has to expect a degree of, well, debate to go along with that.

It felt like Waters just wanted a soapbox and once he had to deal with the presence of even a mere question he just lost the plot completely. The audio of him storming off effing and blinding is truly bizarre.

What an absolute child.

Arghus

ligerdub wrote: »

Hilarious. Mullaly is one of the least adult and respectful debaters around.

Nothing hilarious about it all. You should listen to it.

The interview with Una Mullaly was a good and intelligent debate and she made her points in an articulate and passionate manner. Her reputation precedes her in many ways, but based on what she had to say in the interview, I thought she came across extremely well.

Dunphy asked her the questions and she was able to engage with them and defend her points of views, without resorting to childishly stomping off abruptly. There's no comparison between the level of debate in her interview and the corresponding one with John Waters: Mullaly's is clearly and objectively far superior and to claim otherwise is totally and utterly farcical.

Yer Da sells Avon

dulpit wrote: »

I hadn't really appreciated how good an interviewer Dunphy is until listening to these 2 podcasts. When he's not doing his "showbiz baby" or "it's a disgrace Bill" schticks he's really very very good.

He's a seriously underrated interviewer. He had a great radio show on RTE around a decade ago, Conversations with Eamon Dunphy. Similar to Miriam O'Callaghan's Sunday morning series, but more probing and less cloying.

sleepyman

dulpit wrote: »

I hadn't really appreciated how good an interviewer Dunphy is until listening to these 2 podcasts. When he's not doing his "showbiz baby" or "it's a disgrace Bill" schticks he's really very very good.

Totally agree.I'd love if he could maybe get some different contributors on crime/football instead of the usual suspects.Apart from that It's really good.Walters came across as a right petulant child.

murpho999

ligerdub wrote: »

Hilarious. Mullaly is one of the least adult and respectful debaters around.

Did you listen to her interview with Dunphy?

Care to point out any provable examples to back up your argument?

Pete Moss

ligerdub wrote:

Hilarious. Mullaly is one of the least adult and respectful debaters around.

Listened to Waters yesterday and Mullally this morning. No contest. Mullally was eloquent and allowed Dunphy to make his point and hold his own opinion. Waters was abusive, aggressive and frustrated when challenged, he came across as a simpleton and out of his depth in an adult discussion.

As a side note, while I have no issue whatsoever with social and political topics being debated and discussed, I feel the campaign behind this referendum has become farcical over recent weeks.

The viral ads on YouTube and Facebook, many of which seem to have been funded by prolife organisations from outside Ireland. The hipster peddled Repeal jumpers. The campaign posters with inaccurate information placed outside schools, or the posters of aborted fetuses beside an image of Simon Harris in his constituency. The picketing at maternity hospitals by the No side, or the subsequent angels standing guard outside these hospitals from the Yes side. The shambles of the Claire Byrne debate with its Jerry Springer-esque audience, or the giant "No" plastered to the side of a mountain.

For what is a personal and emotive issue, this campaign should have been handled in a respectful and informative manner by both sides, rather than the mudslinging exercise it's become.

DickSwiveller

Very soft interview with Mullally, but I suppose that's par for the course these days. I like John Waters. He's a welcome alternative to the liberal consensus, but he acted like an idiot yesterday.

minikin

I’d suggest Waters reacted so personally because Dunphy is supposed to be a friend but he comes across as a bit of a two-faced snake in the grass.

Dunphy told Waters he was a no voter.
Dunphy told Mullaly ‘to put my cards on the table... I’m undecided’.

Which is it Eamo? Running with the hare and chasing with the hounds?.

igCorcaigh

minikin wrote: »

I’d suggest Waters reacted so personally because Dunphy is supposed to be a friend but he comes across as a bit of a two-faced snake in the grass.

Dunphy told Waters he was a no voter.
Dunphy told Mullaly ‘to put my cards on the table... I’m undecided’.

Which is it Eamo? Running with the hare and chasing with the hounds?.

Yeah! I noticed that too!

murpho999

minikin wrote: »

I’d suggest Waters reacted so personally because Dunphy is supposed to be a friend but he comes across as a bit of a two-faced snake in the grass.

Dunphy told Waters he was a no voter.
Dunphy told Mullaly ‘to put my cards on the table... I’m undecided’.

Which is it Eamo? Running with the hare and chasing with the hounds?.

I got the impression that he was an undecided voter but leaning towards no.

Nothing two faced about it.

Might be a tactic for interviewing too to get more out of them.

kenco

Listened to it this morning. I thought it was fine to start with but I feel within minutes Waters became very uncomfortable and - I think - was walking it was just a question of when. His reaction was a very poor reflection of on him as while Dunphy was undoubtedly challenging him it wasnt in a bad way...

Mullally I listened to yesterday and it was well handled and while she too was challenged she in comparison dealt with it maturely

dulpit

murpho999 wrote: »

I got the impression that he was an undecided voter but leaning towards no.

Nothing two faced about it.

Might be a tactic for interviewing too to get more out of them.

I thought he had mentioned a few months back that he'd be voting no?

ligerdub

murpho999 wrote: »

Did you listen to her interview with Dunphy?

Care to point out any provable examples to back up your argument?

Admittedly I hadn't (I never claimed I did), but I have since.

No surprise it was soft touch to be honest. Very difficult to give her praise for being so even handed and patient under such circumstances. You might as well give Real Madrid with Ronaldo & co praise for beating their under-8's team in training. There's nothing to be learned from somebody who isn't challenged.

To use an example of how Dunphy laid up these points for her, he:

- Spoke about the citizens assembly and why that was used to spur on the referendum. The point was about representation, which Mullaly said the CA did (it didn't), and how the Dail isn't representative (it is). Dunphy then went on to agree with her because of "the scarcity of women", a hollow point needlessly served up by Eamo.

- He then made some sort of leading question about patriarchy.

- He also then repeatedly answered her question for her in the sense that it wasn't really a question at all.

Mullaly's colours show up very clearly when anybody gives her even the most minor of pushbacks. She pulls out of debates if she doesn't like the opponent. She has sought (and succeeded in) getting comments disabled on her articles, one must not criticise Una. Her articles are a collection of misandry.

She has also used her own personal health struggles as a means to emotionally sway people or bat away opponents about why she, as a lesbian, should be permitted to get married. That's not to say she shouldn't be allowed, but let's leave the personal stuff out of it.

I never claimed this to be a Waters v Mullaly point either by the way. You'll notice I haven't mentioned Waters once, think what you like about him you'll find no pushback here, however I can't stand over a viewpoint that puts Una as some sort of reasonable commentator on anything.

Dial Hard

Pete Moss wrote: »

For what is a personal and emotive issue, this campaign should have been handled in a respectful and informative manner by both sides, rather than the mudslinging exercise it's become.

I keep seeing this and it honestly, genuinely puzzles me. I hand-on-heart haven't seen anything from the Yes side even approaching the kind of tactics employed elsewhere. Genuine request here: can someone please point me in the direction of some examples of disrespectful/unacceptable campaign behaviour from any of the Yes organisations?

DickSwiveller

Dial Hard wrote: »

I keep seeing this and it honestly, genuinely puzzles me. I hand-on-heart haven't seen anything from the Yes side even approaching the kind of tactics employed elsewhere. Genuine request here: can someone please point me in the direction of some examples of disrespectful/unacceptable campaign behaviour from any of the Yes organisations?

A lot of repealers are extremely intolerant of anyone who dares disagree with them. Maybe that's just the twitter bubble crowd, though