Mistahbear are you serious?
A couple of clips of Hazel Blears has what, exactly, to do with the topic of this thread, Labour's 10yr Gov record on British 'liberalism'?
Do you honestly think a politician (any politician) as they launch their campaign, for whatever, has much of anything anything to do with the
specifics of, nevermind validate or invalidate, the 10 yrs of the party's record in Gov on things like Devolution, Freedom of Information, the
incorporation of the ECHR etc etc?
No offense to you but it's precisely that kind of 'point missing' vacuous nonsense and today's (usually media inspired - such are the delights of
a 24hr 'rolling news' society) insistence on concentrating on the almost wholly superficial in politics that has bred the very approach you are
holding up to criticise.
The record of this Gov in terms of "liberalism" (in the actual sense of the word, not the current American right's abusive distortion of the term)
is neither addressed nor represented by some pointless and idiotic questions put in a TV show about the Labour party's own leadership and deputy
(What on earth did anyone expect she could possibly possibly have said anyways?
The truth is as she said, Gordon Brown will be elected by a landslide in the Labour party.
And what? No point wishing it were different, it isn't.
BTW.....yes I did watch the 1st clip all the way through (it's only courteous if you post links etc to actually look at them if you expect debate or
comment about them) and actually she was absolutely correct about the contrast between this Gov'rs record & the appalling 20yr record of the last
tory Gov and how little they have actually changed since then
By all means debate the shortcomings or otherwise of Labour's record and whether and where they have extended democracy and 'liberalised' our
political life but simply saying 'I thought s/he looked poor at *whatever*' when speaking about something unrelated really isn't much of a point at
[edit on 28-4-2007 by sminkeypinkey]