Will abortion conspiracy theorist Emily O'Reilly run for President

[Defeated Romanticist]

A report in the Phoenix(not online) out yesterday claimed that current information ombudsman Emily O'Reilly may be interested in running for President in 2011. The report claims that she shopped around the big two but as nothing seemed possible for her their she is now angling for the Labour nomination for President. The report states that other candidates like Ivana Bacik may prove to be too "divisive" to win a presidential election. The report obviously didn't consider Ms O'Reilly's past form in regards to the divisive issues which have irrevocably tarnished Ms Bacik.
In 1992 Ms O'Reilly authored a book, Masterminds of the Right. In it she painted a picture of a dark conspiracy among certain Catholic groups to change the constitution to secure the right to life for everyone. Simultaneously painting these forces as all powerful, potent as well as pathetic and incompetent she even claims that they nearly destroyed the European project over the Maastrict protocol! In the book she freely admits that the right to life was always supported by the overwhelming majority of the Irish people as well as most of the political establishment. The writing style is reflective of the main story line in terms of quality and cogency ie hurried, confused and contradictory. How such a woman got to be information ombudsman is beyond me. The thought of her as president induces pining for the candidacy of Mary White.
[SIZE=2][/SIZE]

[Mr.De-Regulation]

Sorry that was hard to read. Is she pro-life?

[Sailor]

A report in the Phoenix(not online) out yesterday claimed that current information ombudsman Emily O'Reilly may be interested in running for President in 2011. The report claims that she shopped around the big two but as nothing seemed possible for her their she is now angling for the Labour nomination for President. The report states that other candidates like Ivana Bacik may prove to be too "divisive" to win a presidential election. The report obviously didn't consider Ms O'Reilly's past form in regards to the divisive issues which have irrevocably tarnished Ms Bacik.
In 1992 Ms O'Reilly authored a book, Masterminds of the Right. In it she painted a picture of a dark conspiracy among certain Catholic groups to change the constitution to secure the right to life for everyone. Simultaneously painting these forces as all powerful, potent as well as pathetic and incompetent she even claims that they nearly destroyed the European project over the Maastrict protocol! In the book she freely admits that the right to life was always supported by the overwhelming majority of the Irish people as well as most of the political establishment. The writing style is reflective of the main story line in terms of quality and cogency ie hurried, confused and contradictory. How such a woman got to be information ombudsman is beyond me. The thought of her as president induces pining for the candidacy of Mary White.
[SIZE=2][/SIZE]

Octopus Dei ?

[Didimus]

Heard her speak at a conference recently. Very impressed. Here is a n extract from her address:
"After six years in the job, I have come to the view that public bodies and agencies begin to go bad when they begin to lose sight of why they are there in the first place, when they begin to put their own internal needs above the needs of those who they are there to support and to serve, when they begin to play in defence all of the time. What is needed above all in every public body, is a leadership of integrity, a leadership that viscerally understands what it is there to do, and who ensures that every single person in that organisation also understands that and employs it day after day in their work.

And if we, as a society, are actually to commit ourselves to social justice, we need to talk about what that means in practice and to examine and break down the barriers to achieving it. What do we want from our health service? What does a socially just health service mean? Does it mean equal access for all, regardless of income or do we - the better off in many cases - continue to put our own self-interest to the fore by seeking to protect and promote a system that no matter how it is spun, is most definitely two tier.

What about our nursing homes, our mental institutions, our prisons? We cannot be unaware of the huge problems besetting many of them, drab functionality at best, inhuman squalor at worst. We have blamed an older generation for hiding its own outcasts, yet we continue to do it in this generation, older people shuffled off to at times indifferent institutional care, people with mental or psychiatric problems shuffled off to equally dehumanising places, prisoners most of whom come from the same few square miles of disadvantaged concrete, bunking down in shower rooms for want of adequate space. The words "subhuman " and "degrading" were used or implied frequently in the Ryan report, the very same words have been used in inspection reports in relation to some of our current institutions that care for our old, out mentally ill and our imprisoned. The Minister for Health herself, just a few years ago, described the conditions in one mental institution as beyond her worst nightmare.

And this happens, all of this happens, because we - collectively - allow it to. There will be no marches on the streets around Leinster House on behalf of the prisoners or the mentally ill and the peeling paint in their rooms and the unsanitary conditions and the lack of privacy and stimulation, no Minister is going to be frightened by the baying of several thousand angry voices railing against the diet in an old person's home or the fact that they all have to go to bed at the same time, like children, or the fact that they're too intimidated to complain. It took young adults struggling to stay alive while ravaged by Cystic Fibrosis to painfully cough their way - from their hospital beds - through hour after hour of the Joe Duffy show before some movement was made in relation to special isolation wards where they could heal. Not so much hiding in clear sight as dying in clear sight."

[JCSkinner]

Yup, sounds straight out of the Robinson/McAleese breastbeating touchy-feely bullsh!t manual alright.
If Labour have any sense whatsoever (often in doubt) they'll run David Norris with the support of the entire left, the Greens and probably a quiet rump of both FF and FG too.
Why the feck would Labour want to back the discards of FG or FF?
They should cop themselves on and put up the only candidate they could which could win it, and that's Cap'n Dave.

[imokyrok]

Heard her speak at a conference recently. Very impressed. Here is a n extract from her address:
"After six years in the job, I have come to the view that public bodies and agencies begin to go bad when they begin to lose sight of why they are there in the first place, when they begin to put their own internal needs above the needs of those who they are there to support and to serve, when they begin to play in defence all of the time. What is needed above all in every public body, is a leadership of integrity, a leadership that viscerally understands what it is there to do, and who ensures that every single person in that organisation also understands that and employs it day after day in their work.

And if we, as a society, are actually to commit ourselves to social justice, we need to talk about what that means in practice and to examine and break down the barriers to achieving it. What do we want from our health service? What does a socially just health service mean? Does it mean equal access for all, regardless of income or do we - the better off in many cases - continue to put our own self-interest to the fore by seeking to protect and promote a system that no matter how it is spun, is most definitely two tier.

What about our nursing homes, our mental institutions, our prisons? We cannot be unaware of the huge problems besetting many of them, drab functionality at best, inhuman squalor at worst. We have blamed an older generation for hiding its own outcasts, yet we continue to do it in this generation, older people shuffled off to at times indifferent institutional care, people with mental or psychiatric problems shuffled off to equally dehumanising places, prisoners most of whom come from the same few square miles of disadvantaged concrete, bunking down in shower rooms for want of adequate space. The words "subhuman " and "degrading" were used or implied frequently in the Ryan report, the very same words have been used in inspection reports in relation to some of our current institutions that care for our old, out mentally ill and our imprisoned. The Minister for Health herself, just a few years ago, described the conditions in one mental institution as beyond her worst nightmare.

And this happens, all of this happens, because we - collectively - allow it to. There will be no marches on the streets around Leinster House on behalf of the prisoners or the mentally ill and the peeling paint in their rooms and the unsanitary conditions and the lack of privacy and stimulation, no Minister is going to be frightened by the baying of several thousand angry voices railing against the diet in an old person's home or the fact that they all have to go to bed at the same time, like children, or the fact that they're too intimidated to complain. It took young adults struggling to stay alive while ravaged by Cystic Fibrosis to painfully cough their way - from their hospital beds - through hour after hour of the Joe Duffy show before some movement was made in relation to special isolation wards where they could heal. Not so much hiding in clear sight as dying in clear sight."

Impressive. Could be our third woman in a row for president.

[QuizMaster]

I'll eat my hat if anyone other than Crowley gets it.

In fairness I don't own a hat. I'll go out and buy one especialy for the occasion, preferably an edible one.

I know he's a bucket of smoke, but that's exactly what the position requires.

[blacbloc]

Yup, sounds straight out of the Robinson/McAleese breastbeating touchy-feely bullsh!t manual alright.
If Labour have any sense whatsoever (often in doubt) they'll run David Norris with the support of the entire left, the Greens and probably a quiet rump of both FF and FG too.
Why the feck would Labour want to back the discards of FG or FF?
They should cop themselves on and put up the only candidate they could which could win it, and that's Cap'n Dave.

A***hole.

[Didimus]

Yup, sounds straight out of the Robinson/McAleese breastbeating touchy-feely bullsh!t manual alright.
If Labour have any sense whatsoever (often in doubt) they'll run David Norris with the support of the entire left, the Greens and probably a quiet rump of both FF and FG too.
Why the feck would Labour want to back the discards of FG or FF?
They should cop themselves on and put up the only candidate they could which could win it, and that's Cap'n Dave.

Sort of know where you are coming from, and would be happy with Mr Norris in the Aras (free slogan) , but I think it's a bit unfair to use the touchy feely brush on EO'R - her criticisms were more pointed and I felt aimed at making listeners feel uncomfortable. The two Mary's both had the irritating habit of sounding critical while at the same time drawing their audiences into the smug circle of their own righteousness.

[Panopticon]

Yup, sounds straight out of the Robinson/McAleese breastbeating touchy-feely bullsh!t manual alright.
If Labour have any sense whatsoever (often in doubt) they'll run David Norris with the support of the entire left, the Greens and probably a quiet rump of both FF and FG too.
Why the feck would Labour want to back the discards of FG or FF?
They should cop themselves on and put up the only candidate they could which could win it, and that's Cap'n Dave.

Do you know how many publicised, accurate quotations from the Senator it would take to sink his chances among ordinary people?