Tonight With Vincent Browne Thread v2.0

Harry Angstrom

MrsD007 wrote: »

It is definitely not the role of the President to comment on government policy. It would be inappropriate for him to criticise Joan Burton.

I take your point Mrs D, but I honestly don't think that a person should change their values overnight, just for the sake of the office that they hold. For instance, Michael D. Higgins had always been an outspoken critic of US foreign policy thoughout the period in the 1980's during the disgraceful US hegemony of Nicaragua, Grenada, El Salvador etc. Do we now expect that he will wipe his memory of all of that when he meets the US Ambassador or the US President?
Similarly, do we now expect Michael D. to wipe his memory of the social injustices that have been a part of this country for so long, just because he's now occupying the office of the Presidency? If that's the case, then he would've been far better off not putting himself forward for it in the first place.

hotmail.com

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

I take your point Mrs D, but I honestly don't think that a person should change their values overnight, just for the sake of the office that they hold. For instance, Michael D. Higgins had always been an outspoken critic of US foreign policy thoughout the period in the 1980's during the disgraceful US hegemony of Nicaragua, Grenada, El Salvador etc. Do we now expect that he will wipe his memory of all of that when he meets the US Ambassador or the US President?
Similarly, do we now expect Michael D. to wipe his memory of the social injustices that have been a part of this country for so long, just because he's now occupying the office of the Presidency? If that's the case, then he would've been far better off not putting himself forward for it in the first place.

I presume you're aware that the President is just a symbolic role and no one gives a toss about it?

Any speech given by an Irish President has to be checked and approved by the government of the day. The constitution doesn't allow an independence of mind to a certain extent for a president. Instead they can subtly highlight particular issues.

JonathanAnon

"I think the future will be fairer, I think we will recover a sense of justice.."..

blah de blah de blah.. load of old platitudes... There is NO evidence for either of the above statements..

Lady Chatterton

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

I take your point Mrs D, but I honestly don't think that a person should change their values overnight, just for the sake of the office that they hold. For instance, Michael D. Higgins had always been an outspoken critic of US foreign policy thoughout the period in the 1980's during the disgraceful US hegemony of Nicaragua, Grenada, El Salvador etc. Do we now expect that he will wipe his memory of all of that when he meets the US Ambassador or the US President?
Similarly, do we now expect Michael D. to wipe his memory of the social injustices that have been a part of this country for so long, just because he's now occupying the office of the Presidency? If that's the case, then he would've been far better off not putting himself forward for it in the first place.

Michael D is President of Ireland, he is meant to be above politics. It would be wholly inappropriate for him and he would be in breach of his constitutional role if he were to use the presidency to further is own political and social views no matter how worthy his causes may be.

The Irish public have to separate President Higgins from Michael D, the Socialist politician.

hotmail.com

JonathanAnon wrote: »

"I think the future will be fairer, I think we will recover a sense of justice.."..

blah de blah de blah.. load of old platitudes... There is NO evidence for either of the above statements..

Difficult to find evidence for something in the future!

Ah the President has to say all this optimistic stuff, comes with the territory.

Harry Angstrom

hotmail.com wrote: »

I presume you're aware that the President is just a symbolic role and no one gives a toss about it?

Any speech given by an Irish President has to be checked and approved by the government of the day. The constitution doesn't allow an independence of mind to a certain extent for a president. Instead they can subtly highlight particular issues.

That's exactly my point. Why on earth would somebody like Michael D. Higgins put himself forward for the office of the Presidency if he didn't fancy putting his feet up for the next 7 years?? If you ask me, it was a complete cop-out on his part, as he pursued the sinecure of the Presidency, rather than continuing the fight the good fight and highlighting the many social injustices that are rampant in this country. I'm sorry but Michael D's platitudes do not impress me one bit.

Lady Chatterton

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

That's exactly my point. Why on earth would somebody like Michael D. Higgins put himself forward for the office of the Presidency if he didn't fancy putting his feet up for the next 7 years?? If you ask me, it was a complete cop-out on his part, as he pursued the sinecure of the Presidency, rather than continuing the fight the good fight and highlighting the many social injustices that are rampant in this country. I'm sorry but Michael D's platitudes do not impress me one bit.

I completely disagree with you Harry, I'm sure Michael D like Mary Robinson will find a way of achieving something meaningful over the next seven years. Many people thought Mary Robinson would be completely wasted in the Aras and she was responsible for changing the role of the presidency and making it more than a retirement home for eldery politicians.

You might remember that it was Michael D Higgins who accompanied her on her emotional visit to East Africa, the interview she gave on that occasion brought world wide attention to a cause that was being largely ignored by the international community and the media. I'm confident that President Higgins will leave his own indellible mark on the presidency.

hotmail.com

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

That's exactly my point. Why on earth would somebody like Michael D. Higgins put himself forward for the office of the Presidency if he didn't fancy putting his feet up for the next 7 years?? If you ask me, it was a complete cop-out on his part, as he pursued the sinecure of the Presidency, rather than continuing the fight the good fight and highlighting the many social injustices that are rampant in this country. I'm sorry but Michael D's platitudes do not impress me one bit.

He was rather honest in the campaign about the limits of the presidency did you not think. He was perhaps the most honest about it and never promised to create jobs like some of the candidates.

I don't think he deceived anyone.

He ran because he has a huge ego, why else?

Skid

pixelburp wrote: »

Seems like a great bit of TV to me.

If TV3 thought it was a great bit of TV they would have scheduled it properly, not stuck it in at the last minute after all the TV Guides have been published.

I thought it was a waste of time, more Hello! Magazine than Vincent Browne.

Lady Chatterton

Skid wrote: »

I thought it was a waste of time, more Hello! Magazine than Vincent Browne.

I'm really baffled, did you really expect Vinny to harangue the President of Ireland?

Lady Chatterton

Time to watch Mamma Mia now!

Happy Christmas Guys

Harry Angstrom

MrsD007 wrote: »

I completely disagree with you Harry, I'm sure Michael D like Mary Robinson will find a way of achieving something meaningful over the next seven years. Many people thought Mary Robinson would be completely wasted in the Aras and she was responsible for changing the role of the presidency and making it more than a retirement home for eldery politicians.

You might remember that it was Michael D Higgins who accompanied her on her emotional visit to East Africa, the interview she gave on that occasion brought world wide attention to a cause that was being largely ignored by the international community and the media. I'm confident that President Higgins will leave his own indellible mark on the presidency.

If I was Michael D. Higgins I would have been abhorred by Joan Burton's decision to cut the Disability Allowance in half, and I would've been prepared to speak out about it, irrespective of whether I was President of Ireland or not. I would also have refused to sign the Finance Act on a point of principle, even if it meant that it would have become law anyway after a certain number of days. I'm pretty sure that if Fianna Fail were implementing this measure and Michael D. was still on the opposition benches he would have been the most vociferous in opposing it. It reminds me of Edmund Burke's statement that for evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothing.

Lady Chatterton

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

If I was Michael D. Higgins I would have been abhorred by Joan Burton's decision to cut the Disability Allowance in half, and I would've been prepared to speak out about it, irrespective of whether I was President of Ireland or not.

I would say that he was horrified by that cut but you need to familiarise yourself with the Irish Constitution, he can't comment or criticise government policy. Do you remember what happened to President Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh?

Harry Angstrom

MrsD007 wrote: »

I would say that he was horrified by that cut but you need to familiarise yourself with the Irish Constitution, he can't comment or criticise government policy. Do you remember what happened to President Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh?

I do indeed, Mrs D, and I'm very familiar with the Constitution. "Thundering disgrace" and all that. But again, it goes to prove my point that Michael D. is only looking upon the Presidency as a kind of sinecure; merely a slap on the back for all those years of "service" he gave to the Irish people, whilst being very well paid for the privilege of being a public representative.

Lady Chatterton

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

I do indeed, Mrs D, and I'm very familiar with the Constitution. "Thundering disgrace" and all that. But again, it goes to prove my point that Michael D. is only looking upon the Presidency as a kind of sinecure; merely a slap on the back for all those years of "service" he gave to the Irish people, whilst being very well paid for the privilege of being a public representative.

I think that it would be fairer to man to judge him after he has served his term, I think you are being very premature in your judgement.

I think it is time for a Christmas Ceasefire now

Harry Angstrom

MrsD007 wrote: »

I think that it would be fairer to man to judge him after he has served his term, I think you are being very premature in your judgement.

I think it is time for a Christmas Ceasefire now

Okay Mrs. D. It's time for this I suppose:

Skid

MrsD007 wrote: »

I think it is time for a Christmas Ceasefire now

I'd like to belatedly sing up for the ceasefire.

Wishing you all a Harangue-free Christmas

Skid

Just one more thing,

If anyone missed 'Christmas at the Aras' it is repeated on St.Stephen's Day at 1.05pm on TV3

Elmo

Skid wrote: »

Just one more thing,

If anyone missed 'Christmas at the Aras' it is repeated on St.Stephen's Day at 1.05pm on TV3

Available on the Player

http://tv3.ie/3player/show/41/0/0/Tonight-with-Vincent-Browne

Of course this would be the first time that I go at any of the VOD services and it doesn't work

tayto lover

Anyone know when Karen is on again? I am infatuated.

JonathanAnon

I found this online guys.. It's called "Inside Job" and it's about Iceland, banking deregulation, Lehmans etc, economic crisis... it's very informative..

http://vimeo.com/23086688

JonathanAnon

What's on tonight? I'm sure it's not live but I cant remember what he said the Stephen's Day program is about...

Might just watch Downfall... watch the Germans squirming for a change..

Plautus

From the ads they've been running, I remember Ming is going to be on talking about 'wacky tabacky'.

Skid

JonathanAnon wrote: »

What's on tonight? I'm sure it's not live but I cant remember what he said the Stephen's Day program is about...

A panel of celebrity guests join the host to look back over a turbulent 2011, mixing light-hearted observations with his customary views on political news

http://www.tvnow.ie/detail.asp?id=111898178

I thought he already had at least one stab at a review of 2011?

Anyway, I'm going to stick with Father Ted on Channel 4.

JonathanAnon

oh ok... I'll watch the first half hour... It just wont be the same now that there is a Christmas truce in place with hotmail.com...

Plautus

JonathanAnon wrote: »

oh ok... I'll watch the first half hour... It just wont be the same now that there is a Christmas truce in place with hotmail.com...

Go on, I'll harangue ya ...

You be Hayek. I'll be Marx (Groucho that is.)

My name is URL

I don't think I can bear to watch this tonight.. Has Luke taken off that hemp suit since he first appeared in it?

JonathanAnon

MLOD, Ming, Glenda Gilson, Mick Wallace and Mansergh.. dear god think of the Panto you could have had with this lot..

Plautus

Well, Mansergh is already talking about when he 'came out' ... whatever on earth he meant.

JonathanAnon

Will you either drink out of that glass or put it down..