Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

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

1…1314161819…96

Comments

  • #452
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,495 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    Better Norris than another woman. Hmmm. Well, still better.... :pac:


  • #453
    flash1080
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭flash1080


    Nodin wrote: »
    I can't defend something that doesn't need defending. Its as pointless as - fer instance - attacking something that doesn't deserve attacking. Whatever that might be.
    But aren't you defending the man on a number of threads? Is it really "attacking" to point out an unprofessional photo?
    Nodin wrote: »
    No, I've been defending Norris in two threads




    Nodin wrote: »
    What ones? Why not take it up with the specific individuals?


    A few examples of the "less than that" please.
    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    I see no double standards to be honest, it's just a jokey picture.

    Other politicians have been slated because they are corrupt etc, not because of silly photos.
    zuroph wrote: »
    Please point out examples of this. I sincerely doubt it.
    Nodin wrote: »
    I can't defend something that doesn't need defending. Its as pointless as - fer instance - attacking something that doesn't deserve attacking. Whatever that might be.

    Seriously? There was an image of a politician at a social gathering with his arm on the shoulder(s) one or two young women which was used to ridicule him.


  • #454
    flash1080
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭flash1080


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Speak for yourself. I see no problem with it. I laughed when I saw it because of the obvious irony.

    You're really over-reacting imo.

    I said a lot of people, not everyone. Calm down. It's an unprofessional image, get over it.


  • #455
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    flash1080 wrote: »
    Seriously? There was an image of a politician at a social gathering with his arm on the shoulder(s) one or two young women which was used to ridicule him.

    That sounds like an over-reaction too tbh.


  • #456
    sesna
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,229 ✭✭✭sesna


    dvpower wrote: »
    He's against it. What about it appeals to you?

    ""In terms of classic paedophilia, as practised by the Greeks for example, where it is an older man introducing a younger man or boy to adult life, I think there can be something to be said for it." David Norris.


  • Advertisement
  • #457
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    Just imagine if a FF politician or worse a Priest made the same remarks as Norris? I can imagine that those defending DN would be among the most vocal to castigate such individuals. Is it because DN is a gay rights activist that even if he makes the most reprehensible comments but because he is a gay activist he is beyond reproach? Legitimate criticism is always countered as being homophobic. How will anyone be ever able to debate with him when such an attitiude persists?

    I'm sorry I gave him a preference in the last election. If FG produce a half decent candidate they'll get elected thankfully. The Norris campaign had been torpedoed


  • #458
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    flash1080 wrote: »
    I said a lot of people, not everyone. Calm down. It's an unprofessional image, get over it.

    How about taking your own advice ;)


  • #459
    flash1080
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭flash1080


    zuroph wrote: »
    how dare our politicians have fun with others. we want to see them all sour faced and charmless.

    I never said anything of the sort, well done on trying to exaggerate my points. Politicians are obviously allowed to have fun, but they are in the public eye and they must take care of the image they project, and most of them at least try to.


  • #460
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 56,426 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    They are too entirely different things and you know it.

    Again this is obviously a jokey picture, it is not serious at all.

    Well if out current president was seen laughing while grabbing a male by his private parts would that be seen as a joke too ? I doubt it.


  • #461
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    sesna wrote: »
    ""In terms of classic paedophilia, as practised by the Greeks for example, where it is an older man introducing a younger man or boy to adult life, I think there can be something to be said for it." David Norris.

    Before this he described sexual attraction to children as abhorrant.

    This comment looks bad but I think it has been taken out of context. He's talking about Ancient Greece not modern day Ireland.


  • Advertisement
  • #462
    flash1080
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭flash1080


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    How about taking your own advice ;)

    What advice? I'm simply pointing out an unprofessional image. Seriously, get over it, it's almost embarrassing watching the amigos defend anything that isn't pro-Norris.


  • #463
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    flash1080 wrote: »

    Seriously? There was an image of a politician at a social gathering with his arm on the shoulder(s) one or two young women which was used to ridicule him.

    Ridicule? You're trying to say it disqualifies him from office. Eg

    the fact that it's unprofessional

    ......you're telling me that somebody used one photo as the entire basis to say somebody was unsuitable to hold office?


  • #464
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    flash1080 wrote: »
    What advice? I'm simply pointing out an unprofessional image. ........

    No, you're saying that such an image renders him unsuitable for office -
    It's incredible the amount of ignorant people who will vote for him.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72519521&postcount=422


  • #465
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Well if out current president was seen laughing while grabbing a male by his private parts would that be seen as a joke too ? I doubt it.

    Maybe not but honestly this is being blown out of proportion.

    However I have read some of your other posts on Norris and homosexuality in general so doubt anything I say could convince you be remotely positive about him.


  • #466
    flash1080
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭flash1080


    Nodin wrote: »
    Ridicule? You're trying to say it disqualifies him from office. Eg


    ......you're telling me that somebody used one photo as the entire basis to say somebody was unsuitable to hold office?

    You're exaggerating my points here. It's an unprofessional image, it doesn't form the entire basis to say somebody is unsuitable to hold office, but it does help form people's opinions.


  • #467
    zuroph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,102 ✭✭✭✭zuroph


    flash1080 wrote: »
    Seriously? There was an image of a politician at a social gathering with his arm on the shoulder(s) one or two young women which was used to ridicule him.
    [/quote]


    the one where said politician was obviously quite "tired and emotional"? Which tied in with the story of said politician sounding Tired and emotional on a morning ireland interview, and several other stories of said politician?

    I'd see the norris photo as much more friendly and flattering TBH. It shows a sense of humour and charm.


  • #468
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Well if out current president was seen laughing while grabbing a male by his private parts would that be seen as a joke too ? I doubt it.

    It would actually.


    Unless our current president was a man, in which case you'd have a spasm.


  • #469
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    flash1080 wrote: »
    What advice? I'm simply pointing out an unprofessional image. Seriously, get over it, it's almost embarrassing watching the amigos defend anything that isn't pro-Norris.

    This advice, as you well know.

    It was a moment of humour and fun. Chill out.


  • #470
    flash1080
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭flash1080


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    This advice, as you well know.

    It was a moment of humour and fun. Chill out.

    It's an unprofessional image. Calm down.


  • #471
    zuroph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,102 ✭✭✭✭zuroph


    flash1080 wrote: »
    It's an unprofessional image. Calm down.
    one. of thousands. I'm sure theres a few "bad photos" of everyone. Not that I see anything bad in that photo anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • #472
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    flash1080 wrote: »
    It's an unprofessional image. Calm down.

    No it's not. You're making a mountain of a molehill and you know it.

    I'm perfectly calm thanks.


  • #473
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    flash1080 wrote: »
    You're exaggerating my points here. It's an unprofessional image, it doesn't form the entire basis to say somebody is unsuitable to hold office, but it does help form people's opinions.

    I'm not exaggerating in the slightest. Your presentation of the photo had the implication it was a negative reflection on his suitability for office. The fact that you repeatedly imply it reflects on his professionalism, which is more of the same.


  • #474
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    Nodin wrote: »
    It would actually.


    Unless our current president was a man, in which case you'd have a spasm.

    It wouldn't. Thats why you don't see leaders who want to be taken seriously on the world stage doing it. Those that do, a-la Berlusconi are not generally widely admired internationally.


  • #475
    flash1080
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭flash1080


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    No it's not. You're making a mountain of a molehill and you know it.

    I'm perfectly calm thanks.

    It's an unprofessional image. You're the one making it bigger than it is.


  • #476
    sesna
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,229 ✭✭✭sesna


    ""In terms of classic paedophilia, as practised by the Greeks for example, where it is an older man introducing a younger man or boy to adult life, I think there can be something to be said for it." David Norris.
    AudreyHepburn wrote: »


    This comment looks bad but I think it has been taken out of context. He's talking about Ancient Greece not modern day Ireland.

    Out of context ! That's the lame defence I see the likes of Bill O'Reilly using.

    Ancient Greeks? What difference does that make. Is the above comment suddenly okay because he used the word "classic" - ah that's okay then, it some kind of high brow intellectual comment .


  • #477
    flash1080
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,017 ✭✭✭flash1080


    Nodin wrote: »
    I'm not exaggerating in the slightest. Your presentation of the photo had the implication it was a negative reflection on his suitability for office. The fact that you repeatedly imply it reflects on his professionalism, which is more of the same.

    As I've said, it's an unprofessional image, it doesn't form the entire basis to say somebody is unsuitable to hold office, but it does help form people's opinions.


  • #478
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    flash1080 wrote: »
    It's an unprofessional image. You're the one making it bigger than it is.

    Why do you keep repeating the same thing over and over? Has the real flash left the keyboard and the toy bird that dips its head taken over?


  • #479
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 56,426 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Maybe not but honestly this is being blown out of proportion.

    However I have read some of your other posts on Norris and homosexuality in general so doubt anything I say could convince you be remotely positive about him.


    Quite right too. I have always said i would never vote for him, even before the latest articles. I never could take to him as he gives me the shivers with his behaviour. He overdoes the gayness thing. I never stated otherwise.


  • #480
    zuroph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,102 ✭✭✭✭zuroph


    flash1080 wrote: »
    It's incredible the amount of ignorant people who will vote for him. At least the role of president isn't hugely important, although it does affect perceptions of Ireland abroad.

    http://mylesday.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/david-norris.jpg?w=240&h=156

    you called many people ignorant, then produced the photo of how he would increase negative perceptions of Ireland. Nonsense, its one photo which YOU'VE decided is bad.

    people arent making a mountain out of it, they're making a mountain out of you even bringing the photo to the debate!


  • Advertisement
  • #481
    oppenheimer1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,733 ✭✭✭oppenheimer1


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    Before this he described sexual attraction to children as abhorrant.

    This comment looks bad but I think it has been taken out of context. He's talking about Ancient Greece not modern day Ireland.

    I suppose his defence of Cathal O'Searcaigh who was practicing Classical Greek values was taken out of context too.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement