FrancieBrady wrote: » Love this 'admitted' Indo style spin. He said.... He wasn't hiding the fact nor was he being interrogated. Maty Lou said the same thing. YFG call around to houses too and FG send Civil Servants to the houses of Garda COmmissioners. You also have Party Whip systems that 'control' what party members do as well as stringent rules. Your 'heavy' and 'intimidation# pile-on fell on it's arse blanch and you are not big enought to admit it.
blanch152 wrote: » Sure, I've had members of all parties call to my door, but they aren't calling on cold dark nights in the middle of Covid restrictions asking me to take down social media posts. No, that is the preserve of one political party. #notanormalparty
blanch152 wrote: » Martin Browne has just admitted he regularly calls to the door of Sinn Fein members to castigate them for their social media posts. Christine O'Mahony is not an isolated example. Browne has confirmed that the heavies calling to the door is a normal practice.
Bowie wrote: » You pushed the FG lie that 'the heavies' were sent around to intimidate the woman. You can't even acknowledge that. The fact that more than one would call to other people on occasion, who may feel intimidated is separate from the FG lie you peddled. It's the same FG theme of embellishing facts to try penalise people for not voting FG IMO. I've had Labour party member(s) call to my door and I'd be genuinely suprised it it's not common with other parties. I know my local FG posse are active and door knocking to speak to members. Nobody accuses them of being sinister. It's codswallop.
blanch152 wrote: » You are the one listening to old news and grasping at straws. Interviews with other SF representatives have confirmed that it is normal practice and they have accepted that she “maybe felt intimidated and it was wrong”. See my link from an interview today.
blanch152 wrote: » Martin Browne has just admitted he regularly calls to the door of Sinn Fein members to castigate them for their social media posts.
Mr Browne said that since he became involved with Sinn Féin in 1980 he had gone to members’ doors “to have discussions” about the party, saying: “It was me going to another party member and having a discussion, whether it was a disagreement or an agreement or something or trying to come to a consensus or something. I would never have even think of it as being intimidatory.”
Christine O'Mahony is not an isolated example. Browne has confirmed that the heavies calling to the door is a normal practice.
Bowie wrote: » You pushed the FG lie that 'the heavies' were sent around to intimidate the woman. This is untrue and the woman herself asked FG to retract it.
Bowie wrote: » This is an old non story which has been debunked and the claims you pushed were found untrue. FG and yourself peddled the lie that 'the heavies' were sent around in an effort to intimidate the woman. This is not the case. She herself asked FG to retract that. Here you are pretending you just got wind of the report trying a different spin. Dishonest.
bobbysands81 wrote: » Sinn Féin have made mistakes on the economic side alright but not in budgeting... all their budgets are fully costed by DoF and have been for years. A massive recent error has been to limit the pay of public servants to €100k. As for Fine Gael... they’re a Government party who are acting as if they are an opposition party with their constant sniping and attacks on Sinn Féin... they would be better off sticking to running the State effectively and stop making all the mistakes that both themselves and FF have been making. However, the reason that they are doing this is that they see SF as their legitimate competition now given the slide and long term problems facing FF. FF really need to be careful as they’re on the precipice and look like falling over it is inevitable. They are desperately in need of change... and don’t look capable of it right now.
blanch152 wrote: » Stanleygate is the gift that keeps on giving.https://www.independent.ie/news/sinn-fein-td-admits-calling-to-party-members-homes-when-he-disagreed-with-social-media-posts-39845642.html "A Sinn Féin TD has admitted to calling to party members’ homes when he has disagreed with their social media posts. Martin Browne also said that Sinn Féin needs to stop apologising for its “core belief” that Provisional IRA attacks were a continuation of the War of Independence." It certainly is eye-opening the way that controlling the social media posts of members is so deeply engrained in the culture of Sinn Fein to the extent that a large number of their public representatives view it as normal behaviour. In contrast, no surprise that a Shinner supports murder, thankfully he was man enough to admit that. Put the two together, and would anyone be happy with a man who supports murder calling to your door on a cold dark night to tell you to take down your social media posts?
marieholmfan wrote: » That's good you can vote FG so and children can starve on the street. Some people are fine with the La Mons bombing and Warrington but they draw the line at building council houses.
Floppybits wrote: » Its a lack of trust in SF. They haven't really covered themselves in glory over the last number of years. They need to improve in all areas but especially in budgeting and in the behaviour of the party members. Having idiots like cullinane shouting up the ra after being elected is not going to win over voters. It gives the impression the gunman is just lurking beneath the surface. As for FG they need to get over themselves and their insecurities and stop this its them or us crap. They need to accept that folks will not agree with them on alot of things but that doesn't mean that they can go off on a sulk as they did after the last election or their current behaviour of lashing out because their leader has been exposed for leaking confidential documents and had a hand in appointing a crony to the supreme Court. They need to change this tactic fast as people are sick of them.
christy c wrote: » I've voted FG since 2011, and would not touch SF with a barge pole. That is absolutely noting to do with the IRA. It is solely because of the economic dung peddled by SF for the last decade or so. I'm not sure how common that view is amongst other voters, but there are plenty of reasons to dislike SF other than the IRA.
marieholmfan wrote: » FG hate Sinn Fein because of the IRA that's the reality the typical voter, supporter and activist (FG) utterly reject the assertion that any organisation other than the Irish Defence Forces and Gardai can exercise violence on behalf of the Irish people. They don't believe Sinn Fein are a normal party - they seem as a front for a criminal gang. Sinn Fein IRA -- I might see that as a boast but every FGer sees it as a clear and unambiguous condemnation.
bobbysands81 wrote: » Fine Gael are reluctant to portray SF as any type of “normal” political party, it’s an attempt to consolidate their power base over FF and reduce their popularity (which FF are intent on doing themselves). FG are trying to polarise politics, you’re either with us or you’re with Sinn Féin. It’s a massive mistake by FG, they’re trying to define themselves in opposition to SF rather then being pro what FG stand for. This will bite them.
christy c wrote: » Id broadly agree there. Personally if SF improved dramatically economically I'd throw them a vote no problem. I'd even put up with idiots like Cullinane. However that looks extremely unlikely. FG have so many flaws its hard to know where to start. They are our "right wing" party, yet preside over a colossal public spending, ridiculous marginal tax rates, along with other issues some of which you mention. From what I remember they jumped in the polls when Leo was elected leader, people seemingly liked the "looking after early risers" soundbite. However as we know they proceeded with the policies i mentioned above.
christy c wrote: » Yeah, probably some truth in that about polarisation, hadn't really given it much thought. Probably similar to SF in that case, with their "change" and "tweedle dum and tweedle dee" stuff. Could well bite them, I dont know. There still is a substantial opposition to SF amongst the electorate.
christy c wrote: » While I think many will enjoy Sinn Fein making themselves look even more stupid than usual, personally I'd rather their representatives get hauled over the coals for the horse sh1t they call economic policy. That said, he should have known better.
Nobotty wrote: » Well if you're going for A or B, try C too and have a read first of this from the referendum year,listen to the Sean o'Rourke interview and see some of the context not in that youtube clip or suggested by mullen and crew at Iona Politics is also about dodging and neutering the immense forces opposed to you Iona were using adoption to try whip up hysteria against civil partnership at the time They were immense forces The job was to head them off which from the below interview is another plausible explanation One thing at a time Trying to ease people's minds on issues Iona and crew were stoking Doing that whilst struggling with sexuality can't have been easy I think going down this road of spinning his decision in only one way and only in the way that makes for politicising his private life decision is unnecessary and frankly too far There's loads of other policy material for going after him or FGhttps://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/referendum-is-not-about-me-or-adoption-says-varadkar-30933376.html
McMurphy wrote: » There's no need to get into any kind of rigmarole at all. There's a big elephant in the room you keep ignoring though and I'm going to repeat it, no-one made Leo make the speech in which he "opposed" same sex marriage, he did that off his own bat. It does leave us wondering though if he: A, did it purely for political capital at the time, and he was lying when he made the speech, or B, he, as a gay man in the closet really didn't believe himself and many others didn't deserve the same rights as straight people had since pretty much forever. I'm going with A myself nobotty.
marieholmfan wrote: » What is traditional about his family background other than suggestion that brown people are traditional or in other words backward? Is the traditional element the fact that his parents are heterosexual? You can assert that but it is so normal as not to need to be stated ever anf therefore I don't have to believe you.
Nobotty wrote: » Look,I didn't come here today or any day expecting to be in a rigmarole about Vradakar For a secretly gay politician,soccer player or teacher and there are other examples,lots of things are said and done that conflict with who they really are before they finally come to terms with their situation I can understand the goalpost such a situation in the case of politics is But its not somewhere I'm prepared to go because I believe in limits with something as deeply personal as this and am aware there could be people in that boat reading this.
