Many thanks for the history lesson, it was highly informative and much appreciated.
 
So, if I am reading you both correctly and based upon the evidence to date, you  appear to be suggesting to me that Schav', the phlegmatic Fleming, might well be the proud owner of a zitzak stuffed with horse feathers. 
 
;-)
 
 
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/horse-feathers.html
 

You really want to know?
I slept on one as 4/5 year old, stuffed with human hair. Afterwards it became horribly expensive and they stuffed it with polystyrene balls.
The hair could be replaced with rabbit hair, very specially treated. That kind of "zitzak" with human hair was difficult to handle, they were extremely heavy. From that archaïc model the Italian designers made the new seatbags as "modern" furniture.
Learned something? It's the honest truth. It shows that you can use your own fantasy in some special cases, as long as it is not too smelly.

I wrote this without reading Sag. He makes it smelly, I warned you of this.

Let me try to answer that Q about the traditional *zitzak stuffing.
 
In the sea-faring days of old, this bag was filled with wind. So what you would have is an air-filled zitzak, essentially a windbag, later to be revived as the common airbag we all know today.
 
I believe the idea was sold to Dutch sailors by Lapps: buy a zitzak filled with favourable wind to take your ship in the right direction. Not to be confused though with a Windzak
 
Notice how snugly all of this fits together as a description of certain comments by yitzhak: a bag of wind ;-)

@ Sag'
 
Hey, we bandwagon-riders need to sit on something when embarking upon our journeys of daring-do.
 
@ traveller
 
Q: Traditionally, with what is one  supposed to stuff a zitzak* / yitzhak ? 
 
;-)

Or you are Flemish/Dutch, speaking and writing perfect English, or you are English, speaking and writing perfect Flemish/Dutch. Which one is it? You surprised me with your Get'teafather

But, even if you were fully cognisant of those responsibilities, you would still delegate the task of making the appropriate selection to a group of smiley faced reps, wouldn't you?
 
(Stomach ulcers? Don't worry about me. One needs to have a strong stomach to be a contemporary atlanticist. In fact, most things we atlanticists experience in the EU make us want to puke our guts, but we're made of stronger stuff).

It's difficult to make a choice before knowing the responsibilities of the EU president.

As you see, I'm not fooling myself by gambling and guessing.You may qualify that by "evading power" if you like, who cares anyway
(beware of a stomach ulcer) !

"..Come back, Yitzhak, all is forgiven.."
 
Now if that ain't bittersweet irony ;-)
"Driving out the devil with Beelzebub," eh?
(Hmm, that's transl. Dutch, don't know the Engl. version. Btw, a "zitzak" is a bag filled with whatever, for people to sit on)

No, that's the whole point, you haven't answered my question, you've done everything in your power to evade answering it. Furthermore, as to why the foisting of an unelected president of the EU affects people like myself is concerned, if you can't work that one out for yourself you're not as bright as I imagined you to be.

@ Atlantist

I'm not a smiley faced rep and I did already answer this question.
As a declared europhobe what does it matters you who or what the EU president will be ?

@ Schav'
 
 
If you were one of those smiley faced representatives, who would YOU encourage your fellow smiley faced representatives to select as 1st president of the EU ?

It's amazing how a simple statement is turned down by using pseudo-intellectual vocabulary.
It's hilarious to read that continentals do no more see the difference between humour and irony. If ( I emphasize IF) you had read my comments to the end, you'll have seen a wink, probably an unknown sign by those who take themselves for erudite.

The problem on this blog is that a handful of members are monopolizing the right to comment on contributor's statements (although it would not surprise me that sometimes they are the same individuals). Anyone who's not looking in the same direction as they do is systematically reduced to an alienate who knows nothing about the great ideas of theirs and the lethal ones of the others. The more, they don't reply on embarrassing questions but are escaping them with weird arguments. This partly explains why the number of commentators is reduced to a few because the others are disgusted by this behaviour.

Well, Schav', is marcfrans correct? Is it really like the song says?
 
Pheelings, wo-o o pheelings, wo-o o ...
 
Seeing that it was you who decided to drag marcfrans into our discussion, you are now at liberty to respond to his charge directly, in Phlemish, if that should turn out to be the preferred weapon of your choice.

Let battle commence.

@  Atlanticist
 
Haha...the cat (the ultimate non-argument) has finally come out of the bag.  It was "irony", you see, that is supposed to explain the contradictions and the partially-nonsensical statements that came before.  Does it strike you as much as it strikes me that, these days, certain 'continentals' use this 'emergency tool' frequently when they have been found out.   The Kapitein A certainly has used this device as an 'argument' on several occasions here (although, strangely, Armor has not), and on Dutch-language blogs I encounter it much more frequently.   In North America, while not totally absent, it is rarely used. 

So, I guess it's a 'continental' thing in our time.  Many seem to confuse irony with humor, or rather do not realise that false irony is not humorous. But, having been raised myself on the Continent to full adulthood, I can assure you that it wasn't always a common method on the Continent.   There was a time when educated continentals were expected to take full reponsibility for their mistakes in debates, and when there was an expectation that they back up their 'strong' declarations with facts and logic.   No longer.  These days it is all about 'feelings'.  

@ Schav'
No, Schaveiger, I'm not fooling myself, I'm poking fun at the whole silly idea of a president for the EU. Those candidates are my tongue-in-cheek preferences for YOUR president of YOUR EU, not mine. I'm not a EUrophool, I'm a EUrophobe, or hadn't you noticed?

This was only an ironic reply to your "special" ones i.e. what got Obama to do with this.
As to taking it serious, I have always suspicions against any politician until he proved his skills WITH ACTS.
Regarding marcfrans, he has indeed very little to do with serious matters.

For the start it will be that way, afterwards we'll see.
By the way, don't fool yourself, the candidates YOU choosed were selected by YOU too ?

What have marcfrans, "classy" far-right wingers and the system used in Zimbabwe got to do with the far more serious matter of how we Europeans can get Jose "the special one", elected to the position of 1st president of the EU? Clearly, you are not taking this debate as seriously as I had either hoped or expected.  

And your solution to this perceived dilemma is to hand over the entire decision making process  for the election of YOUR president to those "representatives", is it? Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaghhhhhhhhh !!!
 
Come back, Yitzhak, all is forgiven.

That's your choice and since we live in a democracy, you're free to do so.
I'm tempted to name Frank Van Herck, J.M. Le Pen, Berlusconi and maybe a couple other "classy" far right-wingers from Austria, Spain or Scotland.
But to please marcfrans and some of his buddies, perhaps the systems used in Zimbabwe or Birma would suit them better.
;)

It's difficult to make a choice before knowing the responsibilities of the EU president.
My and your personal thoughts and preferences are always vetoed by those putting the candidates on the election list.

@ Schaveiger
 
Not happy with my first choice for 1st president of the EU? Ok, then how about this man?
 
Check out his "Fiji Plan". It could be the perfect blueprint for future EU world hegemony.
 
;-)
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwbu59aDtbo
 

Hey, you've forgotten Armor. Complains about absence of true democracy in Britain and Europe, but would have been only too happy to see the soviets takeover Europe, in the interests of racial purity.
 
Then, of course, we had our old friend, Yitzhak ben Binangone.
 
 

@ Schaveiger.
 
In the interests of Anglo-US-EU cordiality, I've decided to offer you my candidate for 1st president of the EU.

Quote:

 
"Over the last 15 months, we've traveled to every corner of the United States (of Europe?). I've now been in 57 states. I think one left to go.Alaska and Hawaii...".
 
No, not Bush, but B. Obama.

:-)

@ Atlanticist

I realise that highlichting contradictions in the various statements of wishful thinking by Kappert and Schaveiger is a form of entertainment for foxes, but do not forget that such gentlemen do not really suffer from problems of cognitive dissonance.  On the contrary, they seem to 'thrive' in the presence of such dissonance.  So, I doubt that one could claim that "those representatives" hold a veto on Schaveiger's thoughts and preferences.

It is intriguing to see Schaveiger pining for the EU as a "valuable, powerful, and trustworthy player on the world scene", while claiming a bit further that "most of them" (those representatives) were "failures" in their own country. 

Let's just say that the only clear conclusion we can draw from his pronouncements is that he does not like Tony Blair.  Now, who do you think put that idea in his head?  Could it be the European media and academia? I suspect that they have a bigger lock on those gentlemen's minds than do those "representatives".

You say that you would be happy for the choice of presidential candidate to be decided by "representatives", then later go on to admit that, "Frankly, nobody in the EU-pool is "special" to me at the moment". Sorry, but these two conflicting statements alone suggest to me that those representatives DO, in fact, hold a veto on your personal thoughts and individual preferences.

Agree with your first sentence.

I have no dog in this fight.( You would have to be barking mad to want anybody).

I simply want OUT!

No they don't.
Frankly, nobody in the EU-pool comes out as "special" to me at the moment. This because many of them are unknown and most of them got a "golden EU-seat" because they failed in their own country.
Now who's your "special" one ?

 Those  "representatives" don't hold a veto on your private thoughts and individual preferences, do they? If not, come on, name names and tell me who, in your opinion,  that special "someone" should be.  

It's not a dream, rather a nightmare which I experience by every election.
Talking about dictatorship of the bureaucracy, do you know a place were this is not the case ?
The EU's biggest mistake is that since the start they failed to inform the people about their aims and goals and what is transpiring through (and exaggerated by the media) are only the restrictions imposed by the EU to the National Governments. The latter, of course, jump on this to discredit the EU in order to hide their own failures.
I'm not lifting the corruption louse, an insect present everywhere since the origin of humanity.

Keep on dreaming. The EU in its present form is a dictatorship of its bureaucracy and no president will be able to change that unless he has a mandate from the total European electorate.
The EU has wrecked its relationship with the European electorate and will pay dearly for that. The only people who are happy with Europe are the corrupt Euro-politicians and their corrupt bureaucrats who don't even blink an eye when the European watchdog reveals their corrupt dealings, they just replace the watchdog officials who accused them.

My choice will be the one choosed by my representatives, the way it usually goes everywhere.
The only thing I hope is that they do not elect a saboteur like Blair but someone capable to make the EU in the medium term a valuable, powerfull and trustfull player on the worldscene.

@ Schaveiger
 
Perhaps you'd care to share with us your personal choice for 1st  president of the EU, and the reason(s) why you chose him, or her.

@ Schaveiger
 
Perhaps you'd care to share with us your personal choice for 1st  president of the EU, and the reason(s) why you chose him, or her.

At least they become a bit more serious.

Whoever may become the 1st president of the EU, for sure it will not be the candidate of the wanderers on this blog.

As long as it's not Guy Verhofstadt.
Great eh, a European president before the next American one has been elected. That is because we don't even have to elect ours. How people are going to like that? They are going to be totally uninterested and I soon foresee the first country stepping out of the union, and that will be the starting sign for more countries to follow.
 

Tony Blair would have given an air of legitimacy and hope to the EU, all be it a stale one. The other candidates are non-entities on the world stage and it is hard to believe that any one of them would be up to task of implementing the Lisbon Accord.

The Lisbon Accord is a hideous joke and the sooner the nations of Europe wake up to this fact the better.

I'm happy that Blair after trashing Britain will sink into further obscurity. He deserves no position of respect. 

Oh, and, to the Euroweenies that rejected the Iraq war, what are you going to do when the Iran nuclear bomb gets close and in your face?   Pray that the Americans or Israelis will save your asses, my guess.

You cannot trust these disgusting , adulterous frogs ; we should not have bothered in 1914 and 1939 , if they love the jerries that much we should have left them to it . The French would have made a good slave race .