Bertie the champion of the world

Laminations · 03-02-2010 04:39PM #1

This thread is to debate the man and not FF as a whole. Good and bad points on his character (with references to factual sources) and a debate as to his suitability for President.

I'll start off with my opinion that his behaviour at the Mahon tribunal was unbecoming of a Taoiseach.

Source
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/17-hours-in-witness-box-still-no-answers-1088078.html

His Legacy according to wikipedia

Historian John A Murphy said: "Did Ahern, in his 11 years of power, make the most of this unprecedented prosperity for the public benefit? The answer can hardly be positive, given the present state of health, education and infrastructure, generally."[124]
Historian Diarmaid Ferriter said: "There'll be broad consensus around what Bertie did in Northern Ireland, the social partnership and the unity he brought to his own party. Also, he made Fianna Fáil the permanent party of government. They used to have all of the power most of the time, but now they have most of the power all of the time. All of that takes skill. But I wonder will people talk about 'Ahernism'? Is there any such thing? What does he actually stand for? In some ways Bertie's lack of vision was a positive, it made him flexible and willing to compromise, and he was certainly outstanding in that regard. But I dissent from the universal plaudits going around at the moment. He had no social or economic vision for the state he led. There was no fire in his belly. He didn't really want to change society for the better. He was the ward boss writ large. But at the moment it seems it's unfashionable to say anything adverse about Bertie."[125]
Stephen Collins noted that: "None of his colleagues is really sure whether he is possessed of all the deviousness and cunning attributed to him by Haughey or whether he simply suffers from chronic indecision disguised as political shrewdness".
Ryanair chief executive Michael O'Leary noted in a radio interview that "Bertie squandered the wealth of a generation and I think in time it will be proven he was a useless wastrel."[126] In November 2009 Ahern was again criticised by O'Leary, being described as a "feckless ditherer

Sleepy · 03-02-2010 04:44PM

Any time I've spoken my mind on Ahern I've gotten an infraction so I'll just reiterate my very first argument against his being in politics which imho is still irrefutable:

He admitted to signing blank cheques for Haughey.

This made him either too stupid or too crooked to be involved in the running of a country.

Laminations · 03-02-2010 04:44PM

This quote from the article above highlights Berties 'head in the sand brass neck attitude', re-interpreting events to suit himself (much like his supporters

He dismissed opinion polls which showed that people did not believe the account he had given to the Mahon Tribunal.
"I don't think they did that. I think they said the party was in very good order and we're in good order," he said.

Laminations · 03-02-2010 04:45PM

I certainly dont want an infraction - I cant see how one can be issued for a factual debate of Bertie the man. I'll appeal to all to avoid name calling and although it may be justified please avoid hateful ranting

bijapos · 03-02-2010 04:50PM

History will judge him, probably unfavourably.

He lost it in my opinion the day he said at the tribunal that he won some money on the horses. I wonder myself what the inland revenue would do if every self employed person in this country claimed that unexplained monies were won at the local Paddy Power.

To me he was the leader in waiting and then leader of a crowd of scam artists who have made a joke of the way this country is run. Sadly the country will be administered for the foreseeable future by those who benefitted from shady dealings, be they public or private individuals, no matter what part of the political spectrum they come from.

I never liked the man, less so on the occasions when reasonable debate, warnings and objections to FF policies were greeted by his "begrudgers" and "go top themselves" remarks, why enter into serious debate when a few populist rants will do. He also claims to be a republican but writes for the News of the World, a paper which spent much of the 60's 70's 80's and 90's depicting the Irish as ignorant backward bombers. I suppose they turned his head with some cash too.

Red_Marauder · 03-02-2010 04:58PM

I disliked the leadership style of Ahern, I don't trust his account of financial irregularities as discussed in another thread, and I personally distrust him as a public figure. I just don't like his politics nor his methods and am uneasy about the allegations that still pervade.

But I am not so stupid, nor are lots of other posters, to suggest that his government didn't do a whole deal of good.

I was ten years old and in Primary school when Ahern came to power. When he quit I was 22 and in my final year of University. I enjoyed all of the benefits of the years of success that Fianna Fáil did have a serious part in.

The point is that all of this never, ever negates dishonesty or corruption in political life if indeed such allegations are proven. They are totally seperate issues.

In public life, small failures or perceived failures may overshadow an entire career - often with good reason.

Colm R · 03-02-2010 05:03PM

I don't respect the man. He was in charge when the Celtic Tiger stopped roaring in 2001/2. For the following 6 years, he created a psedo-tiger based on complete consumerism. The fundamentals were not sound in 2007, they had not been for 5 years but he chose to ignore, and direct his cabinet to ignore this issues.

I also don't respect him as he continually blames the collapse of Lehmans for the crisis we are in now. Lehmans did not help matters, but it was not responsible for our education, infrastructure and health problems.

Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone creates problems. Everyone can makes the problems worse by trying to cover over them. And everyone gains a bit of respect when they stand up and say they have done wrong. Even when a murderer admits guilt, you don't respect the crime or the mans actions. But you respect the man for standing up and admitting responsibilty and going to pay his debt to society.

Darsad · 03-02-2010 05:04PM

This is an impossible topic to debate there is no debating Ahern we all know what he is and what he did and for who . Who here could possibly defend this man, in my opinion even his participation in the northern peace process was a self serving sham and something he hoped to live off after his days as taoiseach

Liam Byrne · 03-02-2010 05:11PM

His actions, and the state of the country, speak for themselves.

Any actual corruption or otherwise aside, he screwed up the country and condoned and excused the corruption of others, and doesn't know the meaning of the word "responsibility" unless he's being praised for the occasional decent thing that he achieved.

Haughey's cheques, looking into Burke's corruption, his own finances, accepting Cooper-Flynn back, excusing Lawlor, fuelling the boom, no social conscience, no straight answers, no vision of a modern and fair Ireland, licking arses of influential while shafting the normal folk, and the two-faced sham persona. Right down to him writing a book while on our payroll (no baseline welfare sick-day pay for him) and using our ministerial car, petrol and driver to swan around promoting his work of fiction.

That's the summary version, because despite getting dragged into the fiasco on boards that FF apologists claim is "bashing", even though it's simply stating facts, I don't even think the guy is worth discussing......I'll challenge the half-truths and tactics used to make him look better, but I cannot list off everything I hate about this slimy weasel and what he represents because I'd depress myself and everyone else here.

Laminations · 03-02-2010 05:25PM

Where are the Bertie supporters? I dont want you to feel like you are walking into the lions den here, if you have facts about the man that highlight his good points and you believe his good points outweigh his bad (or can dispute his bad points) then please post.

If you're not willing to whole-heartedly defend/support him here then dont half-heartedly do it in other threads

anymore · 03-02-2010 05:32PM

One of the curious things about Ahern's career are the questions that havent been or put to him.
For example, whilst he has been given great credit for his invlovement in the North (- more about this later), few people have questioned him about the deadly war being waged on the innocent public by the murderous drug gangs in the Republic. Some of the more dangerous of theses gangs effectivley took control of some areas of Limerick, the home city of Ahern's great ally and defender, Willie O Dea. Do innocent people gunned down by criminals in the Republic merit less sympathy or attention than innocent people murdered in the North of Ireland. And did Ahern not owe a greater duty of care to the innocent victims of gangland violence in the Republic than he did to the victims in Northern Ireland ? Yet drug gangland violence merited far less attention than the Peace talks in the North.
Of course the media might ask that question of themselves as much as of Ahern.

hallelujajordan · 03-02-2010 05:35PM

Laminations wrote: »

Where are the Bertie supporters? I dont want you to feel like you are walking into the lions den here, if you have facts about the man that highlight his good points and you believe his good points outweigh his bad (or can dispute his bad points) then please post.

If you're not willing to whole-heartedly defend/support him here then dont half-heartedly do it in other threads

jaysus, give us a chance man . . you've only had the thread up an hour . .

Such a spirited defence will take me a while to compile . . maybe later

ps. . enjoying your new role as back-seat-mod ?

Liam Byrne · 03-02-2010 05:45PM

anymore wrote: »

Some of the more dangerous of theses gangs effectivley took control of some areas of Limerick, the home city of Ahern's great ally and defender, Willie O Dea.

Bit of an exaggeration, tbh.....and there's a few that "effectively took control" of some areas of Ahern's own home city, too.

But I'd view that as a party failure (one of many), rather than Ahern's....as leader, yes, he takes some responsibility, but not as much as he does for his nepotistic appointment of his friend to Financial Regulator.

The crime issue is that John "Zero Tolerance" O'Donoghue was too busy spending money to follow through on his and his party's election promises.

Laminations · 03-02-2010 05:57PM

hallelujajordan wrote: »

enjoying your new role as back-seat-mod ?

I have no delusions of grandeur, I simply dont want the thread closed and I dont want a warning. I want a fact based debate

Liam Byrne · 03-02-2010 06:01PM

Actually I can't believe that I left out self-confessed nepotism in my summary.

I didn't give them jobs because they gave me money; I gave them jobs because they were my friends

Qualifications or suitability not required - just be Bertie's "friend" and you'll get a job where you don't do anything and then get paid off to leave.

And we all know where that got us.

Scofflaw · 03-02-2010 06:01PM

Laminations wrote: »

I have no delusions of grandeur, I simply dont want the thread closed and I dont want a warning. I want a fact based debate

The thread will only be closed if it stops being about politics and becomes a repetitive barrage of trash-talking (and/or potentially libellous material) - as per the thread on Dan Boyle.

moderately,
Scofflaw

anymore · 03-02-2010 06:34PM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Bit of an exaggeration, tbh.....and there's a few that "effectively took control" of some areas of Ahern's own home city, too.

But I'd view that as a party failure (one of many), rather than Ahern's....as leader, yes, he takes some responsibility, but not as much as he does for his nepotistic appointment of his friend to Financial Regulator.

The crime issue is that John "Zero Tolerance" O'Donoghue was too busy spending money to follow through on his and his party's election promises.

Well to use that old saying ' the buck stops at the top'. The Taoiseach of the day appoints the Ministers and ultimately decides on the priorities and allocates the resources. This is a question that could be asked of other Taoiseach as well of course, but as Ahern was in power for so long and so recently, it is appropriate to ask it of him. Below is a link to an article in the Guardian in Feb 2007 about drugs and crime in ' Stab City' :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/02/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation

In the second last paragraph, you will see the reference to the lack of resources:
" claims that police units are not being provided with the resources needed to combat the increasingly well-armed gangs they encounter on the streets "

Liam Byrne · 03-02-2010 06:52PM

anymore wrote: »

Well to use that old saying ' the buck stops at the top'. The Taoiseach of the day appoints the Ministers and ultimately decides on the priorities and allocates the resources. This is a question that could be asked of other Taoiseach as well of course, but as Ahern was in power for so long and so recently, it is appropriate to ask it of him.

I would agree for the most part.

anymore wrote: »

Below is a link to an article in the Guardian in Feb 2007 about drugs and crime in ' Stab City' :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/02/ukcrime.prisonsandprobation

I don't doubt that there's a lack of resources in many areas, but to be honest, there's no point in posting that link.

Any so-called "newspaper" that uses that pathetic, misleading and derogatory slur of a colloqualism as part of a headline is tabloid gutter press, and I have no intention of wasting my time on it.

And that's assuming that it even is about Limerick, considering the URL includes "ukcrime.prisonsandprobation"; I guess the UK gutter press still views Ireland as part of the UK.

rubensni · 03-02-2010 07:59PM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Any so-called "newspaper" that uses that pathetic, misleading and derogatory slur of a colloqualism as part of a headline is tabloid gutter press, and I have no intention of wasting my time on it.

And that's assuming that it even is about Limerick, considering the URL includes "ukcrime.prisonsandprobation"; I guess the UK gutter press still views Ireland as part of the UK.

The story featured in the national (i.e. UK) news section in the Guardian website because that's where it was printed in the newspaper on that day, and when looked at in its context it makes sense that it was located there. It is categorised under world news now, if you look at the website again.

But that doesn't matter, does it Liam? Sure it's all the Brits fault. That's it blame the Brits. Much easier. They raped the country for 800 years, etc. Feckin' Brits.

skelliser · 03-02-2010 08:03PM

I cant trust a man who cant produce a P60 and hopefully soon a P45!!

Liam Byrne · 03-02-2010 08:13PM

rubensni wrote: »

But that doesn't matter, does it Liam? Sure it's all the Brits fault. That's it blame the Brits. Much easier. They raped the country for 800 years, etc. Feckin' Brits.

:rolleyes: LMAO! I deal in facts, and you're so far off the mark you've gone all the way round the world and probably hit it again!

Sure FF and their buddies raped us more than "the Brits".

Disclaimer : Hope we're allowed use "that word" in that non-literal context

Mind you, it seems like a normal, average Irish person can't win these days......you spout the above rubbish, while elsewhere I'm called a "WB" that has SFA to do with cartoons!

I guess that means I'm well-balanced and objective, so! Happy Days!

As for the link, maybe I was off-the-mark as to the reason for the UK in the website URL, but like I said I saw the title of the target page appear, saw that they're obviously not interested in realistic headlines or facts, and shut it down, so therefore I didn't get to see if there was a "World News" header on that page; those two combined made me comment on both.

But I really can't understand your attack and OTT reaction to what are simply the facts. Simply pointing out the fact that "Ireland isn't in the UK" - which I would do if I were dealing with half of the so-called celebs and contributors on Irish radio and TV - does not warrant a diatribe about "the Brits" and "800 years" and other rubbish similar to what you posted above. :rolleyes:

rubensni · 03-02-2010 08:20PM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

:rolleyes: LMAO! I deal in facts, and I'm about as far from that attitude that you're superimposing on me as I could possibly be!!!! You're so far off the mark you've gone all the way round the world and probably hit it again!

For a fella who deals in facts you sure spent the last post moaning about a source. Anyone who would categorise the Guardian as part of the gutter press is deluding themselves and that's why I made those comments.

Liam Byrne · 03-02-2010 08:41PM

rubensni wrote: »

For a fella who deals in facts you sure spent the last post moaning about a source. Anyone who would categorise the Guardian as part of the gutter press is deluding themselves and that's why I made those comments.

Yes, obviously! Because if a source can't be arsed use the city's name, and instead uses the label that the uninformed who've never visited the city use, then it puts a question mark over their reports.

And there was no excuse for those comments, but I don't care, because they were so far wrong and such an over-reaction that they were ridiculous.

Anyway - this thread is about Ahern.

Biggins · 03-02-2010 08:51PM

I have said a fair bit about him and still could but all I will say now, is a quote from the "Western People" July 01, 2009 - Link HERE :

He is powerless to rewrite history and the best he can do is hope his involvement in the Northern Peace Process spares him the ignominy of being described as Ireland’s worst ever Taoiseach.

LifesgoodwithLG · 03-02-2010 08:55PM

His timing was impeccable in getting out thats the only positive thing I can say about this crook.

trapsagenius · 03-02-2010 10:22PM

Darsad wrote: »

This is an impossible topic to debate there is no debating Ahern we all know what he is and what he did and for who . Who here could possibly defend this man, in my opinion even his participation in the northern peace process was a self serving sham and something he hoped to live off after his days as taoiseach

Yet another "Bertie Ahern was the worst Taoiseach ever and thats that!" childish response(which I've come to expect on this forum tbh).And how could you possibly label his work in NI as "a self serving sham".I'm sure it had nothing to do with getting peace in the north after 30 years and preventing innocent people dying:rolleyes:.You're anti-Ahern sentiment has clearly blinded you.

BTW, i started a similar thread about Bertie.Didn't get very positive reponses either.

Anyway, Bertie presided over a peroiod of unprecedented economic growth and established peace in NI.And i always believe that a poor Taoiseach will never win 3 elections in a row.So, i'm still happy with the job he did.
*awaits outraged responses*

Liam Byrne · 03-02-2010 10:52PM

trapsagenius wrote: »

BTW, i started a similar thread about Bertie.Didn't get very positive reponses either.

Would that not give you the hint that lots of people hate the guy, and have damn good reasons for that ?

Odd that the only thing you latched on to was the one post that didn't give a reason; mind you, your blind loyalty probably means that you didn't even see all the other posts.

trapsagenius wrote: »

Anyway, Bertie presided over a peroiod of unprecedented economic growth and established peace in NI.

The "unprecedented economic growth" was based on a false, doomed-to-fail economy.

As has been explained to you previously, his finishing off of the process in Northern Ireland was a plus, but it doesn't negate all the damage that he did.

I mean, even the priests that abused kids did some good along the way somewhere; but they're still scum.

And before you trot out the usual diversionary mock-indignation that I'm somehow comparing him to a paedophile, which is the usual tactic employed to deflect from the facts raised.

He did a few OK things, one decent thing, and presided over serious damage and embedded the culture of corruption by not being a proper leader and saying "we're not putting up with any of that crap".

Unfortunately the equally childish "I like Bertie and that's that", and "I'll repeat his one good point and ignore all the other stuff" is your opinion; it's disagreed with by most, thankfully, but you're entitled to keep it as long as you don't ridicule all of the other valid opinions.

There's loads of other posts above with all of the facts as to why people reckon he's a weasel, and not one of them is unreasonable.

trapsagenius · 03-02-2010 11:04PM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Would that not give you the hint that lots of people hate the guy, and have damn good reasons for that ?

Odd that the only thing you latched on to was the one post that didn't give a reason; mind you, your blind loyalty probably means that you didn't even see all the other posts.

The "unprecedented economic growth" was based on a false, doomed-to-fail economy.

As has been explained to you previously, his finishing off of the process in Northern Ireland was a plus, but it doesn't negate all the damage that he did.

I mean, even the priests that abused kids did some good along the way somewhere; but they're still scum.

And before you trot out the usual diversionary mock-indignation that I'm somehow comparing him to a paedophile, which is the usual tactic employed to deflect from the facts raised.

He did a few OK things, one decent thing, and presided over serious damage and embedded the culture of corruption by not being a proper leader and saying "we're not putting up with any of that crap".

Unfortunately the equally childish "I like Bertie and that's that", and "I'll repeat his one good point and ignore all the other stuff" is your opinion; it's disagreed with by most, thankfully, but you're entitled to keep it as long as you don't ridicule all of the other valid opinions.

There's loads of other posts above with all of the facts as to why people reckon he's a weasel, and not one of them is unreasonable.

You accuse me of "blind loyalty" despite the fact that in thread after thread you've tried to steer the debate onto an "I HATE FF.DO YOU?IF YOU DONT YOU'RE STUPID!" topic which shows your blind loyalty to the opposition.

And just because you tried to get me to not comment on the fact you compared him to a paedophile doesn't mean i won't -there is absolutely no need for such comparisions.

And lets just gloss over the fact he acheived peace in NI where leader after leader (on both sides of the Irish sea) had failed.And the fact that there wasn't too many people complaining during the years where money was plentiful.

And where did i ridicule "valid opinions"?(Because you would NEVER do that right:rolleyes:?)

Liam Byrne · 03-02-2010 11:17PM

trapsagenius wrote: »

You accuse me of "blind loyalty" despite the fact that in thread after thread you've tried to steer the debate onto an "I HATE FF.DO YOU?IF YOU DONT YOU'RE STUPID!" topic which shows your blind loyalty to the opposition.

:rolleyes: I have absolutely no party affiliation or loyalty, and I have criticised FG for shooting themselves in the foot by not dealing with the JOD fiasco properly.

trapsagenius wrote: »

And just because you tried to get me to not comment on the fact you compared him to a paedophile doesn't mean i won't -there is absolutely no need for such comparisions.

:rolleyes: I did not compare Ahern to a paedophile. I said that everyone does some good. But, as expected, you ignored what was being said and chose to use it against me.

trapsagenius wrote: »

And lets just gloss over the fact he acheived peace in NI where leader after leader (on both sides of the Irish sea) had failed.And the fact that there wasn't too many people complaining during the years where money was plentiful.

:rolleyes: I'm not "glossing over" that - if you bothered to read, my post said

Liam Byrne wrote: »

As has been explained to you previously, his finishing off of the process in Northern Ireland was a plus, but it doesn't negate all the damage that he did.

trapsagenius wrote: »

And where did i ridicule "valid opinions"?(Because you would NEVER do that right:rolleyes:?)

Well, if someone can acknowledge ALL of the facts and not make ridiculous claims and red herrings when discussing them, I might take their opinion seriously. I'd still disagree, obviously, but I wouldn't ridicule.

But since you're claiming that I have "opposition loyalty" and other such rubbish :rolleyes:, I don't really need to ridicule your posts - you're kinda doing that yourself by making those claims.

Anyways, I'm going to butt out of this thread now, regardless of what you claim from now on, because if it gets closed due to bickering we won't get to read other people's opinions of our disgraced former Taoiseach.

trapsagenius · 03-02-2010 11:31PM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Would that not give you the hint that lots of people hate the guy, and have damn good reasons for that ?

Odd that the only thing you latched on to was the one post that didn't give a reason; mind you, your blind loyalty probably means that you didn't even see all the other posts.

The "unprecedented economic growth" was based on a false, doomed-to-fail economy.

As has been explained to you previously, his finishing off of the process in Northern Ireland was a plus, but it doesn't negate all the damage that he did.

I mean, even the priests that abused kids did some good along the way somewhere; but they're still scum.

And before you trot out the usual diversionary mock-indignation that I'm somehow comparing him to a paedophile, which is the usual tactic employed to deflect from the facts raised.

He did a few OK things, one decent thing, and presided over serious damage and embedded the culture of corruption by not being a proper leader and saying "we're not putting up with any of that crap".

Unfortunately the equally childish "I like Bertie and that's that", and "I'll repeat his one good point and ignore all the other stuff" is your opinion; it's disagreed with by most, thankfully, but you're entitled to keep it as long as you don't ridicule all of the other valid opinions.

There's loads of other posts above with all of the facts as to why people reckon he's a weasel, and not one of them is unreasonable.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

:rolleyes: 1 I have absolutely no party affiliation or loyalty, and I have criticised FG for shooting themselves in the foot by not dealing with the JOD fiasco properly.

2:rolleyes: I did not compare Ahern to a paedophile. I said that everyone does some good. But, as expected, you ignored what was being said and chose to use it against me.

3 I'm not "glossing over" that - if you bothered to read, my post said

Well, if someone can acknowledge ALL of the facts and not make ridiculous claims and red herrings when discussing them, I might take their opinion seriously.4 I'd still disagree, obviously, but I wouldn't ridicule.

But since you're claiming that I have "opposition loyalty" and other such rubbish :rolleyes:, I don't really need to ridicule your posts - you're kinda doing that yourself by making those claims.

Anyways, I'm going to butt out of this thread now, regardless of what you claim from now on, because if it gets closed due to bickering we won't get to read other people's opinions of our disgraced former Taoiseach.

Jesus Christ, I don't even know where to start with that post!I''l try though.(again underlined parts are my own additions)
1.Well its fantastic that you can criticise FG for one thing isn't it?:rolleyes:.I'll admit that maybe "anti-FF bias" would have been a more apt description though.But you surely accept that you have attempted to turn many threads into an anti FF/Bertie rant, don't you?

2.So comparing Ahern to child abusing priests isn't comparing him to paedophiles is it:rolleyes:?(Liam, a paedophile is someone who abuses children)

3.Unfortunately for you, one (half) sentence saying"his finishing off of the process in NI was a plus" amounts to glossing over.After all the damage Bruton did, he wasn't exactly "finishing off". You're glossing over what a massive and momentous achievement it was.

4.Again, where did i ridicule?

I know you said you'd butt and i accept that.So you can reply whenever.I'd say i better butt out myself,tbh.

Liam Byrne · 03-02-2010 11:52PM

trapsagenius wrote: »

I'll admit that maybe "anti-FF bias" would have been a more apt description though.But you surely accept that you have attempted to turn many threads into an anti FF/Bertie rant, don't you?

No. I've expressed my disgust at their actions (for good reason, all down to them) and I've challenged those who post ridiculous comments such as "vote sensibly, not in anger" as if those two were mutually exclusive, and I've challenged posts that say that "when" Ahern is found innocent, he'll be suitable as president (i.e. as if the tribunal's judgement within it's specific terms of reference absolve him of everything).

The same people tend to object to the above factual analysis based on track record, despite throwing out ridiculous claims that FG will be worse, with no track record to judge on.

If people didn't make claims that need to be challenged, then I wouldn't mention the guy; I'd actually prefer that he didn't exist and that we didn't feed his ego by discussing him.

trapsagenius wrote: »

2.So comparing Ahern to child abusing priests isn't comparing him to paedophiles is it:rolleyes:?

Repeat this one and I'll report you. I did not compare Ahern to child abusing priests. I said that "even child abusing priests have done some good". FACT. So lay off this angle immediately.

trapsagenius wrote: »

3.Unfortunately for you, one (half) sentence saying"his finishing off of the process in NI was a plus" amounts to glossing over.After all the damage Bruton did, he wasn't exactly "finishing off". You're glossing over what a massive and momentous achievement it was.

And you're glossing over what a monumental achievement screwing up an entire economy was; hell, you're not even referring to it, as if it never happened. You also don't seem to accept that as leader of a party he should not have encouraged and condoned corruption by rewarding those involved.

At least I mentioned his achievement and acknowledged it.

If you want to start acknowledging all of the damage, then I'll look into how much of an influence Ahern was in the peace process. But until then, I'll err on the side of using your tactic.

Even if I did fully acknowledge this amazing, single-handed, massive and momentous achievement - it does not negate the damage that he did.

trapsagenius wrote: »

4.Again, where did i ridicule?

Well, for starters, claims like the above are an attempt to undermine the person making a point, and are ridiculous.

I'm not sure off-hand whether the "vote sensibly, not in anger" statement was yours, if not then I'll retract some of the above.

But writing off genuine concerns with claims of it being "blind loyalty to FG" (incorrect) or "a rant" (incorrect), and expecting people to ignore the facts and the track record of FF and Ahern when discussing him (by dismissing it as a rant) is "ridiculing", as if it were somehow unreasonable to do any of this.

Claiming that Ahern will be clear of all wrong-doing and suitable as president if the tribunal finds him innocent of what's in their narrow terms of reference is misleading and patronising, and again ridicules genuine concerns and observations.

It's an informed opinion, and if it's against Ahern it's because of his own track record, actions and those of his party.

Bertie the champion of the world

Comments