This isn't an example of that though, is it?

They reported Ganley's exact words and got a quote of similar length from the other guy. This was a perfectly fair and straightforward piece of political reporting.

Muppets eh? Would these be the same "Muppets" that happened to campaign successfully on the Lisbon Referendum?

How did FG do on that one? No wait, i know already, they lost!! If "muppets" can win a referendum vote, it doesnt say much for a party that cant now does it?!!

The emphasis of the piece was deliberately chosen to distract from the main purpose of the launch. Fair enough, Ganley played straight into it through his naivety (unless he deliberately wants to be seen as street-fighting with the 'establishment politicians'), and the Irish Times are right to report it as a facet of what happened the other night, but for it to dominate the piece, well that's a straight piece of news manipulation for political purposes...

On the other hand, they could simply have not reported it...

__________________
Never let the best be the enemy of the good.

Which, the handbags or the whole shebang? Either way, they'd have been wrong to do so...

Which leaves them reporting the launch, and the handbags...a bit tricky, under those conditions, to come out looking 'fair and balanced'. I don't know - to some extent I think the media have Ganley down as a 'controversialist' (I wonder why?), and when they're reporting him, he tends to be put in that box. Lazy, yes...witch-hunt, no.

__________________
Never let the best be the enemy of the good.

Dear God in heaven. Your paranoia is unbelievable. Are you so gullible you believe that Ganley didn't deliberately provoke the row??? Do you have the first idea how politicians (and Ganley is a politician) work? If they want to get coverage for something they provoke a row and bingo, they get coverage through the row. Your paranoia about the Times is comic. They did what any journalist anywhere would do - they covered a row. However in the weird world of Ganleyites (and don't give us that crap about how you are not a Ganley supporter. You are almost as fanatical in defending him from the every imagined slight as CM and D Cochrane) merely doing standard media reportage is a hatchet job.

The best of luck to Ganley, he is putting himself before the people and that takes courage.

On a separate matter is it Libertas policy that over six thousand workers should not have accesses to a swimming pool or is the proposed pool for the MEPs only?

I do hope it's the latter because I would hate to think that Ganley and Libertas are anti worker and would deny them access to a swimming pool, if he got elected would he also close the gym? Stop the canteen subsidy? Close the shop in the Parliament? Yep this is the start of Ganley and his right wing views.

Welcome to the world of politics Mr Ganley but you must learn that you cannot throw the baby out with the bath water.

__________________
The new Enda.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Who is the paranoiac now? I support Kathy Sinnott in the Euro elections, and if she wasn't running I'd vote socialist. I'm not sure, short of inviting witnesses in to watch me vote, how I can prove your conspiracy theory to be such, but I am neither a Euro-federalist, nor of the right wing that I perceive them to be. Nor do I think they stand a hope in many European countries, particularly Britain, and I think there's an element of hubris and vanity project about it all. As I have said here for months. Your tactic seems to be to malign me (you are basically calling me a liar in saying I don't support them, simply because I object to witch-hunt and smear by innuendo).

As to the main point, the Irish Times has been banging this drum for months now, they seem to take it almost personally that Ganley led his wing of the 'no' campaign very effectively and captured votes for the no side that the traditional opponents such as myself would not be able to. They have showed a campaigning style of journalism, bordering on obsessiveness, about Libertas (if only they had shown similar initiative about the corruption in Fianna Fail). And this is no accident. If they were of the 'yes' side, there wouldn't be a word against Ganley (and are you so gullible as to believe otherwise?). There's an orchestrated hatchet-job by factoid and vague innuendo going on, and it's all because of which side of the campaign this man came down on. I don't know what the truth is about Ganley's past business dealings, but I've heard nothing yet that says he did something corrupt or illegal, all I've heard is wild conspiracies swirling around allegations that are never articulated. And I know why, it's aimed at the entire no side, myself included. Don't give me that crap, as you so gracefully put it, that it's all motivated by a sudden concern for the democratic process. If he was a 'yes' supporter you'd be on here licking the man's boots.

And, talking of conspiracy theories, why exactly do you keep changing your user name (what is this now, the fourth or fifth?) and then swearing blind you're not the same person, what's that about? Isn't that slightly odd and suspicious behaviour? Perhaps I should get Colm Keena on the case...

humility is a virtue