Simon Danczuk M.P. speaks up.

I would be amazed if everyone did agree. But I would warrant that the majority would be in sympathy for your MP's view.

They gave up the right to call themselves British or English or Rochdalian the minute they tried to join the very people we (the rest of us) are fighting against. They are traitors. Not to put too fine a point on it.

We used to hang traitors. But unlike ISIS we grew up and now no longer use capitol punishment as an answer to man's stupidity.

I would give them a limited freedom but I wouldn't take much time in helping to protect them in the future.

Official estimates say a lot of people are travelling to join I.S. from varioua places. It's a pity no-one from Rochdale posts on here any more to say what they think about the Rochdale contingent.

ISIS propaganda will always appeal to some - usually the disenchanted and messianic brainwashed malcontents. It will appeal to many who feel the West needs a new direction and the only way is by violence and fear. Both these figure greatly in ISIS propaganda - although it's of course by 'jihad' and 'religious obedience', much better wording by which to lull the idiots into acceptance and compliance. Am I my brothers keeper?

Simon Danczuk speaks up again, giving a thoughtful history of how the Labour party he loved tragically destroyed itself.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3250583/The-party-love-deluded-bullying-cult-Labour-MP-SIMON-DANCZUK-slams-Corbyn-s-Hard-Left-crowd-pleasing-syrup.html

He's 100% spot on. The only hurdle are the young who didn't experience hard-left Labour policies and don't know the meaning of 'there's no such thing as jam today' - regardless of how 'wonderful' it all sounds. It's a sad (but was foreseeable) day for the Labour party which began when the leftist unions voted in Ed the Millimuppet as a so-called leader (should have read - puppet). All this was on the cards when that 'phrase' - 'more democracy' began to be used by them. That is (and was known by them) also an illusion. Idiots. But who's surprised -? Not me.

Nothing surprises you Atlas. I was a bit surprised to hear from the Labour conference that Jeremy Corbyn will let us keep the Queen. Very decent of him.

He has to say that. It's political meanderings. He CAN'T get rid of Trident, the Royal Family,Nuclear Power or that 'Lemon' character on the TV (although I think I might be persuaded to pay for that to happen). It's all political posturing - Nationalisation - Give me a break. Rule 14 - Don't make me laugh. He's twenty years too early and forty years too old. It's a joke - and very bad news for anyone who wanted a 'solid' viable opposition. This lot is just a kick-around during the interval. The real business begins in 2018.

This idea of paying to remove annoying 'celebrities' from the media is appealing, if many people were prepared to pay a small amount by way of crowdfunding. A list of such celebrities that could usefully be eliminated from the media might be difficult for everyone to agree on.

Perhaps if we email Jeremy he could put this celebrity elimination idea to the house at P.M.s'Question time.

Assuming he is 'aware'.He wouldn't be that honest. Trotsky steeped political animals do not have the capacity to be honest. If they had, they would have realised that their beliefs are purely Utopian in nature and have never worked out in practice. The world cannot prosper and live well on dreams. I would agree that capitalism is not the perfect answer - but it does have far more credibility than socialism and has lasted far, far longer. A balance of the two favours the present day society the most. The battle lies within keeping the balancing act stable. Not too right. Not too left. And never up or down - that's where the liberals wallow.

Jeremy Corbin is quite popular now, but not as popular as Keith Lemon.

Hitler and Stalin were both very popular - until the truth came out.


Only fools and the ignorant go for 'easy', today not tomorrow, and 'believe me'.
There's nothing down for this country other than to be prepared to work both for a living and for a relationship. There are no magic panaceas.  Pity the young for they will be shafted.
:

Perhaps an electorate of an older average age would make wiser choices?

In essence - yes they would. But then you have the young who would say they have no part in deciding their own futures.  Which is a fair enough complaint. The mere fact that they are not wise or educated enough wouldn't enter the equation. Remember your own youth - and your own thoughts at the time.

The answer is education in history and politics beginning at 12 years old - but given the present day curriculum - when and how -???????????

Then raise the age of voting to 21 on the basis that it is too important a vehicle to have ignorance or apathy involved in it. Boy would I be popular!

An ageing population in an established and sucessful country seems manageable, although in an iffy sort of nation it could be problematic.

Hence the acceptance of migrants to many European nations with dwindling birth rates - Germany for one. You have to have the young to pay for the old - as the old haven't put enough aside (governments) to make up for longevity/medical advancement over the past decades.
The question of wise voting can only be through adequate education and adequate experience - the rest unfortunately has to be left to the wilds of youthful temperance.

Seems rather a circular argument, too many old people, so need more young people, a few years later, too many children, too many old people, need more middle aged people, send for re-inforcements. The bigger picture is just too many people, children living with parents into their thirties, living spaces becoming smaller, adults flatsharing and all that.

Yes indeed. I have said before on here that the economies of scale are not infinite. But as the populations are going to increase naturally the even spread of those new births are better placed where they can do the most good rather than left to nuances of nature and the evil machinations of our species. Eventually the 'world' will have to come to grips with over-population  - which will quickly become apparent with lack of resources e.g. water and food - water being the most pressing reality. For now - it's a problem that will not affect my generation and therefore must be left for the future and those that will be ruinously affected. What more can one say - it is beyond 'world' control as things stand at present.

You don't need to be in Rochdale to see this.

https://www.change.org/p/the-labour-party-and-the-rochdale-constituency-offload-simon-danczuk-from-the-labour-party

Where have those five thousand signatures come from? The good folk of Rochdale?

Yes. I did know about it - and the petition. Most of what one needs to know about Rochdale appears on Facebook sites like 'Rochdale Uncovered' and 'Your Rochdale'.

Strikes me that many voters in Rochdale don't know 'jack' about politics and cannot see the useful from the dross. An MP that keeps Rochdale in the limelight is worth a dozen that sit on the back benches and chew the cud. You don't have to like him/her. But you do need him/her. The more they attract publicity (good or bad within reason) the better for the town it will be in the long run.
And it's the long run that matters. Take Oldham and Meacher. Days, weeks, months are of no consequence. Politics and the usefulness that can come from it takes years. A good candle is one that lasts.

I don't expect very much from the far left and far right voter in Rochdale. Mayhem is their stock in trade. Done only to satisfy some uneducated ignorance.

. roll:

I had a look at 'Rochdale Uncovered'. I expect I will cheer up in a bit.

One should always try to be of good cheer. Smile and the world smiles with you. It doesn't have to be wholly sincere (such would be disingenuous) but it's always better for those around you to think well than the opposite.
You will find 'Rochdale Uncovered' somewhat left wing. I follow it because it gives some indication as to how the 'other' side are thinking ( I say other because I don't aspire to extreme leanings left or right) and as such gives a present overall picture of the daily goings on in the town.
Keep smiling.

Rochdale politics seems to involve a certain amount of mud-slinging. Perhaps if enough mud is accumulated, political mud-wrestling could become part of the electoral process?

I'm pretty sure it already is - but without the observable clay loam.
I find that the majority who make a 'life' from Tweeting and Facebook and other social forums do so to 'moan'. Obviously nobody in the real world will listen to their rantings which is why they use those outlets. To many I think it is a welcome relief and stops them from doing worse things. At least whilst someone is 'listening' to them they don't feel totally alienated from society.
It's the old double edged sword - swings both ways and cuts deeply wherever it lands.
Rochdale should be thankful it has an MP who keeps things boiling. The vast majority of places have little better than figureheads who play 'crush candy' all day or sleep away their tenures.

In his latest article, Simon Danczuk describes a rather unpleasant political environent within the labour party today, as described here,
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3298580/Labour-nasty-party-Jeremy-s-hate-mob-destroy-says-Simon-Danczuk.html
Meanwhile, someone else has a different perspective on events,
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/98881/simon-danczuk-is-doing-great-harm-to-the-labour-party-says-local-labour-party-member
There does seem to be some seething political unpleasantness going on.

There are two separate problems going on here, how much they are connected is a matter of perspective. First the problems of the Labour party, and second the more general problems of towns like Rochdale where local government has been in a state of frustrated torpor for many a year, ideal circumstances for people to get away with things and for cliques, resentments, misinformation and interpersonal grudges to develop and fester.

Diverse views are not uncommon amongst politicians of all parties - but Labour do tend to throw out the most extreme internecine squabbles. Left of centre and Right of centre for a socialist is the same as being either a Liberal or a Tory. There's only one place for a true socialist and that's in the Kremlin (without the knives). Nothing less will do for Corbyn's cronies. It won't work of course. But then that's not the 'logical' objective. The objective is to cause disruption, not allow any other party to govern objectively and create anarchy as a palatable outcome. Their policies are not designed to work in a democracy and once centralise are akin to the PRC. Once that objective has been met the reins are loosened around business and finance whilst all other 'securities' are kept tightened - and all other political 'others' outlawed. It's not rocket science. Only from the centre and by the centre can the people be governed fairly and economically - well someone has to do it - they (the people) cannot do it themselves ergo 'we must do it for them'. It's called 'Socialism'. My grandfather was one. My mother was one - and it did neither of them any good whatsoever. And why -? Because out there is a 'real' world. Nature rules not people. Miss out that first criteria and you miss out everything. Rochdale's political elite are in the main non-entities. Small cogs trying to appear as big wheels. It's not what you know but who you know - and more to the point - where from. Westminster is a very good place to start. Not Smith Street.