The Blah

SOPA Ireland is only taking our eye off the ball and I can't help but think thats exactly what the studios, labels and broadcasters want.

So, I am going to take a brief moment to discuss SOPA Ireland.

1. The name in itself is a red herring. 'SOPA Ireland' isn't a concern, mainly because it doesn't exist. The Stop Online Piracy Act is exclusively a US problem but the Irish media has latched onto it with a death grip and refuses to let it go. That is my first gripe.

2. People are up in arms over a law that already exists. Even threatening to take to the streets and riot. They can't believe that such horrifying laws may ever come into effect. Well, they are already here and always have been. ACTA is a confirmation that we are still on board with something that we've already agreed to and that is simply to enforce already existing laws. I've heard people call our government 'spineless' and other such acts of outrageous ignorance. This law isn't the issue. If anything it distracts from the real issue, copyright laws. They are extremely antiquated, from a time where CDs and records reigned supreme and the idea of having a digital copy of something was so far out there that it wasn't even considered. When you buy a CD you aren't actually buying the CD itself or its contents but a license to use them. You buy a CD, you get one copy. Thats how its always been and until the advent of the MP3 player it made a lot of sense. Well, the world has moved on. It's 2012 and the very idea of a Label is starting to feel foreign to me. Why do we even need them anymore? When bands can rent a studio full of professional equipment for a week for a couple of thousand euro and release it on their website at minimal cost why do we need a label to act as a middleman? The simple answer is, we don't (although there can be arguments made for labels) and they are starting to see that. These attempts to reaffirm copyright laws are a desperate last ditch effort to save their business models. The internet has changed things forever. Books, CDs, DVDs, Blu Rays or what ever else feel like relics to the youth of today. Why would I want to have a disc that as soon as I get home I'm going to shove into my computer and throw in a corner to collect dust? There are still enthusiasts out there who like having physical copies (myself included) and there is a reason people pirate stuff, why I pirate stuff and it's not because I'm cheap. 

Convenience: The idea of a network broadcasting a single episode of a show a week is another relic from a pre-Internet age. I want to sit down and browse a selection of content, click what I want to watch and immediately see it. It's not science fiction. Netflix does it right now. I don't want to have to wait and see if an Irish broadcaster picks up Homeland to see if I get to watch it. I don't want to have to wait a week, or two, or three to see an episode of a TV show that has already been made and is sitting in some ABC vault in the States. It does't need to be like that anymore. The most egregious of all these is when you have to wait 3 weeks for an album to come out in Ireland when it's on iTunes in the US and the UK. Ireland specifically has a terrible problem with copyright law, no, the entire world has a major problem and it's that they all have their own. So, if I wanted to set up a streaming website in Europe, I'd have to make agreements to license the content in each individual country. The same content, on the same service, the same price, dozens of deals to be made, all to variations of the same company. It's bonkers. That's why Ireland gets left out of the loop. We don't have a large enough market to draw in companies. Spotify, Rdio, iTunes TV shows, Hulu, Rhapsody all evade the Irish market because it takes incredible time and effort to reach agreements in each individual market. Give me the content I want to watch, let me watch it where ever I want, when ever I want and you'll have trouble stopping me giving you my money. 

The Internet is the solution to all these problems. We can stream audio, video, download books and what ever else from hundreds of devices but broadcasters, studios and labels are sticking to their guns. They are creating the issue of piracy by not supplying a market with such a demand. If they deliever a consistent service, with rich content that they can watch anywhere, they've solved it all. I download TV shows because some of them are either not shown here or are 2-3 seasons behind the US. If I had the opportunity to pay for them I would. I believe that someone put in the work and they deserve the reward but I'm not given that opportunity, I am in fact actually inhibited from doing just that because executives are stuck in the past and so reluctant to change that'd rather jail someone for 5 years for downloading a song than offer it to them in a streaming service or DRM free.

So, as you can see we've dropped the 'Eternal' from our name so now we're just The Blah. If Justin Timberlake had his way I'm sure we'd just be called Blah but I think we're going to stick with this name for the time being anyway. As a result of this we've also had to change our url, so now it's thisistheblah.tumblr.com.

To add to this already riveting news, we now have a Twitter account. How about that! Follow us @The_Blah and stay up to date on all the political nonsense we write about.

I hope you enjoy the changes we've made, no matter how trivial and we'll be tweaking it a bit more over the next while, so keep an eye out.

So, the polling stations are officially closed. I hope you all went out and voted, if you didn't there is a 100% chance that you aren't reading this. Now, I shall take a look into my crystal ball and lay down some predictions of the presidential election and the referendum results.

The Presidential Election:

Is there really any doubt who is going to win? It's going to be Michael D. If it isn't I'll eat all my hats. BUT I think Sean Gallagher might top the poll after the first count. *gasps* I think there is still quite a lot of support out there for Gallagher in spite of his most recent controversy and these people aren't going to change their mind. So, after the first count I expect it to be very close between Gallagher and Higgins. Higgins will then hoover up preference votes faster that the European Union absorbs dept. It will at first appear close. Then it will be an easy win for Higgins. I predict that the results will be as follows:

1. Michael D Higgins

2. Sean Gallagher

3. Martin McGuinness

4. Gay Mitchell

5. David Norris

6.Mary Davis

7. Dana Rosemary Scallon 

Bare with me a second... I know what you're all thinking, "Gay Mitchell at number 4?! Didn't he poll 2% on the Ray D'Arcy poll yesterday?!". Yes, Mitchell has been polling terribly so far but there is a huge die hard Fine Gael fanbase out there and they will come out as they've probably done for years and just straight up vote FG. If he manages to round up the core FG vote there is a chance he might even wind up 3rd. However, there is the risk that the middle class FG vote will migrate to another candidate in order to keep Martin McGuinness out of power at any cost.

Martin McGuinness will poll very well in first preferences, maybe even up to 20% but he isn't transfer friendly at all. I can't see many people who would be traditional party voters even giving him a preference. No matter of his result Sinn Fein have achieved what they set out to do, legitimise Sinn Fein as a strong, top tier party in the Republic.

Norris, too little too late in my opinion. He preformed extremely well in the last Frontline Debate but after his disastrous performances on the other debates and the controversies so far he just isn't in with an actual shot.

Mary Davis has run one of the worst campaigns in history. For a woman with such shining credentials and such a high stature amongst the community before the election she really has turned the entire thing around. From the get go she came across elitist and unlikeable. Despite better performances latter in the campaign she found it hard to shake off this image. It's a shame really.

Dana Rosemary Scallon represents something that no longer exists in this country and hasn't truly existed since Eamon De Valera left office. The idea of a conservative, protectionist, Catholic Ireland isn't something that appeals to the electorate. I respect her for having the bravery to put herself forward as a candidate and standing for something she believes in. If only she had of ran in the early 80's, maybe then she would have been in with a chance.

The Referendum:

In relation to the referendums, I predict a Yes on Judicial Pay reform but a No on giving the power of enquiry to the Oireachtas. The electorate just doesn't know enough about it to justify passing it. It was terribly handled by the Referendum Commission and by the Government parties. I didn't even get my information leaflet in the door. Hardly acceptable and if it doesn't pass it is their own fault. 

As for turnout, it pains me to say, I expect around 45%-50% countrywide and as low as high 30's in certain urban areas. A shockingly low number but the combination of rather underwhelming candidates and a lack of information about the referenda have fuelled his.

The only thing lower than the turnout is my likelihood of being in any way correct. I hope you all enjoy the count and are happy with the results but I have the feeling that most of you are just happy to have it over with. To be honest, so am I.

After the extremely boring and somewhat pointless ordeal that was the Late Late debate* the TV3 debate didn't have much to live up to.  Vincent Browne was the man chosen to chair the second of the presidential debates and if truth be told, he did a pretty good job. He asked hard hitting questions to the candidates (some more than others) but still allowed the debate to have a certain flow to it, where the candidates were able to actually, well, debate. So, who are the big winners and losers of the night? Going from left to right, (podium position that is, not ideology) let's find out.

Martin McGuinness: Mr McGuinness has a certain something about him that makes him feel presidential. He is a very capable speaker, is unfazed by questions and has a strong history of peace making in Northern Ireland. However, there is no denying that this man was a member of the IRA, he admits as much. So, doesn't this make him somewhat responsible for the violence that required the peace process? Doesn't this mean, as a member of the IRA at the time, that he is somewhat responsible for the actions carried out by these men? Hasn't it been shown by various sources over the years that his membership of the IRA continued long after he said he left? These are the questions that McGuinness has been asked on a near daily basis since his entry into the presidential race, yet we have no definite answer to them. When Vincent Browne confronted him with the issues, in what may have been the most hilarious moment in any political debate of all time, he simply brushed them off as anti-IRA spin doctors. In spite of Vincent's Library™ he remained unflustered and composed yet still didn't give a definitive answer to the question. A fairly strong showing by Nelson Mandela's best friend. B-

  Mary Davis: I'm not quite sure what happened on tonight’s debate at all. Ms. Davis has an excellent record with the Special Olympics and has shown from this that she has excellent organisational and people skills. She also has no political background and with the huge backlash against the current political establishment, this should work hugely in her favour. However, her lack of political experience has really shown through. She seemed constantly flustered by questions and unlike the other the candidates, her question dodging skills definitely need some honing. Her abysmal attempt at addressing Vincent's questions about her affiliation with the Bank of Ireland boards definitely alienated the working class and people who still feel burned by the banks behaviour over the last 10 years. It's not all doom and gloom but, as she definitely improved on her Late Late performance but overall did little to win people over newcomers. C-

  Michael D.Higgins: Michael D. is a gentleman in every sense of the word. He has a near impeccable political record having campaigned for human rights both home and abroad and has over the years made huge contributions to the arts (he is himself a poet and author) and has been a public servant in some capacity since 1973, right up until the general election this year. This record really speaks to the public and he has been a front runner since the beginning of the race and is on top of the latest opinion polls. His performance on the debate was nearly flawless, he answered questions with precision and with an elegance that some of the other candidates simply don't possess. Michael D's knowledge of the constitution is unrivaled and his understanding of the limitations of the presidency and his passion and commitment to work in such a restricted role are extremely refreshing. He remained confident, carried himself with grace, refused to get caught up in the attacks placed on other candidates. An excellent performance and he is undoubtedly a deserving front runner in the race. All this whilst standing on a box! A

  Sean Gallagher: Former Dragon's Den investor and founder of Smart Homes, Sean Gallagher is reaching out with the catchphrase "Let's Put Our Strengths To Work" and is obviously trying to use his business past to his advantage. He is straight talking, makes some excellent points on campaign reform (such as not putting up costly posters), seems to really, really want the job and has over come some hurdles in terms of his eyesight to be a successful entrepreneur. Every time he spoke on the debate I could feel him winning over fans. However, there were times in the debate that I forgot he was even there! He remained quiet for extended periods, which seems like a missed opportunity since when he spoke he definitely seemed to be speaking some sense. He didn't sufficiently answer the question on his background in Fianna Fail and the people who were holding it against him before are more than likely sticking to their guns. Mr. Gallagher does have a genuine enthusiasm for working for people as shown by work with the youth and in voluntary and community groups nationwide and you really can tell that he feels he can make a difference in the Aras. This might actually be the problem. He can't really attract jobs to Ireland with the help and approval of the government. Overall it was a strong performance and he definitely put quality before quantity. Now, will Ireland vote to invest in Sean Gallagher? B

  Dana Rosemary Scallon: I barely know where to start. In all fairness to Dana, she is definitely passionate about her beliefs and convictions. Too bad that she portrays this passion in totally the wrong way. Not once, not twice but three times Dana produced a copy of the Bunreacht and waved it about the place whilst shouting about how much the EU is trying to destroy our Irish ideals and take away our sovereignty whilst taking away our national identity and stated more than once that she would refuse to sign any bill that didn't fall in line with her interpretation of the constitution. So, her two main claims are to not pass bills as she sees fit, which means they'll go through a court system, which in it self creates more constitutional issues. This seems extremely irresponsible to me. Her next promise was to keep Europe at bay, she has ZERO power to do this and the fact she think she can only goes to show her extreme ignorance to the actual power of the president. As a whole Dana's constitution waving and claims that she will save the Irish people are immensely patronising and definitely implies that we aren't competent to see these threats ourselves. Tiring, ignorant and patronising. F--------

  Gay Mitchell: I can't state this strongly enough, Fine Gael made the wrong decision in picking Gay Mitchell as their candidate for the president. From the beginning and in spite of huge support for FG, he has trailed far behind in the polls. Fine Gael have been trying to get across the image of Gay Mitchell the fighter, the scrapper but instead all we have received so far is copious amounts of tedium. His tactic of attacking Martin McGuinness didn't pay off on the Late Late and it definitely didn't pay off here. You know when the chair of the debate can make a more coherent and intelligent argument than one of the candidates that something has gone drastically wrong. I have no doubts in my mind that he is an extremely capable politician but he is definitely not presidential material. Disappointing in every regard. D

  David Norris: The Prodigal Child has returned! Then, he immediately fell flat on his face. Norris' reentry to the race has been anything but the triumphant return that either himself or his supporters had imagined. After initially exiting the campaign after controversy about a letter he sent in support of his formal partner, he returned only to find that the public hadn't forgotten and that they wanted him to release the subsequent letters that have come to light. He decided to not release them, citing legal advice. Norris started well and came out pretty strong and for a while it seemed like he would avoid the wrath of Vincent but in the final ten minutes of the debate Vincent let loose. He brought up the issue of the letters and when Norris' gave his standard response, Vincent pounced. Vincent had gone and sought his own legal advice and concluded that Norris' reason for not releasing the letters was rubbish. Norris didn't really have an answer to this, he resorted to trying to shout down Vincent which made him seem unreasonable, dishonest and in the end he clarified nothing. Combine this with the story in the Independent that he received disability payments for 16 years as a TCD lecturer whilst continuing to sit in the Senate. Overall an extremely bad night for Norris and his campaign is in severe trouble. D-

  Overall the debate, despite not bringing any real new information on the candidates to light, proved far more entertaining that the previous Late Late debate and proved an absolute train wreck for some of the candidates, maybe even destroying their campaign.

  -Eden

This debate was chaired by journalist Vincent Browne, who, as well as asking a number of probing questions, allowed the candidates to rebut and rebuke the claims of their opponents. It was indeed a more lively debate than that of the Late Late Show the previous week, but we were not exactly presented with any new information on these candidates. Does the role of President necessarily require three televised debates? A question for another day, perhaps. Let's take a look at the performances of the Magnificent Seven.

Martin McGuinness: Despite how much I disagree with everything Mr. McGuinness stands for, he does tend to stand out in these debates for the better. He delivered a competent performance, outlining his contributions to the peace process and innovation & employment in the North (including negotiations to bring Game of Thrones to Antrim, by which, admittedly, I was taken aback). He failed to successfully dissolve the concerns that many have about his apparent continued affiliation with the IRA. However, Mr. Browne's unnecessary theatrics when asking these questions may have pushed Mr. McGuinness out of the line of fire, pun intended. Nevertheless, a decent showing by the North's Deputy First Minister. B

Mary Davis: Ms. Davis is the unconventional candidate, without any direct experience in political life. However, she appears to be the one who has the greatest knowledge of what the role of the president entails, and I fully believe this. Her greatest weakness, which may prove to be her eventual downfall, is her inability to express her knowledge concisely, and this was evident tonight. Also, her failure to properly address her association with the Bank of Ireland boards was damaging, and did little to appeal to the working class. I believe Mary Davis would be the perfect candidate if she had any capable political skills, but her showing tonight will not add to her candidacy. Decent, but underwhelming. C+

Michael D. Higgins: What I find about Michael D is that some way, somehow, he can say anything at all, and it seems to make sense (take note, Mary Davis). He is the intellectual candidate, a man who knows his articles of the constitution offhand, with an esteemed knowledge of the limitations of the presidency, but with an extreme passion to work within these limitations. I cannot find fault with his performance. He addressed Mr. Browne's questions with poise and precision. He raised a discussion about the core values of the presidency as opposed to the petty squabbling of some of his peers. Assured, confident, and perhaps heading for the Áras. A

Dana Rosemary Scallon: Dana is a passionate woman. However, I do not see why she is in this race. She cannot be taken as a serious candidate, at least until she leaves her copy of the constitution at home instead of waving it around like a lunatic, trying to provoke any kind of mad socialist response. She makes me feel ashamed to be a Euro-sceptic. Taking her performance solely into account, she changed the subject multiple times, often onto things not associated with the presidency and out of the potential president's hands. Mad. Raving. E

Sean Gallagher: On one hand, Mr. Gallagher can be viewed as a master of to-the-point rhetoric. On the other, he cuts a subdued figure. Gallagher was quiet tonight, and when he spoke, he recounted the same clichés that have been the trademark of his campaign. Yet, without saying much, he oozes some sort of likeability that I am yet to fully understand. Clearly, he appeals to the working class with his promise of luring investment to Ireland using his powers of the presidency, yet I'm not sure that this is an honourable angle to take (more later). Calm. Composed, yet unspectacular. B-

Gay Mitchell: I have a feeling that Fine Gael are kicking themselves for the mess that they have gotten themselves into. Mr. Mitchell's campaign has garnered less and less traction from the very beginning, and now seems to be heading into meltdown. This is perhaps exemplified by his initial denial of negative campaigning, and then his procedure to direct jibes at Martin McGuinness for the entire debate. He is dry, tedious and just downright pointless. A stereotypical politician in every respect, and clearly not the public's choice for president this time. Smug. Awkward. Hypocritical. D

David Norris: I don't believe that Mr. Norris' revitalised campaign has emerged as quite the comeback that he had anticipated. Perhaps this is the result of media bias, but also perhaps it is due to his refusal to answer questions that are key to his credibility and integrity as a presidential candidate. Mr. Norris again refused to address the now infamous "letters" scandal, and continuously interrupted the debate with insincere words of agreement. As a result, he comes across as sycophantic and nauseating, but at the same time, dishonest, which is quite a feat by Mr. Norris in truth. A disappointing performance which will have turned many people away. C-

Tomorrow, I examine some of the opinion polls published in recent days, as we draw closer to election day.

The Presidential election is drawing ever closer, and here I take a look at the main candidates, their prospects, and evaluate their suitability to the role. It has proved to be one of the most anti-climactic races in living memory, in my humble opinion, not helped by a number of people who do not strike me as being the Presidential type. This, combined with the recession, has called the role of the President into question among commentators. Is it worth the salary and privilege? Are we championing a person who, at the end of the day, is merely a figurehead? Personally, I believe that the President of Ireland is key in establishing social, economic and political relations with other countries, and it is for this reason, among many, that the job is vital for our country. But I digress. Let's take a look at the candidates:

Gay Mitchell: Mr. Mitchell received the Fine Gael nomination amid reports of failing to win the backing of party leader Enda Kenny. He has been a political stalwart in Dublin for the past 32 years, being a TD for half that time, and an MEP for the past seven years. For me, Mr. Mitchell hasn't shone enough in his political career to be considered a viable candidate for the role of President. He is a mediocre speaker, and I consider him to be incapable of inspiring the Irish people in potential crisis. Following the departure of David Norris from the race (more on that later), Mr. Mitchell's credibility has been called into question with the knowledge that he, like Norris, pleaded clemency for a known felon, in this case a double-murderer. Presidential material? Hardly.

Michael D. Higgins: Mr. Higgins received the Labour Party nomination. He was a TD for 14 years, and was Minister for Arts & The Gaeltacht within that period. He is renowned in the arts circle, being heavily involved in the Irish Film Board and TG4. Call me cynical, however, but I am convinced that Mr. Higgins sees the role of President as nothing more than a retirement position. Like David Norris, I see him as a caricature, a person who acts up for the cameras in order to find favour among the public. Is this the face of Ireland for the next seven years? I certainly hope not.

Mary Davis: Ms. Davis is best known for her work in bringing the Special Olympics to Ireland in 2003. She secured her place on the ballot by winning the nominations of six county councils. She is best described as a social entrepeneur, working to improve cross-border relations, promoting active citizenship, as well as working on a number of boards endorsing charity, science and sports. She is an all-rounded individual who has a proven track record in promotion and development. Perhaps this is exactly the type of President we need if we are to continue on the road to economic and social recovery.

Sean Gallagher: Mr. Gallagher is best known to Irish audiences as an entrepeneur on the RTE programme, Dragon's Den, in which he hears proposals to invest in the development of companies and products. He has secured his place on the ballot on the basis of winning five nominations from county councils. He claims that his main goal, as President, would be to attract foreign investors to the country with the help of the title of his new office. As much as I respect Mr. Gallagher for making a name for himself with his businesses and investments, it would displease me to see a man of his financial stature use the office of the President to further enhance his reputation abroad. I think there are better ways that Mr. Gallagher can contribute to economic recovery than becoming President of Ireland.

And the rest...: Eden covered the David Norris story in intricate detail the other day, and I feel I must add to that by stating that I am glad that he will not be the next President of Ireland, despite my misgivings about how the media targeted his lifestyle. It is a difficult scenario to evaluate because, while he has the right to have his name on the ballot, he is the last person I would like to see in Aras an Úachtaráin. Like Mr. Higgins, but perhaps to a greater extent, he is a caricature, a cartoon character, a man who uses his wit and personality to attract voters. We found out, however, that beneath this large personality, there lies little substance, and some deeply disturbing social views as well. Other names that have been thrown into the frame in the last few days include Dana Rosemary Scallon, a former candidate, and Gay Byrne, broadcaster. I have little time for celebrity candidates, and the same applies in this case.

So, there is my round-up of the Presidential candidates. In conclusion, unless a Fianna Fáil candidate emerges in the next few weeks, I will be voting for Mary Davis as the next President of Ireland. This race has raised some interesting questions about the election process itself (the requirements needed to get a place on the ballot, in particular), and in my next piece, I hope to cover some of these questions in a bit more detail. But, for now, slán!

Remember how, not too long ago, I mentioned that things were going to get interesting? Well, they have. We were going to start with a post about the current presidential campaigns and our opinions of them, but, things have changed a bit. So, first, let's address the elephant in the room.

The presidential campaign, so far, has been a bit of a snore. Boring candidates, all saying the exact same, middle of the road garbage. Ireland is great at some things, running a presidential campaign isn't one of them. Out of all these candidates there was one person, one real character of Irish politics, Senator David Norris. Now, before you assume anything, I'm NOT saying I think he would be a great president, or that I'd even vote for him. In fact, I probably definitely wouldn't have. However, there is no denying, he made things interesting.

From day one, his campaign has been shrouded in controversy. The lowering of the legal age of consent was the first scandal that legitimately damaged his campaign. Whether or not his comments were purposively leaked and taken out of context isn't the issue for me. It's the fact that someone, who wanted to be a candidate for the presidency (by all accounts, he has been considering it for the last 14 years), didn't think that what he was saying was susceptible to that kind of media scrutiny, or what he was saying could have been so easily taken so out of context. On the one hand, I do admire the fact he is outspoken and opinionated but on the other hand, he doesn't know where to limit himself. He has always had a habit of getting himself into trouble by saying something before fully thinking it through. I asked myself at this point in his quest for candidacy, "Are these qualities I really want in a president of Ireland? The international face of Ireland?". No, they aren't, Ireland had suffered enough embarrassment in recent years with our sovereignty issues. We need a strong, well spoken, likable and most importantly, uncontroversial president. David Norris was not that candidate.

Here is where things get tricky, I still wanted him on the ballot. My opinion, no matter how excellent, isn't the opinion of the Irish people. By my standards, he had every right to be on the ballot and I was disappointed to see him struggling to even get that far. Ireland should be given as much choice as possible and to many, David Norris was the best person for the job. 

Then, things got worse, much worse for Mr.Norris. The media, through means unknown, "acquired" information about a letter that Norris wrote to Israeli authorities in 1997 pleading clemency for a former partner of his, Ezra Yizhak Nawi, in a case that involve the statutory rape of a 15-year-old boy. In this letter, written on Seanad notepaper, Norris described Mr. Yizhak as a "throughly good and moral person for whom the 'present difficulty" is quite uncharacteristic." He went on to say that Mr, Yizhak was "lured into a carefully prepared trap" and offering to be used as a character witness in the case and act as a guarantor to Mr. Yizhak, vowing that he would not offend again.

This is pretty insane stuff and as with everything, there are two sides. The first side are touched by Norris' obvious love of his former partner and friend, Mr. Yizhak. The other, are absolutely horrified that a possible future president of Ireland could act like this.

I believe the letter, despite what some people argue, shows huge disrespect to the victim. No matter what Norris' personal beliefs may be, Yizhak broke a law and a damn serious one at that. The victim, was a child. I believe that everyone here can relate to the fact, that at 15, we didn't make the best decisions and we were not nearly mature enough to be involved in a sexual relationship. Laws like the statutory rape law are put in place for a reason, to protect to most innocent and vulnerable in our society. Despite, Norris' personal relationship, he should have seen this and he should never wrote that letter. It was a huge error in judgment. In a way, I'm glad this came out now. If Norris had of gone on and won this election and this came out, the subsequent fallout would have been hugely embarrassing to the Irish people. 

Norris has bowed out and become the first causality of what will, probably, become a much more run of the mill election. I wish him every success in his future in politics.

Now, don't get me started on the rest of those guys...

This is a short post to introduce myself. I am Paul, and I will be a regular contributor to The Eternal Blah Blah. I consider myself a political spectator, not actively involved or committed to a single party, or even a particular school of thought. However, this is not to say that I do not have views; believe me, I do. My immediate aim is to enlighten myself on the views of my peers, and to evaluate my own views in the context of yours. In the long term, this will hopefully lead to an ever-changing, ever-evolving, reciprocal development of analysis and critical thought. I look forward to working with Eden and others, and of course, to hearing your thoughts and opinions.

Hello there.

Well, I've decided to start a brand new blog that will deal exclusively in political opinion and analysis. I'm aware that a lot of people on my personal blog don't particularly care about politics and I feel that important posts I make are getting lost in all of my reblogging of 8-bit photos and complaining about TV. I hope that people will use the blog as a medium of discussion and I don't expect everyone to agree with me, sure, isn't that the beauty of politics and opinion?

So, prepare to enjoy (maybe), discuss, argue and disagree.