Opposition mounting

The News Letter report this morning that 6 Ballymena DUP Councillors will refuse to canvass for their party at this election. They also claim that Robert McCartney has contacted them to announce that he plans to have anti Agreement candidates in 14 to 16 Constituencies, although in 6 he will be the candidate himself.

UPDATE: Apparently the persons in question number seven not six, and were “got at”. Got at is an interesting phrase to use; it seems to imply that they couldn’t form opinions of their own. Also there are clear implications in this report that the DUP manifesto will reject St Andrews or major elements of it, yet at the same time ignores the issue at hand:

Mr Paisley said it was a pity the seven did not know what was in his party manifesto, especially on the issue of sanctions against Sinn Fein.

Sanctions against SF. Quote from Davy Tweed in today’s News Letter “I’m totally opposed to Sinn Fein/IRA in government and will not campaign for anyone proposing it”. He doesn’t want safeguards for bad behaviour, he wants SF excluded from the Executive completely.

So we wait for the DUP manifesto still with the same question – are they going to put Martin McGuinness in the DFM’s office? Still not convinced that we’ll get an answer.

  • unionist

    Hahahaha – now the DUP are finding out whats it like to take the progressive stance….

    slap it up them…

  • although in 6 he will be the candidate himself.

    The ego has landed.

  • Observer

    It doesn’t do unionism any favours though ‘unionist’! Does it?

    This is what SF/IRA want and hope for. They have steadied their ship, Unionists need to steady theirs.

  • Observer

    Ur not a candidate urself Sammy then?

    What do ur devisive comments intend to do for the Unionist population?

  • Dee

    Question: How does Bob ensure that there are UKUP candidates in every constituency?

    Answer: Put himself up!

    I dont think that Bobs campaign is taking off at all, those supporting him are either associated with paramilitaries or are Free P nutters! I doubt whether King Bob would feel at ease with either group – not would he want them under a UKUP banner!

  • Token Dissent

    A major development. It is not a surprise that Mr Gillespie has broken ranks, he is an evangelical (politically to the right of the evangelicals!) who was never going to support the Agreement. He has a big personal powerbase.

    There is a strong possibility that local solicitor Lyle Cubbit will stand as an independent anti-agreement candidate. Cubbitt and Gillespie are veterans who go all the way back to the formation of Paisley’s Protestant Unionist Party and the campaigns against Terence O’Neill.

    It has to be a huge personal blow for Paisley, as well as a politically dangerous one for the DUPers.

    As for Bob…he is going to stand in 6 himself??? That is truly pathetic.

  • AvalonSunset

    Bob standing in six ….. he could atand in them all, accumulate his vote and still not get elected!

  • Observer

    Token Dissent,

    It demonstrates the intention of the move.

    It is quite simply a vote in opposition. Obviously every candidate seeks election with the intention of taking your seat (unless stated otherwise – like RSF or SF themselves at Westminster).

    I wonder how he’ll choose which one if he has a choice …?

    Anyway, this is being done on the basis by which they’ll not win, they don’t expect too. It is on the same basis as these ‘independent’ Republican candidates. The purpose is to demonstrate discontent and I suspect many Unionists will give their no. ‘1’ preference to McCartney et al. Then transfer to other Unionists.

    I wonder where McCartney is standing though? Apart from North Down obv. I suspect he’ll put his name forward in minority Unionist constituencies with the exception of perhaps South Belfast and poss Lagan Valley; unless he has got dissents there? His colleagues may stand in ‘winnable’ seats: East Antrim, North Antrim, East Londonderry. I await the details in anticipation.

    This move however might be enough to knock the DUP off course.

    However what can McCartney and ‘Voice for Democracy’ really offer the Unionist population of NI?

  • Hope you’ll contribute to the McNarry thread, Michael.

  • Ur not a candidate urself Sammy then?

    No, but I have been at various times and places in the past. But never for six constituencies at once! What a muppet!

    What do ur devisive comments intend to do for the Unionist population?

    Don’t know and don’t care, but if pressed, would say “make them realise what an eejit Bob is”.

    Like you, I suspect he will be standing in constituencies where he has no prospect of winning to maximise the vote. However, he will still be a laughing stock, especially given that he’s already known for having a vaulting ego.

    I’ve always thought Cubitt had real prospects in North Antrim, however, and if Gillespie backs him openly things become very interesting there; Gillespie has taken big votes in council elections in recent years. A few more credible campaigns with credible candidates like that and Big Ian might be sweating a little. However, Bob’s move makes a bit of a laughing stock of the whole Unionist anti campaign.

    With RSF pursuing its ‘Ourselves Alone’ strategy as well, it’s nice to see the dissidents harming their own election chances on either side of the fence.

  • Inspector Clouseau

    Some of the councilors in question have a persoanl power base, whilst others only got votes because they were wearing a DUP rosette.

    Dr Paisley or Ian Junior don’t seem to be too disconcerted by this opposition.

  • Observer

    “With RSF pursuing its ‘Ourselves Alone’ strategy as well, it’s nice to see the dissidents harming their own election chances on either side of the fence. ”

    True Sammy, thanks.

    I would also agree with you on Bob.

  • darth rumsfeld

    ..and yet more proof of the sectarian attitudes of Northern Ireland footer fans. On Tuesday I’m sure I heard the crowd chanting “Roy…GILLESPIE!!”.
    I’ll get me sash

  • youngpretender

    “Bob standing in six ….. he could atand in them all, accumulate his vote and still not get elected!”

    but, er, he already did get elected in 2003 and many times before that banging on the line that the DUP used to be so fond of.

    Odds are he will be re elected in North Down at least, but all depends on how much more the DUP intend to screw up doesn’t it….what else will this “strong leadership of unionism” present us with yet?!?!

  • Carnlough

    I suspect the 6 to feature such bigoted dinosaurs like roy gillespie,robin stirling and sam gaston.Long serving councillors no doubt but imagine the progress which could be made without them

  • Greenflag

    The ego has landed.

    Posted by Sammy Morse

    LOL 🙂 12 out of 10 for that one SM

    Landed indeed but unfortunately not on the moon !

  • interested

    The real story here is not the list of ‘quality’ candidates that Bob has dragged together because of their mutual personal loathing for the DUP, but the massively bigger list of people whom Bob contacted personally begging them to stand only to be politely, or in many cases, not politely told where to stick his offer.

    Lets remember who the last person to run in multiple constituencies was:

    Anwer: Rainbow George!

    The trouble is that George’s vote may look massive when compared to Rainbow Bob after the 7th March.

  • Crataegus

    How can you stand in 6 Constituencies?

    What happens if you are elected in more than 1 constituency? Do you get double pay, 2 seats in the chamber and two votes?

    Why not carry it a stage further and stand twice in the same constituency, so people can vote for you twice!

  • This speaks volumes for the strains in the DUP – 6 Councillors in the Ballymena heartland won’t even canvass for their party and yet solidarity is maintained. LOL!

    The DUP are the new UUP, so maybe Bob can be the new DUP?

    Fun and games – but this is what happens when the stench of sell-outs fills the air.

  • interested

    “I’ve always thought Cubitt had real prospects in North Antrim, however, and if Gillespie backs him…….Gillespie has taken big votes in council elections in recent years. A few more credible campaigns with credible candidates like that and Big Ian might be sweating a little.

    Funny how all these Councillors think that every vote they get is a vote for them personally and of course nothing to do with the Party banner they are running under. Roy Gillespie might have a hundred or two people (at most) who vote for him because of his ‘personality’ but lets not get carried away. He’s hardly irreplacable is he.

    Lets also not forget that one of the Councillors now claiming to speak for the people of Ballymena and Ulster wasn’t even elected in the first place. He was only co-opeted about 6 months ago. Not sure at what level he puts his personal vote at.

    “However, Bob’s move makes a bit of a laughing stock of the whole Unionist anti campaign.”

    Now that is true. I hope that Bob spends equal time in all of the constituencies in which he is running. He isn’t just a token candidate is he? Just how small would his vote be if it was divided by 6 in North Down?

  • McGrath

    With regard to normalisation of the NI society, Unionists argue the pace has been slow and various aspects of the new republican policy remain to be proven, a fair argument. Proof and rate of progress arguments aside, it would be hard for unionists to argue that republicans are not heading in the right direction and that some kind of progress is being made.

    As impartial as one can be in NI my observation is, what ever progress SF/republicanism has made, the DUP has stood their ground. They have conceded nothing, have adopted a sensible wait and see policy, yet many DUP party members are unhappy, various members are defecting, or in this instance refusing to canvass for their party.

    There has been no change in DUP policy recently, but at even the suggestion that SF will sign up for policing, there has been an mini exodus from the DUP. Why? What would it take to make these people happy?

  • What happens if you are elected in more than 1 constituency? Do you get double pay, 2 seats in the chamber and two votes?

    No, you have to take one seat and stand down in the others. If you don’t have an adequate substitutes list a by-election results. It wasn’t that unusual in the early part of the century.

    Funny how all these Councillors think that every vote they get is a vote for them personally and of course nothing to do with the Party banner they are running under.

    Of course that’s the case but remember there are two factors helping Gillespie. Firstly, he’s been a councillor for quite a long time. Secondly, there’s clear political space for him to move into and take voters with him (i.e. opposing a DUP Sinn Féin deal). This isn’t the same as someone not being reselected and taking the hump and standing as “Independent DUP”.

    there has been an mini exodus from the DUP. Why? What would it take to make these people happy?

    I was going to say turning the clock back to 1965, but O’Neill was in charge then. Probably turning the clock back to 1955 would be a good start for them. Then they’d like to see:

    * Britain severing diplomatic relations with the Vatican City;
    * The Union Jack, Ulster Flag and weird blue and red Independent Ulster flag flying over the Kennedy Way roundabout;
    * Martin McGuinness convert to Free Presbyterianism;
    * Catholics to spontaneously drown themselves, lemming-style, in Lough Neagh.

  • Ca Va

    Is Cedric Wilson standing as an Independant rather than a UKUP?

  • Percival

    Ca Va

    Yes – he fell out with Bob, just like he falls out with everyone he ever works with.

  • Crataegus

    Also there are clear implications in this report that the DUP manifesto will reject St Andrews or major elements of it,

    What a bunch of comedians. I thought this was the agreement forged in heat of battle by the diplomatic skills of the DUP. The agreement that was so much superior to all that went before and now the y have read what they negotiated they are going to reject it?*!!?** Bring on the next act.

  • Token Dissent

    Nice attempts by DUPer friendly bloggers to downplay the Ballymena dissent, but frankly it doesn’t wash. It is an unfortunate reality that the views of the not so magnificent seven are representative of their electorate. The concern on the ground isn’t a manufactured media creation – it is real.

    The fact is that a large section of the base of the party doesn’t want to share power with nationalists, never mind the Shinners. The fact that these people represent the leading party in Northern Ireland highlights just how clueless unionism is at the minute.

  • Greenflag

    McGrath,

    ‘What would it take to make these people happy? ‘

    If SF were somehow wiped off the earth and the Irish Republic along with them 🙁

    Seriously these people were born complaining, they live whining and are destined to die disappointed. Compared to these gobshites even the American Know Nothings and KKK look like intellectuals of the first rank.

    Ireland can do without these inbred orang utangs but they do help to make the case for Repartition:) .

  • marty (not ingram)

    Ireland can do without these inbred orang utangs but they do help to make the case for Repartition:)

    No, it makes the case for a UI in which their thoughts aren’t as important :O)

  • Greenflag,

    Referring to those whose views you disagree with as ” inbred orang utangs” tells us plenty about you. I trust the moderator leaves your bigoted comment up for all to see.

    Slugger’s nationalist readers need to understand that any sensible unionist is opposed to power-sharing. With terrorists. Get it?

  • Yeah David, ‘cos you clearly speak for ‘sensible unionists’…

  • Token Dissent

    Greenflag,

    In the past I have enjoyed many of your musings but frankly you have revealed yourself to be nothing but a bigot. What a shame.

    While I can disagree with the councillors’ actions and beliefs I can acknowledge that they at the very least deserve respect.

    You are a great example of a republican reaching out to unionists…

  • El Matador,

    High level of debate from you, I see.

  • lib2016

    For some years I’ve been a lone voice on this board trying to explain that unionists should not be looking at the SDLP and the ‘moderates’ if they expect their views to be treated with respect.

    The present leadership of Sinn Fein is as good as it’s going to get…..and probably the same could be said for the present leadership at Westminster.

  • Overhere

    Aparently the Doc says his members who refuse to campaign were “got at” http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6347527.stm

    LOL

    BTW remember kids DONT FEED THE TROLLS

  • Token Dissent

    David,

    Do you accept that a sustainable government requires the support of the majority of both communities?

    The horrible reality is that the majority of nationalists are voting for Sinn Fein. So for this country to be administrated unionists have to engage with these people. The alternative is Direct Rule, decay, and slow British dis-engagement. Or do you have a magic secret plan?

  • Greenflag

    DV,

    ‘Slugger’s nationalist readers need to understand that any sensible unionist is opposed to power-sharing.’

    Ah they do – they do – indeed . Shure I’m opposed to this power sharing gobshittery meself . I simply can’t understand why any irish nationalist or republican in NI would even want to share power in a powerless Assembly ? and I’d nearly forgotten that it’s only the nonsensical unionists that want power sharing .So be honest now do ye think that yer Ayatollah will prove to be sensible or non sensible ? After 40 years of ranting the Arch NI political primate shows no sign yet of coming down from the trees to begin his evolution to sapiens status .

    Is your alternative to power sharing a return to Stormont majority rule 1969 style ? Now that would make sense and I’d personnally favour it AFTER an agreed repartition of the 6 counties of course . Ye see that way all the sensible and not so sensible orang utangs even the inbred ones will get to share the same cage . I hope yiz have enough fruit and nuts to share with each other and to be nice to any green neighbours and others that have to live with yiz 🙂

  • Greenflag,

    Sorry – you’re not worth debating with.

    Token Dissent,

    Thanks for the question. I fully understand your point but would ask you to explain why “this country needs to be governed” from Stormont?

    It does not. A Grand Committee at Westminster of NI MP’s could do the job just as well (or badly)Also do bear in mind that we don’t ALL seek to have politicians running our lives. Does being unionist/nationalist mean that we slavishly accept a loss of individual freedom and liberty so that “our” politicians can lord it up over us?

  • Greenflag

    TD,

    ‘In the past I have enjoyed many of your musings but frankly you have revealed yourself to be nothing but a bigot. What a shame.’

    Not guilty yer honour I’m only bigoted against certain unionists 🙂

    ‘While I can disagree with the councillors’ actions and beliefs I can acknowledge that they at the very least deserve respect’

    ??????

    I’d say your comment ‘clueless’ as below is much more insulting as you brand everybody within unionism with the same brush . My tongue in cheek barb was directed at a specific group of unionists .

    ‘The fact that these people represent the leading party in Northern Ireland highlights just how clueless unionism is at the minute

    ‘You are a great example of a republican reaching out to unionists… ‘

    Eh? Who’s reaching out to anybody ? I’m not reaching out to unionists -I’m reaching out beyond unionists and unionism . I’ve given up on unionism and unionist politicians long ago as well as this power sharing farce .

    I’d much rather see Irish nationalists and republicans within NI focus their energies instead on representation in the Dail and on moving to an agreed Repartition of NI with what is left of unionism.

    The 26 county Republic has left the NI Unionists way behind over the course of the past two decades . An enlarged Republic post Repartition can leave Unionists even further behind . It’s what they want obviously and I see no good reson to deny it to them . They have a right to their little corner of NE Ireland /Ulster and we should leave them to get on with it without having to worry forever and a day about being outbred by the Fenian Irish or outnumbered by the Catholic Irish , Poles , Filipinos , Portuguese etc etc etc etc.

    Believe me Ireland will be the better off without the unionist albatross around it’s neck .

    Now I know that this is not pc for our republican purists but we have to ask ourselves why should we today in 2007 be bound by the idealism of our 1798 or 1916 revolutionaries. The world has changed since then even if Unionism fails to recognise it !

  • Token Dissent

    David,

    I agree with the central premise of your argument that we are currently over-governed. This is ironic considering that the power that politicans have to govern with regard to job creation etc. is lower than ever.

    I don’t however understand where the link is between the resortation of Stormont and the loss of civil liberties. Are you referring to security measures, and ID cards?

    NI committee at Westminster? If Northern Ireland was a ‘normal’ region of the UK this would be a strong suggestion. However, the reality is that a large minority do not accept the legitimacy of the state. Therefore a more complex form of devolution and agreed legitimacy has had to be found.

    Unionists should be positive about the institutions, and have increased confidence about the future. Negativity falls into a republican trap.

    I would reverse the power-sharing question. I say that Sinn Fein have to prove that they want the thing to work. Many people believe that the Shinners want the process to continue as it is. After all if a successful executive is formed it proves that NI is workable.

    If unionists reject the Agreement the Shinners can paint the unionists as the bad guys. Let’s put then to the test!

  • Greenflag

    DV,

    ‘Greenflag,

    Sorry – you’re not worth debating with’

    I know DV shure it’s only the unvarnished truth I spake and it is regrettably hurtful to some I know .Every night I toss and turn and turn and toss over some of the bigoted remarks I make for ten seconds and then I fall fast asleep :). Good luck with your Grand Committee -You’ll need it but I’ll grant you that NI does not need to be governed from Stormont . It was a bad idea from the beginning in 1920 and the idea has’nt improved since to judge by the performance of the members/former members !

  • Token Dissent

    Good try Greenflag.

    My “clueless” comment referred to my opinion on the political agenda of the leadership of unionism. That in no way bares comparison with your description of them as: “inbred orang utangs”.

    The rest of your considered ‘analysis’ is so laughably ill-informed, offensive and plain silly it doesn’t merit consideration.

    Cheerio.

  • parcifal

    I’m a wee bit worried that this Grand Committee idea will need a Grand Wizard, and we’re back to the horrors of KKK politics.

  • Greenflag

    TD

    your actual quote

    ‘The fact is that a large section of the base of the party doesn’t want to share power with nationalists, never mind the Shinners. The fact that these people represent the leading party in Northern Ireland highlights just how clueless unionism is at the minute.

    Exhibit A -Large section of base of party
    Exhibit B- These people represent etc
    Exhibit C – Clueless Unionism

    In your own words TD . If I’m guilty as charged then we’ll hang together.
    Anyway no need to get your undies in a knot over a few orang utangs . One they don’t do knots -too complicated and two why do I bother my arse anyway when I could be worrying how we’ll manage without O’Driscoll against the French 🙂 Isaac Boss will be ok instead of Stringer

  • George

    Token dissent,
    “I would reverse the power-sharing question. I say that Sinn Fein have to prove that they want the thing to work. Many people believe that the Shinners want the process to continue as it is. After all if a successful executive is formed it proves that NI is workable. ”

    Tried to post on this but it disappeared.

    Sinn Féin don’t have to prove that they want the executive to work. They only have to prove that they agree with the principle of consent.

    Also, a successful executive proves nothing regarding the workability or not of Northern Ireland.

    It does prove that Sinn Féin and unionists have totally accepted the principle of consent.

    If unionism accepts the principle of consent, they accept the reality that they could end up out of the union.

    For that reason, I understand the dissenters in unionism.

    They have nothing to gain from going into a power-sharing agreement with parties that will work to end the union.

    There is nothing in this executive that is designed to copper-fasten the union. Sinn Féin are unreconstructed unificationists.

    The unionist dissenters look and see that their army is gone, their state paramilitaries are gone, their police is going, going gone.

    For them, they are virtually defenceless, less than 100,000 votes away from being ejected from the union.

    Impasse and stagnation is in their short to medium term interests.

    Especially, if the alternative is handing more political power to their enemies in return for some of their own.

  • June 76

    DV,

    I may disagree with your politics but I can’t fault your honesty when you say, “Slugger’s nationalist readers need to understand that any sensible unionist is opposed to power-sharing. (period – as in full stop)

  • Henry94

    The Grand Committee idea and the repartition idea are close to each other. If such a committee were formed and large areas of the north voted not to be represented repartition would become a fairly obvious solution.

  • McGrath

    Thanks for the question. I fully understand your point but would ask you to explain why “this country needs to be governed” from Stormont?

    It does not. A Grand Committee at Westminster of NI MP’s could do the job just as well (or badly)Also do bear in mind that we don’t ALL seek to have politicians running our lives. Does being unionist/nationalist mean that we slavishly accept a loss of individual freedom and liberty so that “our” politicians can lord it up over us?

    Posted by David Vance on Feb 09, 2007 @ 06:39 PM

    This grand committee at Westminster would still contain roughly the same proportion of elected NI MPs as the NI assembly of the type that you refuse to share power with. If SF can now endorse policing, do you think they would not take their seats in Westminster if participation in such a committee were to govern NI?

  • Sean

    Slugger’s nationalist readers need to understand that any sensible unionist is opposed to power-sharing. With terrorists. Get it?

    Posted by David Vance on Feb 09, 2007 @ 06:03 PM

    Ummm David that pretty much only leaves the alliance party

    so are you voting alliance?

  • Sean,

    Alliance? Oh – you mean the NIO Party? NOPE!!

    That said, votes have to be earned, so that kinda gives unionism a problem.

  • Billy

    David

    “Alliance? Oh – you mean the NIO Party?”

    Nice one – that’s the best (and most accurate) definition of the Alliance party that I’ve heard.

    I was wondering, as a former colleague, what you think of Robert McCartney’s plan to stand in up to 6 constituencies?

    I am by no means a supporter of Mr McCartney’s but (in media appearances) I have always found him to be very articulate and highly intelligent.

    Frankly, I think this 6 constituencies plan is doomed to failure and he will make himself an easy target for mockery.

  • Henry94

    Billy

    I think this 6 constituencies plan is doomed to failure and he will make himself an easy target for mockery.

    You mean as in Dolly the candidate? What happens by the way if he wins six seats? Could he resign from five and nominate alternates or does he get six votes in the Assembly?

    Given his previous experience he should give himself six resignation letters just in case.

  • BillyO

    Henry94

    I think that an earlier posting indicates that he would have to keep 1 and resign any others – frankly I don’t think that it will be a problem.

    I don’t know North Down too well so he may well get in there especially as Hermon isn’t standing.

    I notice he said that there were about 8 other individuals who will stand in other constituencies under the UKUP banner.

    In the unlikely event of Robert McCartney and at least 1 of the others getting elected, I wonder how long it will be before he falls out with them and goes back to being a one-man band.

    Going by past experience, his “party” will be down to a membership of one within 3 weeks.

  • Nice one – that’s the best (and most accurate) definition of the Alliance party that I’ve heard.

    It might have been accurate in about 1986. Since the mid-1990s, the NIO dream has been to get the Shinners into government with Paisley following the logic that no-one could do an Workers’ Council job on such a coalition.

    For the NIO, the dream has finally come true and we shall see how accurate their logic was.

  • Billy,

    Thanks for the comments.

    I don’t really know very much of Bob’s plans as portrayed by the media but I would prefer to wait and see who runs where and on what platform.

    Personally, I see the “None of the above” Party capturing a big slice of the unionist vote!!

  • slug

    David V: have you considered joining/standing for UKIP?

  • willis

    Dv

    “Personally, I see the “None of the above” Party capturing a big slice of the unionist vote!!”

    You are probably right, but what would that party do with its mandate?

  • Comrade Stalin

    High level of debate from you, I see.

    David, you don’t know the meaning of the word. A debate is a thing you run away from. If you had any balls you’d run for election yourself, but you’re probably too scared that you’d get your ass kicked again, like the last time you tried that. It’s a shame though – given that your principles are not exactly watertight (you rail about the BBC but then accept a paycheque from them in exchange for a few moderated musings) it would be interesting to see exactly what you would do if you were in Paisley’s position.

    Billy:

    Nice one – that’s the best (and most accurate) definition of the Alliance party that I’ve heard.

    If you think Alliance are an NIO mouthpiece then why does the government exclude them at every turn ?

  • Comrade Stalin

    On the subject of Bob’s intentions here, I think he is trying to upstage Paisley and capitalize on what he believes is a weak point.

    I think it’s almost impossible to guess accurately what way the unionist electorate are going to swing. On one hand, there will be people out there who will not believe that Paisley is setting them up for a sellout given his 50-year political pedigree. On the other hand, there will be people who will walk away, having voted DUP to stop powersharing under any circumstances. There is a parllel with Sinn Fein here, and the people who believed that Sinn Fein would never ever back the police. Like Sinn Fein, the DUP have never said they would never share power – indeed they made it clear that they were always a devolutionary party and they have openly called for powersharing without Sinn Fein.

    Looking back, I think unionism has always been mainly pro-devolution in one form or another. “Unionists” advocating other means such as tighter integration with the UK, or some form of independence, have historically never done well at the polls. If Bob succeeds in that area it will be a first.

    It would be helpful though if these people would just come out and say that they don’t want taigs in power.

  • Slug,

    Nope – but I increasingly see them as the only valid alternative to the Blair/Cameron socialist axis.

    Comrade,

    I have enough balls, to use your preferred parlance, to put my name to what I say. More than you, it seems.

    Since I do not take a party political line, why would I seek to gain a party political position? Also, you ask what I would do were I in Dr Paisley’s position. The answer is – stick to my sworn principles.

  • Comrade Stalin

    I have enough balls, to use your preferred parlance, to put my name to what I say. More than you, it seems.

    It’s a pity you don’t have much to say other than reading off a one-page script.

    Since I do not take a party political line, why would I seek to gain a party political position?

    A position you obviously arrived at, having reflected upon getting your ass soundly kicked at the polls.

    Also, you ask what I would do were I in Dr Paisley’s position. The answer is – stick to my sworn principles.

    Yeah, that’s what they all say. And then when they get into a position of actual power, it changes. Given the duplicity of your approach regarding your appearances on the BBC, where you carefully moderate the way you express yourself, I don’t think your sworn principles are likely to be particularly credible.

  • spade a spade

    How can the Paisley party still retain the ‘Democratic’ part of its name after this fiasco?
    Not enough that the ‘Doc’ has to make his underlings sign a resignation letter before being rubber-stamped as candidates now all dissenters are being driven from HIS party. The truth of the matter is big Ian wants to be crowned king of the north and if this means having Martin as his aide de camp that is a price he is willing to pay.Baby Ian would then be prince of the realm.
    Maybe if people had just had the sense tohand Ian the crown 40 years ago we would all be living happily ever after. Anyone voting for the ‘D’UP may as well rip up their ballot paper, as it is plainly obvious that it is not a vote for the demoratic process, just a vote for an egotist with royal ambition.

  • spade a spade,

    Fair points!

    Comrade,

    Next cheque I get from the BBC, I’ll think of you. LOL.

    My position re the elevating of terrorists into positions of power in the run-up to the GFA and my position now are unchanged. It’s a matter of public record, pal, and I suggest you compare what I have said to public positions taken by Dr Paisley, Mr Trimble’s or any of the worthies you troll for!

    Now, that’s enough time wasted on the likes of you.

  • Truth and Justice

    My question for David Vance what is the Unionist alternative not to share power, do you andvocate Joint authority the Governments Plan B

  • direct

    Comrade

    I think the BBC should be looking to terminate Vance’s contract and give you the position.

    Blogging is great in that it shows who’s up to it and not.

    Seriously , Chalk & Cheese, Chalk & Cheese ..

  • Brian Boru

    “Slugger’s nationalist readers need to understand that any sensible unionist is opposed to power-sharing. With terrorists. Get it?”

    What about former terrorists DV? Also there is no evidence that all of the SF MLAs have a history in the PIRA.

  • Truth and Justice,

    My alternative to sharing power with terrorists is to recognise that devolution is a poisoned chalice and it must be rejected. My preference is to establish a Grand NI Committee at Westminster -open to all NI MP’s who swear the oath of allegiance of course – and which can deal with all NI specific legislation. At a stroke we save the massive costs of the Assembly, we remove the endless bureaucracy that will cost us, and we ensure that NI is centrally linked to our UK Govt. My question to any Unionist is this; why object to a solution that ensures insurrectionists are kep out of Government. As a Unionist, I see no reason to cede ground to republicans and this solution ensures that.

    Direct,

    Thanks for the good wishes but I regret to inform you that I do not have ANY contract with the BBC. For some reason they come to me seeking my views.

  • Stiofán de Buit

    DV

    You realise, of course, that there is about as much chance of your ‘solution’ being put into practice as there is of Ian Paisley being the next Pope?

  • Truth and Justice

    David there is already a NI Grand Committee and it met for ther first time in Northern ireland, unfortunetly your idea is not bad the only problem is that the Government will never agree to it and as such your idea is worthless!

  • IJP

    Truth

    Now there I can agree with you.

    There is no point in Unionists (or anyone) pursuing things that the Government(s) aren’t going to agree to.

    Which makes me wonder why Messrs Vance, McCartney and co continue to insist upon doing so.

    Always remember, if you’re a Unionist, 97% of the population live outside Northern Ireland. Paisley and McCartney may think they’re important, but it’s what Blair and Hain think that counts – and that’s what Unionism is about.

  • IJP.

    You neatly encapsulate the futility of the NIO Party.

  • confused

    David
    I have some sympathy with your views but actually you have no more idea or chance of progressing them than Bob who promised to Turn the Tide in 1995 (still waiting Bob)
    Politics is the art of the possible to go off and bark at the moon might be self satisfying but thats all