David Norris for President....would you vote for him?

tayto lover · 31-05-2011 02:42PM

Pherekydes wrote: »

There is nothing to debate. What he said is not in question. Her interpretation of is what's in question. She is wrong. Simple. His interpretation is correct, by definition. They are HIS words. She took him up wrongly, or she is wilfully misrepresenting his opinions. Personally, I think it's the latter.

You can't tell someone else what THEIR opinion is.

Have you even contemplated the thought that she is telling the truth and that he is back-tracking to escape trouble ?

tayto lover · 31-05-2011 02:45PM

francois wrote: »

Cheap and utterly blatant attempt at a smear

And you know that because .....

phantom_lord · 31-05-2011 02:46PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Have you even contemplated the thought that she is telling the truth and that he is back-tracking to escape trouble ?

When has he back tracked?

Annasopra · 31-05-2011 02:50PM

tayto lover wrote: »

I had my mind made up not to vote for him a long time ago, even before the programme yesterday. Whether he is guilty or not i don't know. That is why there should be a debate between them on t.v. or radio.
You seem to have you're mind made up about H.L.B. on the issue. Maybe she is telling the truth.

Yeah we know that; you won't vote for him because he is gay.

Dudess · 31-05-2011 02:52PM

Oh yeah, tayto lover - you made your views on gays clear not too long ago. But anyhoo, what he's talking about is not paedophilic.

siltirocker · 31-05-2011 02:53PM

Johnnymcg wrote: »

Yeah we know that; you won't vote for him because he is gay.

This is why this thread is farcical! Cause if anyone says anything anti Norris. . . . BOOM! YOU HATE GAYS!!!!:mad::mad::mad::mad:

Retarded stuff folks.:rolleyes:

mikemac · 31-05-2011 02:55PM

Johnnymcg wrote: »

Yeah we know that; you won't vote for him because he is gay.

This type of statement has been all over this thread. And in Politics forum last year

The knuckle dragging bigots oppose Norris and the open minded, young sophisticated people can see this :rolleyes:
Every legitimate question must be a smear campaign I suppose....

Maybe the poster you quoted reckons there are better candidates. I definitely do

JessieM · 31-05-2011 02:56PM

It looks as if David Norris might well be backtracking.

I saw him in 2009 on an episode of "Seoige" on RTE1 speaking in favour of Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth, in a debate-style discussion.

This should be readily available to RTE in their archives.

So David Norris cannot honestly claim that he has never advocated Ireland rejoining the commonwealth as the evidence proves otherwise.

siltirocker · 31-05-2011 03:02PM

Johnnymcg wrote: »

Yeah we know that; you won't vote for him because he is gay.

I have just realised tayto lover might have INFACT said anti-homo stuff earlier. Apologies Johnnymcg.

Nate--IRL-- · 31-05-2011 03:06PM

JessieM wrote: »

It looks as if David Norris might well be backtracking.

I saw him in 2009 on an episode of "Seoige" on RTE1 speaking in favour of Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth, in a debate-style discussion.

This should be readily available to RTE in their archives.

So David Norris cannot honestly claim that he has never advocated Ireland rejoining the commonwealth as the evidence proves otherwise.

I don't believe you.

Nate

Annasopra · 31-05-2011 03:08PM

siltirocker wrote: »

I have just realised tayto lover might have INFACT said anti-homo stuff earlier. Apologies Johnnymcg.

It's ok - I'm not voting for David Norris either (if he ever gets nominated)
But if people like taytolover want to go on and on about flaunting gayness well then I think it's fair to be blount and call them on it.

zuroph · 31-05-2011 03:10PM

tayto lover wrote: »

I had my mind made up not to vote for him a long time ago, even before the programme yesterday. Whether he is guilty or not i don't know. That is why there should be a debate between them on t.v. or radio.
You seem to have you're mind made up about H.L.B. on the issue. Maybe she is telling the truth.

I've not much of an opinion on HLB. I dont know the woman, and have no previous knowledge of her. My mind is made up that the comments seem to be out of context, and in the context Norris offers, seem to make much more sense.

Guilty of what exactly? Your language there is misleading, Norris is not accused of any crime.

zuroph · 31-05-2011 03:12PM

tayto lover wrote: »

And you know that because .....

because a nine year old article has suddenly been dug back up as he goes for president. why not over the last 9 years when he was a sitting senator? Or does that not matter?

tayto lover · 31-05-2011 03:14PM

zuroph wrote: »

because a nine year old article has suddenly been dug back up as he goes for president. why not over the last 9 years when he was a sitting senator? Or does that not matter?

Nothing out of the ordinary there, remember Brian Lenihan when he was running for the same office ? Tapes again.

RachaelVO · 31-05-2011 03:18PM

zuroph wrote: »

I've not much of an opinion on HLB. I dont know the woman, and have no previous knowledge of her. My mind is made up that the comments seem to be out of context, and in the context Norris offers, seem to make much more sense.

Guilty of what exactly? Your language there is misleading, Norris is not accused of any crime.

I wonder about HLB, ya know this site http://www.davidnorris4president.com (which has a disclaimer at the bottom *Note: This website is not endorsed or produced by David Norris. Furthermore Campaign for Conscience does not endorse David Norris for President.) well that's set up by these religious maniacs http://www.campaignforconscience.org/

I wonder if they are backing up HLB. Seems to me that she is regurgitating sh1te that suits their agenda.

RachaelVO · 31-05-2011 03:22PM

JessieM wrote: »

It looks as if David Norris might well be backtracking.

I saw him in 2009 on an episode of "Seoige" on RTE1 speaking in favour of Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth, in a debate-style discussion.

This should be readily available to RTE in their archives.

So David Norris cannot honestly claim that he has never advocated Ireland rejoining the commonwealth as the evidence proves otherwise.

He never did say he didn't say it. What he also said was, that it has how HE felt on the issue, and he would never push anything that the Irish nation didn't agree with. More stuff taken outta context... you any relation to HLB?

JessieM · 31-05-2011 03:26PM

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

I don't believe you.

Nate

It's not a matter of belief, Nate. This is a fact. RTE can prove it if they choose to publicise the interview or print a transcript.

John Waters spoke against rejoining the Commonwealth in the same interview so he can also back this up, as could the Seoige sisters who presented the programme.

I hope someone does indeed publicise the Senator's comments and ask him for his views. There seems to be a suggestion that he is turning his back on comments he made in the past if they are not now appropriate for his presidential campaign. Life in the public eye doesn't work like that.

zuroph · 31-05-2011 03:29PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Nothing out of the ordinary there, remember Brian Lenihan when he was running for the same office ? Tapes again.

the release of information, true or false, with the specific and sole intention to discredit someone at a specific time, is a smear campaign. If she genuinely cared about the issue, she'd have been pushing it for the last 9 years, not letting the tape gather dust in her attic.

Nate--IRL-- · 31-05-2011 03:32PM

JessieM wrote: »

It's not a matter of belief, Nate. This is a fact. RTE can prove it if they choose to publicise the interview or print a transcript.

So I just have to take your word for it, that it is a fact? Not good enough.

Nate

My name is URL · 31-05-2011 03:33PM

Anyone know if Enoch Burke (campaign for conscience) is any relation to Helen Lucy Burke, or is the shared surname just coincidental?

tayto lover · 31-05-2011 03:36PM

zuroph wrote: »

the release of information, true or false, with the specific and sole intention to discredit someone at a specific time, is a smear campaign. If she genuinely cared about the issue, she'd have been pushing it for the last 9 years, not letting the tape gather dust in her attic.

Maybe she is doing it now because its on her conscience and she does not want someone of dubious character getting a higher position in life. We don't know why she is doing it now. Any of us.

RachaelVO · 31-05-2011 03:38PM

My name is URL wrote: »

Anyone know if Enoch Burke (campaign for conscience) is any relation to Helen Lucy Burke, or is the shared surname just coincidental?

I did wonder that myself after I was going through the few sites they have out there... Before I seen the guys name I thought her comments coincided beautifully with the agenda of Campaign for Conscience!

mikemac · 31-05-2011 03:41PM

RachaelVO wrote: »

I did wonder that myself after I was going through the few sites they have out there... Before I seen the guys name I thought her comments coincided beautifully with the agenda of Campaign for Conscience!

Ask the guys in conspiracy theories forum, they may know

jimthemental · 31-05-2011 03:42PM

He'd probably make a good president but at times he seems a bit hyper or something, a bit like Jedward. After hearing Sean Gallagher talking a few times now I'd say I'll give him the nod. The man is a hard worker and that is something I respect.

JessieM · 31-05-2011 03:43PM

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

So I just have to take your word for it, that it is a fact? Not good enough.

Nate

Contact RTE or John Waters or Grainne/Sile Seoige then, several options there.

Nodin · 31-05-2011 03:44PM

jimthemental wrote: »

He'd probably make a good president but at times he seems a bit hyper or something, a bit like Jedward. .......

Hehehehehehe. Ye don't say.

Nate--IRL-- · 31-05-2011 03:50PM

JessieM wrote: »

Contact RTE or John Waters or Grainne/Sile Seoige then, several options there.

Yeah, that really backs up your assertions. :rolleyes:

Nate

zuroph · 31-05-2011 03:55PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Maybe she is doing it now because its on her conscience and she does not want someone of dubious character getting a higher position in life. We don't know why she is doing it now. Any of us.

He's been a high profile senator all that time, regularily on tv and in the papers. strange that her conscience only acted up this week.

Nodin · 31-05-2011 03:57PM

zuroph wrote: »

He's been a high profile senator all that time, regularily on tv and in the papers. strange that her conscience only acted up this week.

Indeedy. Bit odd she went to Mr Bluffys show and not Pat Kenny or morning Ireland too.

mikemac · 31-05-2011 04:00PM

zuroph wrote: »

He's been a high profile senator all that time, regularily on tv and in the papers. strange that her conscience only acted up this week.

Norris easily won Joe Duffy's text poll last week for next President

That's why she came forward and to that show. And this answered you Nodin on the show she went to. Like why go to Pat Kenny over a poll on Joe Duffy show?

She doesn't think he is fit for the office so now is the time to come forward

If Norris was a no hoper in the polls, it's possible she would have not have bothered and let history rest

David Norris for President....would you vote for him?

Comments