Languish.org

Let languish decide!

I want to vote for a leader of principle, strength, and wisdom whose inspired leadership will move Europe forward into a new age of glory and prosperity.

So which one fits that description?  :unsure:

Quote from: Valmy on October 29, 2009, 01:24:28 PM
I want to vote for a leader of principle, strength, and wisdom whose inspired leadership will move Europe forward into a new age of glory and prosperity.

So which one fits that description?  :unsure:

Jaron.

I'll go with the witch.  She looks like the only one who could beat Putin in arm wrestling.

Quote from: Valmy on October 29, 2009, 01:24:28 PM
I want to vote for a leader of principle, strength, and wisdom whose inspired leadership will move Europe forward into a new age of glory and prosperity.

So which one fits that description?  :unsure:

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.slate.com%2Fmedia%2F1%2F123125%2F2158911%2F2159086%2F2159087%2F070221_CL_HitlerEX.jpg&hash=2c117be191147399dc957988ef5d1e817f6c5345)
:unsure:

The young Garrison Keiler.

I don't even know the last one. Who is that?

I'd like to nominate the eventual winner for the Nobel Peace Prize.

That little Nazi eagle on Hitler's tie looks really ridiculous.

Quote from: Zanza on October 29, 2009, 02:26:48 PM
I don't even know the last one. Who is that?

The Irish guy IIRC.
I stole these photos from a BBC run down on who is in the running.

Blair is a good man who wants good things, things that I find good. He is a politician, a very effective politician. We need that as president.

I like Blair.

I've voted on the guy that looks like Gonzalez with a white hair. Is he him?

The German press reports that the socialist parties want to nominate the new foreign minister, conceding to the conservative parties the right to appoint the president. Which would rule out Blair and would make Balkenende (the guy who looks like Harry Potter at 50) the favorite. On the other hand, the socialists nominating the foreign minister would make David Miliband a hot candidate.

Oh God, please not Milliband.

He is key member of the absolutely insuffrable generation of young, 'professional politicians' that is taking over Westminster. Having gone into policy work straight from university, their undoubted intellects are nevertheless unshackled by anything like experience or wisdom of the world.

Miliband  :o

Is there some weird EU regulation that at least one of the top posts has to be occupied by a reject from the UK?

No, but the EU establishment really dislikes Cameron and would like to spite him. ;)

Another name for foreign minister I just read is Massimo d'Alema of Italy. Looking up his credentials he seems to be an okay candidate. The other forerunner for president is apparently Juncker (the second guy in this poll). The German government has so far not openly indicated its position on any of the nominees yet.

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F46629000%2Fjpg%2F_46629114_-11.jpg&hash=2bbc7cefb1ab99d1ce6ec1d5e7711efd3da4a5c7)


Is that guy the leader of the Rebel Scum(R) ?

González would have been an awesome EU president 15 or 20 years ago*. A true statesman, even if not without faults. If only we had someone like him running nowadays. Alas, the only skill current candidates have is licking the right arses.



*I mean actual president, not the travesty in place.

I object to this poll, Anders Fogh Rasmussen should be in it. Just so I could still choose to not vote for him.

Quote from: Zanza on October 29, 2009, 02:26:48 PMI don't even know the last one. Who is that? 

It's John Bruton. Former Irish PM and current EU ambassador to the US. 
I think he'd be a decent choice.

Quote from: clandestino on October 29, 2009, 02:40:39 PM
I've voted on the guy that looks like Gonzalez with a white hair. Is he him?

Yup.

QuoteAnother name for foreign minister I just read is Massimo d'Alema of Italy.

:bleeding:

I voted for the angry chick. She gives off a good Margaret Thatcher vibe.

Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 29, 2009, 07:51:06 PM
I voted for the angry chick. She gives off a good Margaret Thatcher vibe.

:yes:

I continued the strategy of voting for the one with the most hair.

Quote from: Maximus on October 29, 2009, 08:11:03 PM

Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on October 29, 2009, 07:51:06 PM
I voted for the angry chick. She gives off a good Margaret Thatcher vibe.

:yes:

I continued the strategy of voting for the one with the most hair.

I continued my strategy of voting for the one most recently played by Michael Sheen in a biopic.

I think González would probably do a good job (or one of the best) and Blair the worst.

I won't name names, except the ones already mentioned, but my bets are

1. Hah, hah and freakin' hah. Blair is labour when the majority of Europe has rightist governments, British, and has even got Tories and LibDems saying they don't support him. And his inaction as 'special envoy' in the Middle East has damaged his reputation. 0 possibilities.

2. Efficient, but grey. Rightist. Favors further integration and comes from an small country. Fairly good possibilities, only his lack of charisma hurts him, because the job is supposed to be first and foremost to provide a 'face' to the European Union.

3. He probably would get few votes in the first round, but could be the perfect compromise candidate. Fairly good possibilities.

4. She has two difficult aspects, that could be considered strong points or weaknesses. First, he has strong views and could find difficult to work in a representative, not executive, position. Second, Moscow certainly would receive her appointment as a virtual declaration of war. Moderately strong possibilities.

5. Mister Greyish G. Grey. The only thing not dull about him is that he once was in coalition with rightist ultras, which is bad. Zero or almost zero possibilities.

6. Felipe González. He could be a very good president, but has two factors working against him. First, there are already two Iberians in top positions, Barroso and Solana. Many countries will probably consider that another one is too much. Second, he's a Socialist, while most European countries have rightist governments at this moment. Weak possibilities.

7. Same as 3, he would probably get few votes in the first round, but could be a good compromise candidate. In addition, I would say the same factors that make difficult for a British to be the first president favor choosing him. Quite good possibilities.   

All considered, I think the president will be 2, 3 or 7, while 4 and 6 are long shots. 1 and 5 are out. If I have to choose only one bet, then the candidate best positioned today is 7, in my humble opinion.

Quote from: Scipio on October 29, 2009, 08:14:51 PM
I continued my strategy of voting for the one most recently played by Michael Sheen in a biopic.

:huh:

The Queen wasn't a biopic.

Why Blair should not get the job :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/6462902/Tony-the-twister-Blair-now-wants-a-free-ride-on-the-Euro-Express.html

Quote from: Alatriste on October 30, 2009, 02:43:26 AM
4. She has two difficult aspects, that could be considered strong points or weaknesses. First, he has strong views and could find difficult to work in a representative, not executive, position. Second, Moscow certainly would receive her appointment as a virtual declaration of war. Moderately strong possibilities.

I knew she was a good choice. :)

I think the whole debate has been flawed from the start. The problem is we don't really know what the position does yet. But too many in the public who talk about the politics of the individual candidate being right or left miss the point.

We know that the position is not about setting a legislative agenda for the Union. It's about managing personal relationships within the Council and being a figure on the world stage.

That said, I think Juncker gets unfair treatment when people say he's the grey bureaucrat candidate. He has proven experience and is a solid candidate even if he won't make headlines across the world.

QuoteBlair is labour when the majority of Europe has rightist governments

So what? Blair's Labour manifesto was to the right of most Christian Democrat parties. If anything, he's *too* right-wing.  :lol:

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 30, 2009, 06:27:26 AM
Why Blair should not get the job :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/6462902/Tony-the-twister-Blair-now-wants-a-free-ride-on-the-Euro-Express.html

You know, it used to be that the Telegraph was - like the Guardian - a paper one could respect for the quality of its journalism regardless of one's own political orientation. But after reading that frothing diatribe masquerading as a editorial, I fear it's really now just the Daily Mail printed on bigger paper.

Blair because the irony of it is just too big to ignore.

Quote from: Alatriste on October 30, 2009, 02:43:26 AM

1. Hah, hah and freakin' hah. Blair is labour when the majority of Europe has rightist governments, British, and has even got Tories and LibDems saying they don't support him. And his inaction as 'special envoy' in the Middle East has damaged his reputation. 0 possibilities.

He's Nu Labour. So fairly centrist on the British scale. And that's the British scale. On the European scale he's safely on the right :p

The German Handelsblatt suggests that Juncker, being perhaps the most experienced EU politician, would never announce his interest openly if he had hopes to actually get the post. Because that usually backfires. And Sarkozy doesn't like him apparently.

Quote from: HisMajestyBOB link=topic=2685.msg134627#msg134627
I knew she was a good choice. :)

Who is she?

Everybody but Blair, please.

Quote from: Maximus on October 30, 2009, 07:31:48 AM

Quote from: HisMajestyBOB link=topic=2685.msg134627#msg134627
I knew she was a good choice. :)
/quote]
Who is she?

Vaira Vike-Freiberga, former president of Latvia.

@BVN

I Assume you mean anybody, because having six presidents would be a bit unwieldy.

Quote from: Warspite on October 30, 2009, 06:38:54 AM

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 30, 2009, 06:27:26 AM
Why Blair should not get the job :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/6462902/Tony-the-twister-Blair-now-wants-a-free-ride-on-the-Euro-Express.html

You know, it used to be that the Telegraph was - like the Guardian - a paper one could respect for the quality of its journalism regardless of one's own political orientation. But after reading that frothing diatribe masquerading as a editorial, I fear it's really now just the Daily Mail printed on bigger paper.

Damn, I've read that and you can only picture him with small horns and a devilish goatee afterwards, cackling maliciously as he goes on rejoicing in his destruction of everything British. I knew that the torygraph was biased, but...just damn.

Quote from: Alatriste on October 30, 2009, 07:55:43 AM
I Assume you mean anybody, because having six presidents would be a bit unwieldy.

That's the genius of his plan.  :D

Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 29, 2009, 03:59:30 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsimg.bbc.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F46629000%2Fjpg%2F_46629114_-11.jpg&hash=2bbc7cefb1ab99d1ce6ec1d5e7711efd3da4a5c7)


Is that guy the leader of the Rebel Scum(R) ?

Well, he's Dutch. IIRC once I spent somewhat like 50 years obliterating rebel scum in the Low Countries before the damned Dutch Republic formed.

Quote from: Warspite on October 30, 2009, 08:05:52 AM

Quote from: Alatriste on October 30, 2009, 07:55:43 AM
I Assume you mean anybody, because having six presidents would be a bit unwieldy.

That's the genius of his plan.  :D

Indeed...  :whistle:




But given the size of EU bureaucracy, that wouldn't even be such a crazy idea.

Quote from: BVN on October 30, 2009, 02:07:59 PMBut given the size of EU bureaucracy, that wouldn't even be such a crazy idea.

Ah, the mythical size of the EU bureaucracy. About 25,000 for a population of 495 million. That's one EU bureaucrat for 20,000 citizens. An astounding number when you compare it to national bureaucracies.

Quote from: Zanza on October 30, 2009, 02:16:01 PM

Quote from: BVN on October 30, 2009, 02:07:59 PMBut given the size of EU bureaucracy, that wouldn't even be such a crazy idea.

Ah, the mythical size of the EU bureaucracy. About 25,000 for a population of 495 million. That's one EU bureaucrat for 20,000 citizens. An astounding number when you compare it to national bureaucracies.

1. There are 38.000 civil servants working for the Commission. There are a few more working for other institutions, but I don't have numbers on them.

2. And you forget to take into account the number of tasks the EU bureaucracy has in regard to a national bureaucracy. Granted, the EU is active in many fields today, but my experience learns me that the Commission is very eager to poke his nose even in fields which are literally reserved to the member states in the Treaty.
If the Commission would stick to his core business, I'm sure they could do with a bit less.

3. Maybe my words were badly chosen, because many national bureaucracies are also bigger then they should be.

4. Don't think I'm bashing the EU. I'm largely pro EU

Quote from: BVN on October 30, 2009, 03:11:45 PM1. There are 38.000 civil servants working for the Commission. There are a few more working for other institutions, but I don't have numbers on them.

No, there are 38,000 staff working for the Commission. At most 33,000 of those can be considered bureaucrats if you look at the staff figures.
http://ec.europa.eu/civil_service/about/figures/index_en.htm
Anyway, still not a huge number.

QuoteIf the Commission would stick to his core business, I'm sure they could do with a bit less.

I agree. If the Commission wasn't so horribly bloated with 27 Directorates, it would need a lot less people I think.

Quote from: BVN on October 30, 2009, 03:11:45 PM

Quote from: Zanza on October 30, 2009, 02:16:01 PM

Quote from: BVN on October 30, 2009, 02:07:59 PMBut given the size of EU bureaucracy, that wouldn't even be such a crazy idea.

Ah, the mythical size of the EU bureaucracy. About 25,000 for a population of 495 million. That's one EU bureaucrat for 20,000 citizens. An astounding number when you compare it to national bureaucracies.

1. There are 38.000 civil servants working for the Commission. There are a few more working for other institutions, but I don't have numbers on them.

2. And you forget to take into account the number of tasks the EU bureaucracy has in regard to a national bureaucracy. Granted, the EU is active in many fields today, but my experience learns me that the Commission is very eager to poke his nose even in fields which are literally reserved to the member states in the Treaty.
If the Commission would stick to his core business, I'm sure they could do with a bit less.

3. Maybe my words were badly chosen, because many national bureaucracies are also bigger then they should be.

4. Don't think I'm bashing the EU. I'm largely pro EU

38,000 staff to manage a single market of over 300 million people? How awful.

Quote from: Warspite on October 30, 2009, 08:14:42 PM
38,000 staff to manage a single market of over 300 million people? How awful.

Almost 500 millions actually... and many of those 38,000 are translators and interpreters. The trick is, the Union works mainly trough national bureaucracies.

Fear keeps the local systems in line, Moff' said (Moff Tarkin).

The question is what the philosophy behind the post is (and yes, I know that noone really knows that yet). If he is supposed to be a functionary, akin to the German President, with no real power or influence, then indeed anyone in the list except Blair is good.

If he is supposed to be the mover-and-shaker and the "face", then Blair is the only guy recognisable and everybody else would suck.

Quote from: Alatriste on October 31, 2009, 04:55:03 AMFear keeps the local systems in line, Moff' said (Moff Tarkin).

Not really. Unlike some real federations (e.g. Germany, USA), the EU can't used force to keep its members in line. The only thing they can do is withholding funds. Not exactly a death star. ;)

The EU is built almost entirely on consent.

I think the best candidate would be Barroso. Why have two head honchos? It would even be possible to have the presidents of the commission and of the council be the same person according to Lisbon. He's also already reasonably well known as the face of the EU.

Quote from: Zanza on October 31, 2009, 05:22:21 AM

Quote from: Alatriste on October 31, 2009, 04:55:03 AMFear keeps the local systems in line, Moff' said (Moff Tarkin).

Not really. Unlike some real federations (e.g. Germany, USA), the EU can't used force to keep its members in line. The only thing they can do is withholding funds. Not exactly a death star. ;)

The EU is built almost entirely on consent.

Actually, withholding of funds is a very effective stick.

Quote from: Martinus on October 31, 2009, 05:27:57 AMActually, withholding of funds is a very effective stick.

Not against the net payers. They can do the same. ;)

Quote from: Martinus on October 31, 2009, 05:09:49 AM
The question is what the philosophy behind the post is (and yes, I know that noone really knows that yet). If he is supposed to be a functionary, akin to the German President, with no real power or influence, then indeed anyone in the list except Blair is good.

If he is supposed to be the mover-and-shaker and the "face", then Blair is the only guy recognisable and everybody else would suck.

Basically right, but IMHO you go too far. At the very least 4 and 6 (González and Vike-Freiberga) would make an impression and could perfectly become the movers-and-shakers.

Besides (and I'm reluctant to employ American equivalents, but they are perhaps the most suitable) I think the Union is not looking for a Roosevelt, Theodore or Franklin, or a Wilson but a Washington. Someone able to do the work of Bismarck without blood, thunder and iron.

@Zanza

That was a joke...  :P

The complete quote is:

General Tagge: But that's impossible. How will the Emperor maintain control without the bureaucracy?
Governor Moff Tarkin: The regional governors now have direct control over their territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this battle station.

Regarding Barroso, it's a possibility, but the system was conceived to have Barroso as the equivalent of a prime minister or head of government, the new president as the equivalent of a head of state (but not along German lines, because the president will chair the meetings of European leaders, making him far more important if the right person is chosen) and the head of the new European Foreign Office as the Minister of Foreign Affairs (incidentally, the presidency is getting too much attention and this new position too little - having a Common Foreign Office designing an European policy is potentially far more revolutionary than having a president that could become a mere figurehead)

I have even heard some comments about Blair candidacy being a devious scheme to make easier for Great Britain to reach the real target: getting Milliband to lead the European Foreign Office... and yeah, I see the hand of Sir Humphrey Appleby after the plot.