Caesar beware the Ides of March

Okay today is the Ides of March: the anniversary of the murder of Julius Caesar. I think that it is long enough ago to avoid whataboutery. My question for the assembled intellects of slugger is who is most likely to have their political career assassinated in the near future?

Update: I am clearly not thinking that straight today (I have the cold). With the Julian calender being different to the Gregorian; will we have to wait until 28th March?

  • perci

    Not political, but Eddie O’Sullivan ought to be for the chop
    should Ireland fail to perform at Twickenham today!

  • Twinbrook

    Baby doc, Durkan, Cat,

  • Inspector Cleauso

    Turgon,

    You should nip over to the DUP website for Robinsons latest speech.

    Hopefully communicating this message to the Unionist electorate loud and clear will be the beginning of the end of Allister’s political career.

  • “Latin: Idus Martiae”

    Is Martius McGuinneus safe?

  • URQUHART

    Ruane is toast

  • fair_deal

    IC

    “will be the beginning of the end of Allister’s political career.”

    Why is PR repeating what has been said numerous times before going to make any difference? The media strategy against TUV aka Jim Allister didn’t just fail because of the media circus around the Paisley’s, it failed because it isn’t a particularly effective line of attack.

  • Rory

    Were Barak Obama to win the Democratic nomination he would swiftly be chopped into pieces and fed to a shoal of piranha (metaphorically speaking, of course) in order to assure a Republican victory. Only as second-string on Hillary Clinton’s ticket will he avoid such cruel descent to oblivion. Of your kindness, I beseech you, pray that the boy does not win the nomination.

    In the UK, the leader of the Liberal democrats, Chris Who? will also fall. But that is in the nature of the role so no surprise there.

    I do not expect that after the much anticipated retirement of Ian Paisley there will be any significant falls from any of the 4 major parties and that means that I do not share in the gleeful speculation surrounding Catriona Ruane.

  • Crataegus

    Baby Doc has already received a fatal wound, his career will be more like that of Cesare Borgia after the death of his father the pope than it will be to that of Julius.

    It has to be Ruane. The support from within SF is definitely weakening.

    What is more interesting is next year. We may well see some interesting play in Unionist ranks. Just how secure will the next leader of the DUP be? When the new anointed is crowned emperor, and with the Doc gone, will all the personal ambitions disappear?

    Cesare Borgia and Julius Caesar were capable individuals, who if they had lived, would probably have had an impact on the flow of history. Our local victims will disappear without a blip.

  • Crataegus

    Rory

    Agree with you about Obama he is being groomed for a fall.

  • Constable Cleauso (recently demoted), here it is:

    JIM ALLISTER, THE FACTS – PETER ROBINSON

    I wonder if Peter has included all of the ‘facts’. He’s up against a QC – and I suspect we won’t have long to wait for a reply.

    “If Direct Rule had become the vehicle of Joint Authority in 1985 I need not overstate the worsening of the situation by 1998 when additional measures were put in place to strengthen Dublin’s role and authority under the Belfast Agreement.”

    I supplied Peter with a reference to the Common Chapter of Ireland 2000-2006. It details some changes that were made by Mowlam post-Agreement. I wonder if Peter, as DRD minister, took any steps to ‘undo’ any items that were within his jurisdiction – or, perhaps, his focus was on displacing Trimble via the musical ministerial chairs escapade.

    “Shaping Our Future – 2025”, prepared under the watchful eyes of Robinson and Campbell, makes no mention of East-West infrastructure links being under the direction of the North South Ministerial Council [see Ireland 2000-2006]. Perhaps they didn’t read my reference or weren’t fully briefed by their officials.

    “So, when the government was in this present process announcing that in the absence of devolution it would add a further level to the Joint Authority nature of Direct Rule we had to evaluate whether it was better to be part of a devolution settlement in which we had controls and the ability to influence direction or opt to be spectators on the sideline while London and Dublin determined the pace and direction of change and while they “in partnership” dictated the policies and outcomes on all those matters that would impact on the future of our people.”

    Why is Robinson using Trimblespeak? After demonising Trimble, he will probably soon have the ‘privilege’ of sharing an office with Martin McGuinness – and Gerry Kelly – and, perhaps, Jeffrey Donaldson.

    “While I was part of the wider DUP delegation at St Andrews I was carefully excluded from all negotiating meetings. Now, I better understand why!” Allister

    Perhaps Robinson should have include this ‘fact’ for sake of completeness.

  • fair_deal, have you any thoughts on the consequences of a ‘media circus’ for the leadership intentions of Peter Robinson? I presume any links that he might have with property developers will be subjected to the same scrutiny as those of his colleague, Ian Paisley jnr.

  • fair_deal

    Nevin

    Who knows what will happen?

  • Crataegus

    Nevin

    Interesting point the leadership contest could get dirty.

    The links with property developers will eventually sink a few careers here. If anyone has a mind to dig there is ‘allegedly’ a fair bit to uncover. This is a web that could compromise others, because when all is said and done politicians may have influence, but who then endorses the approvals?

    Sooner it surfaces and is properly addresses the better for us all, including most politicians and developers many of whom may be wrongly implicated or are sullied by general association.

  • BfB

    B.O.
    It’s not racism if it’s the truth….
    Whitey has nothing to do with these race baiting, thieves.

  • fair_deal, McAllister’s future within the DUP may now be rather less secure following the departure of the Paisleys from the DUP leadership.

    I suspect that the ‘media circus’, having tasted Paisley family blood, will use the FoI and other channels to explore the Robinson ‘dynasty’.

    It would appear that some of those in lesser party roles who’ve been ‘used and abused’ by the DUP leadership over the years have finally plucked up the courage to tell their stories to the media.

  • Crataegus, politicians have their uses so far as property developers are concerned but how long will they have their ‘protection’ whenever and wherever a spotlight is shone.

    Let’s take another look at the DUP offices in Ballymena.

    Paisley says the changeover from Sweeney to Curry took place “simultaneously” with the signing of the loan documents from the Bank of Ireland.”

    The CR documents show that they were lodged with CR on 21 February 2008, around the time that the story broke. The change of directorship is not 31 July 2007, the date of the mortgage, but is claimed to be 24 October 2007.

    Does the October date have any validity? It certainly lands Junior in the soup. Directors are obliged to notify changes to CR within two weeks of said change and that apparently didn’t happen.

    This would seem to be a case for Nigel Dodds, the DETI minister associated with CR. And Mark Durkan chairs the DETI committee. Simon Hamilton is also a member of the committee so we’re bound to see a press release on the DUP website – very, very, very soon!!

  • As forecast, the reply has been delivered speedily:

    Allister answers Robinson

    “As for ‘Direct Rule’, I’d gladly prefer democratic devolution.”

    Jim Allister’s difficulty is that this wasn’t, isn’t and probably won’t be on offer from the two Governments.

  • Inspector Cleauso

    The Robinson speech (which he is repeating on the Association circuit from what I gather) is a coherent and intelligent rebuttal to Allister and the lies he is spouting. Why? Because it is the truth.

    However this message needs to be taken beyond the party faithful when filled with turkey and ham and communicated to the wider electorate, over and over again. Unless you have a better strategy Fairdeal?

  • jadedobserver

    Are people like Cleauso, T. Ruth, peaceandjustice, etc. actually sincere in their posts, or are they known trolls?

  • Steve

    the question is who will give the Mark Anthony speech for Caesar

    oops I mean Paisley

  • fair_deal

    IC

    I never questioned its accuracy. It is not only Robinson who is delivering it around associations, I heard an MLA deliver a similar speech.

    However, read the DUP press statements for the last year, this has all been said before, repeatedly. It is not a new message. All of these were wheeled out during the Dromore by-election and it didn’t convince 40% of the DUP voters.

    The Paisleys were not the only post-St Andrew problem the DUP had.

    I ask again “Why is PR repeating what has been said numerous times before going to make any difference?”

  • Bigger Picture

    Fair Deal

    I agree that the Paisley’s were not the only cause of Dromore but rather a sympton of a larger DUP problem of communicating were they are going effectively. It doesn’t make what PR said wrong either but it isn’t the right strategy because Allister was able to bat right back with the usual. PR needs to take a lesson from this week, in a week that the DUP stopped P&J;, ended the maze stadium, confronted SF on symbols and made Ruane back down over the transfer system, Jim Allister had very little he could shout about. Keep doing that and the line is simply, We are delivering!!

  • “The Paisleys were not the only post-St Andrew problem the DUP had.”

    Stop being such a tease, fair-deal!!

    “I never questioned its accuracy.”

    Why not? Do you believe it to be accurate?

  • “in a week that the DUP stopped P&J;”

    Leaving it where? Ah yes, in the hands of those who are, allegedly, driving the all-island agenda.

  • fair_deal

    Nevin/BP

    “larger DUP problem of communicating were they are going effectively” “Stop being such a tease, fair-deal!!”

    I am working on a blog about the DUP’s communication issues (probably complete it over Easter). I’d welcome your comments when I finish it.

    Plus Nevin I outlined a number of issues besides the Paisley’s in my Dromore analysis.

    Nevin

    AFAIK yes. No policies – haven’t seen much out of TUV in that front only the little leaflet they produced. Apart from the by-election candidate who has appeared on the media for the TUV? JA. Did the Euro manifesto include two pages on devolution now? yes it did. Does the photo mentioned exist? yes.

  • You might like to comment on this assertion, fair_deal:

    “But we will not run from the field of battle and we will resist the republican agenda.

    We are committed to working to improve the devolved arrangements to allow us to deliver more effectively for the people of Northern Ireland. Unionists can work from a position of strength within the institutions to make things better rather than shout impotently from the sidelines.”

    Wasn’t there some shouting from the sidelines in 1997/8? Hadn’t the DUP ‘run from the field of battle’ in the lead up to the 1998 Agreement?

    El Blogador has some nice photos of the DUP man who paid his fine rather than serve time for another ‘battle’.

    Perhaps there’s some merit in leaving policies for another day. He might be ‘forced’ into a flip-flop like the leadership of the UUP and, later, the DUP.

  • Harry Flashman

    I keep hearing people say how they fear that if Barack Obama is elected he will be assassinated by some presumably right wing white fascist type, why do they believe that? In the history of US presidential assassinations the assassins have always been radicals from the left.

    The great Republican president Lincoln was murdered by a radical secessionist of the sort that formed the backbone of the Democratic party for over a century.

    President McKinley was assassinated by left wing anarchists.

    President Kennedy, one of the most anti-Communist presidents of the post war period was assassinated by a Moscow trained Communist sniper (no I don’t believe the theories that it was the Mob, the Cubans, the Freemasons, the CIA or Opus Dei).

    His brother Robert Kennedy was assassinated by a radical Jordanian.

    Presidents Ford, Nixon and Reagan all survived assassination attempts by nutters none of whom could conceivably be described as “right wing”.

    As far as I can see it’s McCain who needs to watch himself.

  • latcheeco

    Flash.
    Please don’t say orthat some sluggerites won’t sleep tonight.Their depending on Barak’s assasination to save western civilization:)

  • fair_deal

    Nevin

    No they didn’t run from the field in 97/98. They kept their electoral promise plus all of us having to wait for an entire decade for SF to deliver on the democratic basics that the DUP and UKUP wanted back then. Whether staying would have made a difference or not is virtual history.

    I don’t fall for the Trimble bleating, that there leaving weakening Unionism’s hand. IMO this actually inflated the UUP’s importance in the process without them there was no deal.

    Plus the new checks and balances in St Andrew’s make this form of devolution much more workable than the dog’s breakfast previously.

  • “No they didn’t run from the field in 97/98. They kept their electoral promise”

    Of course, they ran from the field, fair_deal. It’s the sort of gutless blustering approach that we’ve come to expect from the DUP leadership over the years. Paisley has already confessed that he was ‘forced’ into a deal; I take it he got more or less the same offer as Trimble if no deal was forthcoming. Unionists were left outside the tent in 1985 and IMO it’s wishful thinking to imagine it wouldn’t happen again.

    I’ve already pointed out that when the DUP ministers were previously in power they played musical chairs rather than undoing the additions that Mowlam had made to the 1998 Agreement. You’ll find Gregory Campbell’s name on the “Shaping Our Future” document and Peter Robinson’s in its formulation.

    The image of a dog’s breakfast is an apt metaphor for the alleged deals done by the Chuckle Brothers in advance of Executive meetings. And then there was the Foster-Dodds deal done apparently in breach of the ministerial code. Perhaps they were just carrying out the orders of the DUP high command and it was left to a minor SFer to do the bleating. Opposition to the deal seemingly came mainly from outside Stormont.

    Stories emanating from the DUP family, past and present, don’t paint a picture of a democratic organisation. Those who’ve fallen foul of the leadership in the past have been unceremoniously bundled out; McAllister of Moyle District Council has been the exception yet he’s the one found guilty of fraud. I’m led to believe that things could get even worse under a new leadership.

  • Dave

    Turgon your such a joker!
    “My question for the assembled intellects of slugger”
    I take that it was a Joke?

  • Frustrated Democrat

    Maybe when the media are at it they should have a closer look at Peter Robinson’s past, he appears to have an agressive and bad tempered history.

    Is he fit to be First Minister?

    How will he deal with ‘his deputy’ Martin who isn’t a benign TV interviewer?

    Fisticuffs on the front lawn at Stormont?

    I await to see it with interest!

  • Merrie

    >> Agree with you about Obama he is being groomed for a fall

    Hope this is not just wishful thinking…

    With IKP’s political and religious career(s) ending not with a bang but a whimper (heh) and with many of his former supporters thinking he is a Lundy, I wonder if he may still surprise us – converting to Catholicism on his deathbed, perhaps????

    I enjoyed the sweet sarcasm of Gerry Adams’s comments on IKP.

  • fair_deal

    Nevin

    “It’s the sort of gutless blustering approach that we’ve come to expect from the DUP leadership over the years.”

    The DUP and UKUP (and the UUP) said if SF was allowed into talks without decommissioning they would leave the talks. It was an attempt to try and keep the government to its commitments.

    The rest of the post is somehwat all over the place jumping from one unrelated issue to another. You don’t like the DUP I get it.