Garret has got it wrong: Nama must be opposed

[Cael]

I don't believe a mandate means denying the right to speak yourself. Except, of course, if you're the peculiar type of fascist whose 'mandate' from the long-rotted corpses of 1918 brooks no other mandate from the living...

I think your idea of Republicans comes from the pages of the Sindo rather than from Republicans themselves.

Of course, if you hand someone the right to speak for you, then you lower the need to be listened to yourself. Thats clear. If someone (who you may have never even met) can claim to speak for you, then there is no real reason to listen to what you actually have to say.

[H.R. Haldeman]

Am I the only one who hears Vinnie's wail screeching in my head when I read his written words? It's great.

[Furze]

Garret, in his own mind (and now possibly guilt), saw in effect how he benefited from a mini-nama when his impaired loan was written off. He got a second chance and believes all those good folks (banks et al) deserve his support now. He'll be long buried having insulated his grandchildren from the fallout.
At this stage, like Albert & Bert etc - should be ignored and left in histories dustbin.

[politicaldonations]

Any campaign against NAMA should call for greater transparency or auditing as i dont trust these FF f*$%ers to not help their cronies and mates. They know they are gone from government so wanna rob the place blind while they can.