Messages

Lots of chips on shoulders with the anti Brolly brigade, especially from counties against whom he has had a go, which is quite a few admittedly, including his own.  Wouldn't matter what he did or said.

Absolutely.  Yesterday's RTE analysis was rubbish. Safe, anodyne contributions may offend no-one but at half-time are only good for providing an opportunity for getting on with dinner preparations, getting the dog out for a walk or ironing a shirt for Monday.  Football is entertainment, not science or politics.  Half time analysis should reflect this.  What a lot of people on here regard as leading edge analysis, eg the Sky offering, is dull.  If all we are going to get at half time is such drabness, thank god I have a dog.

Some chips on shoulders here.

Rochford adds absolutely nothing. Tells us what we saw.

Margaret Ritchie to enter the lords. Jesus wept, I know the SDLP are sore at having no MP's and I know that she has technically resigned. But HTF on principle can any Irish Nationalist join the lords?

Hardly a surprise;



Margaret still taking the soup.

Typical stoop. Brits wave a wee bauble or bit of ermine their way and they're bowing and scraping. A failed politician who claims she will represent nationakists in Lords. She can fcuk right off

Hardly typical.  Second in nearly 50 years to go to the HoL.  I'd presume many more were offered.

Given that an MEP will do zero to advance the case of Nationalism or Unionism does anyone want to make the case why there 1st preference will be the top performer in the role if elected?

SDLP are part of PES who have been vocal on a range of issues but importantly, migrant issues and workers rights. They also fully believe in the European project.
Others sit with Marxists and Communists. That's for them to explain.

All accepted and Colum could hold his own. Don't think he is in Long's league plus Alliance's group whilst smaller is the power broker in the current parliament under Verhofstadt (that could change) and the Uk representation of that group is likely to increase with the remain vote going to Lib Dems. We need our voice inside that group

You "Don't think he is in Long's league".  Wha?  I would be interested to hear what you might say to support that.  Both articulate their party position in engaging ways, with Long for me maybe being a bit preachy.

In debate I would consider Long superior. Whilst ultimately that is subjective I would consider in the round, her calmness, articulacy and ability to react intelligently to live events.
In instinct I would judge her more politically savvy. She is managing an upward trajectory. Colin isn't flying. At best he is falling with style. His failure to grasp Mike TV's initiative, the Fianna Fáil fudgy thing, the failure to grasp the electoral importance of Hanna and the lack of clear positions on some key areas can all be cited.
In resilience I would judge Long to be superior. The shinners are gunning (in the metaphorical sense) for Colum and they don't give him an easy ride. This is nothing compared to what Long personally and Alliance generally have to withstand from PUL intelligentsia

Anyway  I would be interested to hear what you might say to support your claim that Long is preachy?

As you say, there is an element of subjectiveness about comparing Long and Eastwood or most politiians.  I certainly don't consider her a better debater.  He has the abilities that you attribute to her.  I don't recall him being any less calm than her.  He's no less articulate and, for me, quicker with the witicisms.

Her party leader role is much easier than his.  He inherited a party in decline, then a political situation going into decline.  There is a bit of a mood of "one is as bad as the others" viz nationalists and unionists, hence Alliance get an easy ride for being agnostic about nationality.  I don't want the person who represents me to be agnostic.  I am a nationalist and I want someone to articulate that.  Not in a way that denigrates unionists, or seeks to raise tensions, or tells them their days are numbered.  For me Alliance is a bit of "whatever you are having yourself", which is an easy position to play.

On the preachy - here's an example.  Friday 11th May there was a debate on RU involving Eastwood, Long and Jim Allister.  At the offset there was a discussion between Eastwood and Allister about how much NI gets from the EU (Eastwood) and how much UK puts in (Allister).  They both emphasised their points.  First comment from Long was "here we go, Punch and Judy politics".  We know she means, "we are above this arguing from the great unwashed like you".  For then on, her and Allister had a ding dong.  I don't want my political reps to not challenge Allister, the opposite in fact.  That is what Eastwood did, but not in an ignorant or uncouth way, but stridently.  I was a bit pissed off at her sanctimonious, holier-than-thou attitude, which seems to be her MO.

I agree with a lot of this. Can't comment on the RU debate that I didn't hear. I completely disagree with 2 points though.

Alliance do not get an easy ride. The Twitter responses to Long can be dismissed as keyboard warrior stuff but they give an insight into the vitriol Alliance can and do face. That on occasion is manifested physically. It's a very Belfast thing but Alliance's presence has been very Belfast focused but is starting to change

Secondly I cannot agree that as a nationalist that you need to represented by a nationalist on roads, education, tax, economics, health etc etc etc. Alliance are not a case of "whatever you are heaving yourself" and more a case of "can you leave your baggage at the door and deal with the unrelated issue on its merits ". This is where every party should be.

I will transfer to Colum as a determined proEU candidate. I will give him more respect when his party takes on issues like standing up to the shinners on local councils in the way Alliance did to loyalist in Belfast and beyond

All political parties get the vitriol on social media, SDLP no less than Alliance.  Alliance do get an easier ride from media.

Sure, I don't need to be represented by a nationalist on roads, education etc, and they don't any more than Alliance.  I find all parties in my area to be much the same on these matters, not great mostly - Alliance no better or worse than the others, hence I transfer widely, esp in local government. 

The idea that my Irishness/nationalism is "baggage" to be left at the door.  I certainly don't see it as baggage, whatever that means, or as something to be dismissed.  Its important to me, and as far as I can see, to a lot of other people.  Its not everything that I think about in a political rep, nor is it nothing.  I want someone who can advocate for me on roads, health, education and irish nationalism.  There is nothing wrong with that, its not a case of either/or as you seem to suggest.

I am not sure where the idea that the SDLP don't stand up to SF on councils comes from but it certainly does not reflect reality.  I know the political scene in Derry, over a few decades.  Your version of the SDLP/SF relationship is definitely not borne out by the experiences here.

Given that an MEP will do zero to advance the case of Nationalism or Unionism does anyone want to make the case why there 1st preference will be the top performer in the role if elected?

SDLP are part of PES who have been vocal on a range of issues but importantly, migrant issues and workers rights. They also fully believe in the European project.
Others sit with Marxists and Communists. That's for them to explain.

All accepted and Colum could hold his own. Don't think he is in Long's league plus Alliance's group whilst smaller is the power broker in the current parliament under Verhofstadt (that could change) and the Uk representation of that group is likely to increase with the remain vote going to Lib Dems. We need our voice inside that group

You "Don't think he is in Long's league".  Wha?  I would be interested to hear what you might say to support that.  Both articulate their party position in engaging ways, with Long for me maybe being a bit preachy.

In debate I would consider Long superior. Whilst ultimately that is subjective I would consider in the round, her calmness, articulacy and ability to react intelligently to live events.
In instinct I would judge her more politically savvy. She is managing an upward trajectory. Colin isn't flying. At best he is falling with style. His failure to grasp Mike TV's initiative, the Fianna Fáil fudgy thing, the failure to grasp the electoral importance of Hanna and the lack of clear positions on some key areas can all be cited.
In resilience I would judge Long to be superior. The shinners are gunning (in the metaphorical sense) for Colum and they don't give him an easy ride. This is nothing compared to what Long personally and Alliance generally have to withstand from PUL intelligentsia

Anyway  I would be interested to hear what you might say to support your claim that Long is preachy?

As you say, there is an element of subjectiveness about comparing Long and Eastwood or most politiians.  I certainly don't consider her a better debater.  He has the abilities that you attribute to her.  I don't recall him being any less calm than her.  He's no less articulate and, for me, quicker with the witicisms.

Her party leader role is much easier than his.  He inherited a party in decline, then a political situation going into decline.  There is a bit of a mood of "one is as bad as the others" viz nationalists and unionists, hence Alliance get an easy ride for being agnostic about nationality.  I don't want the person who represents me to be agnostic.  I am a nationalist and I want someone to articulate that.  Not in a way that denigrates unionists, or seeks to raise tensions, or tells them their days are numbered.  For me Alliance is a bit of "whatever you are having yourself", which is an easy position to play.

On the preachy - here's an example.  Friday 11th May there was a debate on RU involving Eastwood, Long and Jim Allister.  At the offset there was a discussion between Eastwood and Allister about how much NI gets from the EU (Eastwood) and how much UK puts in (Allister).  They both emphasised their points.  First comment from Long was "here we go, Punch and Judy politics".  We know she means, "we are above this arguing from the great unwashed like you".  For then on, her and Allister had a ding dong.  I don't want my political reps to not challenge Allister, the opposite in fact.  That is what Eastwood did, but not in an ignorant or uncouth way, but stridently.  I was a bit pissed off at her sanctimonious, holier-than-thou attitude, which seems to be her MO.

Given that an MEP will do zero to advance the case of Nationalism or Unionism does anyone want to make the case why there 1st preference will be the top performer in the role if elected?

SDLP are part of PES who have been vocal on a range of issues but importantly, migrant issues and workers rights. They also fully believe in the European project.
Others sit with Marxists and Communists. That's for them to explain.

All accepted and Colum could hold his own. Don't think he is in Long's league plus Alliance's group whilst smaller is the power broker in the current parliament under Verhofstadt (that could change) and the Uk representation of that group is likely to increase with the remain vote going to Lib Dems. We need our voice inside that group

You "Don't think he is in Long's league".  Wha?  I would be interested to hear what you might say to support that.  Both articulate their party position in engaging ways, with Long for me maybe being a bit preachy. 

Co-opting. Jobs for the boys/girls. If you're a good little boy or girl and do what the Felon's club tells you, you'll get a cushey MLA number.

Or the Durkans in Derry or Dallats in Causeway or the Paisleys, Poots and Robinsons etc. etc....all the same in every political party.

It's definitely not the same in every political party.

I see there is an issue with postal votes for the European elections in NI. Be interesting to see if this has an effect on percentage vote share....

It's exactly the same in most political parties - co-opted or standinging for the first time.

Durkan in Derry...mmmm...nepotism and all the rest, Maskeys in Belfast, Poots and Robinsons in Belfast.  Family name means a lot on the poster regardless.

Last sentence is probably true but that's democracy. Co opting is not the same is it? The electorate don't have role to play in co opting do they?

A Durkan in Foyleside? As good as co-opting.

Bunkum.  There were 3 SDLP candidates and 2 SDLP quotas. Voters had a choice and voted strongly for Mary Durian.  Nothing like a co option.  A simple case of offering voters choice.

What do you think?

Which full time officials were incompetent?

We can't blame Coldrick, bad as he was.  Defensive approach was brutal.  Letting Kildare carry the ball so far up the field, without a challenge.  What was the thinking there?

Kildare very cynical.  Ref completely let them be cynical.  A disgrace.  Derry very naive in defence.

McElduff is a disgrace.  He knew exactly what he was doing.  But you still deflect.


quote author=Il Bomber Destro link=topic=15128.msg1766830#msg1766830 date=1515364818]

Let me tell you defenders of this crap something else. There will be no united Ireland without a proportion of current day unionists supporting it. We have that opportunity now due to the calamity of Brexit. United Ireland might make some financial/economic sense to middle ground unionists. The old guard in Republican circles are put out to pasture which makes it a bit easier to do for them too. Things are moving into place. And then you have a total f**king moron like this guy doing this. Unionists need to see that there losses will be respected in any new republic. Anyone who calls themselves a republican should understand that.

Sinn Fein leadership need to toss this fool out on his hole and show that while Arlene and her cronies have no shame, republicans will deal with this stuff. I am ashamed to see so many republicans defending this and reverting to "whataboutery" as a defense. Anyone who questions it is a free stater etc etc. Cop the f**k on.

What is important is balance and I think it's very relevant that those Free Staters who come on to express their outrage here are usually the same ones mentioned when it comes to commenting on the disgusting behaviour and obstruction of justice of the establishment parties in their own state.

Play the ball not the man

I've made my comments on this matter. I'm just pointing out the selective outrage from free staters, but there seems to be an agenda to quell this being pointed out.

You know what outrages all free staters? Tell me have I selective outrage too. Curious as to your assessment of this free stater.

I find it odd that a SF MLA making a crass social media post about the Kingsmill massacre, intended or unintended, is something that draws more outrage from the Free Staters than the injustices that have the fingerpints of the Free State establishement parties all over them of late. These are also topical issues such as the Mary Boyle case and the Stardust families. Yet none of those posters could muster any disgust about the role of the parties in that thread.
[/quote]

How many of them came to see how he was after the bomb attack?