Del.Monte wrote: » Nope, all the critics are perfect little robots and have never done anything similar in their blemish free lives. :rolleyes:
Andrea B. wrote: » It was most likely not a conscious action to nod off, as opposed to the actions of the many owners of empty seats around him submitting for full daily allowances for their "attendance".
Andrea B. wrote: » Has anyone here criticising the lad for what I understand is a once-off, never suffered from extreme fatigue, due to a personal situation or illness?
Higgins5473 wrote: » Suffering from extreme fatigue is something every single human being will go through in our lives more often than we would think. Falling asleep at work as a result of it, is not.
RandomViewer wrote: » If we're using Rees Mogg as an acceptable example of anything we are truly fuxxxd
Bowie wrote: » For me it's being asleep during the discussion then being woke so he could vote. He was obviously told how to vote ir had decided going in, was happy to do so and anyone making a point that might have swayed him was to be ignored. In fact he may as well have not been there.
Shefwedfan wrote: » That’s the SF attitude anyway...don’t bother showing up..... I think you will find most of the political parties will meet prior to these votes and have an internal discussion, then when they are at meeting they will already have discussed in detail Of course that doesn’t mean they have to vote with the party, as seen before the member can still vote against....well in most parties that’s how it works....Others we won’t comment
Galwayguy35 wrote: » No its the second time, he did it a few weeks ago as well. And he isn't alone Mattie McGrath was caught out as well having a nap.
Galwayguy35 wrote: » No its the second time, he did it a few weeks ago as well.
ronivek wrote: » Any links to support that claim? Not that it would be terribly surprising I suppose since anyone in Government seems to get held to much higher standards than anyone in opposition.
Bowie wrote: » You're obsessed with SF. I think you'll find its common courtesy to listen to others before you need be woke for a vote. He did what he did. If you feel the need to defend him cool.
Bowie wrote: » See now it reads like you have a pro government bias for some reason. Holders of office are held to higher standards. This isn't new. Leader of the Greens in a new coalition government is under more scrutiny than say a FG councilor admiring fascists and thanking them for free speech while being critical of Black Lives Matter protesters.
Shefwedfan wrote: » It's common coutesy to show up to work and to attend for votes like this. So if you are so high and mighty about Eamonn Ryan then why do you have zero issue with SF? This is relevant as you are the most outspoken on this thread, as usual you seem to have one rule for one TD and another set of rules for another.
blanch152 wrote: » To some posters falling asleep in the Dail is a greater crime than - welcome home parties for Garda killers - attending fake funerals for thugs during lockdowns - being an anti-vaxxer - misogynistic, racist podcasts - tweeting sectarian photos - singing IRA songs at political rallies - refusing to pay rent and putting charities out of business - going on holidays during election campaigns (now there is real contempt for voters) - lying about your brother’s child abuse - gun-running - bomb-making - drunken Garda assaults - living in a Council house while earning 95k It really is serious when you fall asleep in the Dail
Bowie wrote: » Why bring up SF so much in threads where they are not the topic? Do you think that cancels out criticism or something? Lots of issues with SF. Prefer their housing intent to FG's. I don't think so. I've given my opinion. I don't think he should be arrested or anything. Quote one comment by me on any thread doing that.
Shefwedfan wrote: » Your on board 24 x 7 and filling every thread with bile against TDs If you have such a lofty requirement for some TD should you not have it for all? I
Bowie wrote: » See you are dodging and deflecting there. Can you not speak on sleepy Eamo without running defense by changing the subject? Being critical of a politician is not automatically defending another. Nice to see you defend the Greens for a change.
Bowie wrote: » No bile were it isn't due. I do. You say I don't but can't seem to back that up.
blanch152 wrote: » I think the problem here is that you see this as a political battle with everyone having sides. I see it differently. It is a matter of applying standards equally. So in a world that allows politicians to flout lockdown restrictions and attend a fake funeral, falling asleep in the Dail is a minor indiscretion by comparison, ditto the other examples in my post. You have been loud and clear about ms humphreys in other threads. Again, if what she is accused of is given some evidence, then it is worse than falling asleep in the Dail, but still a long way short of the type of misogynist racist podacst that your friend from Tallaght is in the habit of posting, for example. It comes back to standards, and applying them equally. You will let every single SF and PBP offence go, but attack the slightest hint of misbehaviour from FG. It is ridiculous at this stage, because you have no standards, there is nothing that SF could do that would persuade you to abandon them. I only look like a FG supporter because I contrast the standards applied by posters like you to SF and FG, and find it silly. Getting back to Ryan, a Minister working 110-hour weeks falling asleep for a few minutes in the Dail is perfectly understandable and far from an issue.
Shefwedfan wrote: » So you want Ryan sacked for sleeping, you want Cowan sacked for lying Mary Lou McDonsld stood on tv and lied directly to camera about a poor mans murder. Yet you have no issue over that This lie was to cover up another lie from a SF politician about the poor man. Again you have no issue You have SF TDs getting fined for not showing up to their job. You have no issue You have a SF TD caught robbing a charity, then abusing people online when caught, again no issue with that Mattie fell asleep and did you even post on the thread???? So how exactly are you holding them all to the same requirements?
Bowie wrote: » Quite the opposite. Eamo falls asleep and votes a way I disagree with. That's me giving an opinion and giving reason for the opinion. You and one or two others chime in talking about SF and making claims about differing standards with zero back up because I believe it's a team sport for some and they cant address a topic on it's own merits. Its Eamo did it didnt do anything too bad. It's not Eamo criticised, bring up the Omagh bombing. In short your comment above is delusional. The last part is all you needed post.
Bowie wrote: » Don't really care if either were sacked or not What lie? Is this the lad got murdered? Is this when he said he was a criminal? Sounded like he was involved with dodgy folk. Did he have a record? What ones are fined for not showing up? Let me know and I'll make a decision. No clue who you are talking about. I did post in the Mattie thread. What did I win? Show me how I'm not? You made the claim I was as usual at that. I asked for quotes.
blanch152 wrote: » Well, let’s be clear, then. I don’t think falling asleep is any big deal, especially from someone putting in 110-hour weeks. However, there is a long list of worse wrongdoing that you have repeatedly failed to criticise. You are on other threads, defending all sorts of thuggish behaviour.
Deleted User wrote: » What fake funeral?? Your making things up,to excuse what is obviously a physical ill man,who isnt able for the workload,falling asleep at his job
Bowie wrote: » See that wasn't hard. Like what and how would that work? Eamo was asleep but spare a thought for Lord Mountbatten?
