Dinner wrote: » Except your view 'forgets' to add in all the work that has been done since the last vote. If the situation was "wrong answer, try again" then my opinion would be very different. But it's not like that. Some no campaigners will continue to say that this is the case but it very very clearly isn't. But the response by the government was to try to address the problems that the Irish people had, I find it to be a good example of democracy in action, find and address the issues and see if that is acceptable to the public. Which bit is undemocratic?
tonycascarino wrote: » I see it like that too...:)
CliodhnaB wrote: » just to remind you on the name of the thread. 'How do YOU intend to vote' Gave my opinion and yet some stranger is questioning it? debate all you want but on the day i will still be voting no. and hopefully it will rejected again and we'll see how many more times they push it on us. banana republic. Laters :P
CliodhnaB wrote: » but why shd we do it again??
CliodhnaB wrote: » brian cowen wouldnt get a look in wit ya.... you'll try tell me his doing a good job now hahahahahaha
Dinner wrote: » They didn't reject our choice. The treaty was not ratified. The studies that were undertook after the vote showed that a lack of knowldge was the main cause of rejection followed by reasons that were addressed through the guarantees. With some of the issues sorted out it is not undemocratic to have a second vote.
bayviewclose wrote: » "some of the issues sorted"?
Dinner wrote: » Was my wording confusing?
bayviewclose wrote: » No that suggests that not "all" of the issues are sorted with regards to treaty. I was just looking for clarification.
Eire Go Brach wrote: » I have already voted on Lisbon. I won't do it again.
Dinner wrote: » I hold back on saying "all issues have been sorted" for a couple of reasons. Firstly, if I did say all then there would be a queue of no voters jumping on that single line claiming that their issues were never sorted or that the issues that were sorted were blown out of proportion so they weren't important or something like that. And secondly because some people have an issue with the EU and hate to even think that it is being given any more power. Obviously, no protocol will appease this issue. So the 'some' part is to possibly save me some hassle in a future post, not because I believe that there is a genuine concern that can be sorted out that wasn't sorted.
Grissom wrote: » Hi Eire. The fact that you have already voted and the government have chosen to ignore the mandate of you and everybody else in the country should motivate you to go out and vote in protest at the government rejection of the overwhelming will of the people. There is no doubt that part of the governments strategy is that people will not come out on the day to vote because of the same reasons as you......
Grissom wrote: » I too will be votinf NO......for the above reasons and some of my own;)
WeeBushy wrote: » Say you and a friend wanted to go on a holiday. He has some concerns about the holiday so says no, I wont go. You then address these concerns and ask him again would he like to come. Wouldn't you consider it a bit stupid of him to say "I said NO the first time and even though you have addressed my concerns I'm still saying no, how dare you ask me again."?
Treora wrote: » Say you went on a holiday with that travel company and the hotel wasn't there when you arrived (the builders never finished due to bankruptcy). When you return home you find out that the company has stuck to the contract with other clients and F**** them over, just like they are doing to you now. In the nicest possible way they say that the guarentees are grand but a contract is a contract is a contract and they tried to stick to the guarentee, but the contract won out.
freefromgov wrote: » Hi all I made a little video and placed it on youtube asking the people of mainland europe to pick a name out of the Irish telephone directory and to send them a post card letting them know how they would have voted (If they'd had a vote) there are over half a billion euorpeans, and we get to decide their fate ! Not very democratic IMHO, I would not like to be abroad and Irish if a yes vote got carried However if the Irish people vote no we will be hailed as the Heros of europe, and maybe then the People of europe might just get a chance to have their say. Untill then IMHO it would be immoral to vote yes even if you think the Treaty of Lisbon is a good thing. Ok that's my ten cents. Oh! here is the link to the video if you wish to view it.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bFibFbkZZU
freefromgov wrote: » However if the Irish people vote no we will be hailed as the Heros of europe, and maybe then the People of europe might just get a chance to have their say. Untill then IMHO it would be immoral to vote yes even if you think the Treaty of Lisbon is a good thing. Ok that's my ten cents. Oh! here is the link to the video if you wish to view it.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bFibFbkZZU
freefromgov wrote: » Not very democratic IMHO,
bustertherat wrote: » What would James Connolly have voted for??
K-9 wrote: » I wonder that myself. I think he'd be so disappointed with us, the Irish people, from around about 1922.
The first proposal for a directive regulating temporary agency work was issued by the European Commission in 1982. However, agreement has not yet been reached on the directive, even though most of the EU Member States support the proposals to provide equal treatment rights to temporary agency workers similar to those enjoyed by people directly employed in the same undertaking. To date, equal treatment rights have been opposed by a blocking minority of countries – notably Ireland, Poland and the UK.
bustertherat wrote: » I'll be voting no to lisbon!!!! What would James Connolly have voted for?? He would have voted for freedom!!!! Our forefathers gave their lives for freedom and independence and i'll be damned to hand that over to brussells!!! A United States of Europe i pray not!!!! A vote for Yes is one step closer to totalitarianism!!!!
Catsmokinpot wrote: » After not really caring for some time about this Lisbon treaty, i am going to vote yes for two reasons: 1. Because of Christians and their anti-abortion agenda. 2. Because of the lies from the anti-Lisbon side over the minimum wage and a few other things.
bayviewclose wrote: » Its your vote but not really a good use of one. Just as voting No to get back at government is a good use of one.