David Blunkett affair

[Tinker]

Sad lonely man? None of our business? Discuss?

Must say, it would be more believable if she were the blind partner

agree with the peameistress

I heard the blessed Margaret Hodge on the radio last night describing Blunkett as a man of integrity.

When did it become an act of integrity to go to bed with someone else's wife in our culture? I thought that was still considered a dishonourable act? But I obviously live in a different world to Mrs Hodge.

And the idea that this guy has the right to force her to DNA test these babies - what legal precedent is there for this? Can anyone just come along and tell me to DNA test my babies? Could the plumber or the milkman suddenly decide that he wants paternity testing done on my kids? Are there certain criteria men have to fulfill before they can force a DNA test? If anyone knows the answer to this, please tell me, I'm genuinely interested.

and agree ( post pc crash!) with aloha
He must have lied

thinks the dna test thing us a new labour " right" ( i cna hear my mum about to start on this!!)

From the Guardian today:

"Mr Blunkett has conceded that he gave Mrs Quinn a first class rail ticket assigned to him as an MP and for use by his family - but said that, at the time in August 2002, he thought she was to be his wife."

Mr Quinn has been treated abominably but I do feel for Blunko too - sorry.

I agree with this piece from the Telegraph (not the Telegraph????)..."there are no villains to be found here now, just a very human mess"

Of course none of the people (journos and others) rushing to point the finger on his use of the official car etc will ever have made not-strictly-correct-and-moral use of any perks of their jobs? (We don't know about the visa yet but the information came from Mrs Quinn...if he really did use his influence to push that through then yes, he should resign.)

I must be very naive because i am really shocked by this story!

What tends to be in the papers is salacious gossip, but no one saying adultery is wrong - except on MN . What annoys me is that single parent families are fair game for all sorts of criticisms all the time, but there is so little criticism of adultery because we say, oh, that's a private matter, as if the fact that Britain has the highest divorce rate in Europe and loads of single parents is unconnected to the fact so much adultery is going on at home and amongst our friends, and our politicians, from John Major through to David Blunkett.

I feel so sorry for the husband and the poor boy, let alone the unborn child.

I have some sympathy with TAC's view - if these people weren't cabinet ministers, they'd be Jerry Springer Show candidates and everyone would be laughing at how chaotic and sad their lives are, instead of talking about "human tragedy" and suchlike. No-one talks about the human tragedies of the Waynes and Waynettas of the world, they just take the piss out of their jumpsuits.

Hmmm, maybe Trisha could do their DNA tests for them, and Mr Blunkett and Mr Quinn wrestle on the floor while Kimberley screams 'Leave it darlin', 'e's not worth it!"

Oh, we shouldn't!

politicians are always fucking someone they shouldnt i dnt know why we all act so shocked.

what i did find shocking are the reports that he looked over his fuckpieces nannies application for visa
my analogy is thus:

if i am the giver of lottery grants and my tennis club would like a grant of errrrrm £100,000 of lottery sports money and i look over it - i dont fast rack it, i dont tell anyone to treat it specially - what i do however is tell my close tennis pal applying for the grant the best way to fill int he form -the best words to use, the phrases to look for.

that is what i find immoral becuase if this kind of help is available to one person it should freely be available to all people seeking a visa - this is blatant discrimination.

am not particularly fussed who he is fucking becuase i dont hold politicians in very high regard anyway

can't stop thinking about this. SHE's the mad one, surely. what is she doing, leaking all the stuff about him looking at nanny visa/rail tickets etc (which seems pretty insubstantial to me) to the press?
where's the advantage, to her, in slurring the reputation/future of the man who seems to be the father of her children?
how does this give her a better negotiating position? surely it's not going to affect DB's access rights, is it?
oddly now i feel quite sorry for DB now, as well as her husband.

I agree, bp - she is coming across as mad, bad and dangerous to know. She threatened him that she would do this if he didn't back off, and as he didn't she is doing it, although there really doesn't sound to be much to it.

Feel sorriest for the little boy and the new baby really.

This business doesn't give me much hope for curtailing the number of teen pgs when our 'esteemed leaders' can't keep their you-know-what's in their pants.

agree with bakedpotato, Kimberley Fortier/Quinn/whatever is the bad guy in this (pending the independent investigation into Blunkett's alleged misuse of his position to fasttrack a visa application for her nanny) - she had the affair and was married at the time. And she's behaving in an unacceptable manner towards the man who may be the father of her children and may subsequently be granted access to them. Bonkers.

For me, Blunkett comes across as a bully who can't stand women defying him (which was pretty much his reputation locally when I lived in his manor). Clearly Quinn's behaviour is shocking but if Blunkett gave a toss about his alleged unborn child he wouldn't cause his ex-partner such stress. Stress linked to premature birth, amongst other things.

You will like Rebecca Atkinson's piece in yesterday's Guardian then, edam - specifically the punchline

ROFL JanH. ITV early evening news (6.30) doing a package on this including 'what effect will all this stress be having on a heavily pregnant woman', by the way...

I read somewher over the weekend that she went away at the weeknd with Blunkett citing the fact that she felt guilty about working and wanted to spend quality time with her child. can you imagine - feeling crap about not being her so just taking our child away for the weekend, just me??? I don't think so. It will have suited the husband very well, he'll have known about it I bet you

but edam, she is responsible for upping her own stress levels this week, isn't she? i can't work out why she's taken it to this level.

Perhaps this will make politicians think twice before they start sounding off against single parents being the root of all evil etc... For what its worth I think its up to the married person to say no since they are the ones that entered into the marriage in the first place. Not that I agree with DB carrying on with a married woman but he does have a legal right to find out whether the kids are his and I guess I can understand that. If I was him I would have waited until the second baby was though.

I didn't like the Guardian article as for me the fact that he is blind isn't the issue, I didn't even think about that to be homest.
I do think his lover has a great deal to do with the mess she is in. I can imagine Blunkett as being quite stubborn (had a boyfriend not so dissimilar and it took ages for him to get the message that he was dumped... and he wasn't blind!)... so can appreciate she felt she had to do something.... the point was she made the mistake of getting involved (as a married woman) in the first place !

She does seem a bit unstable though doesn't she? She started her affair with DB 9 weeks after getting married to second husband. First marriage due to her infidelity. Wonder if she used DB for children? She's 44 now and her husband had a vasectomy reversed, assume of guarantees of success. And now DB, by demanding DNA tests, is ruining teh plan? I'm not getting carried away thinking about this honetsly. I do think though, that if he is so heartbroken (and I don't doubt that he is) he shoudl really be off work with stress himself.

LOL Tinker about DB being off for stress !