Lisbon 2: prepare to bend over and recieve ur destiny!

sk8board · 12-12-2008 04:21PM

ben bedlam wrote: »

Im sick of the argument put forward that just because we elected the MEP eurocrats that that somehow gives them a licence to decide on matters of national importance without consulting and refering back to their peoples.

as opposed to our elected TD!? don't be so narrow-minded.

Does Brian Lenihan consult the country before setting the budget?

Or batt o keefe consult the country before cutting back the Edu budget?

Of course they don't. Why? Becuase nothing would ever get done. Ever.

Theres nothing different here. we elect these people to operator for us, and in our interest.
Thats why we call them elected representatives.

Sometimes things just need to get going, and get pushed through.

If my local TD, whom I know, tells me that after careful consideration, they have decided that Yes is the best way forward, and for these reasons. Then I'll vote Yes without much concerns.

Otherwise you are merely suggesing that we're better off having NO elections whatsoever, while out of the other side of your mouth you say you don't want an unelected president of Europe.

skelliser · 12-12-2008 04:26PM

sk8board wrote: »

If my local TD, whom I know, tells me that after careful consideration, they have decided that Yes is the best way forward, and for these reasons. Then I'll vote Yes without much concerns.

So after careful consideration getting rid of medical cards, 200euro car parking tax, levy on low paid workers is grand and the best way forward!

anonymous_joe · 12-12-2008 04:29PM

Ckal wrote: »

Yes, but we find it worrying that people vote yes because they are Fianna Fail arse lickers. It goes both ways. Like I said, the "Bash the no-voters!" game is dead, it was a **** game to start with. So people need to back off.

Ireland answered a question. The majority of the powers didn't like it. "You're voting again" is what we were told by them and our own Government. What a load of absolute bull****. You'd expect this in Zimbabwe, not Ireland.

Given that I am registered to vote (I did what was needed to apply, yet they seem incompetent to actually send out a voting card these days), I will vote no. If it is Yes this time (which I doubt) then I don't care. Chances of me living in this country (and continent) for the rest of my life are very slim.

I have not once in my life ever voted for FF. Nor would I.

One of the things I really regret is that people are voting on the whole shenanigans surrounding the treaty. I think FF/FG/Labour et al all expected that the treaty would be passed easily. Irish people love the EU after all, look at all the free money they gave us, etc, look at the vast improvements in terms of lifestyle etc.

As such, tehy did next to no campaigning, and in fact, there campaigning was more about increasing visibility of their members than passing the treatment.

I find their conduct lamentable and fúcking stupid. However, that would not make me vote no.

I don't like Brian Cowen and FF. That would not make me vote no.

I have tried to understand the gist of the treaty, and it's purpose. That and that alone would make vote either yes, no or if I did not understand, I would abstain!

I want Ireland to be a part of the EU. People are trying to make the EU more efficient. I'm in favour of that, and won't hide that. I can understand why people might vote No, but would those people want us to leave the EU? Because we're seriously holding up the EU, and that's not going to be tolerated. I don't mean that as a threat, merely that we just asked for money for the piggy problem and were told to fúck off. I doubt that would have happened if we'd voted yes. Our little island of 5 million or so is holding up an organisation of what, is it 300 million, or is it 400 or 500? It's hardly democratic that such a minority can wield such power, but c'est la vie.

Around the time of the vote I heard so many lies pedalled by the No campaign. THe Yes campaign was a shambles, but they didn't lie.

Terry · 12-12-2008 04:30PM

sdonn_1 wrote: »

Brian Cowen stated categorically after the last referendum that there would not be another one.

Bye, Brian. Nice knowing ya.

I don't know what to vote. I didn't know last time and I voted NO based simply on "better the devil you know" etc. I see a few more reasons to vote yes this time, but I'm still almost as in the dark as I was before. I nearly voted yes last time, and I think having a commissioner now may influence me to cave and vote yes this time.

On the other hand I'm tempted to vote no purely because the Irish government refuses to respect the will of the people and in solidarity with the masses.

Again though - there will be fundamental changes to the deal. The only way to ask the people if they accept the changes is another vote.

We shall see. I'll be voting no doubt, but I'll need some convincing as to which side to vote for.

It's not the same treaty.

The parts most people objected to the last time have been changed.

How do people not get that?

boring_job_guy · 12-12-2008 04:32PM

sk8board wrote: »

Otherwise you are merely suggesing that we're better off having NO elections whatsoever, while out of the other side of your mouth you say you don't want an unelected president of Europe.

No we're not. We're suggesting the people have MORE of a say. No-one on the no side has ever said there should be less elections. It's the yes side who say that.

The no side are all for elections.

In fairness if you blindly trust your politician when given the chances to decide for yourself, you are a fool and nothing short of it.

boring_job_guy · 12-12-2008 04:33PM

Terry wrote: »

It's not the same treaty.

The parts most people objected to the last time have been changed.

How do people not get that?

1.A lot of people rejected it because of the unelected european representative. This has not been changed.

2. The treaty is still un-readable gobbledygook (why ratify something potentially disatrous?)

(yes it could also be good, but tbh no-one knows that as no-one actually understands the thing).

These were my 2 main objects. Neither have been addressed

skelliser · 12-12-2008 04:33PM

The whole point of lisbon was to streamline policy and decision making, how can this now be achieved with 27 commissioners?!
The treaty makes for a reduced rotating commission and by there own admission they cannot re-open it, so how can we have a situation were we will now have a 27 member commission.
Does'nt that not make a mockery of the treaty!

skelliser · 12-12-2008 04:34PM

Terry wrote: »

It's not the same treaty.

The parts most people objected to the last time have been changed.

How do people not get that?

Its the same treaty. if we ratify it we get our ammendments added to the croatian acession treaty.

Ckal · 12-12-2008 04:35PM

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Around the time of the vote I heard so many lies pedalled by the No campaign. THe Yes campaign was a shambles, but they didn't lie.

What lies were they? (I'm actually curious

) (And the FF arse licking wasn't aimed at every yes voter, just the few who do;))

Ckal · 12-12-2008 04:37PM

skelliser wrote: »

Its the same treaty. if we ratify it we get our ammendments added to the croatian acession treaty.

Yeah, but not to the Lisbon Treaty, which we are told would be amended. And it clearly won't be.

So all this "We've changed it for you" is crap. They haven't changed one single thing.

passive · 12-12-2008 04:37PM

Ckal wrote: »

What lies were they? (I'm actually curious ) (And the FF arse licking wasn't aimed at every yes voter, just the few who do;))

Lisbon treaty means we'll lose our commissioner (with the dishonest implication that we have a commissioner representing our interests)
Lisbon treaty will mean conscription/forced military involvement for Ireland
Lisbon treaty will bring in abortion
Lisbon treaty will reduce our influence and voting power
Lisbon Treaty will bring in a new world order of lizard people
etc
etc
etc

melekalikimaka · 12-12-2008 04:38PM

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Stop making excuses for voter ignorance.
It's disgusting.

Ì agree, if your ignorant enough to vote on something you dont understand, you shouldn't vote at all, making decisions for our country with no understanding of the implications is highly careless and something I personally feel disgusted that such a large portion of our country actually did, I honestly didn't expect it from much a civilised and articulate society

sk8board · 12-12-2008 04:39PM

skelliser wrote: »

So after careful consideration getting rid of medical cards, 200euro car parking tax, levy on low paid workers is grand and the best way forward!

lets get real here; this country is in the ****ter; SEVERE budget cuts are needed.

Lets not implement the cuts you listed, and instead cut the teachers. Oh wait, the unions wouldn't like the sound of that; and guess what, nothing would ever get done.

Sometimes you just have to take responsibility as an elected government Minister, irrespecitve of what tin-foil-hat brigade think, and make the damn budget cuts. I only wish they had the same balls in teh boom years.

Its time for this country to man up. The good days are over. we need to pare back to '04 and perhaps even '02 spending rates. A lot will be sacraficed.
Live with it.

melekalikimaka · 12-12-2008 04:39PM

boring_job_guy wrote: »

1.A lot of people rejected it because of the unelected european representative. This has not been changed.

2. The treaty is still un-readable gobbledygook (why ratify something potentially disatrous?)

(yes it could also be good, but tbh no-one knows that as no-one actually understands the thing).

These were my 2 main objects. Neither have been addressed

you second reason... you didn't understand the treaty... yet you voted against it... why would you vote for something you don't understand about... fear?

passive · 12-12-2008 04:40PM

boring_job_guy wrote: »

1.A lot of people rejected it because of the unelected european representative. This has not been changed.

2. The treaty is still un-readable gobbledygook (why ratify something potentially disatrous?)

(yes it could also be good, but tbh no-one knows that as no-one actually understands the thing).

These were my 2 main objects. Neither have been addressed

They've been addressed hundreds of thousands of time on the politics forum, where every single aspect of the treaty has been explained and simplified and discussed rationally. If you wanted to understand it you could.

My name is Mud · 12-12-2008 04:40PM

sdonn_1 wrote: »

Brian Cowen stated categorically after the last referendum that there would not be another one.

Bye, Brian. Nice knowing ya.

Brian Cowan doing a U-turn? What are the odds?

sdonn_1 wrote: »

I don't know what to vote.

Research and make an informed decision. All the info is out there. A blind "no" is the worst decision you can make.

sdonn_1 wrote: »

I think having a commissioner now may influence me to cave and vote yes this time.

Its not Ireland's commisioner. A commissioner works on behalf of all EU member states. This was one of the big mis-information issues. Plus we lose the commisioner under the pre-exsisting conditions of Nice.

sdonn_1 wrote: »

On the other hand I'm tempted to vote no purely because the Irish government refuses to respect the will of the people and in solidarity with the masses.

Fair enough. The same will of the people democratically elected the government you speak of in the first place.

I'll be voting no doubt, but I'll need some convincing as to which side to vote for.

Make the decision yourself. Dont wait to be convinced by any side.

BroomBurner · 12-12-2008 04:41PM

sk8board wrote: »

as opposed to our elected TD!? don't be so narrow-minded.

Does Brian Lenihan consult the country before setting the budget?

Or batt o keefe consult the country before cutting back the Edu budget?

Of course they don't. Why? Becuase nothing would ever get done. Ever.

Theres nothing different here. we elect these people to operator for us, and in our interest.
Thats why we call them elected representatives.

Sometimes things just need to get going, and get pushed through.

If my local TD, whom I know, tells me that after careful consideration, they have decided that Yes is the best way forward, and for these reasons. Then I'll vote Yes without much concerns.

Otherwise you are merely suggesing that we're better off having NO elections whatsoever, while out of the other side of your mouth you say you don't want an unelected president of Europe.

Brian Lenehan should have consulted with SOMEBODY about the budget, he completely made a mess of it.

The Education cuts were also a mess and include taking money away from the most needy.

Feel free to vote yes or no on Lisbon 2, but at least try to understand it's ramifications yourself. If you trust politicians to make decisions on your behalf, then you are crazy. Especially the current bunch of incompetent muppets who have proved time and time again to be ridiculously stupid and untrustworthy.

I did not vote for FF, I did not vote for Cowen.

When I will be forced to vote again on a treaty I already voted on, I will be voting no. This won't be because of hatred for the government, it will simply be because I don't want the EU to become more autonomous than it already is. I know there are gross inefficiencies in the EU, as in any large organisation, but these are fixable without yet another treaty.

What I want to hear from the government in the line up to the second vote is Why - Why do we have to vote again? and Why does Europe need this Treaty. The latter was never explained properly the first time.

ShooterSF · 12-12-2008 04:43PM

sk8board wrote: »

as opposed to our elected TD!? don't be so narrow-minded.

If my local TD, whom I know, tells me that after careful consideration, they have decided that Yes is the best way forward, and for these reasons. Then I'll vote Yes without much concerns.

Wow. Talk about voter ignorance.

Terry wrote: »

It's not the same treaty.

The parts most people objected to the last time have been changed.

How do people not get that?

I'll agree it's a different treaty when every other country is asked to ratify the new treaty instead.

melekalikimaka · 12-12-2008 04:43PM

BroomBurner wrote: »

Why do we have to vote again? and Why does Europe need this Treaty. The latter was never explained properly the first time.

It was, and alot of people would agree on that, ignorance is not an excuse, if you gave a damn you woulda found out

sk8board · 12-12-2008 04:44PM

boring_job_guy wrote: »

In fairness if you blindly trust your politician when given the chances to decide for yourself, you are a fool and nothing short of it.

so I'll ask again, why elect them?

The only other option is communism or rampant socialism. nothing would ever get done. Nothing would ever move forward.

we elect these guys to make the hard decisions, the hard calls.
We cannot go to the people for every single decision.

Then we lift them out of it irrespective of what they choose to do.

(can't believe I'm defending politicans btw, but I think its an important democratic point, and its why central governments work by and large).

boring_job_guy · 12-12-2008 04:46PM

melekalikimaka wrote: »

you second reason... you didn't understand the treaty... yet you voted against it... why would you vote for something you don't understand about... fear?

the problem is less about me being able to understand it and more about the fact that it is written in such a way as to deliberately confuse people.

I do not trust other european leaders and I would not put it past them to use trickery like this.

If the Irish constitution is understandable i do not see why the lisbon treaty cannot be.

sk8board wrote: »

so I'll ask again, if you don't trust your politician, why elect them?

we elect these guys to make the hard decisions, the hard calls.

No, we elect the government to deal with the day to day runnings of the country.

When it comes to major decisions such as the lisbon treaty, the public should decide.

Politicians are professional arse-lickers. It's sad that you put them on such a pedestal.

utick · 12-12-2008 04:48PM

Terry wrote: »

It's not the same treaty.

The parts most people objected to the last time have been changed.

How do people not get that?

its the same treaty, nothing in the treaty has been changed, just as the yes side told us before the first vote that if we voted no the eu would not change the treaty

skelliser · 12-12-2008 04:48PM

sk8board wrote: »

Sometimes you just have to take responsibility as an elected government Minister

Live with it.

ya your right! So why wont they take responsibility and respect the the peoples democratic decision.
And dont start tryin to peddle me of as a tinfoil-hat idiot, i read the treaty and voted yes.

hobochris · 12-12-2008 04:48PM

My name is Mud wrote: »

A blind "no" is the worst decision you can make.

As apposed to a blind "yes"?

Ckal · 12-12-2008 04:49PM

hobochris wrote: »

As apposed to a blind "yes"?

Bingo.

melekalikimaka · 12-12-2008 04:51PM

boring_job_guy wrote: »

the problem is less about me being able to understand it and more about the fact that it is not written in such a way as to deliberately confuse people.

do yoy mean is written in a way to deliberately confuse people? do you really think that, what purpose had the government to gain from that, people with an understanding of the treaty...in gerneral....extreme generalisation here from personal observation here, as a whole more yes voters.l... so the government wanted this passed, so the decided to make the infomation on it confusing to p1ss off the public??? I think not, I think they wrote the information in a way the people who wrote it felt was clear but maybe the general public, including myself found hard to grasp, I set out to inform myself on the information after this and there was more than one source of infomation on this treaty, so blaming one government leaflet is hardly rational

ShooterSF · 12-12-2008 04:58PM

sk8board wrote: »

so I'll ask again, why elect them?

The only other option is communism or rampant socialism. nothing would ever get done. Nothing would ever move forward.

we elect these guys to make the hard decisions, the hard calls.
We cannot go to the people for every single decision.

Then we lift them out of it irrespective of what they choose to do.

(can't believe I'm defending politicans btw, but I think its an important democratic point, and its why central governments work by and large).

No there's a fantastic option that we currently employ actually! We elect a government to run the country but restrict their actions by a set of rules, or constitution. When they want to change the rules they have to ask us. Them saying ah go on it'll be grand is not a reason to say Yes :eek: by the way.

sk8board · 12-12-2008 05:04PM

boring_job_guy wrote: »

No, we elect the government to deal with the day to day runnings of the country.

When it comes to major decisions such as the lisbon treaty, the public should decide.

Politicians are professional arse-lickers. It's sad that you put them on such a pedestal.

I don't put them on a petestal; I'm simply saying that I understand why we elect them.

I voted yes last time round, and I don't fully agree with a re-running of the same; but more for the 'we made our bed lets sleep in it' reason. I think common sense is prevailing and it will be passed 2nd time around, once, as I said a few pages back, then unions, farmers, interest groups etc, all get on-message.
It will be peddled to us as: With abortion, neutrality and the commissioner issues wrapped up (whether they are or not, bear with me), what other reasons have you for voting no.
I would have thought a lot of the common voters would be happy their issues are being addressed. I know my parents are, and they're already saying their 'No' will become 'Yes' next time around, now their major concerns have been met.

cooperla · 12-12-2008 05:07PM

sdonn_1 wrote: »

Brian Cowen stated categorically after the last referendum that there would not be another one.

Bye, Brian. Nice knowing ya.

I don't know what to vote. I didn't know last time and I voted NO based simply on "better the devil you know" etc. I see a few more reasons to vote yes this time, but I'm still almost as in the dark as I was before. I nearly voted yes last time, and I think having a commissioner now may influence me to cave and vote yes this time.

On the other hand I'm tempted to vote no purely because the Irish government refuses to respect the will of the people and in solidarity with the masses.

Again though - there will be fundamental changes to the deal. The only way to ask the people if they accept the changes is another vote.

We shall see. I'll be voting no doubt, but I'll need some convincing as to which side to vote for.

On the other side, one of my mates was on the wall last time and swayed to the yes side come vote day. This time however he's fairly strongly saying "no" thus far. Not sure how many people will fall into this category or how many who will simply vote yes because they figure they'll keep making people vote until they get the yes they are after.

sk8board · 12-12-2008 05:09PM

ShooterSF wrote: »

Them saying ah go on it'll be grand is not a reason to say Yes :eek: by the way.

but some unknown entity called declan ganley saying these guys are crooked is a valid reason for voting no?!

I'll trust a politican before one mans private agenda any day. Only one of them was chosen by the electorate.

Until such point as he gets elected, he's just a political commentator, using his wealth to influence people

Lisbon 2: prepare to bend over and recieve ur destiny!

Comments