I believe that you are out-of-date with that view (since the Treaty of Lisbon). See here, particularly the second paragraph:
Quote - "However, it is the Commission that currently holds executive powers over the European Union".
-- Jeff
It may hold formal power, but it would be very careful of exercising it in ways that would upset the national governments of the of the bigger countries in the European Union.
If the president mattered they'd be French or German. As it is, Jean-Claude Junker is from Luxembourg, nestled neatly between France Germany and Belgium and very much under the Franco-German thumb.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
He he :)
Viz started /just/ too late for me to have become interested, so I can't comment.
I don't disagree, but the point is that it /does/ have the power, as crazy as it might be to exercise it.
Currently, more the latter than the former.
-- Jeff
We used to get that at my old employer, ~25 years ago.
It looks like it's still funny, great stuff :)
-- John Devereux
"THINK CRITICALLY" would be a good one. Too many people let "opinion formers" - the newspapers and TV - do their thinking for them (but that is quickly changing, thankfully).
Well there's a surprise! Gardner doesn't read. I'd never have guessed.
I read very slowly, because much of what I read requires me to critically examine it for veracity against my personal life experience and that of others I have known. This slows me down considerably, but there is the advantage that I remember *far* more of what I've read than others who read more quickly typically do.
No, but he's certainly making his mark as a shambling drunk.
Sloman's views were out of date half a century ago.
We are talking about the man who has the power to destroy the United States (in his own frazzled mind, anyway). They are *so* pissed off about Brexit and desperate to find a scapegoat to deflect attention from the fact that *they* are responsible.
It is a pity that Cursitor Doom isn't following the fashion. He lets the Express do his thinking for him.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
I wonder why Curistor Doom thinks that. Some of his silly ideas can be trac ed back to particular fatuous misconceptions - he may be persisting in his lunactic idea that my enthusiasm for demoncratic socialism (as currently ma nifested in Scandinavia and Germany) implies an enthusiasm for the undemocr atic regime that used to run the Union of the Soviet Socialists Republics, which I always saw as a repuslive and decidely non-democratic and non-socia list oligarchy
I very much doubt if Jean-Claude Juncker had it mind to destory the United States, any more that Donald Trump was planning to dismantle the European U nion by endorsing Brexit.
If anybody is to blame for Brexit it would be Nigel Farage and Boris Johnso n, both of whom lied through their teeth to bring it about. Jeane-Claude Ju nker never had the political power to change the EU enough to make Brexit p erceptibly more or less attractive, least of all to the kind of ignorant ha lf-wits who thought that Brexit was ever a good idea.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
You're insulting over half the UK population who voted on the matter. Let's be clear - /both/ sides lied; they were expressing political views. Anyone who expects any politician to tell the truth is living in cloud-cuckoo land.
Brexit is not a good idea. On a scale of 1 to 20, it scores 2. The problem is that remaining in the EU scores 1. The EU has been voting itself more and more power for the past 20 years, and although needing reform, and talking about it
Just to return to the original point about who has power in the EU setup, the diagram at the bottom of the page here explains it clearly:
Note the position of the "European Parliament (Directly elected)". The only democratically elected body in the EU, directly answerable to the half billion of so of its population, appears quite a way down in the pecking order.
-- Jeff
Indeed, but some lies were more egregious and self-serving than others.
Disgracefully there is an argument that some of the leading Brexiteers weren't /lying/. Classic example is David Davies (now minister for Brexit) who - until /two months/ before the referendum - believed the UK could negotiate trade deals with individual EU countries. That would be illegal, of course.
The depth of leading Brexiteers' ignorance was breathtaking. Tenth-rate, some of them.
Oh, but in modern countries it is more subtle than that! Take the UK: in such an org chart the sovereign is at the top and parliament underneath.
Certainly, but does that make them worse or not? I've always considered half-truths to be more dangerous than blatant lies, as there is a nagging feeling that they /might/ be right.
Hmm, it may be semantics, but is such a /negotiation/ illegal? Its /implementation/ would be, but what about just discussing it and not "signing on the dotted line"? If simply discussing it isn't, how long will it be before BMW and Mercedes executives call on Merkel (Frau
Not so different to Cameron believing he could get a deal on immigration prior to the referendum.
Well, I suppose that "Royal Assent" is part of the process. It's over
300 years since it was refused, and the Queen is much too savvy to exercise such power. But He Who Would Come Next? I'm not so sure...-- Jeff
ISTR even negotiation is illegal, but don't quote me on that! More importantly, who on earth waste time negotiating something that would be illegal.
Most importantly, the depth of the vociferous Brexiteers' ignorance is gobsmacking.
When I was young and there were Ripping Yarns of Empire-building Derring-do, there was often a backplot where someone had cocked up so badly that they /entered/ a room with a loaded revolver and a bottle of whisky.
Cameron ought to Do The Decent Thing.
As for Farrage, Spinks, Carswell, I'd stake them out over an anthill, and keep them supplied with drinking water.
... too savvy to /overtly/ exercise such power ...
As for speaker-with-flowers[1], he probably won't be there for too long. I doubt he could do more damage than the Brexiteers.
[1] with apologies to Larry Niven :)
Quite intentionally. They voted as gullible idiots.
Perhaps. But the Brexiteers told bigger lies. Farage bailed out as soon as he had thrown his brick through the plate glass window while Boris Johnson tempered his ambitions enough to become Foreign Secretary.
Of course the EU is becoming more powerful. It's a way station on the route to a European federal government. The national governments aren't enthusia stic about giving up any power, but the EU needs to become better federated if it is going to serve any useful purpose. The UK is indulging in the del usion that it can stay outside that incipient federation. Wales and Scotlan d are better aware that that kind of resistance is futile. You may not like the EU, but you are going to like your situation outside it a whole lot le ss.
It's an organisation tree with arrows. The real power doesn't pay any atten tion to the arrow.
Try to find something equivalent for the US - you won't find the Koch broth ers shown anywhere, but that isn't evidence that they lack political power.
So what. It doesn't do anything much. Putting it in a position of actual po wer is several steps further down the road.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Well, seeing this drunk clown Junker falling about making an arse of himself on the eve of the Referendum didn't exactly boost the Remain side's appeal:
Wales voted to leave the EU. I can assure you that the prime reason for Scotland's vote to remain was continued access to the single market.
In the forthcoming referendum on whether Scotland should end the UK I suspect that the post independence position postulated will be membership of EFTA/EEA (with a currency not tied to the English pound).
Let me introduce you to Hamish (the Lion)
That thinking was popularized by hippies in the 60's. Now they've taken over.
They didn't yet have control when, in fifth grade, Sister Mary Priscilla needed to remove a staple, and didn't have a staple remover.
She said, "Do any of you have a pocket knife?"
Sean got up and handed her a one or two-inch blade.
"Thank you.", she said.
Patrick yelled, "You're not supposed to have a knife in school."
Sister Mary Priscilla responded, "Oh why don't you shut up."
She was the authority. She decided that Sean could be trusted with the little knife. Now that the hippies have control, they don't allow authorities to decide anything, so they use zero-tolerance policies to dictate, and essentially to automate, the teacher's response, which is to suspend a kid from school for having a Tums.
In the context of this thread, "authority" is not the issue. The video is real regardless of the source. Sloman's tendency is to disemble and make non-sequiturs. His source of data might be reliable in some cases, but even when it is he makes logical hash out of the conclusion.
The video seems to be real enough. The problem is that Jean-Claude Juncker made a rather barbed joke, and Cursitor Doom swallowed the moronic spin put on it by the Sunday Express.
That's where the dissembling and the non sequiturs (note the spelling) came from. John Larkin and Tom Del Rosso are both as dumb as Cursitor Doom (which are a fairly serious insults, but unavoidable in context).
At least Tom Del Rosso can spell conclusion, but that doesn't stop him from jumping to the wrong one.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Bring back the tired and emotional Lord George Brown. The UK isn't short of politicians who like to drink.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.