Me and You and a Dog Named Boo

By AM Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Share Tweet Share Share Email

It is instinctive to say that the debate generated by Richard O’Rawe’s hunger strike narrative still continues. But it doesn’t. What has taken the place of the debate is a heavily one sided if deeply reasoned discourse that meets little in the way of serious opposition. The argument of force deployed against O’Rawe has been swept aside by the force of argument from him. A quick read of his book Afterlives – and that is what it is, a quick pulsating read – shows how well he has marshalled his defences, impenetrable echelon upon echelon. For long enough he defended in depth, ceding no ground and allowing his attackers to shake their fists without them ever landing a punch. Now he is on the move and at breakneck speed.

The tide has turned, gone out in fact, and we can all see who is naked. It is not O’Rawe. He is well covered by his blanket. For his critics there is nothing else to hide behind. Neither fig leaf nor flag. As he pursues with clinical efficiency those who had maligned, berated, derided and dismissed him as ‘the fool’ it is like watching a tank phalanx routing a regiment of donkeys. The braying means nothing. It neither intimidates nor inspires, merely invites contempt.

From the midst of the cacophony that often drowned the sound of reason one thing rarely heard was laughter. The charge and counter charge were too serious for lighter moments. Now that O’Rawe is so far in front and cannot be caught things have relaxed a bit. His flailing critics having run out of puff seem eager to demonstrate that they don’t even take themselves seriously any longer.

Yesterday I was told if I wanted a laugh I should visit the discussion about Afterlives being pursued on the Slugger O’Toole blog. These days I rarely get to visit Slugger despite its reputation as a blog without equal in terms of discussion of Irish political issues. But I was glad I found the time. Because in the midst of explaining where things were at in terms of interpreting the hunger strike one poster claimed that:

the protection of the peace process against embittered failed politicos such as McIntyre, O’Rawe and Twomey is an entirely different kettle of fish and a task well worth pursuing.

So this is what it has come down to – the peace process must be defended. That’s what O’Rawe is all about, wrecking the peace process, the dirty rotten scoundrel. He must be a Protestant. So he should be pursued and purged of anti-peace process thoughts. Catholics don’t have them.

There are many daft things that get written or said when people get a rush of blood to the head and for that reason I have never been one to take these things seriously. I remember arguing with my daughter when she was 7 and she shouted at me ‘you are a wee lesbian.’ I laughed so much tears came to my eyes. The comment on Slugger reminded me of that occasion but there is an excuse for a seven year old. I could barely resist chortling and chuckling upon discovering that once again I was an enemy of the peace process against which it must be defended. But why is it always defended by morons on a moony mission? Surely if I was such a threat an intelligent defence would be mounted with a fine tipped pen rather than courtesy of the fluency one gets from a pencil with a rubber at either end.

I turned to my wife and fellow threat to the peace process and said, ‘Me and you and a dog named Boo.’ Well, O’Rawe is not a dog but each time he shouts ‘Boo’ some Sinn Fein luminary jumps as if electrocuted.

And then the terrible discovery that his bite is worse than his bark.