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

why does her husband put up with it? mine would have kicked me half way up the street by now!

just think he seems so sad about not seeing his son, it is so unfair despite whatever he may or may not have done. I just think this woman is a nasty p[eice of work tbh

It is all a bit weird isn't it, the whole being married 9 days and then starting an affair thing? Aloha, I didn't know that about the dna test. Re the double standard I just haven't seen much criticism of his having an affair with a married woman but as I don't know that much about it and haven't read widely on the subject I should shut the f* up really! I bow to your superior knowledge of the coverage!

Aloha, that's really funny! Let's speculate about how democracy is being undermined by various powerful men's mistresses who have not been elected but whisper policies into their ear at night time without any democratic mandate! Maybe that's an argument for having a First Lady with such a high status and profile? At least they know which woman is doing the whispering.

I know, I'm obsessed! I find it utterly amazing. Plus there is the media connection which also fascinates me. The Quinn/Fortier wedding was THE event of the year...very glamorous & 'romantic'. She was saying even then that she was desperate for children. And just nine weeks later....

When this story first broke, before anyone realised the kid/s were his, I was most shocked that a Labour minister was having an affair with a high Tory.

Aloha!

That smiley was at your being obsessed btw!

I had a lunch with Blunkett relatively recently (beginning of the summer and not on my own!) and he was good company. His personal charm at odds with some of his antics in the HO. I think that's why I feel sorry for him - he did win me over and I think he's a decent bloke at heart. Even writing it makes me feel a bit naive though....

And I'm supposed to be working and I'm SOOOOO bored and pregnant.

I'm a bit disturbed by the idea that the partner who is not married has less responsibility for the adultery than the partner who is married. The whole point of marrige is that it is a public relationship, which demands that society support it. If you're going to say that it's just a private arrangement between two people and any third party can come along at any time and disrupt it with no moral opprobrium heaped on him or her as a result, then you've effectively abolished marriage as a concept. (Although actually, I think that's what has happened to all intents and purposes in the Western World.) Somebody else has already pointed out that adultery has always implied equal guilt of both adulterous parties, whether married or not. Thirty years ago, there would have been no doubt in most people's minds that DB was an adulterer, as guilty as the mad bint he was shagging - his duty as a member of society was to support Kimberly Clarke's marriage, not disrupt it. Their guilt would have been judged as equal.

but is the partner who is not attched not actually staraying? because surely the person who has a husband/wife ids the worst in all this?!@ i wouklld fink so

Oh, Caligula, thank you for "the mad bint he was shagging", I nearly fell off my chair.

fio, I agree with you, they were both wrong but the mad bint was much much wronger.

glad you could translant that jan

I definitely disagree, Caligula. I think that in the messiness of real life personal betrayal is the thing that is morally wrong and painful. Wouldn't you think a man who ran off with his brother's wife had done something worse that one who ran off with a stranger's wife, all else being equal, for example?

I can see the reasoning that both are guilty but he didn't make public vows to be faithful, she did. Also, this is where women get slagged off more than men. The mistress is deemed to be conniving etc and the wife deemed to be dim and/or guilty in some way for "forcing" him to have an affair. The bloke just gets the "Aw shucks, he's a bloke, you know what men are like" treatment. So, in this case, I'm glad that she is being reviled more than him but wish the same logic applied to affairs that happen the more usual way round. Her husband appears to be either dim or conniving though.

my own honest opinion

thay want money

they dont give a shit who gets hurt

money money publicity

makes me sick, poor kids

I totally agree that her personal betrayal was much worse, but marriage isn't just about personal arrangements, it's a publicly recognised status totally different from any other relationship (in theory - although I think in the real world atm that special status has been eroded to the point where marriage is being treated as a purely personal arrangement).

Yep, guess I see where you're coming from, caligula. I'm not a marriage fan so hadn't thought about it like that. For me the commitment thing is what matters in relationships, so a person who professes commitment to a partner and then has an affair would have a lot more to answer for than their lover, IMO, unless there were unusaual circumstances.

i also think that DB's side of the adultery seems pretty clearly to have been based on falling head over heels in love, whereas KF-Q's motives are currently much less clear, as evidenced by aloha, at least. I really think the fact that he fell deeply in love is an ameliorating factor in DB's behaviour. Is that a bit wet of me?

No, I agree with you scummy.

Being in love is a state of madness I think. Not excusing him but...

If I was an intelligent articulate married woman looking for either a sperm donor (pref academic professional politically appropriate yada yada) or a bit of tumble on the side, I would have not have chosen someone
a) so well known in public life in such high office
b) such a man of deep personal conviction and belief and somewhat stubborn and VERY principled (we could argue that but for my postings sake let's not )
c) nor would I have left evidence via my nanny's visa, my abuse of railcard when actually rather wealthy of any affair.

So from these ideas I can only summise that KQF fully intended for this to land DB in fairly hot shit at some point and she (perhaps)imagined she could use it as leverage to prevent him from interfering in her life once she had tired of him and to stop him being a part in his sons life.

She never really understood the term morally principled did she? Yes he had an affair with a married woman... His only failing seems to wrong woman, wrong time
Her misdemeanours are still to count up fully...
I am not at all surprised that he was the sort of man who would choose his child over his career. The cost to him will be enormous it seems.
The whole thing is a good example of how not to win friends and influence people...
And Michael Howard launching that biog to the front bench?
At least DB was interesting enough to actually biog you limp lily livered little prat...
Ps how can I make my bloody nick xmassy?

If I was an intelligent articulate married woman looking for either a sperm donor (pref academic professional politically appropriate yada yada) or a bit of tumble on the side, I would have not have chosen someone
a) so well known in public life in such high office
b) such a man of deep personal conviction and belief and somewhat stubborn and VERY principled (we could argue that but for my postings sake let's not )
c) nor would I have left evidence via my nanny's visa, my abuse of railcard when actually rather wealthy of any affair.

So from these ideas I can only summise that KQF fully intended for this to land DB in fairly hot shit at some point and she (perhaps)imagined she could use it as leverage to prevent him from interfering in her life once she had tired of him and to stop him being a part in his sons life.

She never really understood the term morally principled did she? Yes he had an affair with a married woman... His only failing seems to wrong woman, wrong time
Her misdemeanours are still to count up fully...
I am not at all surprised that he was the sort of man who would choose his child over his career. The cost to him will be enormous it seems.
The whole thing is a good example of how not to win friends and influence people...
And Michael Howard launching that biog to the front bench?
At least DB was interesting enough to actually biog you limp lily livered little prat...
Ps how can I make my bloody nick xmassy?

I think that's crediting someone with being a bit too machiavellian and scheming. Mostly people don't plot in that way - I think it's much more likely that she genuinely did think she'd leave her husband for DB and then changed her mind (irresponsible, selfish woman.) If she were that Machiavellian, she would have insisted at the outset to DB that the baby was her DH's, and not allowed him to become involved in the baby's life at all right from the beginning.

well perhaps she waited until she was expecting another child before she decided he had outstayed his usefulness to her?
I am presuming her to be very manipulate and scheming, because nothing I have read or seen tells me she is anything other than that...
I would be happy to know that someone really was not that devious in all honesty...