Trump seems to tell it like he sees it. Some areas of the UK are no go areas for the Police and why should the USA welcome more people who really want to bring down that country and impose its own rule of law..Telling the truth about such things is not racism..it is reality.
Apols for posting again - but this trenchant writing was on a Nationalist blog:
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Scotland: The Slightly Less English British Franchise....
The Franchise where corporation tax is lower than it is in London. The Franchise where you can still go to jail for possessing cannabis, but hey, didn’t we show those English twats who is boss? The Franchise where we still operate on the same moral playing field as the union we so denounce – politically, economically and militarily insulated by NATO and the EU – while believing ourselves to be morally superior.
Scotland: The Slightly Less English British Franchise where being Scottish alone is what makes us moral. Where being Scottish in and of itself trumps all else. Where being Scottish is its own justification and anybody with anything critical to say is a vicious nonce apologist.
Bella Caledonia is pro Independence not pro SNP. I presume the writer is RISE or SSP.
Not everyone who is pro-Independence is pro-SNP ;-) (as indeed the comments demonstrate: See this “SNPbad” chat? It’s pathetic. It’s designed to shut down legitimate criticism of the One True Party. Time to grow up.)
The writer's pen-name is Loki.
Amusingly some Yoons of very little brain took that specific comment as a paean to the SNP, and then went on and on and on about it.
Trump seems to tell it like he sees it. Some areas of the UK are no go areas for the Police and why should the USA welcome more people who really want to bring down that country and impose its own rule of law..Telling the truth about such things is not racism..it is reality.
It was only a few years ago that large areas of London and other cities were no go areas for the police, during the August 2011 riots.
RN..Do you deny what he says..there are certainly parts of some cities in the UK that have no go areas...and some Muslims that have entered the USA have been consistent in their aggressive stance against their host country..why should the USA accept more of them...this is what Trump sees..most of us turn our eyes away..
Trump seems to tell it like he sees it. Some areas of the UK are no go areas for the Police and why should the USA welcome more people who really want to bring down that country and impose its own rule of law..Telling the truth about such things is not racism..it is reality.
This is correct, but the right-on bedwetters don't want to face reality, they want to live in their bubbles of virtue-signalling self-righteousness. But sooner or later reality will intrude, like it is doing in Germany. Just look at the chaos wrought in Germany by Merkel's war guilt, soon to be heading our way...
Seems as though the telegraph, the sun, the guardian, and the BBC are all xenophobic kippers getting their excuses in early for the referendum defeat
Who knew?!
You're the first person to mention xenophobia on this thread.
As the keenest fan of Farage on here, I'd have thought you'd want to spend a little time considering your position on his 'leadership'.
Sorry europhobes
No it's ok I get it. You are not a conservative and everyone who mocks Cameron's negotiations is a bitter kipper, understood
Farages leadership has taken UKIP from 3% to 12.5% in the GE, won the euros, won a couple of seats in the H of C, improved vote in almost every seat and got us a referendum, so I am ok with it
That's the past. If he can't take you from 12.5% to 20% he's worse than useless.
My first instinct is you are joking, but just in case you are not...
I thought the question was what I thought of Farage's leadership? I base that on how the party has done in the 5 years he has been leader. It would take some nerve to suggest UKIP are worse off now, though I wouldn't be surprised to see someone try it
Perhaps you misunderstand me.
He's done well to take UKIP from a fringe party to a player. But a political party has to keep moving forward. If Farage is not capable of taking UKIP from where they are today to being the clear third party (it could easily take 2 leaders before they are in a position to challenge for one of the top 2 slots) then he needs to retire gracefully and be replaced by someone who can deliver that objective.
If he stays he has negative value to UKIP (if only opportunity cost) and hence is "worse than useless"
Trump seems to tell it like he sees it. Some areas of the UK are no go areas for the Police and why should the USA welcome more people who really want to bring down that country and impose its own rule of law..Telling the truth about such things is not racism..it is reality.
Anyone can look at the % of muslims in a country and compare it with the % from 40 years or so ago. The countries where the Muslim % has risen from virtually zero to more than 4% in that time are now the countries suffering from violence at the hands of Islamic extremism
So although what Trump says sounds outrageous, and is definitely a step too far practically, any country with less than 1% Muslim population now should be doing its best to keep it at that level, or at least let it grow very slowly through birth rate rather than immigration
Mr. Isam, it's not just that. If you say, as Merkel did, we'll let in anyone from Syria, then a load of chaps will suddenly discover they're Syrian. That'll include economic migrants, and lunatics (some of whom may actually be Syrian).
Amusing that Trump has run a tremendously low cost campaign so far.
Leaves him a full war chest should he become the nominee.
Trump claims to be a multi-billionaire. Should that be true and he can't be bought like the usual politician then he's free to say what he wants. For good or ill.
Seems as though the telegraph, the sun, the guardian, and the BBC are all xenophobic kippers getting their excuses in early for the referendum defeat
Who knew?!
You're the first person to mention xenophobia on this thread.
As the keenest fan of Farage on here, I'd have thought you'd want to spend a little time considering your position on his 'leadership'.
Sorry europhobes
No it's ok I get it. You are not a conservative and everyone who mocks Cameron's negotiations is a bitter kipper, understood
Farages leadership has taken UKIP from 3% to 12.5% in the GE, won the euros, won a couple of seats in the H of C, improved vote in almost every seat and got us a referendum, so I am ok with it
That's the past. If he can't take you from 12.5% to 20% he's worse than useless.
My first instinct is you are joking, but just in case you are not...
I thought the question was what I thought of Farage's leadership? I base that on how the party has done in the 5 years he has been leader. It would take some nerve to suggest UKIP are worse off now, though I wouldn't be surprised to see someone try it
Perhaps you misunderstand me.
He's done well to take UKIP from a fringe party to a player. But a political party has to keep moving forward. If Farage is not capable of taking UKIP from where they are today to being the clear third party (it could easily take 2 leaders before they are in a position to challenge for one of the top 2 slots) then he needs to retire gracefully and be replaced by someone who can deliver that objective.
If he stays he has negative value to UKIP (if only opportunity cost) and hence is "worse than useless"
I wouldn't assume it was possible for UKIP to get to 20% under anyone's leadership. I wouldn't make the mistake of thinking that a leader like Carswell, Hannan or Reckless would be able to keep the existing voters as well as attracting defectors
I am uncomfortable with the view that everyone else will be swayed by a "compliant media", whilst we, the better informed, call us more intelligent, will see through it all with our our laser-like acute analysis.
Echoes of CiF and the great Murdoch conspiracy in such a proposition.
(Welcome back, btw.)
It not so much a "swayed by the media" as "not really that interested or listening that closely so only really heard the stories on the TV while eating their dinner, or on the radio while they have their breakfast", ergo they will only hear the BBC views of the negotiations and even if they are smart, they will not have seen a rounded view of the issues. Many people are very clever, but insufficiently interested in politics as to bother with being well informed, their vote is still worth as much as anyone elses.
Politics thrives on the disinterest of the bulk of the populations, you get endless bullshit like Dave's "cast iron" promises, and his "no ifs, no buts", and most of Osbrown's budgets, which the spin doctors know they will have to back away from once the think tanks have had a look, but the PM launching his manifesto, or the Chancellors budget speech gets a large audience, his spin doctors moving to a more nuanced position on the second page of the politics section of the Telegraph is seem by almost no one. So that man on the streets only sees the bullshit version.
Or maybe the Great British Public can weigh up the pros and cons themselves and form their own opinions. Then come to the correct conclusion, they usually do. It all smacks to me of the BOOers getting their excuses in early, a bit like the cybernats.
Ah Mr FoxInSocksEU fancy seeing you here If OUT wins you will be jumping up and down like a maniac complaining that politicians, never mind the public don't know enough for the country to function outside the EU and how it's madness to even consider it
No. I do not think it would be a disaster, but also not a good choice. I would accept it, particularly if we stayed in the EEA and enjoyed the 4 freedoms.
I do think it a mistake for the BOOers to depict pro-EU Brits as unpatriotic. Its a bit like the cybernats saying that no true Scot can be a Unionist. By insulting the centreground it pushes the undecided into the Remain camp. No one likes being insulted and it is not a good campaigning tactic.
Police officer deaths in the UK in the line of duty in 2015: 1 (there have been 6 such deaths since 2010). Police officer deaths in the USA in the line of duty in 2015: 69.
Which country is more likely to have no go areas for the police?
Police officer deaths in the UK in the line of duty in 2015: 1 (there have been 6 such deaths since 2010). Police officer deaths in the USA in the line of duty in 2015: 69.
Which country is more likely to have no go areas for the police?
Depends on the ratio of American Cops to the traditional British Bobby (Charlton)
RN..Do you deny what he says..there are certainly parts of some cities in the UK that have no go areas...and some Muslims that have entered the USA have been consistent in their aggressive stance against their host country..why should the USA accept more of them...this is what Trump sees..most of us turn our eyes away..
There are far fewer 'no-go' areas in the UK (if indeed there are any) than there are in US cities (where the no-go areas are completely unconnected with Islam), so he seems to be 'seeing' rather selectively. The US has suffered one terrorist mass shooting in last decade, and hundreds of non-terrorist mass shootings in the same period; again what he 'sees' seems absurdly selective. Perhaps doing about something the ludicrously easy availability of assault rifles, which would help hugely with both problems, might be rather more proportionate and effective than the unconstitutional banning of millions of completely innocent Muslim tourists from visiting the US. And so on and so on. The guy is a nut, who leaps on headline concerns and comes up with idiotic saloon-bar 'solutions'.
Seems as though the telegraph, the sun, the guardian, and the BBC are all xenophobic kippers getting their excuses in early for the referendum defeat
Who knew?!
You're the first person to mention xenophobia on this thread.
As the keenest fan of Farage on here, I'd have thought you'd want to spend a little time considering your position on his 'leadership'.
Sorry europhobes
No it's ok I get it. You are not a conservative and everyone who mocks Cameron's negotiations is a bitter kipper, understood
Farages leadership has taken UKIP from 3% to 12.5% in the GE, won the euros, won a couple of seats in the H of C, improved vote in almost every seat and got us a referendum, so I am ok with it
That's the past. If he can't take you from 12.5% to 20% he's worse than useless.
My first instinct is you are joking, but just in case you are not...
I thought the question was what I thought of Farage's leadership? I base that on how the party has done in the 5 years he has been leader. It would take some nerve to suggest UKIP are worse off now, though I wouldn't be surprised to see someone try it
Perhaps you misunderstand me.
He's done well to take UKIP from a fringe party to a player. But a political party has to keep moving forward. If Farage is not capable of taking UKIP from where they are today to being the clear third party (it could easily take 2 leaders before they are in a position to challenge for one of the top 2 slots) then he needs to retire gracefully and be replaced by someone who can deliver that objective.
If he stays he has negative value to UKIP (if only opportunity cost) and hence is "worse than useless"
I wouldn't assume it was possible for UKIP to get to 20% under anyone's leadership. I wouldn't make the mistake of thinking that a leader like Carswell, Hannan or Reckless would be able to keep the existing voters as well as attracting defectors
You need someone who appears serious, rather than a bar room bore, and who can tone down the racist dog whistles.
I wouldn't pretend to be an expect on UKIP politics, but I'd imagine that the likes of Evans or Nuttall (possibly Bickley or may be, but less likely, James) might all be able to do that.
Perhaps it's not 20%, may be it's 15% and 5 seats through better focus. But if you are still at 12.5% and 1 seat in 2020 what have you achieved?
Seems as though the telegraph, the sun, the guardian, and the BBC are all xenophobic kippers getting their excuses in early for the referendum defeat
Who knew?!
You're the first person to mention xenophobia on this thread.
As the keenest fan of Farage on here, I'd have thought you'd want to spend a little time considering your position on his 'leadership'.
Sorry europhobes
No it's ok I get it. You are not a conservative and everyone who mocks Cameron's negotiations is a bitter kipper, understood
Farages leadership has taken UKIP from 3% to 12.5% in the GE, won the euros, won a couple of seats in the H of C, improved vote in almost every seat and got us a referendum, so I am ok with it
That's the past. If he can't take you from 12.5% to 20% he's worse than useless.
My first instinct is you are joking, but just in case you are not...
I thought the question was what I thought of Farage's leadership? I base that on how the party has done in the 5 years he has been leader. It would take some nerve to suggest UKIP are worse off now, though I wouldn't be surprised to see someone try it
Perhaps you misunderstand me.
He's done well to take UKIP from a fringe party to a player. But a political party has to keep moving forward. If Farage is not capable of taking UKIP from where they are today to being the clear third party (it could easily take 2 leaders before they are in a position to challenge for one of the top 2 slots) then he needs to retire gracefully and be replaced by someone who can deliver that objective.
If he stays he has negative value to UKIP (if only opportunity cost) and hence is "worse than useless"
I wouldn't assume it was possible for UKIP to get to 20% under anyone's leadership. I wouldn't make the mistake of thinking that a leader like Carswell, Hannan or Reckless would be able to keep the existing voters as well as attracting defectors
You need someone who appears serious, rather than a bar room bore, and who can tone down the racist dog whistles.
I wouldn't pretend to be an expect on UKIP politics, but I'd imagine that the likes of Evans or Nuttall (possibly Bickley or may be, but less likely, James) might all be able to do that.
Perhaps it's not 20%, may be it's 15% and 5 seats through better focus. But if you are still at 12.5% and 1 seat in 2020 what have you achieved?
Farage isn't boring. Cameron is profoundly boring, it is the reason for his success.
Seems as though the telegraph, the sun, the guardian, and the BBC are all xenophobic kippers getting their excuses in early for the referendum defeat
Who knew?!
You're the first person to mention xenophobia on this thread.
As the keenest fan of Farage on here, I'd have thought you'd want to spend a little time considering your position on his 'leadership'.
Sorry europhobes
That's the past. If he can't take you from 12.5% to 20% he's worse than useless.
My first instinct is you are joking, but just in case you are not...
I thought the question was what I thought of Farage's leadership? I base that on how the party has done in the 5 years he has been leader. It would take some nerve to suggest UKIP are worse off now, though I wouldn't be surprised to see someone try it
Perhaps you misunderstand me.
He's done well to take UKIP from a fringe party to a player. But a political party has to keep moving forward. If Farage is not capable of taking UKIP from where they are today to being the clear third party (it could easily take 2 leaders before they are in a position to challenge for one of the top 2 slots) then he needs to retire gracefully and be replaced by someone who can deliver that objective.
If he stays he has negative value to UKIP (if only opportunity cost) and hence is "worse than useless"
I wouldn't assume it was possible for UKIP to get to 20% under anyone's leadership. I wouldn't make the mistake of thinking that a leader like Carswell, Hannan or Reckless would be able to keep the existing voters as well as attracting defectors
You need someone who appears serious, rather than a bar room bore, and who can tone down the racist dog whistles.
I wouldn't pretend to be an expect on UKIP politics, but I'd imagine that the likes of Evans or Nuttall (possibly Bickley or may be, but less likely, James) might all be able to do that.
Perhaps it's not 20%, may be it's 15% and 5 seats through better focus. But if you are still at 12.5% and 1 seat in 2020 what have you achieved?
Farage is almost definitely the best UKIP have got. Unlike others (non kippers mainly), I don't assume that they will keep on rising at the rate they have since Farage took over in 2010, I would say they probably wont. They certainly wont under the leadership of anyone you mention there. There may be no need for UKIP in 2018 if we leave the EU, and perhaps a new party will emerge including some Kippers, some Cons and some Labs, the leader of which could come from any of the three parties mentioned
There is fruit on the left for UKIP to pluck, but the profile of the party's leadership makes that very difficult. If you look at the FN in France, they combine very strong anti-immigration and anti-EU rhetoric with high-profile, left-wing populist policies. That has allowed them to put down strong roots in former Communist and Socialist leaning areas. They have also worked incredibly hard at national and local level - doing the hard yards, much as the LDs did here back in the 90s and early 2000s. Again, the UKIP leadership does not seem that inclined to do this. They have their MEP salaries and their TV profiles and they seem to think that this is enough. Farage would clearly prefer a long lunch over a detailed policy and positioning discussion. That may make him a more entertaining bloke, but it lessens his impact as a game-changing politician.
RN Even some forces are admitting to having no go areas..and there certainly was one in Leeds when the Ripper murders were taking place.I know because I was embedded with the police at that time shooting a documentary...so in that case Trump is right...He may well be a nut but he is pointing out some truths that have been covered by politicians and officials for years..and lots of Americans appear to agree with him..time to get it all out there.
If @rcs1000 is about - on your recommendation, I slogged through 7 episodes of Jennifer Jones. I'd give it a 7/10. I'm clearly missing what made you such a fan. I'll finish it only because I'm stubborn
Do you mean Jessica Jones? If so, I'd give 7/10 as about right. A bit like Daredevil I found it brilliantly produced and brilliantly acted, but it just didn't grab me. The grimness of both may not have been right up my alley, but onboth cases I felt it had all the elements there that I should have thought them brilliant, but ended up just thinking it was pretty decent. I also kept thinking the heroine, even considering the burdens she was under mentally, came across as pretty dim, rather than stubborn, which was distracting.
Good day everyone.
The main problem with Jessica Jones is that it drags a story which needed 6 or at most 8 episodes over 13 hours of television. This just didn't work and left me utterly bored at times.
Compare to Daredevil where there were two or three substantial cases before the Big Bad even appeared. Kingpin wasn't even on screen till episode five-ish and wasn't even partially fleshed out till past mid way of the season. These extra cases and later focus on the Big Bad made the series work much better.
Jones had a single, short case (which turned out to be a direct part of the Big Bad arc) and Tennant was present from the start. The story was just too thin for the number of episodes.
It has other problems - the inconsistency of Jessica's powers is a huge one, there is a comical scene with the hermetically sealed room where the actress makes clear physical effort to open the heavy door. Not intended to be funny but it was hilarious. Some of the performances were weak too - Tennant phoned it in and Nuke was meh.
Overall, I thought it was a huge let down. Man in the High Castle released the same day was much better.
There is fruit on the left for UKIP to pluck, but the profile of the party's leadership makes that very difficult. If you look at the FN in France, they combine very strong anti-immigration and anti-EU rhetoric with high-profile, left-wing populist policies. That has allowed them to put down strong roots in former Communist and Socialist leaning areas. They have also worked incredibly hard at national and local level - doing the hard yards, much as the LDs did here back in the 90s and early 2000s. Again, the UKIP leadership does not seem that inclined to do this. They have their MEP salaries and their TV profiles and they seem to think that this is enough. Farage would clearly prefer a long lunch over a detailed policy and positioning discussion. That may make him a more entertaining bloke, but it lessens his impact as a game-changing politician.
The Faragists seem to prefer long liquid lunches to the grind of local government or serious canvassing. As long as that carries on they will get nowhere. For example the UKIP byelection loss in Huntington last night was because of their councillors failure to attend council meetings. Not very professional at all, and a big swing to the LDs.
What are the odds that Jeremy Corbyn comments on this morning's police shooting in a way that can be interpreted as not wholly supportive of the police?
The principal no-go areas for the police in the UK have traditionally been in Northern Ireland. In terms of fear factor for individual cops on the mainland I'd have thought it would be areas with high levels of gang violence. No go can also be used as code for "can't be arsed". The various child abuse scandals relating to Moslem paedophiles and perverts were not exacerbated by police being scared to go into communities, but by their traditional lack of interest in taking the claims that kids make about adult sexual predators seriously, with some PC thrown in on top.
What are the odds that Jeremy Corbyn comments on this morning's police shooting in a way that can be interpreted as not wholly supportive of the police?
btw the American Cop/Bobby (Charlton) reference was this at 6:35
THE Guardian newspaper has launched its annual appeal to make you feel dreadful about Christmas.
Unveiling a miserable George Monbiot article about how having nice things is bad, the paper pledged to ‘gnaw at our readers’ consciences like they will gnaw at the bones of horribly abused poultry’.
The paper is lining up a series of nasty, depressing yuletide features including excerpts from Jonathan Freedland’s new book It is Not a Wonderful Life, Polly Toynbee’s Guide to Turning a Nice Christmas Dinner into an Argument About Universal Benefits and a Nick Cohen article about reactionary toys made by lovely, tiny dogs.
"In England in 2013, 64% of women aged 34-44 and 71% of women aged 45-54 were classified as overweight or obese. "
In the NW, the fatties have taken over, but lack of "advice" isn't the problem. In a few rare cases like thyroid problems, there may be some sort of excuse but basically, if you're fat, you're eating too much.
People generally know that stuffing their gob with high calorie food isn't a good idea, but they like to do it. Nowadays, fat people can mingle and be one of the majority. No one is allowed to comment anyway. Years ago, fat people were figures of fun, and they were rare.
So if we're serious about reducing obesity, call a fat person a porker. Probably won't happen because some will feel depressed as a consequence. But they are killing themselves and costing the NHS a fortune. The NHS will spend a another fortune advising calorifically-challenged people on what they already know. And it will fail.
I'm old now and my metabolism is slower than it used to be. I can't get away with gobbling for fun so I don't. I don't need advice, I need willpower and the knowledge that eating everything that isn't nailed down will ensure an early grave.
Mr. Observer, worth noting the police were mentioned in some instances as turning a blind eye or even being present during some of the disgrace in Rotherham.
Edited extra bit: with any luck future prosecutions will get to the bottom of that. If police were present they must be prosecuted and incarcerated, and, if not, it's important their (collective) name is cleared.
It's astonishing to see the number of supposedly politically neutral people and bodies that have been drawn into making pronouncements regarding Trump's recent comments. Interfering in another country's politics doesn't usually end well, as the Guardian learned with Bush / Ohio in 2004.
Donald Trump made comments about law enforcement in Britain. Can you imagine the headlines if the Prime MInister's spokesperson had declined to comment on claims that there are no-go areas in London for the police?
I think that is right although I think the uproar over his initial remarks and the 'petition' are batshit twitter-led craziness. Overall as per usual the 'establishment' responses have probably played into Trump's hands.
On TV: saw the last episode of The Last Kingdom last night. Won't spoil it, but overall I've enjoyed the series rather a lot. There are some iffy moments, but I thought the portrayal of Alfred was excellent.
"In England in 2013, 64% of women aged 34-44 and 71% of women aged 45-54 were classified as overweight or obese. "
In the NW, the fatties have taken over, but lack of "advice" isn't the problem. In a few rare cases like thyroid problems, there may be some sort of excuse but basically, if you're fat, you're eating too much.
People generally know that stuffing their gob with high calorie food isn't a good idea, but they like to do it. Nowadays, fat people can mingle and be one of the majority. No one is allowed to comment anyway. Years ago, fat people were figures of fun, and they were rare.
So if we're serious about reducing obesity, call a fat person a porker. Probably won't happen because some will feel depressed as a consequence. But they are killing themselves and costing the NHS a fortune. The NHS will spend a another fortune advising calorifically-challenged people on what they already know. And it will fail.
I'm old now and my metabolism is slower than it used to be. I can't get away with gobbling for fun so I don't. I don't need advice, I need willpower and the knowledge that eating everything that isn't nailed down will ensure an early grave.
A slightly simplistic view, but ultimatly people are responsible for their own diet and lack of exercise.
Women in particular are as a group rather exercise shy.
Police officer deaths in the UK in the line of duty in 2015: 1 (there have been 6 such deaths since 2010). Police officer deaths in the USA in the line of duty in 2015: 69.
Which country is more likely to have no go areas for the police?
Depends on the ratio of American Cops to the traditional British Bobby (Charlton)
The United States is roughly six times the size of the UK (by population), therefore would expect a ratio of approximately 6:1. We can argue about whether more police or fewer police on the beat will increase the number of deaths (more police, less crime, fewer deaths... or more police, more potential victims, more deaths...), but absent compelling evidence for a change, 6:1 is probably OK.
This means that - per head of population - the US has 10x as many police officer deaths than in the UK. Which - given the prevalance of guns in that country - seems utterly unsurprising.
Some years ago,on a patrol in a very dangerous section of LA with two LAPD officers they told me that they suspected that every single person on the street we were patrolling,and there were several hundred pedestrians,would be armed in one way or another...but mainly with a firearm...They still went into that area.
A slightly simplistic view, but ultimatly people are responsible for their own diet and lack of exercise.
But, in 2015, should we have to be?
It's not peoples responsibility to avoid catching smallpox any more, so why can't we have a scientific/medical solution to obesity, other than the endless patriarchal preaching and moralising?
I'm a fat bloke. I like eating and drinking. I do not like exercising. I want to have my cake and eat it, often literally. Life is short enough already, without depriving ourselves of one of its great pleasures.
If we can create drugs that target tumour cells, surely we can painlessly blast calories out of the body? Is anyone doing any serious research into this sort of thing?
Food is great. It really is. Let us enjoy the stuff.
I'd rather suffer through a root canal than listen to that poor woman's interview again I've bet heavily on Rubio winning the nomination and then defeating Hilary with about 300 EV but I'm a cool cat and don't panic when things don't go to plan ...ergo , Trump is just a lot of noise , a Pat Buchannon on steroids ; a political version of a WWF wrestler and about just as eloquent ...his supporters tend to be a WWF -like crowd of low information voters , many of whom will never turn out to actually vote ...I will be genuinely surprised if he wins a single state I expect Ted Cruz to win Iowa and then Rubio to win NH and Cruz may well do well in some southern states but the further away from the Bible Belt he goes the less support he will get Furthermore , Nate Silver is correct insomuch that the Blue states are weighted in favour of a moderate republican and tend to have a greater population density and more EVs ..the problem for Cruz is that he is just too redstate , too Texan and just too Elmore Gantry for folks outside of the Old South ...he even dresses like a Texan in cowboy boots , jeans and checkered shirt and reinforces the worst stereotypes of Texans ...he is not going to go down too well in those swing states Likability is very important in TV age politics and Cruz is disliked by almost everyone outside his immediate family ...he seems like a creep and a zealot
Indeed, it is, Dr Fox, but it's a straight forward message. There's no point going into the vagaries of epigenetic changes, or leptins or whatever. Fat people were much rarer a hundred years. I accept that we tended to die of different things, but type 2 diabetes wasn't a major killer.
My real point is that many people know that they have a bad diet. "Advice" is preaching to the converted or being deliberately ignored.
"• Philip Collins in The Times (pay wall) today concludes that a breakaway party from Labour is a non-starter. He calls it a fantasy and a folly, but says Labour MPs must get rid of Jeremy Corbyn instead:
By next year’s party conference Mr Corbyn could have cemented his position by changing all the party rules. That means the day will come soon when the shadow cabinet will have to force a contest in which the parliamentary party gathers around a single candidate. Mr Corbyn may not prove as meek, in those circumstances, as many of them suppose. In one sense, to act requires courage, but how courageous is it really to take the only available course?
I agree that a non-Corbynite breakaway is a foolish idea, but it is quite easy to spot the flaw in Collins's plan. Who would the single candidate be, and how would the 300,000 or so of the Labour selectorate who support Jeremy Corbyn be persuaded of his or her superior virtues? Collins concludes: "Persuading Labour members of the truth will be a tough task, like rolling a stone uphill. There is no other option." I would say the impossible is not an option.
I conclude that whatever happens is going to take a long time and that, although Things Can Only Get Better, they can get an awful lot worse first."
There really isn't much else to say on the subject, though I'm sure we'll all keep jabbering on.
For those interested, Aunty now has a ‘Live’ update thread on the Woodgreen shooting.
Based on the thread and main story however, they appear to know sweet fanny adams and have resorted to padding it out with old and unrelated news stories
RN Even some forces are admitting to having no go areas..and there certainly was one in Leeds when the Ripper murders were taking place.I know because I was embedded with the police at that time shooting a documentary...so in that case Trump is right...He may well be a nut but he is pointing out some truths that have been covered by politicians and officials for years..and lots of Americans appear to agree with him..time to get it all out there.
There is fruit on the left for UKIP to pluck, but the profile of the party's leadership makes that very difficult. If you look at the FN in France, they combine very strong anti-immigration and anti-EU rhetoric with high-profile, left-wing populist policies. That has allowed them to put down strong roots in former Communist and Socialist leaning areas. They have also worked incredibly hard at national and local level - doing the hard yards, much as the LDs did here back in the 90s and early 2000s. Again, the UKIP leadership does not seem that inclined to do this. They have their MEP salaries and their TV profiles and they seem to think that this is enough. Farage would clearly prefer a long lunch over a detailed policy and positioning discussion. That may make him a more entertaining bloke, but it lessens his impact as a game-changing politician.
UKIP probably need a female leader to get beyond 20%. The people at UKIP's HQ in Oldham were pretty much 100% male for example,
A slightly simplistic view, but ultimatly people are responsible for their own diet and lack of exercise.
But, in 2015, should we have to be?
It's not peoples responsibility to avoid catching smallpox any more, so why can't we have a scientific/medical solution to obesity, other than the endless patriarchal preaching and moralising?
I'm a fat bloke. I like eating and drinking. I do not like exercising. I want to have my cake and eat it, often literally. Life is short enough already, without depriving ourselves of one of its great pleasures.
If we can create drugs that target tumour cells, surely we can painlessly blast calories out of the body? Is anyone doing any serious research into this sort of thing?
Food is great. It really is. Let us enjoy the stuff.
Eat, drink and be merry for tommorow we may diet!
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
For those interested, Aunty now has a ‘Live’ update thread on the Woodgreen shooting.
Based on the thread and main story however, they appear to know sweet fanny adams and have resorted to padding it out with old and unrelated news stories
On TV: saw the last episode of The Last Kingdom last night. Won't spoil it, but overall I've enjoyed the series rather a lot. There are some iffy moments, but I thought the portrayal of Alfred was excellent.
Mr Dancer,
Michael Caine played a good Alfred in the Dark Knight trilogy.
AndyJS Doubt it..the production company ceased to exist some years ago and it was before the digital age..so would have been on film..which were usually ditched....
Good article, thanks. I've always been suspicious of the passive voice - it immediately makes me believe we're about to see spectacular feats of arse-covering.
518,956 people do not believe in Freedom of Speech!
Trump is a bit of a prat, but we do already have banning orders on a number of people for inflammatory statements.
Free speech in this country is history, and indeed was never absolute. The US Constitution does guarentee it though. In some ways the yanks are well ahead of us.
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
The problem I have with gastric banding/bypass, in addition to the issues associated with invasive surgery, is that it works by making you eat less. I don't want to eat less. I deeply enjoy the experience of eating, and a substantial part of my career is dependent on it.
I've heard the horror stories about the fat absorption blockers - food coming out essentially undigested at a moments notice. Brutal stuff. It really doesn't feel like 21st century medicine.
There is fruit on the left for UKIP to pluck, but the profile of the party's leadership makes that very difficult. If you look at the FN in France, they combine very strong anti-immigration and anti-EU rhetoric with high-profile, left-wing populist policies. That has allowed them to put down strong roots in former Communist and Socialist leaning areas. They have also worked incredibly hard at national and local level - doing the hard yards, much as the LDs did here back in the 90s and early 2000s. Again, the UKIP leadership does not seem that inclined to do this. They have their MEP salaries and their TV profiles and they seem to think that this is enough. Farage would clearly prefer a long lunch over a detailed policy and positioning discussion. That may make him a more entertaining bloke, but it lessens his impact as a game-changing politician.
''If you look at the FN in France, they combine very strong anti-immigration and anti-EU rhetoric with high-profile, left-wing populist policies.'' Which is why they are good old fascists. ''Again, the UKIP leadership does not seem that inclined to do this. They have their MEP salaries and their TV profiles and they seem to think that this is enough. Farage would clearly prefer a long lunch '' Which is why they are lazy fascists.
By next year’s party conference Mr Corbyn could have cemented his position by changing all the party rules.
Sorry if someone's done this and I've missed it but it would be great if someone who knows a bit about internal Labour politics could take us through what kind of rules he could conceivably change and who has a veto on changing them.
Likewise deselections: People keep saying the moderates need to move fast to prevent this, but what's the actual timetable?
518,956 people do not believe in Freedom of Speech!
Trump is a bit of a prat, but we do already have banning orders on a number of people for inflammatory statements.
Free speech in this country is history, and indeed was never absolute. The US Constitution does guarentee it though. In some ways the yanks are well ahead of us.
Are we going to ban Pegida? The German far-right group plans demonstrations in UK according to Telegraph a couple of weeks ago.
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
I've heard the horror stories about the fat absorption blockers - food coming out essentially undigested at a moments notice.
Not food per se - just fat as a liquid oil. Of course oil is an effective lubricant....
While being overweight is clearly unhealthy....some of the dietary advice over the last 50 years may not have been as robustly founded as its proponents might have you believe:
My real point is that many people know that they have a bad diet.
This is another widespread assumption that I'm not convinced is true. We don't all eat every meal at Chicken Cottage and drink gallons of Pepsi every day. I'd hazard that just as many thin or averagely-built people eat a 'bad' diet, but this goes unnoticed. Equally there are fat people, such as myself, who generally eat natural, nutritious food, but in substantial quantities.
There are tonnes of junk food places round here, which I generally have little cause to frequent. All of them appear full of skinny youngsters.
It's not 'bad' diets that causes obesity. It's big diets. (And those who eat bad diets may be storing up a bunch of other problems for themselves, regardless of their size).
518,956 people do not believe in Freedom of Speech!
Trump is a bit of a prat, but we do already have banning orders on a number of people for inflammatory statements.
Free speech in this country is history, and indeed was never absolute. The US Constitution does guarentee it though. In some ways the yanks are well ahead of us.
Are we going to ban Pegida? The German far-right group plans demonstrations in UK according to Telegraph a couple of weeks ago.
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
I've heard the horror stories about the fat absorption blockers - food coming out essentially undigested at a moments notice.
Not food per se - just fat as a liquid oil. Of course oil is an effective lubricant....
While being overweight is clearly unhealthy....some of the dietary advice over the last 50 years may not have been as robustly founded as its proponents might have you believe:
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
The problem I have with gastric banding/bypass, in addition to the issues associated with invasive surgery, is that it works by making you eat less. I don't want to eat less. I deeply enjoy the experience of eating, and a substantial part of my career is dependent on it.
I've heard the horror stories about the fat absorption blockers - food coming out essentially undigested at a moments notice. Brutal stuff. It really doesn't feel like 21st century medicine.
The 21st century solution is to identify the problem and develop ways to fix it. The problem is eating more calories than you burn there are lots of 21st century calorie trackers and exercise trackers you can get.
What you seem to be suggesting is like saying: I like smoking so I want to be able to smoke and not get cancer. What is medicine doing about it. I like unprotected sex so I want to have lots of unprotected sex and not get STDs.
My real point is that many people know that they have a bad diet.
This is another widespread assumption that I'm not convinced is true. We don't all eat every meal at Chicken Cottage and drink gallons of Pepsi every day. I'd hazard that just as many thin or averagely-built people eat a 'bad' diet, but this goes unnoticed. Equally there are fat people, such as myself, who generally eat natural, nutritious food, but in substantial quantities.
There are tonnes of junk food places round here, which I generally have little cause to frequent. All of them appear full of skinny youngsters.
It's not 'bad' diets that causes obesity. It's big diets. (And those who eat bad diets may be storing up a bunch of other problems for themselves, regardless of their size).
What you seem to be suggesting is like saying: I like smoking so I want to be able to smoke and not get cancer. What is medicine doing about it. I like unprotected sex so I want to have lots of unprotected sex and not get STDs.
Priorities, man. Once we've solved the hugely more pressing and fundamental food problem we should indeed move onto these.
Good piece on Oldham. Andrew Gwynne gets it. But how many seats will have a Jim McMahon as a candidate next time, and how many will have a Stop The War agitator?
I believe UKIP is attempting to become the Scottish National Party of northern England. In Scotland, we took our vote for granted, and we paid the price. We cannot let the same thing happen to our northern heartlands. We have to halt the malaise in northern seats, and work every single constituency like a marginal. It is about reconnecting, and earning the right to be heard through hard work and a track record of delivery through local councils. This is what won it in Oldham, and I see no reason for that success not to be replicated across the north in 2020 – as long as we all put the work in.
Someone yesterday asked me what RT were reporting on - delayed response, but today it seems they're enjoying reporting on a brawl in the Ukrainian parliament provoked by an MP presenting Prime Minister Arseny Yatsunyuk with a bouquet of roses and then trying to carry him away with one arm under his crotch. https://www.rt.com/news/325598-rada-fight-yatsenyuk-roses/
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
I've heard the horror stories about the fat absorption blockers - food coming out essentially undigested at a moments notice.
Not food per se - just fat as a liquid oil. Of course oil is an effective lubricant....
While being overweight is clearly unhealthy....some of the dietary advice over the last 50 years may not have been as robustly founded as its proponents might have you believe:
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
The problem I have with gastric banding/bypass, in addition to the issues associated with invasive surgery, is that it works by making you eat less. I don't want to eat less. I deeply enjoy the experience of eating, and a substantial part of my career is dependent on it.
I've heard the horror stories about the fat absorption blockers - food coming out essentially undigested at a moments notice. Brutal stuff. It really doesn't feel like 21st century medicine.
The 21st century solution is to identify the problem and develop ways to fix it. The problem is eating more calories than you burn there are lots of 21st century calorie trackers and exercise trackers you can get.
What you seem to be suggesting is like saying: I like smoking so I want to be able to smoke and not get cancer. What is medicine doing about it. I like unprotected sex so I want to have lots of unprotected sex and not get STDs.
When I was a med student in the early days of AIDS I was approached by a graphic designer friend who asked me about the risks as a hetero sexual. I replied that at that time the risk was very low, but may be much more of a problem in a few years. His response: "So you are saying that I screw around as much as I can now, while it is still safe?" A perfectly valid interpretation of my summary!
My real point is that many people know that they have a bad diet.
This is another widespread assumption that I'm not convinced is true. We don't all eat every meal at Chicken Cottage and drink gallons of Pepsi every day. I'd hazard that just as many thin or averagely-built people eat a 'bad' diet, but this goes unnoticed. Equally there are fat people, such as myself, who generally eat natural, nutritious food, but in substantial quantities.
There are tonnes of junk food places round here, which I generally have little cause to frequent. All of them appear full of skinny youngsters.
It's not 'bad' diets that causes obesity. It's big diets. (And those who eat bad diets may be storing up a bunch of other problems for themselves, regardless of their size).
No, it's bad diets. You think your diet is a healthy one; it isn't.
Good piece on Oldham. Andrew Gwynne gets it. But how many seats will have a Jim McMahon as a candidate next time, and how many will have a Stop The War agitator?
Yes, a very good piece, which all parties would do well to study and learn from.
However, I was a bit surprised by this bit:
Our data consistently showed that of everybody who told us they were voting Labour before the general election, eight in ten were supporting us again. But – here is the crucial part – we were actually winning over substantial numbers of people who told us before the last election that they wouldn’t be supporting us. This explains our increased vote share.
It may well explain the increased vote share, but it flatly contradicts what Labour sources were saying right up until the close of polling (and I think saying honestly, although you never can be sure).
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
I've heard the horror stories about the fat absorption blockers - food coming out essentially undigested at a moments notice.
Not food per se - just fat as a liquid oil. Of course oil is an effective lubricant....
While being overweight is clearly unhealthy....some of the dietary advice over the last 50 years may not have been as robustly founded as its proponents might have you believe:
@SirBenjamin There's a body type referred to within bodybuilding circles as fat-skinny. Those who appear very slim, but actually have very little muscle mass. I take no notice of BMI figures as they're enormously misleading.
Whilst I wouldn't fancy being very overweight for pure vanity reasons - I take a pretty open-minded view about it all. Some folks are heavy set [endomorphic] and find it very difficult to maintain a fashionable notion of *the right size*. http://www.britannica.com/science/endomorph We all know people who can live on a diet of Mars Bars and look like stick insects, the opposite is also true.
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
I've heard the horror stories about the fat absorption blockers - food coming out essentially undigested at a moments notice.
Not food per se - just fat as a liquid oil. Of course oil is an effective lubricant....
While being overweight is clearly unhealthy....some of the dietary advice over the last 50 years may not have been as robustly founded as its proponents might have you believe:
Comments
http://tinyurl.com/npr7gu5
I would not get carried away by the polling for early primaries/caucuses given the nature of this field.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/12/10/laying_odds_on_the_gop_presidential_race_128994.html
Leaves him a full war chest should he become the nominee.
He's done well to take UKIP from a fringe party to a player. But a political party has to keep moving forward. If Farage is not capable of taking UKIP from where they are today to being the clear third party (it could easily take 2 leaders before they are in a position to challenge for one of the top 2 slots) then he needs to retire gracefully and be replaced by someone who can deliver that objective.
If he stays he has negative value to UKIP (if only opportunity cost) and hence is "worse than useless"
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/12/10/laying_odds_on_the_gop_presidential_race_128994.html
Note that he thinks the single most likely outcome is that no one wins a sufficient number of delegates to claim the nomination.
Edit: I see TP has just posted the same link
Hackney South 1,496
Romford 301
Bristol West 1.779
Kingswood 260
Bethnal Green and Bow 1874
Thurrock 241
So although what Trump says sounds outrageous, and is definitely a step too far practically, any country with less than 1% Muslim population now should be doing its best to keep it at that level, or at least let it grow very slowly through birth rate rather than immigration
Merkel's off her bloody head.
I do think it a mistake for the BOOers to depict pro-EU Brits as unpatriotic. Its a bit like the cybernats saying that no true Scot can be a Unionist. By insulting the centreground it pushes the undecided into the Remain camp. No one likes being insulted and it is not a good campaigning tactic.
Police officer deaths in the UK in the line of duty in 2015: 1 (there have been 6 such deaths since 2010).
Police officer deaths in the USA in the line of duty in 2015: 69.
Which country is more likely to have no go areas for the police?
I wouldn't pretend to be an expect on UKIP politics, but I'd imagine that the likes of Evans or Nuttall (possibly Bickley or may be, but less likely, James) might all be able to do that.
Perhaps it's not 20%, may be it's 15% and 5 seats through better focus. But if you are still at 12.5% and 1 seat in 2020 what have you achieved?
Compare to Daredevil where there were two or three substantial cases before the Big Bad even appeared. Kingpin wasn't even on screen till episode five-ish and wasn't even partially fleshed out till past mid way of the season. These extra cases and later focus on the Big Bad made the series work much better.
Jones had a single, short case (which turned out to be a direct part of the Big Bad arc) and Tennant was present from the start. The story was just too thin for the number of episodes.
It has other problems - the inconsistency of Jessica's powers is a huge one, there is a comical scene with the hermetically sealed room where the actress makes clear physical effort to open the heavy door. Not intended to be funny but it was hilarious. Some of the performances were weak too - Tennant phoned it in and Nuke was meh.
Overall, I thought it was a huge let down. Man in the High Castle released the same day was much better.
#IBoughtMyDaughterAPinkToyAndNowSheDoesntWantToBeAScientistOrADoctorOrALawyerOrAPrimeMinister #OhMyDays #GetAGrip https://t.co/hLLY2Ev0nR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtG0p5JL2Dw
In the NW, the fatties have taken over, but lack of "advice" isn't the problem. In a few rare cases like thyroid problems, there may be some sort of excuse but basically, if you're fat, you're eating too much.
People generally know that stuffing their gob with high calorie food isn't a good idea, but they like to do it. Nowadays, fat people can mingle and be one of the majority. No one is allowed to comment anyway. Years ago, fat people were figures of fun, and they were rare.
So if we're serious about reducing obesity, call a fat person a porker. Probably won't happen because some will feel depressed as a consequence. But they are killing themselves and costing the NHS a fortune. The NHS will spend a another fortune advising calorifically-challenged people on what they already know. And it will fail.
I'm old now and my metabolism is slower than it used to be. I can't get away with gobbling for fun so I don't. I don't need advice, I need willpower and the knowledge that eating everything that isn't nailed down will ensure an early grave.
Edited extra bit: with any luck future prosecutions will get to the bottom of that. If police were present they must be prosecuted and incarcerated, and, if not, it's important their (collective) name is cleared.
Women in particular are as a group rather exercise shy.
This means that - per head of population - the US has 10x as many police officer deaths than in the UK. Which - given the prevalance of guns in that country - seems utterly unsurprising.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/12/10/the-asbolutely-epic-letter-jeb-bushs-super-pac-sent-to-donald-trumps-lawyer/
It's not peoples responsibility to avoid catching smallpox any more, so why can't we have a scientific/medical solution to obesity, other than the endless patriarchal preaching and moralising?
I'm a fat bloke. I like eating and drinking. I do not like exercising. I want to have my cake and eat it, often literally. Life is short enough already, without depriving ourselves of one of its great pleasures.
If we can create drugs that target tumour cells, surely we can painlessly blast calories out of the body? Is anyone doing any serious research into this sort of thing?
Food is great. It really is. Let us enjoy the stuff.
I've bet heavily on Rubio winning the nomination and then defeating Hilary with about 300 EV but I'm a cool cat and don't panic when things don't go to plan ...ergo , Trump is just a lot of noise , a Pat Buchannon on steroids ; a political version of a WWF wrestler and about just as eloquent ...his supporters tend to be a WWF -like crowd of low information voters , many of whom will never turn out to actually vote ...I will be genuinely surprised if he wins a single state
I expect Ted Cruz to win Iowa and then Rubio to win NH and Cruz may well do well in some southern states but the further away from the Bible Belt he goes the less support he will get
Furthermore , Nate Silver is correct insomuch that the Blue states are weighted in favour of a moderate republican and tend to have a greater population density and more EVs ..the problem for Cruz is that he is just too redstate , too Texan and just too Elmore Gantry for folks outside of the Old South ...he even dresses like a Texan in cowboy boots , jeans and checkered shirt and reinforces the worst stereotypes of Texans ...he is not going to go down too well in those swing states
Likability is very important in TV age politics and Cruz is disliked by almost everyone outside his immediate family ...he seems like a creep and a zealot
Indeed, it is, Dr Fox, but it's a straight forward message. There's no point going into the vagaries of epigenetic changes, or leptins or whatever. Fat people were much rarer a hundred years. I accept that we tended to die of different things, but type 2 diabetes wasn't a major killer.
My real point is that many people know that they have a bad diet. "Advice" is preaching to the converted or being deliberately ignored.
And I haven't had a rant for a while.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/daily-catch-up-prospects-of-a-labour-breakaway-fantasy-and-folly-a6768911.html
"• Philip Collins in The Times (pay wall) today concludes that a breakaway party from Labour is a non-starter. He calls it a fantasy and a folly, but says Labour MPs must get rid of Jeremy Corbyn instead:
By next year’s party conference Mr Corbyn could have cemented his position by changing all the party rules. That means the day will come soon when the shadow cabinet will have to force a contest in which the parliamentary party gathers around a single candidate. Mr Corbyn may not prove as meek, in those circumstances, as many of them suppose. In one sense, to act requires courage, but how courageous is it really to take the only available course?
I agree that a non-Corbynite breakaway is a foolish idea, but it is quite easy to spot the flaw in Collins's plan. Who would the single candidate be, and how would the 300,000 or so of the Labour selectorate who support Jeremy Corbyn be persuaded of his or her superior virtues? Collins concludes: "Persuading Labour members of the truth will be a tough task, like rolling a stone uphill. There is no other option." I would say the impossible is not an option.
I conclude that whatever happens is going to take a long time and that, although Things Can Only Get Better, they can get an awful lot worse first."
There really isn't much else to say on the subject, though I'm sure we'll all keep jabbering on.
Based on the thread and main story however, they appear to know sweet fanny adams and have resorted to padding it out with old and unrelated news stories
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-london-35015480
Gastric banding works quite well, as does gastric bypass. There are also drugs that cause fat malabsorption. I have never fancied the consequent dumping syndrome or steatorrhea myself though, but to each their own.
"X is undesirable, so I'll call it impossible, and advocate for Y instead, which is actually impossible."
Why are the BBC even bothering?
Are you trolling?
Michael Caine played a good Alfred in the Dark Knight trilogy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12044288/Why-this-is-the-week-that-Trump-went-toxic.html
Free speech in this country is history, and indeed was never absolute. The US Constitution does guarentee it though. In some ways the yanks are well ahead of us.
I've heard the horror stories about the fat absorption blockers - food coming out essentially undigested at a moments notice. Brutal stuff. It really doesn't feel like 21st century medicine.
Which is why they are good old fascists.
''Again, the UKIP leadership does not seem that inclined to do this. They have their MEP salaries and their TV profiles and they seem to think that this is enough. Farage would clearly prefer a long lunch ''
Which is why they are lazy fascists.
Likewise deselections: People keep saying the moderates need to move fast to prevent this, but what's the actual timetable?
While being overweight is clearly unhealthy....some of the dietary advice over the last 50 years may not have been as robustly founded as its proponents might have you believe:
http://thebigfatsurprise.com
To adapt the old saying about teetotallers, - 'Vegetarians don't live longer - it just feels longer'
There are tonnes of junk food places round here, which I generally have little cause to frequent. All of them appear full of skinny youngsters.
It's not 'bad' diets that causes obesity. It's big diets. (And those who eat bad diets may be storing up a bunch of other problems for themselves, regardless of their size).
TSE: It's what Ian Rush drinks!
What you seem to be suggesting is like saying: I like smoking so I want to be able to smoke and not get cancer. What is medicine doing about it. I like unprotected sex so I want to have lots of unprotected sex and not get STDs.
Big mistake. Really big mistake.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/12045740/Todays-feminists-are-so-out-of-touch-with-how-most-women-live-they-might-as-well-be-on-another-planet.html
I'll pop over and sup from the Devil's Cup...
The SNP on Edinburgh Council are opposed to a referendum on extending the tram because - no, really - "it would divide the city"
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CV79zeuWsAA7w9u.png:large
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/boxing/35056459
Well we know who the BBC are backing...a former drug dealer....
I believe UKIP is attempting to become the Scottish National Party of northern England. In Scotland, we took our vote for granted, and we paid the price. We cannot let the same thing happen to our northern heartlands. We have to halt the malaise in northern seats, and work every single constituency like a marginal. It is about reconnecting, and earning the right to be heard through hard work and a track record of delivery through local councils. This is what won it in Oldham, and I see no reason for that success not to be replicated across the north in 2020 – as long as we all put the work in.
http://labourlist.org/2015/12/how-the-oldham-west-was-won/
https://www.rt.com/news/325598-rada-fight-yatsenyuk-roses/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwa2tooywPM
In any case, I found the book about 'The Big Fat Surprise' a very welcome fillip to dining!
However, I was a bit surprised by this bit:
Our data consistently showed that of everybody who told us they were voting Labour before the general election, eight in ten were supporting us again. But – here is the crucial part – we were actually winning over substantial numbers of people who told us before the last election that they wouldn’t be supporting us. This explains our increased vote share.
It may well explain the increased vote share, but it flatly contradicts what Labour sources were saying right up until the close of polling (and I think saying honestly, although you never can be sure).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pieK7b4KLL4
Whilst I wouldn't fancy being very overweight for pure vanity reasons - I take a pretty open-minded view about it all. Some folks are heavy set [endomorphic] and find it very difficult to maintain a fashionable notion of *the right size*. http://www.britannica.com/science/endomorph We all know people who can live on a diet of Mars Bars and look like stick insects, the opposite is also true.