Politicisation of the office of President.

[Purple]

Given President Higgin's repeated habit of politicising his office to further his left-wing agenda, most recently in his speech to the SIPTU Conference, has he done irreparable damage to the office he holds?

I have never liked his as a person or as a politician. That is mainly due to him being quite possibly the most arrogant person I have ever heard, his rank hypocrisy and what I consider to be the abuse of his position while a TD, a Minister and now as our President. He is now damaging the highest office in the country, dragging it down to his level. The only positive is that he's old and won't be around that much longer.

 

[odyssey06]

I seem to remember something about a promise to step down after 1 term... hmm?

In fairness he gives a good speech even if i disagree with 90% of anything he says remotely political, we should have made him poet laureate to the President instead.

 

[Purple]

we should have made him poet laureate to the President instead.

I love it!

 

[Peanuts20]

I've seen him in action recently at a couple of events, he came across very well, nice to the kids, very down to earth etc although the organisers of one of the events felt his wife had "notions".

His speeches are far too long and tedious and he has a very blinkered idea on his left wing mates.

 

[Purple]

I've seen him in action recently at a couple of events, he came across very well, nice to the kids, very down to earth etc although the organisers of one of the events felt his wife had "notions".

His speeches are far too long and tedious and he has a very blinkered idea on his left wing mates.

When he blustered that he'd "been on the right side of every social issue in his lifetime" I lost respect for him.

Okay that's not true, I didn't have any to begin with. Arrogance is a very unattractive trait.

 

[Baby boomer]

Personally, I can't stand him, he is a pompous windbag. And like many on the left, he regards left wing views not just as correct, but also morally superior. Whereas those of a more centre-right disposition generally just base their views on efficiency and effectiveness.

I would actually take more umbrage at his views on foreign policy than on social issues in Ireland. He has a long history of anti-US views, and of cosying up to communist dictatorships in places like Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. He even hosted Nicaraguan dictator, Daniel Ortega, as his personal house guest when he visited Ireland! He is pro-Palestinian, completely ignoring their terrorism, and obsessively anti-Israel. He even managed to give a speech once for Holocaust Remembrance Day without managing to mention the words Jew or Jewish. Quite a feat!

Having said all that, he is entitled to speak his mind and sully his reputation as he sees fit. It is a myth that the Presidency is a non-political office. It may have developed into one in practice, but there's nothing in the Constitution that requires it. It is actually constructed as a very political office but one with strictly limited powers. That actually made sense back in 1937 when "strong leaders" were quite the fashion, and Dev's Constitution was careful not to construct such a role as an Irish fuhrer.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

He should learn from the Queen

 

[deanpark]

Given President Higgin's repeated habit of politicising his office to further his left-wing agenda, most recently in his speech to the SIPTU Conference, has he done irreparable damage to the office he holds?

I have never liked his as a person or as a politician. That is mainly due to him being quite possibly the most arrogant person I have ever heard, his rank hypocrisy and what I consider to be the abuse of his position while a TD, a Minister and now as our President. He is now damaging the highest office in the country, dragging it down to his level. The only positive is that he's old and won't be around that much longer.

You go ahead then and run for presidency next time - see if you get hundreds of thousands of votes - he's elected fair and square and pushing the envelope of the role. I don't like him but the above from Purple is a bit of a rant.

They're all it - Varadkar, Barry Cowen , Coveney etc etc all arrogant alpha lads opining and spinning on all matters. So why not MDH.

 

[mathepac]

He should learn from the Queen

Presumably this is a reference to the Franco-German woman who sits as monarch of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. She was married to a now-deceased Greek and her family changed their name to Windsor in order to distance themselves from their German relatives, names, titles and associations in the run up to the Great War. Let's not mention the Russian cousins.

I don't think MDH has anything useful to learn from Elizabeth, her late sibling, her antecedents or descendants. He's a grass roots guy, one of our own, and once upon a time when the Labour Party and the working man were tinged a bit more red than green, and wore I rose-tinted glasses, I campaigned for him. That was then, 40 years ago almost, although this isn't. Learn from the Franco-German mongrels, I don't think so thanks.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

And she seemed so nice. To think that she has French antecedents and she consorted with Greeks.
Surely that fella that talks to plants would give Mickey D a run for his money.

 

[Salvadore]

He can be bitter and nasty, not least with his staff but that doesn’t make him unique. He enjoys a very comfortable existence in the Aras and, on a human level, I can understand why he wanted to keep it going for a second second term. Who wouldn’t?

What I find reprehensible is his use of the Office to promote and give voice to his own socialist biases, to the irresponsible neglect of the important role that goes with his position.

His handling of the commemoration service in the north some months ago was evidence of his unwillingness to put country before personal positions and, in doing so, he put social stability at risk.

And rather than seek to challenge him, the government seems to be afraid of him. Hence the decision to send senior ministers to the event rather than take him on.

 

[michaelm]

I seem to remember something about a promise to step down after 1 term... hmm?

There should only be one term, of maybe 7 years, and all candidates should be at least 60. I never liked Mickey D and it pains me that he was gifted a second term when the politicians denied the public a vote. Same with his predecessor, who sadly hasn't gone away.

 

[Purple]

You go ahead then and run for presidency next time - see if you get hundreds of thousands of votes - he's elected fair and square and pushing the envelope of the role.

The role is defined by the constitution. He’s not meant to push the envelope. Am I not allowed to complain about his abusing the highest office in the land unless I also run for that office? Since when was right right to free speech limited in that manner?

I don't like him but the above from Purple is a bit of a rant.

Why yes it is. I can’t stand him. I think he’s an arrogant hypocritical bombastic creep.

They're all it - Varadkar, Barry Cowen , Coveney etc etc all arrogant alpha lads opining and spinning on all matters. So why not MDH.

Because they are politicians and he’s the president. You understand the difference, right?

 

[Peanuts20]

In fairness though, he does have a nice dog.

 

[cremeegg]

He should learn from the Queen

Says the Duke.

 

[cremeegg]

What I find reprehensible is his use of the Office to promote and give voice to his own socialist biases, to the irresponsible neglect of the important role that goes with his position.

Socialist politician gets elected and continues to express socialist views. Shock! Horror!

 

[deanpark]

The role is defined by the constitution. He’s not meant to push the envelope. Am I not allowed to complain about his abusing the highest office in the land unless I also run for that office? Since when was right right to free speech limited in that manner?

Why yes it is. I can’t stand him. I think he’s an arrogant hypocritical bombastic creep.

Because they are politicians and he’s the president. You understand the difference, right?

"He's not meant to push the envelope" - that's a bit mealy mouthed and your opinion - he's doing it like all his fellow politicians!!

 

[Purple]

"He's not meant to push the envelope" - that's a bit mealy mouthed and your opinion - he's doing it like all his fellow politicians!!

He’s not a politician. He’s the President. He’s meant to be above politics. He is meant to get his speeches cleared by the Government. He’s meant to be above his personal biases but he’s so arrogant and egotistical that he thinks his opinions are more important than the constitutional obligations of his office.

 

[Baby boomer]

He’s not a politician.

He is!

He’s the President.

Yes, and?

He’s meant to be above politics.

No, that's nowhere in the constitutional role spec.

He is meant to get his speeches cleared by the Government.

No, there's no such constitutional requirement.

He’s meant to be above his personal biases...

Hardly! Is anyone?

but he’s so arrogant and egotistical...

Can't argue with that!!

that he thinks his opinions are more important than the constitutional obligations of his office.

Not only that, but he thinks his opinions are more important than anyone else's because he's just right.

 

[Purple]

He is!

No, he'sa former politician. Now he's the President.

Yes, and?

Read my first post.

No, that's nowhere in the constitutional role spec.

He is meant to represent all of the people of Ireland. He's required to carry out his function "only on the advice of the government, save where it is provided by this Constitution that he shall act in his absolute discretion or after consultation with or in relation to the Council of State, or on the advice or nomination of, or on receipt of any other communication from, any other person or body. In other words he shouldn't be making political statements without clearing it with the Government.

No, there's no such constitutional requirement.

I didn't say it was. the protocol is that every President gets their speeches cleared by the government.

Hardly! Is anyone?

Yes, judges, sports referees and, usually, the President of this country.