MORE to follow.

136 thoughts on “De Saturday Papers

  1. Ron

    Front story of the Examiner referencing broadsheet.ie for its publication of the unredacted version of the infamous email… well done broadsheet.

    Reply
    1. martco

      fair play BS ye played your part here bigtime, no doubt there’ll be knives out for ye by certain parties so watch your backs!
      Maurice McCabe can only benefit from this bravery whatever the political gameology going on that email in the verbatim shows EXACTLY what was GUBU was abt I don’t doubt STILL IS going on and I don’t need to be a judge to see that.

      Reply
  2. Shayna

    4/5ish years of work by Olga and John on the Maurice McCabe story gets a front page mention. Break out the champagne – why doesn’t it feel like a victory? It’s a mention that the email is out there, unredacted on BS.ie. The poor guy, Maurice, must be sick of seeing his name in the headlines.

    Reply
    1. Shayna

      I do, perhaps occasionally come across as a tad sarcastic on it, this wouldn’t be one of those times, Olga and John – Sláinte!

      Reply
  3. GiggidyGoo

    I wonder when Varadkar is going to grow up. Mary Lou and SF are constantly on his mind and no occurrence goes by in Irish political life without him reverting to attacking them. His use of language is always just that. The Boy Leo has a lot to learn.

    Reply
  4. Charger Salmons

    I wonder why the Examiner chose to devote so much of their front page to a poorly-drawn cartoon that’s not very funny.

    Reply
  5. Clampers Outside!

    The leftists at The Guardian are a fuppin’ joke…. https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/24/the-guardian-view-on-taylor-swift-an-envoy-for-trumps-values

    This is kinda like what Nigel does. if you are silent on a topic, and haven’t voiced upset, then you are painted into the corner with those who upset the leftist regressives.

    *points like Donald Sutherland at the end of Invasion Of The Bodysnatchers and says “you are one of them”*

    Sad for the narrow petty minds of leftists.
    In stitches at the level of petty ‘call out’ culture they’ve created and how this is an example of spinelessness name calling.

    Your regressive tactics are widespread Nigel.

    Reply
    1. Clampers Outside!

      Not even an op-ed, it’s a fuppin’ editorial… no blaming guest writers now, this IS how The Guardian views others. Mao would be proud of this labelling and self defeating call out culture of the leftists… sad, init.

      Reply
    2. Charger Salmons

      Nigel won’t be able to respond for a while – he’s currently fashioning a new tinfoil hat after his last one melted.

      Reply
          1. Scoops4all

            Champers was the personality transplant a consiece decision or was it a result of some major trauma in your life? Like Zoolander do you have trouble turning left?

          1. Clampers Outside!

            * snigger *

            Ooooohhhh, LW making assumptions about where, how and what I should comment on next….. You’d just love that, you imagined it after all :)

            Clutching,
            At.
            Straws.

            * eyeroll *

          2. LW

            I’ve never encountered someone so determined to convince people they’re laughing. Between laughing at people, sniggering, guffawing and the ubiquitous LOL you’d give Santa a run for his money in the jolly beardo stakes

          3. LW

            Clampers the most interesting thing about your posts is the heady mix of hypocrisy and lack of self awareness.

            Clampers: “This is kinda like what Nigel does. if you are silent on a topic, and haven’t voiced upset, then you are painted into the corner with those who upset the leftist regressives.”

            Also Clampers: “By the way, seeing as you are not into denouncing George Soros, I take it then that you support his efforts and investments in vulture funds…. and being a major landlord.”

            So yet again, here you are accusing Nigel of something that you regularly do. Something that your feared boogeyman, the regressive left does. Take the plank out of your own eye!

          4. LW

            For a supposed digital marketing professional, you have very little understanding of how Google works. But here you are anyway. There’s actually multiple examples, in that thread alone, of you using someone not explicitly condemning something as evidence that they support it. This one is just my favourite, so completely off the wall

            http://www.broadsheet.ie/2017/05/30/six-years-later/#comment-1822524

            Clampers Outside
            May 30, 2017 at 9:05 pm

            By the way, seeing as you are not into denouncing George Soros, I take it then that you support his efforts and investments in vulture funds…. and being a major landlord.

            I look forward to you cheerleaders Soros I’m the coming year as the housing crisis continues.

            Good lad Ahjaysiz

          5. LW

            The what?! Their search engine works just fine on Broadsheet anyway.

            Fair play for admitting it. Maybe you owe someone an apology for reading an article, becoming outraged by it, then coming on here to rail at them (out of the blue) about behaviour you frequently indulge in.

            Going forward, instead of blanket statements about ‘the regressive left’, why not take some time to consider if the things you’re so quick to complain about are also things you do. It’s a recurring theme

          6. Clampers Outside!

            I didn’t know you were on about Broadsheets’ search engine which I haven’t used since the upgrade. Thanks for the tip, it used to be terrible.


            I wasn’t outraged. Why does everything have to go all the way to 11 with you when someone points out something stupid on the Left.

            —-
            I dont do it frequently. And usually as a response to a pile-on like the one you linked to.

            —-
            Going forward, instead of losing your cool when I say “regressive left” and assume I’m talking about all the left, maybe take a breather.

          7. LW

            No, I was on about Google. They have a search engine, it’s becoming quite popular. Might be useful for someone in digital advertising.

            Ah we were so close, and some modicum of self awareness has slipped through your fingers like a greased eel. As usual, whether it be name calling or whatever shorthand you’d use for today’s bête noire, it’s justified when you do it, but deplorable when done by the faceless left.

            Yeah you definitely weren’t outraged “The leftists at the guardian are a fuppin joke”. And I’m the one who lost my cool. Keep banging that drum Clampers!

          8. La-La from the Teletubbies

            Stop fighting Clampers.
            You won this argument, ages ago.

            Penis envy is a feminists’ construct.
            It’s not real until you say it is.

            Just look at the size of your penis… Who would envy that?

            You are a minnow in a stagnated pond of desperation, a prick with no sting, all bluster and no balls…etc.

    3. Warden of the Snort

      RE: “Spinlessness name calling”

      Whatever you call it I wouldn’t call it spineless. Taking on one of the most popular female recording artists in the world right now and singling them out for a moralistic twat of an essay, is quite ballsy in my opinion.

      As to the points raised, there are some similarities between Trump’s directed content marketing campaign and those used by Swift, and I believe prior to that, by Lady Gaga. It’s quite a conceit to presuppose that Swift is some closet republican because she chooses not to condemn Trump, but rather than posit this as some regressive leftist thing, it’s more accurate I believe to say that the writer doesn’t understand how Swift’s business model works, and that indirectly attacking her own white cornbread fans by being political about Trump just doesn’t make any commercial sense for her.

      It is indeed a bit sad when people try to frame pop culture in some wider context, but it’s a bit weird frankly, that you’d criticise this approach to opinion-forming, when we see you do the exact same all the fupping time! Sure the other day you were waffling on about Lena Dunham FFS! Lena who? (Note I do vaguely know who she is but I’d posit the vast majority of Broadsheet’s Irish readers had no idea who you were talking about). At least the Guardian is trying to engage young millennials in politics by introducing themes about a figure that most of their younger readers would recognise.

      Reply
      1. Clampers Outside!

        You make it sound like “taking on” Swift is a tough thing to do for The Guardian editors… how so? Why is it tough? It’s demonstrably not tough to do, in fairness…. And “ballsy”… WTF? How is it?
        Plse stop.

        – – – –
        ” but rather than posit this as some regressive leftist thing, it’s more accurate I believe to say that the writer doesn’t understand how Swift’s business model works ”
        Call out culture is a regressive tactic. It’s an approach akin to “you are with us, or we will label you as one of the bad guys”.

        To suggest the article is a confused look at Swift’s business model is ridiculous. If anything, the couple of points on her business model are stupid beyond belief.

        Read this from it… “Her new album, Reputation, is not available on Spotify – anyone wishing to hear it must buy it.”
        Ooooohhhh, creator of music, wants to be paid for said creation, and somehow this is bad? Laughable nonsense.

        – – – –
        ” indirectly attacking her own white cornbread fans by being political about Trump just doesn’t make any commercial sense for her. ”

        “White cornbread fans”? Really? You looking for an arm band of some authoritarian group to go with that statement?
        If I replace ‘white’ with ‘Latino’ and ‘cornbread’ with ‘taco’… what is that? It’d be racist. Mind your indoctrinated bias, it’s showing wildly.

        The piece specifically uses her business model / marketing to make her look like she’s just like Trump. It’s the point of the whole ‘hit piece’.

        – – – –

        “criticise this approach to opinion-forming” …eh what? “Opinion forming” …really? Shouldn’t a publication INform, not form opinions, and allow the reader to make their own mind up. It’s a newspaper, an opinion informer, by provising unbiased reportage. This was an editorial, not an op-ed.. If it is in the business of “opinion forming” it should give up on claims of impartiality which is at the heart of journalism.

        – – – –

        My Lena Dunham comment was laughing at Dunham. Nothing more. I didn’t attempt to form opinions, I attempted to ridicule, and leave people to make their own opinion.

        These are not comparable in the manner you suggest.

        – – – –

        ” At least the Guardian is trying to engage young millennials in politics by introducing themes about a figure that most of their younger readers would recognise. ” – What?
        The piece didn’t do that, they conclude that “Swift seems not simply a product of the age of Trump, but a musical envoy for the president’s values.”
        It’s not trying to engage, it’s trying to paint her as someone suffering from “wrong think” who supports all of Trump’s crap.

        Plse re-read the piece as you seem to have missed most of it.

        Reply
      2. Nigel

        ‘M’y Lena Dunham comment was laughing at Dunham. Nothing more. I didn’t attempt to form opinions, I attempted to ridicule, and leave people to make their own opinion.’

        This is the most Clampers thing Clampers has ever said.

        Reply
        1. Warden of the Snort

          So you admit we shouldn’t take you anyway even remotely seriously as you are a contrarian clown posting provocative and insulting non-sense just for the sake of it? Good, please stop

          Reply
          1. Warden of the Snort

            That response wasn’t directed at Nigel, but at the Clampers follow up Dunham comment which seems to have disappeared now where he says that all he was trying to do was ridicule Dunham, put another way you could say that Clampers’ claims to “objectivity” appear to be coming up short!

          2. Warden of the Snort

            Nah so much of what you write on here itself is ridiculous, it’s VERY difficult to tell.

          3. Clampers Outside!

            That one at 5.05pm is funny :)

            “…he says that all he was trying to do was ridicule Dunham, put another way you could say that Clampers’ claims to “objectivity” appear to be coming up short! ”

            Eh, no. That’s not putting what I said “another way”. Don’t be ridiculous.
            That’s you either incapable of understanding what I said or just making stuff up. I think it’s the latter.

            ….OK, I’m off, that dinner won’t cook itself :)

      3. Warden of the Snort

        If you think I’m going to get into one of your daft and pointless back and forth arguments, think again.
        I do respect your right to be belligerent, needy and defensive – let’s just leave it at that. Unfortunately what you then address in that frame of mind doesn’t make much sense to me so rather than try and understand what you’re on about I’m going to completely dismiss it as you do to other people.

        I’ll just address your first and one other point.

        Taking on the most successful female recording artist in the world right now is ballsy in my opinion because a lot of people in the Guardian’s target market probably like Swift and her music.
        Don’t forget the Guardian has a lot of white, middle-class young readers. Some of them might even be straight women and men. So, writing a piece critical of a successful and popular role model among that demographic, a key one for Guardian’s strategy, is a bold move, as it could serve to alienate a large part of their core readership, unlike say some of the alt right publications you frequently cite, who merely serve up the sort of kneejerk perspectivist-biased slop that they know their readers (key example: you) want to hear.

        As for your comments on wanting the Guardian to be “objective” and defining their journalistic role. No – you don’t. You don’t show any evidence that you want them to be objective at all. You’ve already completely dismissed the article as “regressive left” or some other meaningless tag favoured by small immature boys who barely ever leave their rooms except to hurl online vitriol.
        Who cares what you think the Guardian “should” be doing to show itself to be “objective”?
        No-one with an ounce of wit expects the Guardian to do anything other than what it will call having an independent voice, and therein, making itself attractive to the contrarians and the opinionated of the world. It’s a private business. I certainly DON’T expect it to be even in the least bit “objective” and in any case you wouldn’t know what being objective ACTUALLY was even if it slapped you in the face.

        Reply
          1. Warden of the Snort

            No. I picked up on two of your most egregious error-strewn comments and corrected them. I can’t be bothered trying to figure out what you mean in the rest.

        1. Clampers Outside!

          ” Taking on the most successful female recording artist in the world right now is ballsy in my opinion because a lot of people in the Guardian’s target market probably like Swift and her music. ”
          That’s “ballsy”… you really think that? OK, fair enough you do clarify by saying it is your opinion. I disagree.

          Also, The Guardian is the most left leaning of all UK publications – https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/03/07/how-left-or-right-wing-are-uks-newspapers/

          That wouldn’t fit with your “ballsy” claim, in fact, it is would be more correct to say they were playing to the(ir) crowd.

          – – – –

          ” Don’t forget the Guardian has a lot of white, middle-class young readers ” – sorry what? The UK is 82% white, so, of course it has a majority readership who are white… and so does every single major online/ offline news publication in the UK.
          What is your point?

          – – – –

          ” So, writing a piece critical of a successful and popular role model among that demographic, a key one for Guardian’s strategy, is a bold move, as it could serve to alienate a large part of their core readership ”

          Oh. My Good. Jebus…. I genuinely guffawed at this hyperbolic nonsense! :) Taylor Swift is a popular role model among Guardian readers…

          O… K…. I’ll just move on to the next bit.

          – – – –

          ” unlike say some of the alt right publications you frequently cite ” – More nonsense and accusation.

          Name one, just one website of the Alt right that you are purporting that I frequent.

          Heck, don’t even try name one I supposedly “frequently cite”. I’ll make it easy, just show me one I’ve cited. Just one that I have cited, thanks.

          Just one.

          – – – –

          That last paragraph… Wow! :0)

          Is that you Don?

          I particularly enjoyed this bit…. ” favoured by small immature boys who barely ever leave their rooms except to hurl online vitriol. ”

          ” Who cares what you think the Guardian “should” be doing to show itself to be “objective”? “…Never mind what I think, but I think anyone reading a newspaper or who consumes any news outlets’ content would want and expect some objectivity.

          – – – –

          ” I certainly DON’T expect it to be even in the least bit “objective” – Fair enough. So you enjoy the safety of echo chambers. Cool beans, lots of people do.

          – – – –

          ” and in any case you wouldn’t know what being objective ACTUALLY was even if it slapped you in the face. ”
          It’s cute when you shout.

          – – – –

          Enjoyed that, so much, thanks.

          Reply
    4. Nigel

      Hey, all I do, or all I’ve done the last two times we’ve made out – er – had it out, is, when you raise some pointlessly obscure trivial nonsense that shows how awful the regressive left is, balance that out by expanding the scope of the conversation to compare it to the recent and ongoing actions of the right, such as electing as US president a man accused multiple times of sexual assault one with a 13 year old who himself is supporting an accused paedophile in his run for the US senate. One could also include Brexit in that of course, as personified here by our own right-wing racist Trump supporter paedophile apologist Lord Hee-Haw. That is all I do. I don’t blame you or make judgements on you for strenuously avoiding comment on those issues while fulminating on – um what are we on about this time? A fairly stupid (in fairness) critique of a pop star (a female pop-star popular with girls – yeah good target anonymous Guardian git) I’ve no idea what she thinks, seems weird, okay, whatever – because frankly I think you have a lot of hard work to do to make one seem bad enough to require that much shouting and arm-waving.

      Reply
      1. Clampers Outside!

        Plse do point out all the wrong doings of republicans. It should be done.

        Just stop throwing them up as a defense of the scumbags in the Democrats in a manner akin to saying… “but these guys are worse”. It’s tedious, pointless* and ignores the problems on the Left.

        *Pointless – with regard to the Left ever getting it’s own act together. They won’t win by pointing at the other side, that much is evident from Hillary’s campaign.
        But no, the Left just keeps it up, thinking, it’ll work next time, no need to clean up their own act, sure the other guys are worse…. *eyeroll*

        – – –

        With regard to you bringing up scumbags in the Republican party. I know those persons are scumbags, everyone does.

        Plse stop throwing that stuff in as a response to the regressive Leftist bullcrap I try to ridicule, it does nothing to address the regressives, and even excuses them.

        And it makes you look like you are defending them, even defending Bill Clinton and his sexual activities, and excusing Hillary’s defence of Bill, and her attempts to discredit his accusers. You defend that, or you at least consider it not worth commenting on.
        That’s what it looks like Nigel when you throw in stories about scumbags in the Republican side as a response to stories of the Left.
        I’ve never promoted anyone on the Republican side, or the Democrats. But anyone on here wouldn’t know that with all the constant accusations from you, your preferred regressive tactic.

        Look at the Left, look properly at it…. before the Left destroys itself. And before it makes even more room for the really scary feckers on the far right. Chomsky has said this, and he said it years ago.

        Reply
        1. LW

          So you’ve now done a complete 180 on the original point of your screed? You started off complaining that the dreaded left think people not condemning things means they support it, and here you are claiming Nigel defends Hilary on Bill because… he doesn’t comment on it. You are beyond parody.

          Reply
        2. Nigel

          ‘Plse do point out all the wrong doings of republicans. It should be done’
          Don’t really require your permission but: Wohoo!
          https://youtu.be/6pYI9t-I6qo
          Thing is, I haven’t even defended the Guardian piece you linked to, let alone Bill freakin’ Clinton or any Democrats at all. A possible serial rapist is president of the USA. Right now. Doing horrible things right now which could affect us all. Pointing this out isn’t any form of defending Democrats or the left or either Clinton. It is talking about current events. While you’re using a stupid editorial to accuse ‘the left’ of destroying itself, the right is well set on the path to destroying everything.

          Reply
          1. Nigel

            Thus a whole class of people – centrists? – who get outraged by a Guardian editorial but give Trump a pass. THAT’S how you get Trump.

          2. realPolithicks

            No Clampers, you get it through regressive morons like you who vote for him and people like him.

          3. realPolithicks

            They’re reasonable assumptions to make based on the BS you post on here on a regular basis. Its the same crap I see from the wingnuts over here in the states, the only difference with you is that when challenged you always try to deflect it. Embrace it Clampers, you are who you are.

          4. Warden of the Snort

            I didn’t see Nigel making any such assertion, I can’t speak for RealPolithicks, I only see his posts here infrequently.

            It would be better maybe if you read what people are saying and respond to that rather than making up in your own mind what you think people are saying e.g. “regressive left blah blah” about an irrelevant article about some dumb musician’s business model. Like RealPolithicks rightly said, an average person of reasonable intellect reads that article, and thinks “oh look there’s someone who’s having a go at Taylor Swift, probably some ugly girl who hadn’t a date last few months”, and thinks no more of it. A “wingnut” as I think he correctly describes you, reads that article and incorrectly sees it as part of an avalanche of some vast middle class proletarian conspiracy to remake the world in a place where white people are “marginalised” and wheelchair accessible or gender neutral bathrooms in schools represent some putative social engineering coup attempt. You seem like you have potential to be a reasonable guy, my advice would be to the enter the world of consuming illegal narcotics, preferably class A

          5. Nigel

            It was Trump’s rdiculous campaign that gave us the Trump presidency, aided by useful idiots who thought monstering his opponent using his lies wasn’t doing his work for him. That and a media who seemed to think her emails were as important as the Republicans claimed.

          6. Nigel

            ‘How many times Nigel refuses to accept the right-wing spin placing the responsibility for the right electing someone, eg, under multiple accusations of sexual assault as president on his opponent rather than on the people who nominated him and elected him and the people who spent the entire election attacking his opponent.’

            It’s weird when when the right is trying to BLAME the left for that right’s victory. Even the right doesn’t want to take actual credit for Trump.

    5. realPolithicks

      “Sad for the narrow petty minds of leftists”

      Clampers, you using the phrase “narrow petty minds” in relation to others made me laugh out loud, your lack of self awareness is awe inspiring.

      Reply
        1. Clampers Outside!

          Nah, when you have adblockers on you get a load of crap thrown at you when you visit the sites you have it turned off for. Why? because the site, and your browser, don’t have enough info (cookies to read) about you, which is why you get ads with little targeting parameters beyond male/female, and not even that sometimes.
          I do that stuff, digital advertising, for a living like :)

          Reply
          1. Warden of the Snort

            I hate being targeted because a computer thinks I am male
            I’m gender fluid and your digital advertising offends and discriminates against me

          2. Clampers Outside!

            Stay on Feckbook and allow their trackers to follow you, they have over 70 genders to choose from… although not sure if they are available to choose in Ireland.

            Hope that helps :)

          3. Warden of the Snort

            Why? What’s funny about it? Who are you to say whether or how Facebook users should self-identify in terms of their gender? Please explain what you mean.

          4. Noone

            What is science? Gender labels?
            No, just ways of classifying people.
            Now we have more ways. Try to keep up.

        2. Nigel

          I’ve been getting ads for law school, Islamic dating and road haulage which suggests I’m interested in a Muslim JCB with a law degree.

          Reply
      1. Warden of the Snort

        The councillor was one of just two who voted against the motion, suggesting that the red flag of Marxism and socialism should be flown instead

        – Poor Clampers. Have a lie down you clown.

        Reply
        1. Clampers Outside!

          “At a meeting of the council, Solidarity-People Before Profit’s Matthew Waine opposed a motion proposed by Sinn Fein’s Daire Ni Laoi to hoist the national flag at the council’s HQ in Swords.”

          The Councillors voted in favour to fly the Irish flag.

          The two numpties wanted to fly a Marxist flag and other flags…. because feelings…. or as he said, some might be “offended” by it… FFS.

          Maybe you should re-read the piece.

          Reply
          1. Warden of the Snort

            Maybe you should acquire the comprehension skills of something other than a six year old and hopefully place your remarks in a more considered context?

            The point I’m making is that rather than representing some kind of overthrow by radical leftists, who you would have us believe are teeming like a horde of rats carrying bubonic plague into our frail, vulnerable body politic, what your own article actually suggests is that two lads who are simply, cleverly acting the goat , voted against putting up the Irish flag, in the safe knowledge that somewhere some poor gobdaw on the internet would put it up on twitter and give the pair of them i.e. two nobodies that no-one has ever previously heard of, some unprecedented, unwarranted and thoroughly undeserved public and media attention. Hint: that gobdaw is you.

          2. Clampers Outside!

            “you would have us believe are teeming like a horde of rats carrying bubonic plague”

            That’d be your reaction to what I wrote you are discussing, not what I wrote.

            – – –

            “acting the goat” Really? You know this motivation as fgact now, eh? I say again, reeeealy?

            OK.

            And an ol’ ad hominem at the end. I think that’s your third today.

            Fair play to you, it’s like you’re Nigel’s prodigy :)

          3. Warden of the Snort

            It’s hardly an ad hominem to point out that your reasoning is bereft and absent.

            But I guess this kind of defensiveness is par for the course with alt right broflakes

          4. Warden of the Snort

            Ha you’re VERY sensitive aren’t you?

            Wait – wasn’t that the point of your screeds?

            That some people just get “outraged” so EASILY today?

            Yours, Confused in Carlown

  6. Charger Salmons

    Can I just say the person who shouted ” Get in the hole ” as Sexton’s first penalty sailed between the posts deserves a good kicking.
    That is all.

    Reply
  7. mildred st. meadowlark

    Did you lot spend your entire day engaged in deadly warfare with an avatar?

    Because that’s what it looks like.

    (Warden, my dear, I expected better of you. Tut tut)

    Reply
    1. Warden of the Snort

      fair point Mildred but I consider it a public duty to remind the lad of the error of his ways
      I realise in hindsight I might as well be talking to a cat

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *