• -
  • irishtimes.com - Posted: July 7, 2010 @ 9:54 am

    Two Years a-Blogging

    Deaglán de Bréadún

    Tomorrow I shall be two  years contributing to The Irish Times Politics Blog. It has been a curious journey with many surprises, some good, others not so good.

    A colleague said to me a while back: “You  would need a degree in Geography to find the Politics Blog.”  The location reminds me of a little tapas bar I was taken to once in Barcelona – we traversed an infinity of small side-streets to get there but, on arrival, it was worth the journey.

    One likes to think that those who find their way through the interstices of our website will consider it worth their while. Reading the comments, it has to be said that  not all of them are friendly in tone!

    Nevertheless they are significant in number, compared with when the Blog started. What surprised me most – and I still haven’t gotten over the shock – is how nasty some people are when they put pen to paper, or rather fingers to keyboard.

    It’s like those nice, normal folk who turn into mini-Hitlers when they get behind the wheel of a car. Is it the cloak of anonymity? It seems people are bored with being as nice as pie to everyone in their daily lives and find that commenting on blogs is a useful release.

    It may also be a chip on the shoulder. Like other papers of record, this one would perhaps be seen by some as an “organ of the establishment”. I don’t accept that but undoubtedly there are some who would take such a view. In any case, Lee Harvey Oswald is alive and well and blogging away in the School Depository.

    I should add that there are several contributors who manage to make their point in a thoughtful, civil and polite manner. Many thanks and much appreciation to those people. As for the others, thank you for your interest and for not being boring. Incidentally, there is very little feedback from colleagues in the print media but the public response makes up for that.

    • minXie says:

      @ Aidan — In assessing one’s “opponent” a light-hearted dart throwing strategy usually works to get one to reveal what it is that drives one. So far, from your posts, I understand that Hot Press is your “bible” and Niall Stokes (the little darlin’) is for you the great arbiter when it comes to moral assessment and individuals under public scrutiny for causing offence, also and taking your enthusiastic appraisal for an alternative you suggest for the Decalogue to its logical conclusion, the United States, on account of a particular guideline in its Declaration of Independence (1776), should by now (2010) be the perfect role model for the rest of the world.
      Liberty and the pursuit of happiness……….or perhaps sex and drugs and rock and roll — much depends on interpretation. I see you would do away with 1, 2 and 3 of the Decalogue. I’m guessing you would also amend the 5th to allow for euthanasia
      Ps @ 42 Mark – Well it would seem we have a potential dictator in our midst — wants to do away with comment ‘n the blog. Wonder what would be Mark’s regime of choice — totalitarianism — fascism — despotism? Hitler — now there’s a “big name blogger” all right.
      I admire Deaglán and I really like his blog. He allows the most badly thought out of posts (including/especially my own) and even the most nasty insults against himself, which makes for interesting reading since a long thought out contrived response reveals nothing of the person and getting to know people is the interesting thing imo. I have to say, I find Ruby (in spite of her many faults !!) to be one of the most interesting posters (don’t tell anyone but I think Deaglán does too)

    • Aidan, You asked me why I felt differently about the Tiernan monologue and Peter Cook’s sketch. I asked you for the link to the Cook sketch, to refresh my memory. Now you sign out with a false claim that I won’t answer questions. I am tempted to repeat Brian Cowen’s description of Enda Kenny.

    • Aidan says:


      This is pointless. For you, there is no reasonable defence that can be made of Tiernan, and all attempts to explain Tiernan’s comments are basically masking the insensitivity of the commenter (“flannel”). That’s why I didn’t want to get back into it.

      The unanswered question is this: is this your assessment of all those who defended Tiernan? It seems easy on this blog to tell a commenter, like me, that they are insensitive to the Holocaust, but it seems that you can’t carry the courage of your convictions to state the same about Niall Stokes, for instance.

      I said before that this was understandable. I mean, you can’t as an IT journalist go around saying that the editor of one of Ireland’s major publications lacks sensitivity for the Jewish victims of the Holocaust, unless you’re really sure of your position. What would you say to me instead if I happened to be Niall Stokes? Would you stand by the things you’ve said here, and the way that you’ve conducted yourself?

      Also, I note from the previous blog that when the Cook joke was brought up you proclaimed immediately that the jokes were “different” with great confidence. Now it seems you need a link in order to make an assessment. How did you make your assessment previously?

      Finally, this is the first blog I’ve ever commented on that I’ve been slagged off by the blogger for spending time commenting. It’s a novel approach, I’ll grant you that.

    • Aidan,

      !) What if I contacted a survivor of the Holocaust in, say, Israel or New York and played the Tommy T rant to him/her, then asked you to explain to that person why you think it’s cool and spend half your waking hours defending it?

      2) I explained to you that I cannot locate the Peter Cook sketch but you refuse to provide me with the link or script or any material to revive my memory. I simply don’t recall the context and am quite prepared to explain my position if you will only supply the damned thing. But you’re unwilling to do so. Why????

    • Aidan says:

      1) We’ve been over that. Move on.

      2) You’ve already considered the Cook joke and declared it to be totally different quite a number of times. Anyway, as far as you’re concerned there’s no reasonable defence of Tiernan that can be made, so continuing down this line is utterly pointless. Move on.

      Answer my last post. Courage of your convictions, and all that. What say you to Niall Stokes? What if I was Niall Stokes: would you stand by your statements about my personality and how I regard the Holocaust?

    • Move on, yourself! I am not going to be bullied by you or anyone else. I wrote a blog post. You replied to it. I am responding to your arguments. If anyone else wants to comment, I will respond to them also. I am not going to be railroaded into some ludicrous series of confrontations with the world and his wife. Your attempted defence of an indefensible and tasteless rant on the Holocaust is a shabby and deeply-questionable exercise and an extraordinary waste of your time and obvious talents. Now, where’s the Cook link and why are you so scared to send it to me?

    • I admire Deaglán and I really like his blog. He allows the most badly thought out of posts (including/especially my own) and even the most nasty insults against himself, which makes for interesting reading since a long thought out contrived response reveals nothing of the person and getting to know people is the interesting thing imo. I have to say, I find Ruby (in spite of her many faults !!) to be one of the most interesting posters (don’t tell anyone but I think Deaglán does too)

      Thanks MinXie!

      Comment by minXie | Edit This

    • rubyxcubes says:

      Still talking about me…? yiz must be stuck…what did yiz do before I graced your posts with my wit…? I have learned a lot about the indigenous Irish I do not like what I have learned…It’s been a most unpleasant expereince but an experience none the less…

    • Aidan says:

      “Your attempted defence of an indefensible and tasteless rant on the Holocaust is a shabby and deeply-questionable exercise and an extraordinary waste of your time and obvious talents.”

      Would you say the same to Niall Stokes and all other people who defended Tiernan? Is it your opinion that they defended Tiernan because they lack the requisite care about the Holocaust?

      And, if you’re talking about bullying: I find it very, very interesting that you have no problem at all trashing my morality for trying to defend Tiernan in what I consider to be a reasonable manner, but you won’t bring yourself to say a word about the morality of level of care about the Holocaust of the other people who defended Tiernan. Scared of the big boys, Deaglán?

      P.S. I don’t have a link to the Cook joke. It was very simple. It was a joke about people complaining that television violence makes people go out and commit similar acts. Cook says that he watched a documentary on the Holocaust and then stated that he found himself “gassing six million Jews on the way back from the shops”. But, seriously, there is no point to discussing Cook further. You’ve stated that Tiernan is indefensible, and our discussion on Cook did not previously change your mind. Why go over old ground again and again when there is literally nothing that can convince you that Tiernan can be defended. I’m not dodging, I’m just trying to save my time and obvious talents.

    • Scared of the big boys, Deaglán? Give over the macho codology, Aidan. I will not allow you to drag me into a confrontation with Uncle Tom Cobley and all. If you haven’t the confidence to stand up for yourself, don’t be hiding behind the big boys, as you call them. If you can persuade others, big or small, to send in comments on this blog, they will be very welcome and will be treated with the courtesy and consideration that has made it an internet legend :-) Why not get Tommy himself to comment? It’s all grist to my mill.
      About the Cook joke. Great to have finally dragged it out of you. I don’t think it is remotely similar to the Tiernan monologue – no comparison at all other than at the superficial level. I feel vindicated. BTW I laughed myself sick the first time I saw the film, The Producers. So chew on that for a while.

    • Aidan says:


      You’ve said that before on the Cook thing when I explained it before. See. We got nowhere.

      The logic of your position, that Tiernan is utterly indefensible, dictates that those who defend Tiernan are in some way morally deficient for doing so. There is nothing anyone who defended Tiernan could say to convince you otherwise, so the whole “let them come to my blog and comment” thing is a cod.

      They’d all say the same things I’m saying. The point about Peter Cook was made in Hot Press. Niall Stokes defended Tiernan’s comments as being taken out of context. What could he say now otherwise if he was commenting here to convince you of that? Nothing. You’ve stated that Tiernan is indefensible.

      Of course, it’s easy to pour scorn on some unknown commenter, some small fry, but it’s rather uncouth for an Irish Times journalist to say that the editor of Hot Press and other high-profile people don’t have the correct level of sensitivity for the victims of the Holocaust.

      The great thing about my position is that I can argue it to anyone, without fear, because I didn’t get personal here. I can talk at length about the context of jokes, similar jokes etc., etc, all the points I made here, without needing in any way to talk about the personality of the person I am arguing with. The only thing I said about you is that you are obviously ignorant of quite a lot of contemporary comedy, which isn’t an insult, it’s just a fact.

      So, my original point, that you have no right to complain about other’s nastiness, unevenness, spitefulness, insults, unreasonableness etc. stands very, very well. You should be able to maintain your position no matter who you are talking to, without fear.

      I made an argument. Others made the same argument. You called me a moral degenerate for making my argument. You can’t bring yourself to say that of the others, because in order to explain away my argument you’ve had to paint me as quite a nasty person with quite a lot of insults (unknowing anti-Semite, Holocaust-enabler, insensitive etc. etc.). Can’t do it to the others though. Too high profile. Can’t be seen be as nasty to those people, can we?

      I think my original point is well proven. We’re done here.

    • Aidan says:

      The Producers is funny, but it was made in 1968. I’d expect your references to be a little bit more contemporary seeing as you are commenting on a contemporary comedian, who might not even have been born when that movie came out.

      Here are the lyrics from a song in the 1999 South Park Movie, which, if you check around the movie review sites, is a generally very well-regarded comedy:


      (Note from Deaglán: Readers may find the contents of Aidan’s link upsetting.)

      Can you imagine reading those lyrics to someone who suffered sexual abuse by a family member? There’s no context that could make those words okay, is there? And it isn’t like this is an off-the-cuff remark. It’s a song and dance number in a scripted movie.

      Surely the millions people who made the South Park movie a success, and those gave it a positive review, and would defend such a song, are insensitive to the victims of pedophilia, aren’t they?

    • Aidan,
      1) You keep saying “We’re done” and then you come back for more. Whisper it: are you perhaps suffering from a mild form of obsessive compulsive disorder? That’s a serious question, by the way, not an insult.
      2) Will you please stop trying to start rows between me and the rest of the world? Enough of this intellectual cowardice, Naydo: have a bit of bottle and stand up for your own views without doing the equivalent of calling in your big brother. If someone else writes a comment here on Tommy Tiernan, whether he’s the editor of the New York Times or Le Monde or the NME I shall be more than happy to respond to it. I don’t pick fights with people but will defend myself if attacked. Anyway, I don’t even want to have this discussion with you, never mind anyone else. It’s done to death.
      3) As for the South Park lyrics: they seem pretty nasty tho’ I don’t know the context and cannot make a definitive judgment. The fact that the series may be widely-praised – what has that got to do with the price of eggs? I am clearly not as up to speed as you on contemporary comedy. Any time I attend a gig or listen to someone on the TV, much of it comes across as pretty tasteless with people substituting f-words and other forms of obscenity for genuine wit. The camerawork is often quite manipulative, showing people applauding a particularly tasteless item as a way of lessening the possibility of a formal complaint. I am neither a prude nor a Holy Joe, but at times I feel we are on the cusp of a new form of fascism with the decline in public morality as one of the symptoms.
      4) I didn’t call you a moral degenerate: stop playing fast and loose with the facts please. It is clear that you don’t lie awake at night fretting over the Holocaust: I think that is a reasonable and even unavoidable deduction. And while you are patting yourself on the back for being so fearless, let me point out that you are some pseudonymous or semi-anonymous bloke who hasn’t got the guts to even use his own name (or full name) on his comments. Now are we done, Aidan? I have a feeling I shall hear back from you.

    • bairbre says:

      I see there’s still a bit of a schemozzle going on in the parallelogram (to paraphrase a certain Michael O’Hehir’s well-known expression for when a fracas broke out on the pitch). At this stage Deaglán, I’d be reaching for “the cat” (cat o’ nine tails). What the Tiernan comedian spewed out imo is indefensible and what an easy target (holocaust victims) he chose to be the butt of his “funny” rant. This comedian knows well how to steer clear of a fatwā

    • Thanks Bairbre. I hadn’t thought of Salman Rushdie in this context. Very interesting. Dread to think what would have happened to Tommy if he had joked in the same terms and tone about the other side of the Middle East conflict.

    • jac' hughes says:

      Aidan…as I am sure you know there are some materials so dense that nothing will ever penetrate them…
      You have argued your points well, as usual, but to no avail…
      Instead raise un verre du Vin ‘Le Rouge et le Noir’ and celebrate Bastille Day…Liberte Egalite Fraternite….
      although of course we know that Some are still more Equal than others…Sante/Salut

    • rubyrubes says:

      @58 MinXie…have you been at the cooking sherry?!

      @61 Did I read that correctly… you are describing this blog an ‘internet legend’…sez who…?…apart from yerself a course…? And you know what they say about self praise…! Have you won a blog award…that you’re keeping to yourself?

    • Ruby: I often felt like asking you the same question about the cooking sherry, as an explanation of your sudden and unpredictable changes of mood, but did not dare lest you scold me in your haughty fashion. Not much chance of a blog award the way you keep lowering the tone :D

      Jac’ Hughes: If Aidan gets me into a row with my secondary school contemporary, the Editor of Hot Press,I shall report Aidan to the Simon Wiesenthal Centre ;-)

    • rubyrubes says:

      @37 No you couldn’t make it up and I haven’t made it up and if you think I have made anything up tell me what it is and I will rebut it…!

    • rubyrubes says:

      Actually perhaps that should have been the Communion wine…not the cooking sherry…and no Deaglan I haven’t been at the cooking sherry I have a far more sophisticated palate…
      You claimed the blog was ‘international legend’ I merely asked you to substantiate the claim…or is that verboten in the same way as asking you to substantiate your puerile arguments..?
      As far as lowering the tone is concerned you’re doing a fine job all by yourself berating contributors… I merely respond in kind…albeit more wittily….
      ‘Mood swings’ guess it must be hormonal given that your only other female contributor is post menopausal…
      Please don’t feel the need to respond…repetition is so tedious…

    • Post-menopausal! Now that’s not very nice. I have more than one other female contributor – do you mean MinXie, Bairbre or Barbera2, to name but a few. You have no idea who they are or what stage in life they are at. Incidentally, I wrote “internet” not “international” legend. A bit of self-mockery but you took it seriously. So much for your self-proclaimed superior wit ;-)

    • Aidan says:

      Thanks Jac’Hughes @ 66. Some are more equal than others, and then all of a sudden it’s 2 legs good 4 legs bad when it suits.

      Bairbre, as regards fatwas, you should note that Trey Parker and Matt Stone (Deaglan, click this link: http://tinyurl.com/23u3ym5) have been recently threatened by a fundamentalist Islam group for depicting Mohammed in a bear suit on South Park. Most right-thinking people would condemn the people who make the threat, but you seem to take a visceral delight in the thought of a threat being made as a sort of sick justified comeuppance.

      You often hear conservative Christians who feel their religion has been mocked saying that if the mocker had any courage he or she would mock Islam, as if they earnestly hope that the Pope would start issuing death threats to comedians.

      Now, you can correct me if I’m wrong, because I’m supposed be the one who wouldn’t know a Holocaust if it started in his back garden, but I thought that supporting people who argue against and mock the inherent stupidity of violent regimes was one of things we should do to never let something like a Holocaust happen again.

    • I am not an expert on comparative religion but as far as I am aware Muslims do not portray the face of the Prophet at any time, unlike Christians who are very eager to show the face of Jesus, as with the Turin Shroud, the Crucifix, etc. Showing the face of Mohammed is clearly an issue of great sensitivity and should be treated as such. That, of course, does not in any way, shape or form justify the threat of violence, much less the use of violence (just to anticipate your ritual, knee-jerk distortion of my views, Aidan.)

      Jac’Hughes @ 66: I note your gratuitously insulting remark. So another nasty piece of work emerges from the Blogosphere (sigh!) The supply seems to be endless. Why not try making a contribution of substance instead, once you have polished off the wine?

    • minXie says:

      @ 70 pubic/rubes – Predictable as head lice on schoolchildren of a certain age, ruby falls for the bait (bit of praise jettisoned in that direction by me in a post back around #51) and like a follicly challenged eagle she swoops to conquer. Well that last bloody awful response by ruby is all I need to put together a profile (hobby of mine), which, since it might conjure up a horrifying image of the head of a Medusa swivelling around 360 degrees regurgitating green bile, I’ll keep to myself even though ruby has posted what she deems to be a rather unflattering profile that she has projected onto me and in the process has, in effect, insulted all women. But lashing out at a woman (all women?) one feels threatened by and using age and hormonal status as a weapon. Who does that, I ask? Seriously, who does that? And then ruby likes to present herself as a connoisseur of fine wine but I wouldn’t say her knowledge would amount to much when pressed (lol) – I notice ruby is kind to people she doesn’t perceive to be a threat but hell hath no fury when ruby feels she’s being outsmarted and then out comes the bottled up bitterness (vintage, of course) but if ruby’s wine palate is as “sophisticated” as her wit then I think we can safely assume ruby is a bit of a plonker………..there is something, however, that still holds my interest…

    • Gollygosh, this is getting hot and heavy. What will Rubyharveyoswald say in reply, I wonder?

    • Aidan says:

      No, Sacred Cows which are defended by violence should be challenged by commentators and mocked by comedians at every opportunity, with full support from people who abhor violence, and not treated with “great sensitivity”. That’s just giving into bullying, Deaglán.

      If you tiptoe around people who threaten you and your fellow citizen with violence you are volunteering for oppression, and I thought we were against that sort of thing around here?

      Religion is absurd, and just because that statement is offensive to many people, it doesn’t meant that it shouldn’t be made. Because religion is absurd it can be mocked, sometimes cheaply, sometimes with great wit:


      (Deaglán writes: Not for persons of delicate religious sensibility)

    • Aidan, I quite enjoyed the George Carlin monologue although a strong Christian might find it somewhat offensive. Hadn’t heard of him before. Certain irony in the fact that he is apparently no longer with us: 1937-2008. Looks like Jehovah had the last laugh :-)

    • rubytastic says:

      Deaglan You need to ‘Jerk it Out’….

    • rubytastic says:

      Why is calling someone post menopausal ‘not very nice’…
      If someone i.e. minxie et al remember Mr Ed cf Screen**iter blog then she must be at least in her 60′s that would by anyone reckoning make her post menopausal…
      It’s really quite scary how obsessed you two are with me…that post @71 is quite mad…
      I don’t perceive anyone on these blogs to be ‘a threat’…
      Aidan is impressive having demonstrated an analytical acuity by his patient deconstruction of ill constructed opinion masquerading as argument…
      I suspect he is either a Philosophy or Science Graduate…
      I enjoy reading his comments in particular the way he takes the view of his opponent and unpicks the argument thread by thread until it unravels entirely…it is a skill I recognise from my Professional work…
      My day is busy and I deal with complex issues I therefore prefer to spend my free time when I have any lampooning the stupidity of the less educationally advantaged…
      Think that covers it…well as far as I’m concerned…

    • I should have known: Jac’Hughes is Ruby under another guise. Trademark bile. I have just sent latest comment under that pseudonym to trash. You no break-a da rules a-Ruby, ok?

    • Aidan says:

      Not surprised you haven’t heard of George Carlin. There’d no irony in the death of a 71-year-old. Happens to a lot of 71 year olds.

      Of course, according to your religion, he’s probably in hell right now endlessly screaming his guts out. And when you get to heaven one of the bonuses is that you’ll get to watch. Nice.

      I find it hard to think of a perfect creator who would create a universe where small-minded religious bigots get rewarded with eternal happiness, and thoughtful and truly talent people of the likes of Carlin get burned for eternity.

      On that point of irony, you seem to be suggesting that God might have offed Carlin and got the “last laugh”. Do you think that God does such things? Or, if not, does he laugh at the death of atheists? Christopher Hitchens, an outspoken and eloquent atheist, has cancer of the throat – this would only be an irony if you believed that God gave people who anger him cancer of the throat. Do you believe such things?

    • minXie says:

      @ 79 – It’s “not very nice” ruby because of the obvious intent behind your comment which was to use a woman’s perceived age and hormonal status as something of a derogatory comment. But you know this and still try to claw your way out of the hole you have dug for yourself. No offence, you understand, but to my mind you come across as a bitter, overweight (?), middle-aged (menopausal?) woman who is very bored with her job (legal secretary?) and goes to great lengths to project a desired image of herself, which is of a young, dynamic legal-eagle at the cutting edge of where it’s all happening. I am actually educated up to fourth level and would classify Aidan as a first year Arts & Humanities drop-out – no offence btw Aidan but better to put all that effort into finishing a degree. Deaglán, on the other hand and goes without saying is obviously “educationally advantaged” but is also refined and responds fairly and wittily according to the level of comment being directed at him and that is why I like reading his responses. Who is obsessed with whom – that is a question

    • rubytastic says:

      Pourquoi? What rules were broken?
      As I recall it was a perfectly reasonable comment unlike for instance 74 above, if that is not bile not to mention deranged I don’t know what is…!
      If you’re going to apply the rules then I think you are required to do so equitably…including your own gratuitously offensive comments which are quite scandalous…
      Aidan you read the references correctly for some incomprehensible reason the Blogfather has not published my acknowledgement…Another little ‘Napoleon’ of the four and two legged variety…I will jkeep a watching brief on your ahem progress …

    • Aidan, Odd that a guy with such an interest in comedy has absolutely no sense of humour. I never said what my religious beliefs were, if any. All I ask is that religion and its adherents be treated with politeness and respect: the same applies to non-believers. So much for your forensic skills.

      Rubyharveyoswald: You are not allowed to comment under more than one pseudonym. I will permit variations on “ruby” but “jac’ hughes” is out.

    • minXie says:

      I think it wouldn’t be a bad idea if you put the stopper to this thread Deaglán, since Ruby’s obviously scraping the barrel now and I strongly doubt that Aidan would wish to be “supported” by a big fat middle-aged, grumpy, menopausal woman with a chip on both her puffed up padded shoulders!

    • I don’t tend to close off debates as I find they get more entertaining the longer they go on. Someone suggested to me that minXie and Ruby were the same person but I don’t think that can be the case!

    • rubytastic says:

      I assume that arbitrary rule will apply equally to all those using multiple pseudonyms…?
      As far as my professional status is concerned your elderly church mouse is, as ever, wrong in every particular…
      I never learned to type on principle precisely because I refuse/d to be and have never been anyone’s secretary…
      I know some excellent legal secretaries however…
      As far as my appearance is concerned modesty forbids me from commenting…
      I would have to leave comment on that to those facebook friends who comment on this blog and have access to my physiog…
      Let’s just say I’ve never had any complaints and I was asked to model both cosmetics and my then lovely hair in my youth….it’s a bit more shall we say ‘distinguished’ now…!…Nice try tho’!
      I suggest you arrange a Professional get together and invite Deaglan…he’s mad for it…
      Ooops sorry can’t make it… I’m watching paint dry that night…

    • rubytastic says:

      @86 that suggestion is probably the greatest insult to date made as I recall by the ‘If the Cap Fitz’ self proclaimed wunderkinde with a fistful of kryptonite…(hmm.? wasn’t that a song by the Spin Doctors…appropriately)…
      The type of nerd who wears his underpants outside his trousers…
      As a matter of record I would like to repeat that it is NOT the case…I would also like to record on record that I find her comments that I ‘interest’ her quite CREEPY…they are NOT reciprocated other than to get her off my case…
      in fact she bores the **** outta me…
      In fact her and Deaglan’s apparent obsession with me is beginning to weird me out…

    • minXie says:

      Lawks a-mercy……….this is running ‘amuck’…………kind of interesting though, the apparent politeness and camaraderie between men in our culture (which is generally evident in comments forums) as in contrast with the utter bitchiness and sometimes murderous spite between women which often prevails and I am oft stunned by the sheer nastiness of comments directed at female columnists – even more so when the such vitriol emanates from women. Precarious thing, this civilization business……….time for another look at that social contract maybe……….and are people losing the run of themselves in what some would describe as the aftermath of religion in an increasingly secular society………..weird, though, when a woman attacks another woman at the level of the very core (womb) of her being – maybe it’s an equality thing………if men can establish superiority over each other with a particular body-part measuring contest then women can challenge each other on the basis of womb functionality………. Lawks a-mercy…

    • minXie says:

      ps that last statement was my closing one on this particular issue btw !
      pps @ 86 Deaglán — you don’t think a particular suggestion made to you can be the case — go with that thought definitely !)

    • Kynos says:

      Two years Deaglán? Yer naught but a cub here yet. Some of us been commenting on the IT blogsite (this and previously ireland.com) for 8 years and more. Tho’ you could stick a few xeros after that 8 and I wouldn’t be surprised. Feels like it at times. What’s 8 times 365? Minus oh say about ten days in total for births marriages weddings divorces sick days drunk days carcrash days pre-wi-fi days. Janey. Forever. That’s what it is.

Search Politics