• -
  • irishtimes.com - Posted: June 21, 2011 @ 11:03 am

    Turning Away from the Call of Destiny

    Deaglán de Bréadún

    I know my many friends will be deeply disappointed but unfortunately I have to break the news to them today that I shall not be running for the high office of Uachtarán na hÉireann. I am painfully aware of the unvarnished reality that this will come as a further blow to national morale at a time when Mother Ireland faces great peril.

    I have heard the rumours that a path has been beaten to my door by all manner of supplicants from the political parties and elsewhere, beseeching me to lead the nation out of its current slough of despond. But in truth I feel unworthy of such a great task, especially in light of the multitude of aspirants offering to wear the crown of thorns.

    It is also true that by this stage there are so many wannabe Presidents that I am in a distinct minority in turning down the prospect of running – or standing? – for the office.

    The highways and byways of this fair land are empty as a result of the mad rush of candidates  to radio and television studios to deliver the message to an eager public that they are only too willing to serve. 

    There is what one might call an embarrassment of riches at this stage. Confronted with so much talent and ambition, my natural shyness takes over and I must retreat into a demure silence.

    So let me repeat the words of General Sherman: “If nominated by either party, I should peremptorily decline; and even if unanimously elected I should decline to serve.” Or would you prefer Lyndon B. Johnson: “I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your president.” (I haven’t got a party, but you get the message.)

    I know this will come as a bitter blow to a nation that has already suffered greatly over the last three years – but, hey, there’s always the Galway Races :-)

    • jaygee says:

      Deaglan
      There should be a rule that if anyone seeks the office of President ,
      they should automatically incur a penalty of minus fifty percent of the vote.

    • jaygee says:

      Unfortunately having sold our sovereignity to the Eu
      bankers et al., the office of President looks to be an
      empty totem, serving only to act as hand~shaker in
      chief for visiting dignitaries.
      If the country could sort out the delaying tactics it is
      currently engaged in , in it’s denial of justice to the
      Magdalene women, it might gain some respect world~ wide
      which seems to me to be a more important task facing
      the Irish people.

    • Annalivia says:

      Are you going to run in the Galway Races Deaglán? I’ll back you !!
      Anyway you’d make a much better pres than any of the wannabes so far…don’t give up altogether

    • Doubting Gerald FitzDesmond says:

      Why haven’t you posted my comments…do you think I’m barb.ie…or can you now tell the difference between names and IP addresses…?

    • festy o semtex says:

      presidency is just a PR bauble, still need to appoint someone respectable to represent the country

    • @4 Because they are so offensive and distasteful

    • Peter Barrins says:

      You mean to say Deaglán that you’re not as deluded as most of the raggle taggle who have declared an interest?

      An embarrassment of riches – it’s more like an avalanche of complete and utter delusion from a crowd of political ‘has beens’ that nobody wants. The situation in FG is laughable, but it will be interesting to see the eventual casualties and how they react. Avril Doyle is surely a cat among the pigeons…?

    • Doubting Gerald FitzDesmond says:

      But no more offensive than than Doubting Des FitzGerald comments since December 2009 about Brian Lenihan’s cancer …which you have continued to publish ever since most recently on you on your so called tribute to the man…So don’t talk to me about offensive comments but If that’s what it took for you to get the message so be it….

    • barb.ie says:

      “Doubting Gerald FitzDesmond” — love it. That’s the wittiest thing I’ve read here……..for a few days, at any rate

    • Peter Barrins says:

      Is it not possible to comment on a topic without resorting to nasty comments of a personal nature and innuendo? If people cannot comment on a specific topic without reverting to insults and rudeness, then their comments should rightly be precluded from publication.

    • @10 That is what I try to do. Gratuitous insults and offensiveness are the stock-in-trade of one of the most frequent commenters, variously styling herself as Ruby Tuesday and “Doubting Gerald FitzDesmond”, etc., etc. Sad, really.

    • @9: Are you the Lon Chaney of the blogosphere. He was the Man of a Thousand Faces – are you the commenter of a thousand pen-names? Tacky if you were praising your own attempts to be witty :-(

    • barb.ie says:

      botheration………now I’m confused. No Deaglán, one’s chalk and one’s cheese but sometimes you have to give credit where credit’s due………I thought that the “Doubting Gerald FitzDesmond” re-construction was hilarious…

    • John O'Driscoll says:

      Only a free People deserve a President. It’s a King ye need. King of the Beggars.

    • John O'Driscoll says:

      A Nation that cannot control Her ports is no nation at all.

    • John O'Driscoll says:

      ”Ports” in my sense of usage don’t just include the physical entries and exits, harbours, runways, and other infrastructure associated with inter-state commerce, communications, resource harvesting and war that Childers meant when he said the same thing or words similar a long time ago. He only cost me a grandfather with those sentiments. I mean all elements of trade and taxation whereby we eat our daily bread in the sweat of our faces as well. And nowadays controlling none of them; rather at most acting as a junta, as satraps, parroting to the Irish People the diktats of those who really control your ‘ports’, this ‘Republic’ is thereby a slave state, subject to the whims strategies and machinations of those who have no constitutional duties of loyalty to Her nor fidelity to the Nation She represents. Thus, any ‘President’ or Pretender to the Title, is but a shadow of what a real President should be, as the State is but a shadow of what a real Republic should be. I don’t mean a doctrinaire Republic. i mean a Republic where the People are free.
      Sorry about the excessively wordy clarification there.


Search Politics