Genuinely don’t think anyone wants to see that skyrocket. No one sane anyway.
No one with any modicum of sense would regard Mary Lou as anything but a condescending,holier than thou bag of wind. She’s only marginally less annoying than Boyd Barrett to listen to.
Both appear to be well regarded as decent speakers in the Dail. Mind you, the standard there is very low.
I don’t know now anyone who on can bear them. One shouts no matter what the topic. He seems to think the louder he speaks the more seriously he’ll be taken. And the other speaks as thought we’re all mentally backwards and therefore must… be… spoken to…as if… we could…not understand… her if she spoke…normally.
They’re both painful to listen to in my view.
Unlike these two…
There are very few good speakers in our parliament. Mary Lou’s problem is she cannot walk past a microphone without deciding to lecture the plebs.
In fact, there are no good speakers in our parliament. Just degrees of bad.
And then there is this…
Or this beaut…
I can see how pundits reckoned Mary Lou’s background would attract prospective SF voters.
Even republicans here were inclined to believe a Dublin-based party leader would grow the party in the south…complimented by M O’Neill up north
Maybe that strategy is still correct…but that Mary Lou isn’t the right person. I suppose next year will tell a tale.
The reality is that Irish Politics has changed forever and FF, FG and Labour haven’t accepted the fact that there will not be a majority Government in the 26 Counties for a LONG LONG time.
Usual scare tactics of the rhetoric movement there. “They’re coming to get us!! They’re swarming across the world to take what’s ours!!”. Funnily enough all sounds very like Trump and his wall and related rhetoric, yet the same people who rant about Trump and his ilk don’t seem to get the irony, or the hypocrisy. Perhaps it’s just that good old NIMBY thing?
Seems to be the populist mode of communication of opinions these days, shouting, ranting… shouting ‘larger larger larger’, shouting ‘mega-mega white thing’.
Watch closely and you will notice why you think he is shouting. People like Fine Gaels Peter Fitzpatrick, Heather Humphries, Catherine Byrne and Mary Mitchell O’Connor generally read statements prepared by some civil servant and their script is between them and their microphone thus reducing the volume, as opposed to the likes of Boyd Barrett and others who actually know the subject that they are talking on.
Obviously, the ‘Right thing to do’ is to let migrants come here so by definition, to disagree means that you are a racist. The tone of most media coverage says as much.
It is important to see the bigger picture. Some European countries colonised much of the earth and stole what they could. Now things are hugely unfair on those left behind. What does the west do? Well first of all it sell them lots of guns so they can kill each other. Second, it allows them to uproot their families and come here to work for a pittance. Basically modern slavery. The world is owned and run by the rich. The media is theirs to sell their message. Dissent is not okay. They want the cheap labour so we are told ‘the economy needs it’. This whole plan is portrayed as being benign but it isn’t. What should be happening is that the countries who eviscerated Africa and Asia should be forced to pay reparations to those countries, to set up infrastructure etc.
As for the NIMBY thing, over a fifth of people here were not born here. And rising. How big is your back yard? I was never asked about any of this. Were you? The biggest societal upheaval possible and nobody was asked. How many migrants should we take? A million? The social fabric of our country has been changed totally and irrevocably. It’s insane.
That’s a big assumption, to disagree is controversial but to say it means you are inevitably branded racist by ‘most’ is a very grandiose victim-like claim. And you were talking about ‘numbers of migrants’, not ‘migrants per se’, which is a different matter really. I think it’s important her to look at tone and meaning of comment/opinion. The tone can betray or suggest a fearful and intolerant agenda, even if it’s not meant to. And then it’s backed up at times by miscued rhetoric and skewed commentary, this does work both ways, even if there is such a thing as ‘both sides’ (or only two!!) to the argument.
I think the other part of your post raises many complex issues. For one thing huge migrations have periodically happened throughout the history of the human race. It’s the natural order of things, there comes a point again and again in history/human societal cycles where nothing will stop it. The cheap labour thing is inevitably a part of it but whatever about it being ‘sold as benign’, don’t assume most people are stupid, everybody knows that market forces dictate things, for example the huge East European (and other migrant sources) influx into Ireland in the 90s and 2000s was very much market-force led, and obviously to do with our place within he entity of the EU. Those people make up a large portion of the immigrants to which you referred. What is your point about them? Most have them have been here up to 20 years now.
And the cheap labour point is what plan? You don’t believe the economy of either expanding or potentially expanding countries/regions needs cheap labour? That has always happened, Turks into Germany in the 40s-60s for example, many many many people into America in the first 70 years of the last century and before, then the Yugoslav refugee Dayton Agreement migration in the 90s-2000s. And so on.
I don’t agree it’s insane but that’s differing opinions for you. I think the social fabric of this country has in many ways improved in terms of the impact of immigration. The problems of the social fabric as far as I see it are mainly sourced in other origins, the impact of the church and state hegemony for so long and the abuses of those institutions being amongst the main issues. Similarly to parts of East Europe in some ways. In Ireland the loss of and post- traumatic fallout of the breakdown of the old social fabric once the Church lost control and the state changed from conservative and narrowly parochial and old-fashioned to rampant capitalist etc.
The world over-population and the giant problems of many parts of the world are inevitably going to filter through to the more insulated wealthy parts from time to time, and that’s the natural order IMO.
To me, lots of what you said there is irrelevant and misses the point. This is totally wrong and is simply about money, as I see it. We will agree to disagree so. When, by 2050 or so, indigenous/native Irish are in a minority here, I’ll meet you for a pint. See what you think at that stage.
Fair enough. Firstly though, it will depend on your definition of indigenous and native. Are you going to say that the children and grandchildren of recent immigrants born in Ireland now and in the future are not native or indigenous?
I’ve have yet to see any realistic evidence that immigration into Ireland will go past 50% of total population at any given time as you suggest it could.
I don’t think he’s shouting. He is. And it has nothing to do with him but having a script. He rants. Like a lot of them. And it’s a total turn off. Literally.