Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Mark J. Terrill/AP/Press Association Images
Alec Baldwin
Column Alec Baldwin is waving goodbye to public life – and can you blame him?
Sharon Ni Bheolain was treated abominably by our tabloids at the weekend, so what must it be like to be an international star? It gets hot under that spotlight, writes Lisa McInerney.
1.00pm, 25 Feb 2014
134
23
FIRST SHIA LABEOUF, now Alec Baldwin. It’s not exactly a trend yet – though perpetual chin-stroker James Franco seems tantalisingly sympathetic – but if 2014 comes to be defined by Hollywood actors deserting their posts en masse, who’d be surprised? Though admittedly it’d be nice to see someone plagiarising Shia LaBeouf for a change.
Alec Baldwin’s decision to quit public life comes to us via an editorial in New York magazine. He’s had a turbulent few months. His late-night talk show on MSNBC was cancelled after long-time adversary, TMZ’s Harvey Levin, alleged that Baldwin called a TMZ videographer a “faggot”. Alec’s aghast. He’s not homophobic. Sure, there was that time he called a Daily Mail reporter “a toxic little queen”, and yeah, he casually refers to a transgender man as a “tranny” in the opening paragraphs of the same editorial that he’susing todeny his alleged homophobia, but he’s just hot-headed and being famous is hella hard. He then goes on to list a number of people, media outlets and … uh, cities that have wronged him.
Amongst those to get it in the ear is young Mr LaBeouf, who drove Baldwin up the wall by being too rigid about learning his lines for the Broadway production in which they were both cast.
An uncomfortable truth
Look, there are a lot of reasons to be annoyed with Shia LaBeouf, but his being too darned professional isn’t one of them. The man combated being caught plagiarising with more plagiarism, in the apparently vain hope that we’ll all assume it’s performance art. He even became an art installation in an LA gallery, weeping silently with his head in a paper bag (James Franco’s chin was buffed goodo that day). And, then, at the Nymphomaniac press conference, he cruelly butchered an Eric Cantona quote. This is not a man who needs to be taken to task for learning his lines.
It’s rather a coincidence that the visibly floundering Baldwin has identified the visibly floundering LaBeouf as a personal problem that has compounded his issues with public life, as if their fragile egos were drawn to one another in some sort of peacock-baiting cosmic joke. Whatever the reason, there’s an uncomfortable truth in there somewhere: Baldwin, temperamental gasbag one minute, conscientious zealot the next, has a point.
It must be absolutely head-wrecking to be Hollywood-famous.
Whatever you think of him, consider the paparazzi
Baldwin is an actor of considerable talent and charisma. He’s also undoubtedly a pain in the arse. Not hugely interesting unless he’s lashing out at paparazzi or roaring unpleasant epithets on his daughter’s voicemail, he’s baited by showbiz journos and photographers to display the traits they claim to want to shame out of him. His temper is legendary, so he’s encouraged to lose it as often as possible. There’s no excuse for his carry-on, because he’s not two years old, but we can appreciate that his behaviour is facilitated by those who stand to make money out of it. Whatever you think of the man, the paparazzi’s treatment of his wife and baby daughter is heinous.
Advertisement
In his essay, Baldwin complains about the loss of the personal space New York used to grant its residents.
[People] take your picture in line for coffee. They’re trying to get a picture of your baby. Everyone’s got a camera. When they’re done, they tweet it. It’s … unnatural.
Sarcasm on hold, guys; he’s right. Sharon Ni Bheolain was treated abominably by our tabloids at the weekend, where a story about her ordeal with a stalker was accompanied with sneaky photographs of her shopping and walking the dog. These were double-standards, assuredly exhibited. Par for the course for an RTE personality; what must it be like to be an international star? Little to no craic, I’d wager.
So, granted, being a Hollywood star isn’t all muffin baskets from the Gersh Agency. But while we can grant Baldwin his point on invasion of privacy in a culture where everyone can (and will) play the paparazzo, there’s another interesting detail buried in his rambling diatribe.
‘Gay media culture’
Strongly liberal himself, Baldwin’s biggest bugbear is the erosion of his A-list privilege by what he sees as the sudden eminence of aggressively liberal values, especially the disdain for gay slurs. It is simply not OK to call anyone a “toxic little queen”, or a “faggot”, or a “tranny” anymore. Whether offenders accept it’s hate speech or claim it as momentary, regrettable rudeness is unimportant; a professional entertainer in 2014 should know that certain labels are simply off limits.
Baldwin’s resentment of the “gay media culture” that punished his indiscretions is palpable, and, if we’re feeling generous, understandable. There’s always someone happy to school you when you step out of line, no matter who you are, and now that the media and the public are drawing ever closer together, the need to be constantly guarding your own gob must feel frustrating for a personality like Baldwin’s.
Hot under the spotlight
Still, forgoing the use of gay slurs is hardly too big an imposition, especially when Baldwin claims to be an LGTB ally. Those liberal media sentries might be ever-ready to rain down judgement, but it’s for a good cause. Discrimination left unchallenged is a much bigger problem than actors getting called out for being thoughtless buffoons. Baldwin may demand to be seen as a misunderstood good guy, but he’s got a large hunk of crow to eat first.
In the meantime, disappearing from public life might be just the tonic. As for his worthy opponent Mr LaBeouf, may I suggest some sort of collaboration? He too could do with the time-out. It gets that hot under the spotlight.
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
Since when are they neutral in that commission? Calling it the “stability treaty” when it is “the fiscal compact treaty” is already advocating for the yes vote… Hypocrites!
Actually they called it the “Fiscal Stability” treaty. The leaflet that was distributed with the text of the treaty itself, and which referred to it only as the “Stability” treaty, was probably produced by the government, and didn’t have any referendum commission branding, just a harp. I’d say the referendum commission probably went with “Fiscal Stability” thinking it was a middle ground name, but the fact that “Fiscal Compact” is already neutral obviously escaped them (perhaps conveniently). #knowyourpropaganda
YES leaflets have been sent along with this. I got one with no identification as to source, only a website, and using the official government harp emblem to suggest it is not propaganda but government gospel.
(Oops, everyone knows anything from Gov IS propaganda, what am I saying?)
It’s from an outfit calling itself stabilitytreaty.ie which does not carry any address, phone number, or other ID. Isn’t that the kind of thing we are warned to beware of as part of everyday Internet security?
Why do you think they’re pro yes?
Genuine question.
They are bound to be neutral, and I haven’t seen anything in their publications to suggest otherwise.
Referendum commision complaining about the EFD leaflet is being delivered with the official booklet, but no mention about the stabilitytreaty leaflet which poses as an official publication but advocates a yes vote and clearly flies in the face of the McKenna judgement.
If the commision aren’t taking a balanced and objective approach to their task, then they are basically a PR arm of the yes campaign.
Frank do the constant conspiracies not get tiring? Genuinely? When you start accusing the INDEPENDENT commission of being pro anything, and on an article detailing the NO campaigns attempts at subterfuge, it might be time to up the psychotropic dosage ;-)
@Sean
Your link refers to a Government website which has absolutely nothing to do with the referendum commission.
I’d have thought that a man who is as obviously well-educated as yourself (no insult intended) would not have missed such a basic fact.
Sean O’Keeffe; The Yes leaflet wasn’t delivered inside a No leaflet, or visa-versa.. The Commission is asking that the postal service don’t put the No leaflet INSIDE the commissions booklet. Mainly because it looks like it was official propaganda from them and that’s false.
Nobody is saying that a Yes or No leaflet can not be delivered WITH the commissions leaflet. Just not INSIDE their leaflet. Get it?
“Dublin Socialist MEP Paul Murphy said the website was sailing “extremely close to the wind” and if the booklet breached the McKenna ruling he would seek an injunction to prevent distribution.
“It is outrageous that €2 million of taxpayers’ funds is to be wasted on what seems to be a desperate Government propaganda campaign,” he said.
Serious questions need to be asked about whether this booklet violates the McKenna judgement .
The EFD booklet, however presented, is not presented as an official information booklet and is not paid for by the taxpayer. Many of whom I would imagine be extremely annoyed that public funds are be used to advocate a yes vote in this insidious manner.
Why has the commision not addressed this?
Excerpt from the McKenna judgement:
(refers to the use of public funds for advocating a particular position on a subject being decided in a referendum)
“to spend money in this way breaches the equality rights of the citizen enshrined in the constitution as well as having the effect of putting the voting rights of one class of citizen above those of another class of citizen. The public purse must not be expended to espouse a point of view which may be anathema to certain citizens who, of necessity , have contributed to it. No one would suggest that a Government is entitled to devote money from the exchequer in a direct manner in the course of a general election to secure its re-election. The position of a referendum is not any different.”
If it’s not bad enough that this government is intent on subjecting this nation to debt serfdom for generations, we are also to finance the propaganda used to achieve this end.
Sean – it is the function of the referendum commission to make available neutral and unbiased information to the voting public, and it has done this admirably in my opinion.
It is NOT a watchdog whose role is to vet and censor the publications emanating from either side of a debate.
The government may well have breached the McKenna judgement if it has used public funds to promote one side or another in a referendum, but this is a separate issue to the referendum commission publication.
David Higgins. It was exactly the same during the Lisbon treaty. Lot’s of people claiming the Referendum Commission was biased, and when I say lot’s of people I mean they were all no voters. And weirdly no one took the referendum commission to court, which they would be entitled to if there was actually bias. To the no voters, when the referendum commission disagrees with you I humbly suggest that perhaps you’re just wrong.
How bizarre. I have yet to meet one person voting No. Seriously. Not one person. Everyone I know is voting Yes. This isn’t including those I know involved in politics either, as that would mess the figures.
What if, the people vote Yes in mass numbers. You cant say “Well they never asked me to vote!” like people do when those polls come out “Well, they have never asked me and I am voting No! Nor did they ever ask anyone I know!” (Ignoring the fact that the Register of Electors is pretty big). You cant say its all propaganda and lies by the government. The people actually went out and ticked the “Yes” box on the ballot paper. Nor can you say “If you look at online polls, especially TheJournal, its all No!”.
Jennifer
if you don’t know any one who has declared they will be voting NO, then I suggest you take a trip to the suburbs of any city and walk the streets and speak to people. Ask them how they are managing or coping with the recession ? I am telling you it is not a pretty sight.
Susie EVERYBODY is coping with the recession. You seem to want to claim absolute ownership over suffering in difficult times as the exclusive domain of the NO camp. The irony seems to be lost on you that NO will not end the recession, and would likely only make it worse.
I would also put it back to you that maybe you should take a trip to the city, go visit some business owners, not big corporates, just normal small businesses getting along as best they can in this climate. Small business groups have all come out for a YES. Now why is that? Could it be maybe, just maybe because there is a rationale for it.
And I did not say there were no NO voters. Just that I don’t know any.
Jennifer@
Ha ha
I just love it when people THINK they know me .
personally speaking I am quite comfortable , I can meet my responsibilities , I am not in negative equity and I have only 6/7 years left to pay my mortgage.I live in a city .I see the signs on walls and bill boards and know the RATIONALE behind the yes campaign , it is because of what I see and my experiences that I will be voting NO .
What is your excuse for wanting to vote Yes ? Greed ?
You have a good day and please think in real terms not soundbites before you comment.
@Jennifer. “EVERYBODY is coping with the recession”. What an idiotic, foolish statement. I work voluntary for a suicide awareness and intervention foundation. You tell your statement to the families of people who have died from suicide from not being able to cope, tell that to SVP and other charities that can’t cope with the numbers looking for aid. What a dope!
@ Tom Sullivan – no, I was merely stating that the people I know who are voting no are bums, etc. – please read my comment again, I said nothing about economists. Also, which “economists” would these be? Can you name them please, possibly a link or two to these statements would also be nice.
Wow Susie Chester…you’re clutching at straws trying to redirect Jenifers question. Perhaps re-read your comment: “it is because of what I see and my experiences that I will be voting NO.” – do you really believe this stands up as a legitimate support for what you are advocating? If you yourself are reasonably comfortable, in terms of personal finances etc, then surely your experiences of living in Ireland have been mainly positive. I ask, what in your opinion could improve upon the life you have experienced, and how could voting No bring this thing about?
I got a leaflet about converting my money into dollars and sterling in mine. I’m not sure if it’s after a yes or a no result that I might have to do that, but I thought it was suggestive anyway.
If they have received complaints, they are from FG members. No one is going to rewrite their entire thinking on the matter by a no leaflet and a ref comm leaflet being delivered together.
No, what is going to win this referendum is sustained threat from the yes camp, oh if you vote no the budget will be worse! Or the latest, my favourite- if you vote no your utility bills will go up!
Everyone stay calm and hold the line, these threats have no basis in truth, and a no vote will give us the chance to correct what is wrong with this treaty and make Ireland, small though she is, a force to be reckoned with, and not some unimportant land on the periphery whose only worth is to prop up failing European banks under the mask of sovereign debt. Our primary concern should always be the welfare of every man woman and child here, not adding more loans to our debt just so we can
You have an overwhelming misunderstanding of capital markets – if we vote no we will have to borrow money at a higher interest rate from the capital markets. Aside from that, this treaty should have been ratified 20 years ago. It ensures we do not overspend money which we don’t have, and stabilises our economy.
Its misleading. It doesn’t matter what side was included, the commission is supposed to be neutral. You wouldn’t be very happy if Enda was getting his Yes side leaflets included in every booklet by them. Peoples minds change very easy and very quickly – just look at the presidential election. All going the Fianna Fail way until BANG one remark saw it swing to Labour.
No archibaldovich, it’s you not getting the bigger picture. What you say makes sense in an ideal, perfectly balanced economy, but ours? I am not happy about adding more debts to our balance sheets, from the ESM( yet to exist) or not. Why should we borrow more when there is enough money in this country that can be raised in a fairer, more equitable manner than is currently the case? Why should we take out another loan worth billions to pay for private debt that we never agreed to own? Yet being able to take out a loan ‘cheaply’ is what this treaty is being sold to us as- even though it has nothing to do with it! No one can even say how cheap it will be because this ‘magical’ fund hasn’t even been set up yet, as I stated before! It will hardly be free money like what micheál Martin seems to think.
Also, we owe so much as it already stands that to let us flounder without aid, particularly when we are so good at paying back, would make no sense for the EU.
So vote no!
As for you Kevin, I couldn’t care less how the leaflets came through my door, I’m well able to discern the differences with each by simply reading them
Ailis
Come off it. If a yes leaflet was included in your guide then you’d be in uproar at Fine Gael. The postal workers who did this should face disciplinary action from An Post to be honest.
Also in general I have to say I think its horrible that some people on here talk of “bringing a pen” into the voting center. There are thousands of people employed to supervise and they come from all different parties. To accuse these people of possibly corrupting an election is just downright disgraceful.
Malachy- don’t tell me to come off it. I’ve been inundated with propaganda from FG and Labour, through my letterbox and littering the poles outside, but I am NOT in uproar about it. Instead I relish the opportunity to read up exactly on what they say so I know damn well what I am talking about when I condemn them. For me, I don’t doubt that anyone who puts a leaflet through my door thinks they are fighting for the right thing, yes and no advocates alike. Why would that have me up in arms, just because I happen to disagree with the status quo? Maybe that’s what YOU would do, but don’t judge me by the same criteria.
Just to add Malachy- I certainly wouldn’t be blaming the messenger i.e. An Post for simply delivering them. Discipline them?! A bizarrely extreme response to workers just trying to do their job.
@ Ailis – where is this money that can be raised? I don’t think our government would be borrowing money for the laugh if they could raise it easily through taxes (which it can’t). To support our very generous social welfare system, and indeed to pay for civil services, the government needs to borrow, always has, always will (unless we’re sitting on trillions of barrels of oil, which I doubt). That said, we can borrow money from Europe, at a reasonable rate (which this treaty allows) or we can borrow money on the capital markets, with our current junk status, which would cost a fortune to service the interest alone, regardless of paying it off.
What you are promoting is a third world Ireland, saddled further with unserviceable debt. The treaty is our only fair solution.
Do you even understand what fascist means, Jennifer? We are already fascist. When private losses are paid for at the taxpayer’s expense, then that is quintessential fascist economics.
@Mìchèal de Staic I don’t belittle anything. I say so out of an understanding of what actually constitutes fascism, not what is popularly construed as fascism.
If there was a facility for the 2/3s of us who have the Internet to ‘opt out’ the government could have saved €120,000 that’s three teachers or nurses salaries
I got that leaflet alright, it was awful, im sorry I know it seems biased cause I’m leaning towards a yes vote, but if I was a no voter I would probably be put off. It was like propaganda you might see during WW1 or something.
Judging by the nationhood nonsense espoused by them and the rest of their lunatic friends they are using Bolshevik Russia as a model. And we all know how wonderful that turned out.
Do you really know how wonderful that turned out, Jennifer, or are you just regurgitating the perception of others? Have you ever even been to the country where it took place?
Tom I have a degree in History and a Masters in International Conflict. I think I can make up my own mind about it and not “rely on the perception of others” unless my others you mean scholars in the field. Same goes for your snarky little fascist comment.
@Tom: are you serious? “Do you really know how wonderful that turned out” – yes, check out the nearest history book and you’ll clearly see the USSR collapsing around 1990. Reasons therefore – bad economic policy, totalitarian regimes, miscarriages of justice, corrupt politicians, poverty, war, protests, one party “democracies”, purges, nuclear disasters, cover ups and the list goes on.
I have been to many former Soviet countries, and they are still reeling from the effects of the Soviet era, far from prosperity -but recovering, thanks in part to democratic governments and capitalism.
Oooh Jennifer
Well done on your education ,you may know a lot BUT do you understand any of it ?
I was not fortunate enough to be college educated (soon to be changed ) but that does Not make me ignorant of life or the ramifications of decisions made for the betterment of our society.
Think about what you are espousing , it will effect this country and the PEOPLE in it for generations to come !
Wow Susie you never give up do you. No matter what anyone says, they are uneducated, even when, as I was felt compelled to when responding to a catty little comment from another painful little person accusing me, they can prove definitively otherwise.
And you don’t need to tell me you are uneducated. It is implicit believe me.
enoughofthisalready
Ah now don’t be like that ! I am so hurt by your comments …Not !
I never say that people are ”uneducated” I have said that they may be ignorant of the real life of the ordinary decent people of this country , city or country, who are struggling terribly with this recession.
I am not uneducated , but I am not colege educated , but you have the right to your opinions so I will leave you with them. BTW <What college qualifications do you have ? If any !
Jennifer, I have two doctorates. So what? I asked you if you were simply regurgitating the opinion of others or have personal experience of the thing you are offering your opinion on. I’ve lived in post-Soviet Russia and I can tell you that many people there would like to go back to the way things were prior to the collapse of the iron curtain. Personally speaking, I would have as little time for that system as the one we are currently living under. As for your parting remark, thank you for once again demonstrating that you don’t have a clue what fascism is all about.
@Arch Archibaldovich I have not just been to post-Soviet countries, I’ve lived and worked in one. What I’ve found is a significant minority who would like to go back to before the collapse of the Berlin Wall. Note I’m not saying I support the system that was in place there, because I am not, it was far too statist for my liking. My question was based on my experience that those who proffer opinions on conditions in other countries more often than not have never been there, just as those who bleat about the need for us to be good Europeans often don’t make the effort to learn another European language and many haven’t even mastered English.
@Tom – whatever about your personal agenda to educate people of Europe in European languages and English is a different point to encouraging fascism, simply because people have not been there. I too have been and lived in these states, and you couldn’t be further from the truth about will of these people to return to Soviet era. You might here them say some aspects of it were good (for example, low unemployment). That does not neccesarily mean they want to revert. That simply means they all want employment and security, as does everybody.
If anyone would like to know what a current “Soviet” state is like to a quick google of Belarus and then see if you’d espouse that ideology and like to live in that state. De facto dictatorship, rigged elections, crippled economy with out of control inflation and the only State in Europe that still uses the death penalty. Only a few weeks ago they executed 2 men for their supposed part in a terrorist bombing, even though the whole thing reeked of a Government conspiracy and it drew widespread condemnation from the EU.
I’m a no voter and I think having those leaflets is the only access to getting any information about these treaties, who cares if they where put in with the other leaflets, big deal it’s not the end of the world, at the end of the day we are giving more power to the germans to control our own monetary policy, is everyone in Ireland insane? We all PAY tax and we have a government. Let’s run our own country, our ancestors would be turning in there graves I can tell you of this goes through.
Like where Is the Irish sense of pride gone? It’s sickening that so many weak people are duped and scared into voting yes.
And honest to God if the Yes side did this there would be uproar. How the NO side have consistently managed to ignore (in no particular order) the misquoting of famous economists, the lies about “6 billion”, the failure to outline a viable alternative, the hypocrisy of SF cutting up North, but fighting cuts her, and now blatant subterfuge, makes me genuinely worried about people.
@ Jennifer we all pay tax to the exchequer which finances the running of the country, Jennifer can I ask you this? How much money do you owe to the German bond holder yourself? You must have no pride and defiantly no principles if your going to jump on the yes band wagon. how much money yourself do you owe personally to the German bond holder? So you will leave it happen that the minimum wage will be cut in the near future to mimic the growth in all this B.S treaty
Tom this has nothing to do with German bonds. It’s about stabilising our finances. I believe this treaty, had it been enacted 20 years, would have prevented the current crisis crippling our country.
I am not duped or scared. I see a sensible solution to a real problem. It’s about sound economic and financial policy.
You would know that if you didn’t ignore the neutral stability treat information provided to you by the state, rather than reading national socialist gibberish dumped in your letterbox by racist fascists.
Well said Tom Callaghan.
I am amazed myself at the seemingly lack of Irish pride , but at the same time us No Voters are being shouted down , laughed at, ridiculed for our convictions . We are looked upon as mad looney lefties ….. There is no such thing . We want what is good for the country , the people , NOT the corporate side to our society .
I read a blog today and I will share it here , Very insightfull if some what long.Well worth the read . http://austeritytreaty.blogspot.com/2012/05/what-we-admire-what-we-worship.html
I’m really going to have to stop reading the comments sections in article like this because they just make me despair. In general it’s the written equivalent of a group of five year olds have a playground argument. Most of it just revolves around calling people “traitors”, “cowards”, “sheep”, “idiots”, “dumb”, “ignorant” and so on simply because they have a different opinion.
Democracy is about the fact that other people will have different opinions to yours and that even if you disagree with them fundamentally you should respect their right to have their opinion. Grow up people. If you think you can change somebody’s mind by insulting them you really aren’t living in the real world.
James I made a list of the no tactic that were used on me directly when I argued with them.
No side tactics…
1. Pull on the heart strings.
2. Try to drum up nationalistic fervour.
3. Claim the person is a sheep, an idiot or whatever other name they fancy.
4. Scaremongering. But they *are* stealing our babies.
5. Blame anyone else, especially the Germans. (Often included with xenophobic mentions of Nazis, Fascists etc).
6. Claim the person is being paid for their opinions.
7. Claim bias at every possible opportunity.
No 7. is a new one but it is interesting as especially SF are great at claiming bias but their default position on every treaty with Europe is a no. For that to work they they start with a no and then work back to the reasons to support it, and that to me is utter nonsense.
Comparing Ireland’s problem to the soviet union, Jesus those degrees and masters in history and international conflict have destroyed your common sense! Lol
Like lambs to the slaughter we blindly flock to the polls again.
Has anyone actually even read the full text? I’d be shocked if as much as one percent of voters have yet we all think we know what we’re talking about because of what we read or hear from one side or the other. Is it not obvious that both have an agenda? Can nobody see that it’s almost all propaganda? Actually, does anyone have a clue what’s going on?!
Why are the overwhelming majority of people evidently adverse to educating themselves from an impartial standpoint and making up their own minds without the influence of government, media, leaflets through the door or any other kind of propaganda? Is it laziness, fear, or something else entirely?
People love to make excuses for themselves, “Oh I’m too busy”, “oh I’m too concerned with paying the bills”, “oh look what’s on the telly, I’ll do it another time”… What a cop out.
Are we ever going to start taking some personal responsibility and stop looking to the same structures and entities who put us where we are to lead us away from it, or are we simply content to continue to cede our power, in order to give us something or someone else to blame when things go wrong?
If you’re going to vote on something, at least know what it is your voting on and don’t rely on someone else to tell you what it is. Surely that’s common sense? Unfortunately that’s something that seems but a distant memory across most of this island and we’re all too eager to buy into the ridiculous paradigm that’s presented to us as ‘choice’.
One way or another we will reap what we sow – we have up to now and will continue to do so. Wake up.
”The Referendum Commission says it is asking anyone who receives the two leaflets tucked inside each other to contact the Commission with the name of the road they live on in order to track where the mistake is being made”
This is the sentence and comment that worries me… VOTE NO !
Do enlighten us as to your conspiracy theory on that remark? Seriously. How in the name of god does a comment like that make anyone vote Yes, No or not at all?!
In my humble opinion , these leaflets were delivered free of charge by an post . If they wanted ”special” treatment then pay the postage. I have not heard any one say that it was wrong to put the commissions leaflet in with Nigel Firage’s explanation on the Treaty ( the man has ideas I certainly do NOT agree with) Conspiracy theory ?? Not at all . You carry on thinking that ,by all means and have a really nice day .
Oh and just so you know i Will be voting NO !
I don’t understand how you can make the claim that the leaflets are being delivered free of charge when it clearly states in the article that the commission has paid €190000 for distribution to An Post?
Genuinely Damien, I really don’t know anyone voting NO. The only place I encounter it is on here or Facebook.
And no, don’t be ridiculous. I don’t live in Germany, even if I did I don’t know why that would matter, but no I live and work in Dublin, same as all my friends and family. And we are all voting YES.
Jennifer. I’m the same, genuinely everyone I have spoken to in person is voting Yes. The only place I see people being rabid no voters is online. Queue the usual calls that I’m a paid up Fine Gael supporter and other bullshít.
Mark my words if the people of this country vote ‘YES’ to this treaty on the 31st of May, the budget in December will be a blood bath. Good old nooney and the government will then say ” you all voted YES last May” Vote NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!
Old news. The budget in December and for the next few years will have austerity and tough decisions either way you vote. Vote Yes for austerity. Vote No for austerity. There is no avoiding austerity.
Budget going to be bloodbath anyway. You do know this is not a vote on cuts, that by voting NO money with no appear out of thin air! At lest with the EU money we can do the cuts in stages rather than in one go!
A ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ will make no difference to this year’s budget. Where it will make a difference is in the budgets once the current bail-out is over. I’m on the fence as to whether the budget circa 2014 will be more or less painful with a ‘yes’ vote. The fact is I don’t believe anyone really knows. Not even Enda. I personally would lean towards a ‘No’ simply because I don’t like the way we’re heading towards ever reducing sovereignty and ever increasing control from Brussels/Berlin. Because what works for Berlin doesn’t necessarily work for Ireland.
Rob. The body that is created in this treaty to oversee our budgets is an Irish one, created in Irish law. In the treaty we sign up to creating it. And sorry (not directed at you btw) but anyone who thinks we don’t need an independent budget overseer is crazy after what we’ve done to ourselves.
And I respect that, it must be a Wexford thing then to vote no to that extend but in the end we have a democracy, whatever happen I will accept it, even if unhappy.
I’d like to point out the Yes signs are saying “Yes means Jobs” where are the jobs from lisbon? When will people learn what this country has become? Please vote no, if you actually like having your own nation rather than a state in the USE
Where’s your USE? Why haven’t I been conscripted into a European army yet? Why has abortion not come in by the back door yet? Why are we still so poor at speaking foreign languages when were to be all speaking German by now?
Various yes and no campaigners talk a lot of shit in every European referendum, using various emotive topics to try and stir people and steer them towards their own agenda.
Vote on the issues, not on what the yes/no side are saying that you agree/disagree with. Don’t vote no just because the government are lying about jobs and distracting from the facts. Don’t vote yes just because Sinn Fein are campaigning for a no. Don’t vote yes just because you work for a multinational and there’s groupthink among your co-workers that no is dangerous for your jobs. Don’t vote no just because there’s groupthink among your circle and Mary is in negative equity and where’s her bailout and the banks etc.
It’s very simple. Throw out the leaflets and read the booklet and the treaty itself – they’re the only impartial sources you have. Not convinced either way? Listen to and watch the live debates. Make your mind up on the content of these debates, not on who is speaking on either side. You’ll see that it’s never so black and white.
I won’t be in the country and I’d be voting yes if I was, but I’m only 55-60% convinced, as I’ve heard some very good no arguments in the debates.
How can anyone justifiably suggest that a leaflet falling out of a booklet is to associated with the booklet? By that logic, I could argue that an post are causing public health problems by sticking pizza flyers into referendum commission booklets.
All this story has done is to stir up the accusations about dirty tactics. If I was around next week I’d be voting yes, but I have a lot of difficulty with people in a position of power being allowed to campaign for a yes/no vote.
Having politicians campaign for yes/no:
1. Clouds the issue for people who look up to politicians (god help them) and rely on figures of trust (undereducated yes votes in this instance)
2. Creates a platform for an anti-goverment vote (undereducated no votes) NB: I’m not tarring the No camp with this brush, I’ve just personally encountered a few people who are voting no saying “I don’t care what’s in it. I’m sick of this shit and I’m voting no”.
This muddles the core majority of people who are voting on the issues.
I think the job of our legislators should begin and end with proposing a change to the constitution, and organizing the referendum respectively. You wouldn’t see a government minister speak up in an abortion referendum, I don’t see why I have to tolerate them on the airwaves for this one.
I have delivered no vote leaflets to all the houses where I live, and everyone I have talked to will vote no. I can’t emphasise this enough but bring a biro or marker, a black one so that they can’t erase it and vote no, nein, oxi nil, there you are in four different languages.
I honestly dont know what way to vote. Its hard to know as even the commission fail to explain it properly. We cant say yes until we know.what is happening with Greece. We vote no, we could miss out on support we need.
Michael whatsoever way you vote the crisis in Greece is irrelevant. The only information we have as a fact is in front of us is this treaty. So we should vote the best way we can on it, voting for the unknowns is pretty foolish IMO. *If* things change in the future we can deal with those changes at that time.
Were we supposed to get a copy of the treaty cause it did n’t arrive at my house? Nigels leaflet arrived and I was nearly dazzled by the picture of the girl with the Icelandic flag on her teeshirt (which was probably the intention!) the small summary leaflet arrived from the Referendum Commission which I read in someone elses house. Have n’t seen a canvasser but seen loads & loads of FG posters and last weekend I spotted a very rare beast indeed A Fianna Fail poster!
It doesn’t matter which way we vote until we get the bank people changed or a at least include them in the restrictions that will apply to deliquent countries, big fines and refusal to the esm when established. If that isn’t done or promised to be done, I will have to vote no.
Harrington holds Senior Open lead heading into final round after another 65
The 42
19 mins ago
748
tribeswomen
Mallon goal helps Galway shake off Tipperary and return to All-Ireland camogie final
The 42
21 mins ago
205
As it happened
Australia v British & Irish Lions, second Test
Updated
7 hrs ago
50.6k
83
Your Cookies. Your Choice.
Cookies help provide our news service while also enabling the advertising needed to fund this work.
We categorise cookies as Necessary, Performance (used to analyse the site performance) and Targeting (used to target advertising which helps us keep this service free).
We and our 214 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device. Selecting Accept All enables tracking technologies to support the purposes shown under we and our partners process data to provide. If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you. You can resurface this menu to change your choices or withdraw consent at any time by clicking the Cookie Preferences link on the bottom of the webpage . Your choices will have effect within our Website. For more details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
We and our vendors process data for the following purposes:
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
Cookies Preference Centre
We process your data to deliver content or advertisements and measure the delivery of such content or advertisements to extract insights about our website. We share this information with our partners on the basis of consent. You may exercise your right to consent, based on a specific purpose below or at a partner level in the link under each purpose. Some vendors may process your data based on their legitimate interests, which does not require your consent. You cannot object to tracking technologies placed to ensure security, prevent fraud, fix errors, or deliver and present advertising and content, and precise geolocation data and active scanning of device characteristics for identification may be used to support this purpose. This exception does not apply to targeted advertising. These choices will be signaled to our vendors participating in the Transparency and Consent Framework. The choices you make regarding the purposes and vendors listed in this notice are saved and stored locally on your device for a maximum duration of 1 year.
Manage Consent Preferences
Necessary Cookies
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
Social Media Cookies
These cookies are set by a range of social media services that we have added to the site to enable you to share our content with your friends and networks. They are capable of tracking your browser across other sites and building up a profile of your interests. This may impact the content and messages you see on other websites you visit. If you do not allow these cookies you may not be able to use or see these sharing tools.
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Store and/or access information on a device 149 partners can use this purpose
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development 195 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 158 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Create profiles for personalised advertising 119 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Use profiles to select personalised advertising 120 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Create profiles to personalise content 51 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Use profiles to select personalised content 48 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Measure advertising performance 177 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Measure content performance 78 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Understand audiences through statistics or combinations of data from different sources 111 partners can use this purpose
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Develop and improve services 116 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Use limited data to select content 51 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
Use precise geolocation data 65 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification 36 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Ensure security, prevent and detect fraud, and fix errors 122 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Deliver and present advertising and content 126 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Match and combine data from other data sources 94 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Link different devices 67 partners can use this feature
Always Active
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Identify devices based on information transmitted automatically 116 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
Save and communicate privacy choices 103 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say