Sinn Fein in Government.

[revalade]

The Chief of Staff will stay until SF get hammered out of sight at the next election. The small bit players will then tell him to go or they will split away and form The Real Sinn Féin.

History repeating itself.

And then will he claim that he has been betrayed ? The fox will not outrun the hounds indefinitely .

 

[sloblock]

The Chief of Staff will stay until SF get hammered out of sight at the next election. The small bit players will then tell him to go or they will split away and form The Real Sinn Féin.

History repeating itself.

Ah that's just silly. The idea of SF being 'hammered out of sight' in the forthcoming election is risible.

 

[Linden Arden]

Time to get out both ballot boxes?

 

[Rebel CNC]

As far as SF goes-is the problem the Cast and not the play ?

Think it's the lead player.

Young bloods like Doherty, Mary Lou would love the glorious leader to retire to write his memoirs.
Allowing for margin of error on polls, they, like FF, are stuck around 20% and seem unable to push onto next level.

 

[sloblock]

Think it's the lead player.

Young bloods like Doherty, Mary Lou would love the glorious leader to retire to write his memoirs.
Allowing for margin of error on polls, they, like FF, are stuck around 20% and seem unable to push onto next level.

I am not at all convinced there are grounds for SF to move much further than where they are now, and there are a number of reasons for that:

1) The very hierarchical (dare I say militaristic) nature of the organization itself; centralism and discipline need not be bad things in a party, but the omertà on sex abuse and so on reflects poorly to say the least. The silence (aside from unofficial briefing of journalists) on the process leading to the expulsion and suspension of councillors in Cork County Council, and the use of terms like 'stood down' in relation to local cummain, adds to the dubious aroma.
2) The historical legacy of political violence. Most voters are old enough to remember the PIRA campaign, kids being killed in explosions etc. This has never been disowned or condemned by SF. Many people who might be sympathetic to SF's publicly avowed policies would not vote for the provos' public face.
3) The history of the party means it has grown from ultra-nationalist elements rather than community and campaigning groups, so it is hard to know exactly what its base represents (or indeed believes or wants) at this point
4) Its preparedness to leap into d'Hondt arrangements with whoever bats the eyelids at them, with a view to securing feudal chains of office for 2016 - combined with a readiness to enter more developed agreements with the hated Labour Party on the sharing out of council jobs http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...secret-deal-on-top-council-jobs-31336634.html - makes them look as venal as the rest.
5) Even if a choice was made by (or for) Grizzly that he step down as leader, who would really believe that MLM, Doherty, or whoever replaced him, was not answerable to an unelected army council?

 

[SoundMan]

Time to get out both ballot boxes?

If only our politicians were so quick as to ask the opinions of the people

 

[SoundMan]

I am not at all convinced there are grounds for SF to move much further than where they are now, and there are a number of reasons for that:

1) The very hierarchical (dare I say militaristic) nature of the organization itself; centralism and discipline need not be bad things in a party, but the omertà on sex abuse and so on reflects poorly to say the least. The silence (aside from unofficial briefing of journalists) on the process leading to the expulsion and suspension of councillors in Cork County Council, and the use of terms like 'stood down' in relation to local cummain, adds to the dubious aroma.
2) The historical legacy of political violence. Most voters are old enough to remember the PIRA campaign, kids being killed in explosions etc. This has never been disowned or condemned by SF. Many people who might be sympathetic to SF's publicly avowed policies would not vote for the provos' public face.
3) The history of the party means it has grown from ultra-nationalist elements rather than community and campaigning groups, so it is hard to know exactly what it's base represents (or indeed believes or wants) at this point
4) Its preparedness to leap into d'Hondt arrangements with whoever bats the eyelids at them, with a view to securing feudal chains of office for 2016 - combined with a readiness to enter more developed agreements with the hated Labour Party on the sharing out of council jobs http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...secret-deal-on-top-council-jobs-31336634.html - makes them look as venal as the rest.
5) Even if a choice was made by (or for) Grizzly that he step down as leader, who would really believe that MLM, Doherty, or whoever replaced him, was not answerable to an unelected army council?

1 Hierarchical??? Have you not been keeping up with the goings on in FF where MM rules the roost despite much grumblings from grass roots? Or FG where but for Hogan coming to Enda's rescue that particular dweeb would have been nothing more than an afterthought. And as for the machinations in the Labour/Democratic Left coalition

2 You have a point but I think you're oversimplifying things either for yourself or your perception of your audience

Your take on 3 is most amusing. It's because the established parties didn't want to know about the All-Ireland cause that people from every walk of life who felt disaffected by the whole "Now that we've conned you into voting for us we don't want to hear from you for 5 years" established party attitude saw a party with whom they'd much in common. Of all the parties one would think that SF are most in touch with community groups.

4 I think D'Hondt is recognised as a way for power sharing to actually work - beit north or south, east or west.

5 Answerable to the Army Council? You don't half spout some nonsense. FFS whereas in the 70s the political wing was the junior partner one would have thought that, even for the slow of learning, you'd have realized the former Army Council abdicated all responsibility to the political wing.

That of course didn't suit some on the Army Council at the time and they branded the majority as traitors and vowed to carry on an armed struggle of their own. You do know that there have been death threats by the continuity against people like Martin McGuinness don't you?

 

[Corcaigh32]

I am not at all convinced there are grounds for SF to move much further than where they are now, and there are a number of reasons for that:

1) The very hierarchical (dare I say militaristic) nature of the organization itself; centralism and discipline need not be bad things in a party, but the omertà on sex abuse and so on reflects poorly to say the least. The silence (aside from unofficial briefing of journalists) on the process leading to the expulsion and suspension of councillors in Cork County Council, and the use of terms like 'stood down' in relation to local cummain, adds to the dubious aroma.
2) The historical legacy of political violence. Most voters are old enough to remember the PIRA campaign, kids being killed in explosions etc. This has never been disowned or condemned by SF. Many people who might be sympathetic to SF's publicly avowed policies would not vote for the provos' public face.
3) The history of the party means it has grown from ultra-nationalist elements rather than community and campaigning groups, so it is hard to know exactly what it's base represents (or indeed believes or wants) at this point
4) Its preparedness to leap into d'Hondt arrangements with whoever bats the eyelids at them, with a view to securing feudal chains of office for 2016 - combined with a readiness to enter more developed agreements with the hated Labour Party on the sharing out of council jobs http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...secret-deal-on-top-council-jobs-31336634.html - makes them look as venal as the rest.
5) Even if a choice was made by (or for) Grizzly that he step down as leader, who would really believe that MLM, Doherty, or whoever replaced him, was not answerable to an unelected army council?

None of which is actually the case. There are 2 SF's on the island. The Northern version and the Southern version. Neither of which have anything to do with the IRA as there is no IRA anymore and the continuity/32 sovereignty crew are just guys pedalling their racketeering and diesel laundering operations with the odd "political attack" being used as cover.

The 2 SF's are of the one party and not. The Northern cohort consider themselves to be true republicans for obvious reasons. The Southern cohort tend to be republican lite, a la MLMcD but heavy in the community activism side. That is why the leadership is vested in Gerry Adams nationally because to put it bluntly, the northern crew don't necessarily trust the southern crew and one might argue with good cause.

However the fact of the matter when you peel back all the paramilitary wumming and SF bashing in which the PROC seems to revel, is that the vast majority of people in SF wouldn't know an armelite from a Miller Lite and are simply trying to forward a republican (in which ever way you view it) analysis.

Now there is a while yet before they are acceptable for a transfer, let alone a first preference, to some in the south. And the post above clearly shows why. Is Pearse Doherty a paedophile enabler? Of course not but it is a snappy soundbite or punchline to ward off anyone considering parting with a 1, 2 or 3 at election time. However the same cannot be said of Adams himself. He is THE Achilles heel that SF have and has been for some time. He is inextricably linked with the troubles. He has family issues around abuse and because none of that is ever going away, then the rest of the party become tarred with the same brush.

When MacGuinness ran for the Presidency a couple of years ago it did alot to bring the conversation about the past into focus for the people in the south. That momentum such as it was, was never capitalised on. Gerry should have left then and allowed Doherty to take over, but the internal schisms within the party seem to have prevented that. And while the Irish Water scandal did provide a boost for a while, issues like the party convention matter raise questions in the minds of the electorate.

I think SF will probably hit 22-24% and will be the largest party not in government after the next election. This SF/IRA thing is childish and isn't even used by the TUV anymore. But as long as Adams remains national leader they will always be hamstrung by his past because SF are tied to it as much as he is until the baton is passed over.

 

[sloblock]

1 Hierarchical??? Have you not been keeping up with the goings on in FF where MM rules the roost despite much grumblings from grass roots? Or FG where but for Hogan coming to Enda's rescue that particular dweeb would have been nothing more than an afterthought. And as for the machinations in the Labour/Democratic Left coalition

2 You have a point but I think you're oversimplifying things either for yourself or your perception of your audience

Your take on 3 is most amusing. It's because the established parties didn't want to know about the All-Ireland cause that people from every walk of life who felt disaffected by the whole "Now that we've conned you into voting for us we don't want to hear from you for 5 years" established party attitude saw a party with whom they'd much in common. Of all the parties one would think that SF are most in touch with community groups.

4 I think D'Hondt is recognised as a way for power sharing to actually work - beit north or south, east or west.

5 Answerable to the Army Council? You don't half spout some nonsense. FFS whereas in the 70s the political wing was the junior partner one would have thought that, even for the slow of learning, you'd have realized the former Army Council abdicated all responsibility to the political wing.

That of course didn't suit some on the Army Council at the time and they branded the majority as traitors and vowed to carry on an armed struggle of their own. You do know that there have been death threats by the continuity against people like Martin McGuinness don't you?

I am not commenting here on FF, but if you like I can. Martin, like most party leaders, tries to drag things in the direction he wants. I don't doubt bureaucratic means are used, and central control is employed to push out unwanted candidates. But the difference is that the omertà is not solid in FF, and we hear about it.

I am not oversimplifying the fact that SF has never condemned the acts of murder committed by the PIRA. You can try to complicate it if you see fit, but it will not change the fact that provo bombs in litter bins killed kids.

I am not saying SF is not in touch with community groups - I am saying it did not arise from them and is very separate from them; it arose from militant nationalism. If you seriously think that approx 20% of voters in the Republic are expressing an intent to vote SF because of "the All-Ireland cause", you are living in a dream world.

The use of the d'Hondt system in local authorities is not what I would call power-sharing. Any anti-establishment party worthy of the name would stand on principle against FF, FG, LP hacks becoming mayors, committee chairs etc. They would not say "we want a go too".

Are you really sufficiently simple-minded to believe there is some kind of wall between the PIRA and SF? Do you really imagine the development of the SF side of the movement is not inextricably tied to the paramilitary side? Do you really think the Ard Chomhairle of SF need take no notice of the Army Council? Seriously?

And do you think death threats against McGuinness somehow makes SF cuddly and fluffy?

 

[Corcaigh32]

Is Sloblock Duffs?