Is it just me or have SF vanished?

McMurphy wrote: »

I'll bite. Spoofing what about exactly?

Either way I'm not losing sleep over this, but lay out any inaccuracies you feel I have made about McCabe, I'll be back to address them in the morning.

You are spoofing that some GP resigning from the medical council is something like Maurice McCabe
A spoof
But you know that and you know that's what I said
Asked you to back up your accusations
You didn't because obviously you can't

Now what is one to make of your other or any of your pronouncements if your standard is spoof?

Whelo79

markodaly wrote: »

I can, and its an easy answer.

SF can either, support the current care-taker government in its efforts to try and beat this pandemic or if they think they cannot do that, try and form an alternative working government.

It.is.that.simple

So in your opinion SF can support the caretaker government or they can try form an alternative government (which they have done and are still trying to do), but there is no place for criticism or questioning of the actions and decisions of said caretaker government in order to hold them accountable for their actions? I think there is a name for that type of regime??

Remind me again, how much were FG originally giving to people made unemployed during this pandemic?

Pre election wasn't FG/FF saying a rent freeze was unconstitutional? What happened there?

Need more examples?

[Deleted User]

Whelo79 wrote: »

So in your opinion SF can support the caretaker government or they can try form an alternative government (which they have done and are still trying to do), but there is no place for criticism or questioning of the actions and decisions of said caretaker government in order to hold them accountable for their actions? I think there is a name for that type of regime??

Remind me again, how much were FG originally giving to people made unemployed during this pandemic?

Pre election wasn't FG/FF saying a rent freeze was unconstitutional? What happened there?

Need more examples?

He has almost cult-like refusal to allow any critism of anything FG

Same lad compares everyone else to trump supporters :pac:...perhaps a bit of introspection wouldnt go astray

Mortelaro wrote: »

You are spoofing that some GP resigning from the medical council is something like Maurice McCabe
A spoof
But you know that and you know that's what I said
Asked you to back up your accusations
You didn't because obviously you can't

Now what is one to make of your other or any of your pronouncements if your standard is spoof?

If you're going to make a claim that I'm spoofing about character assassination attempts on McCabe ontjos site and elsewhere and "the disgruntled GP" - you will need to back that up I'm afraid.

You asked me my reasons for making the comparison's, which I duly did..

Just saying it's spoofing without stating your case isn't going to cut the mustard here I'm afraid.

Either use the pot or get off it.

aido79

Whelo79 wrote: »

So in your opinion SF can support the caretaker government or they can try form an alternative government (which they have done and are still trying to do), but there is no place for criticism or questioning of the actions and decisions of said caretaker government in order to hold them accountable for their actions? I think there is a name for that type of regime??

Remind me again, how much were FG originally giving to people made unemployed during this pandemic?

Pre election wasn't FG/FF saying a rent freeze was unconstitutional? What happened there?

Need more examples?

In some ways the criticism is almost more important than the actions and decisions of the government...if it is constructive criticism based on facts and provides workable and realistic solutions.
Criticism for the sake of criticising just gets tiresome after a while especially when facts aren't checked and no proper thought is put into the criticism or solutions. This coupled with the constant need for populism is my biggest problem with SF personally.

Whelo79

[Deleted User] wrote: »

He has almost cult-like refusal to allow any critism of anything FG

Same lad compares everyone else to trump supporters :pac:...perhaps a bit of introspection wouldnt go astray

There are people from both sides who could do with practicing that.

I'd class myself as a SF supporter, no problems stating that. I can and have been critical of them in family discussions and I have no problem giving Leo or FG or FF praise when they do right. I don't understand blind partisan cult like supportership of anything, with the exception of maybe a sports team.

McMurphy wrote: »

If you're going to make a claim that I'm spoofing about character assassination attempts on McCabe ontjos site and elsewhere and "the disgruntled GP" - you will need to back that up I'm afraid.

You asked me my reasons for making the comparison's, which I duly did..

Just saying it's spoofing without stating your case isn't going to cut the mustard here I'm afraid.

Either use the pot or get off it.

You know full well you attempted to equate blanch's accurate biography of the GP with Maurice McCabe
That's the spoof
Impossible to defend so you're spoofing last 2 posts that you didn't try to equate them

I don't need to point that out,you know this,so answer the question, is there a conspiracy to blacken the name of a gp in the medical council's office,Simon Harris's or the HSE
You drew the comparison
You provide the proof
Otherwise it's a spoof
Thank you

Mortelaro wrote: »

You know full well you attempted to equate blanch's accurate biography of the GP with Maurice McCabe
That's the spoof
Impossible to defend so you're spoofing last 2 posts that you didn't try to equate them

This is one of the pitfalls of trying to put out lots of little fires in too many places at once, I never even discussed this with blanch. If you got this bit wrong, what else might you have gotten wrong (to use your own line) :cool:

I don't need to point that out,you know this,so answer the question, is there a conspiracy to blacken the name of a gp in the medical council's office ,Simon Harris's or the HSE
You drew the comparison
You provide the proof
Otherwise it's a spoof
Thank you

Again, you've not been paying close enough attention. I never said anything about the HSE or the medical council, I asked the poster who initially brought up the herd immunity point if this was a character assassination attempt as we had seen on the site ref McCabe.

Mortelaro wrote: »

You are spoofing that some GP resigning from the medical council is something like Maurice McCabe
A spoof
But you know that and you know that's what I said
Asked you to back up your accusations
You didn't because obviously you can't

Now what is one to make of your other or any of your pronouncements if your standard is spoof?

McMurphy wrote: »

I see the troops have been sent out to try and discredit anyone that speaks out against the regime?

Was he the controversial GP that advocated herd immunity? Googled it, seems he wrote something about it alright.

Is he the same GP that quit because of the controversies surrounding the nursing home, of which many govt supporters in this site are agreeing with?

What's the relevance anyway, save for maybe trying to imply he's not credible on the subject?

Bang of Maurice McCabe about this - bit of the auld character assassination Colonel is it?

You have come up with a predetermined answer, and will squirm and lie until you get there.

Any mention of govt legal strategies came along when you initially suggested I was spoofing even comparing McCabes treatment and the post I referred to.

This site was chock full of people suggesting McCabe was a disgruntled loose canon when he emerged with his whistleblower claims.

Marcus de Brun quits his post and complains about how the nursing home controversy has been handled. He's a disgruntled GP, "Herd immunity".

State your reasons for disputing the comparison, drop the spoofing claim and we can move on.

McMurphy wrote: »

This is one of the pitfalls of trying to put out lots of little fires in too many places at once, I never even discussed this with blanch. If you got this bit wrong, what else might you have gotten wrong (to use your own line) :cool:

Again, you've not been paying close enough attention. I never said anything about the HSE or the medical council, I asked the poster who initially brought up the herd immunity point if this was a character assassination attempt as we had seen on the site ref McCabe.

You have come up with a predetermined answer, and will squirm and lie until you get there.

Any mention of govt legal strategies came along when you initially suggested I was spoofing even comparing McCabes treatment and the post I referred to.

This site was chock full of people suggesting McCabe was a disgruntled loose canon when he emerged with his whistleblower claims.

Marcus de Brun quits his post and complains about how the nursing home controversy has been handled. He's a disgruntled GP, "Herd immunity".

State your reasons for disputing the comparison, drop the spoofing claim and we can move on.

I see
All of the above waffle and not one centilla of evidence to back up your claim that this Gp is the subject of a Garda McCabe conspiracy
I asked you
You've declined
Ergo your comparison is a spoof

Classic stuff...
Good job mainstream SF don't go on with your garbage on tv or radio

Mortelaro wrote: »

I see
All of the above waffle and not one centilla of evidence to back up your claim that this Gp is the subject of a Garda McCabe conspiracy
I asked you
You've declined
Ergo your comparison is a spoof

Classic stuff...
Good job mainstream SF don't go on with your garbage on tv or radio

You're a spoofer - classic example of thinking someone said something they didn't - double down on it despite the evidence not supporting the claims you made.

Might I respectfully suggest you are a classic example of someone who is more smug than smart.

Proving what you suggest is beneath you.

Get up the yard you fraud.

McMurphy wrote: »

You're a spoofer - classic example of thinking someone said something they didn't - double down on it despite the evidence not supporting the claims you made.

Might I respectfully suggest you are a classic example of someone who is more smug than smart.

Proving what you suggest is beneath you.

Get up the yard you fraud.

No evidence I see
Or are you now u turning and denying what you said about comparing the GP with Maurice McCabe
No way out for you I'm afraid, you even re quoted yourself making the comparison

All I asked for was proof
All you have in reply is F'ing and blinding...

Oh and trying to say my posts were denying the Maurice McCabe story is a lie
My only mention of him was to say there was no comparison with the GP that resigned
It's you making the comparison
Wheres the proof?
Not the spoof

As I said,theres a reason SF mainstream dont go on with this level of spoofing on tv and radio
They know better

Mortelaro wrote: »

No evidence I see
Or are you now u turning and denying what you said about comparing the GP with Maurice McCabe
No way out for you I'm afraid, you even re quoted yourself making the comparison

All I asked for was proof
All you have in reply is F'ing and blinding...

Oh and trying to say my posts were denying the Maurice McCabe story is a lie
My only mention of him was to say there was no comparison with the GP that resigned
It's you making the comparison
Wheres the proof?
Not the spoof

As I said,theres a reason SF mainstream dont go on with this level of spoofing on tv and radio
They know better

Hey - if you cannot, or will not differentiate between the HSE, the govt, or the Gardai and posters on this site, that's on you and not me.

I've waited on you disproving the comparison's, you're not forthcoming with them.

I'm not prepared to go on with the same jig you're dancing.

McMurphy wrote: »

Hey - if you cannot, or will not differentiate between the HSE, the govt, or the Gardai and posters on this site, that's on you and not me.

I've waited on you disproving the comparison's, you're not forthcoming with them.

I'm not prepared to go on with the same jig you're dancing.

Hang on a sec you are asking me to prove theres no proof behind your comparison so you can carry on with your accusations with no proof?

Heh that is a straw man

It doesn't cover up your spoofing on the matter
For that you need to back up the accusation I called you out on
You can't

Mortelaro wrote: »

Hang on a sec you are asking me to prove theres no proof behind your comparison so you can carry on with your accusations with no proof?

Heh that is a straw man

It doesn't cover up your spoofing on the matter
For that you need to back up the accusation I called you out on
You can't

Stop digging.

The original question was if the poster was trying to discredit the GP by bringing up his herd immunity reference, in the same manner posters on the site tried to discredit McCabe.

There's a fundamental difference in the HSE/Govt/AGS and posters on this site.

It's prob time to rein the horns back in, and admit your mistake (one of several)

McMurphy wrote: »

Stop digging.

The original question was if the poster was trying to discredit the GP by bringing up his herd immunity reference, in the same manner posters on the site tried to discredit McCabe.

There's a fundamental difference in the HSE/Govt/AGS and posters on this site.

It's prob time to rein the horns back in, and admit your mistake (one of several)

I'll stop asking for evidence of your fallacious claim of a similarity between the Maurice McCabe case and the GP who resigned from the medical council if you say there is none and that you were incorrect to suggest there was

Back up your comparison or drop it,is all I am asking

blanch152

Whelo79 wrote: »

So in your opinion SF can support the caretaker government or they can try form an alternative government (which they have done and are still trying to do), but there is no place for criticism or questioning of the actions and decisions of said caretaker government in order to hold them accountable for their actions? I think there is a name for that type of regime??

Remind me again, how much were FG originally giving to people made unemployed during this pandemic?

Pre election wasn't FG/FF saying a rent freeze was unconstitutional? What happened there?

Need more examples?

Given that it is a minority government with only 35 Dail seats, any criticism of it has to be considered in the context of why don't you vote them out and replace them with a proper government.

All of the anti-FG TDs could have clubbed together and elected Richard Boyd-Barrett six weeks ago, if they wanted. Nothing FG could have done about that.

Even now, all those who don't like the FG/FF document have something like 86 votes to elect a different Taoiseach.

As I keep saying, there is only a caretaker government, no proper government and therefore no opposition. Anyone who dislikes what the caretaker government is doing, or criticises it, can step up to the plate and do it themselves instead. If their criticism has merit, they will get support from the Dail to do that.

smurgen

aido79 wrote: »

In some ways the criticism is almost more important than the actions and decisions of the government...if it is constructive criticism based on facts and provides workable and realistic solutions.
Criticism for the sake of criticising just gets tiresome after a while especially when facts aren't checked and no proper thought is put into the criticism or solutions. This coupled with the constant need for populism is my biggest problem with SF personally.

Populism? Like lieo joining in on the criticism of Keelings after he was part of a call for movement of farm workers during the pandemic?

https://www.rte.ie/amp/1132847/

McMurphy wrote: »

There doesn't seem to be much appetite from the Greens/Socdems or labour at taking the judas gold and becoming scapegoats, the last I was reading a rural group of independents voiced some interest in making themselves available, which includes (wait for it) MHR + DHR who has straight off said no to any notion of raising carbon taxes (greens gone) and Michael Collins, who was responsible for pulling the rug from under FG last time (a cork man by the name of Michael Collins, some irony) and Matty McGrath.

So we are in agreement.
No one wants to be in the government hot seat, apart from FF and FG.

Now you can look at it two ways.

You can be infantile about it and chuckle at how no one wants to go into government with FF/FG, Har har...back-slap here...etc...
... but then we are left with the reality, of well what is the next government going to look like so?

If everyone bar FF and FG are running for the hills, it says a lot more about them then anything else and thus we are into a new election as an inevitable consequence.

Now do you really think the electorate are going to reward the same people who ran for the hills? What is the point so of voting for the likes of the Greens/SD'/Labour/PBP/SOL... just to make up the numbers and get their 5 seconds on some soapbox on the 6.1 News... but when offered the chance to actually improve peoples lives and enact change.... they say, nah, **** that, that is waaaay too hard?

People seem to forget, the Dail elects the government. It is the most important thing it does and has a constitutional responsibility in doing so.

Greens/SD'/Labour/PBP/SOL etc.. dont want to go into a FF/FG government... grand.

So who and what are THEIR preferred option.
Have they even sat down with SF and battered out some ideas?
Any joint principle documents?
Any joint policies on the economy or taxes?
ANYTHING???
..
....
We all know the answer to that.

So, yea once this pandemic is brought under some control and we are staring into a new election at the end of the summer, these questions will be rightfully asked of all these other chancers, and it won't be pretty.

Whelo79 wrote: »

So in your opinion SF can support the caretaker government or they can try form an alternative government (which they have done and are still trying to do)

Still trying?
They haven't talked to any other party in months!!

but there is no place for criticism or questioning of the actions and decisions of said caretaker government in order to hold them accountable for their actions? I think there is a name for that type of regime??

You mean acting as the opposition when in fact this Dail has no government and SF are 'trying' to form a government. Classic SF alright. Talking from both sides of their mouth.

markodaly wrote: »

So we are in agreement.
No one wants to be in the government hot seat, apart from FF and FG.

Now you can look at it two ways.

You can be infantile about it and chuckle at how no one wants to go into government with FF/FG, Har har...back-slap here...etc...
... but then we are left with the reality, of well what is the next government going to look like so?

If everyone bar FF and FG are running for the hills, it says a lot more about them then anything else and thus we are into a new election as an inevitable consequence.

Now do you really think the electorate are going to reward the same people who ran for the hills? What is the point so of voting for the likes of the Greens/SD'/Labour/PBP/SOL... just to make up the numbers and get their 5 seconds on some soapbox on the 6.1 News... but when offered the chance to actually improve peoples lives and enact change.... they say, nah, **** that, that is waaaay too hard?

People seem to forget, the Dail elects the government. It is the most important thing it does and has a constitutional responsibility in doing so.

Greens/SD'/Labour/PBP/SOL etc.. dont want to go into a FF/FG government... grand.

So who and what are THEIR preferred option.
Have they even sat down with SF and battered out some ideas?
Any joint principle documents?
Any joint policies on the economy or taxes?
ANYTHING???
..
....
We all know the answer to that.

So, yea once this pandemic is brought under some control and we are staring into a new election at the end of the summer, these questions will be rightfully asked of all these other chancers, and it won't be pretty.

Yeah seems we are in agreement to a certain extent, the only conundrum i forsee in your prediction will be the problem FFG will have in running candidates in the upcoming election trying to persuade the electorate theres any difference in each other - doubly difficult when or if they decide to gobble up and promise to legislate for more of the policies that they told Sinn Fein were pie in the sky economic fantasies, and/or pandering to the "free everything brigade".

Anyone for a United island unit or 12k houses every year for the next five years?

Maybe the shinners will be happy enough to sit on the opposition benches, and watch on as FFG get on with introducing their policies?

Six more counties and free gaffs for all.

McMurphy wrote: »

Yeah seems we are in agreement to a certain extent, the only conundrum i forsee in your prediction will be the problem FFG will have in running candidates in the upcoming election trying to persuade the electorate theres any difference in each other - doubly difficult when or if they decide to gobble up and promise to legislate for more of the policies that they told Sinn Fein were pie in the sky economic fantasies, and/or pandering to the "free everything brigade".

The core vote of FF will vote for FF and the core vote of FG will vote for FG. To add they will also attract votes from the other minority parties as they can pass themselves off as actually being interested in governing.

The details of any manifestos are mute at this point, so no point even discussing it.

Anyone for a United island unit or 12k houses every year for the next five years?

Maybe the shinners will be happy enough to sit on the opposition benches, and watch on as FFG get on with introducing their policies?

Six more counties and free gaffs for all.

Well, you have just proven my point and the very point of this thread. SF are indeed more interested in doing nothing than governing.

James Brown

McMurphy wrote: »

Yeah seems we are in agreement to a certain extent, the only conundrum i forsee in your prediction will be the problem FFG will have in running candidates in the upcoming election trying to persuade the electorate theres any difference in each other - doubly difficult when or if they decide to gobble up and promise to legislate for more of the policies that they told Sinn Fein were pie in the sky economic fantasies, and/or pandering to the "free everything brigade".

Anyone for a United island unit or 12k houses every year for the next five years?

Maybe the shinners will be happy enough to sit on the opposition benches, and watch on as FFG get on with introducing their policies?

Six more counties and free gaffs for all.

It will be amusing to watch the irony of the FG brethren attack any opposition party after FG relishing being in opposition and it being sold as laughing at SF making a balls of it or what ever. We knew the whole FF/FG 'stability' was baloney but Varadkar put a stamp on it the days after the election.

I think SF are the favourites for any coming election. Hopefully we see the SD's and others rise too. Be nice for the electorate to be able to choose between policies and not best of a bad lot, and not the punish FF vote FG or vice versa waste of time.

So, it appears that instead of 200 dead from Covid-19 in NI, the number is actually closer to 500.
Less tweeting, more governing please SF.

[Deleted User]

markodaly wrote: »

So, it appears that instead of 200 dead from Covid-19 in NI, the number is actually closer to 500.
Less tweeting, more governing please SF.

Aye,who can argue againest a utd ireland after what the english have let happen there

We've had a coronavirus outbreak every decade this century,this first to reach europe,we need to push on with utd ireland before more die due to british incompetence here

Ballso

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Aye,who can argue againest a utd ireland after what the english have let happen there

We've had a coronavirus outbreak every decade this century,this first to reach europe,we need to push on with utd ireland before more die due to british incompetence here

Always the victim, always someone else's fault

markodaly wrote: »

The core vote of FF will vote for FF and the core vote of FG will vote for FG. To add they will also attract votes from the other minority parties as they can pass themselves off as actually being interested in governing.

The details of any manifestos are mute at this point, so no point even discussing it.

Someone maybe missed the concerns from TDs and minister's in both party's concerned about a partnership or coalition being problematic for each other in certain constituencies. Trying to pretend they're different to one another will have major complications when it comes to convincing people to vote for one or the other, splitting the vote if you like.

Merger on the cards perhaps?

Well, you have just proven my point and the very point of this thread. SF are indeed more interested in doing nothing than governing.

Two ways of looking at it I suppose.

First.

The core principle of SF to even exist = Irish Unity, I don't think they'll have much to oppose if FFG start working towards that same goal.

Second.

Why buy a dog and bark yourself?

Partitionists up and down the island north and south will undoubtedly be jumping with joy at the thoughts of United Island unit being introduced.

Some lads don't see far enough ahead of themselves though.

markodaly wrote: »

Besides, trying to make political hay or capital about people dying, is kinda sick and twisted. Its low form.

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

markodaly wrote: »

So, it appears that instead of 200 dead from Covid-19 in NI, the number is actually closer to 500.
Less tweeting, more governing please SF.

James Brown

Ballso wrote: »

Always the victim, always someone else's fault

Homelessness = Pretending / worse elsewhere
A&E crises = Drunks and People too lazy to go see their doctor
Housing = Too lazy to go out and get better jobs / pretending / sponging

Aye, indeed.