Playing Tony Blair's spin on eugenics

warning: Parameter 1 to video_params_v_get_params() expected to be a reference, value given in /var/www/ on line 407.

Your browser is not able to display this multimedia content.

Problems viewing videos?

Topics discussed: drug use, teen pregnancy, behavioral problems in children, and "hard to reach" (dysfunctional) families in the UK. How should society (government) intervene?



Blair mentions the problems in child behavior being recognized by teachers as early as 3, 4, 5 years of age.

Could this reflect the many cases of RAD adopted/fostered children are being diagnosed so freely these days?

Tony Blur

As with so much of what Tony Blair says, has said and will say it is usually very unclear what exactly he is talking about. The man has an enormous talent to keep speaking without saying anything relevant. He keeps pondering the trigger phrases as teen-age moms, knowing that will stick in people's minds. What he didn't address is what those interventions actually comprise. Are we talking supportive interventions or disruptive interventions. He also never states clearly what sort of families he is talking about, multiple problems and teen agers are not very descriptive. As always Mr. Blair is very slippery on the subject.

What's in a politician's best interest, anyway?

For the professional politician, isn't the rule to long-term success all about pleasing those who pay his bills?

I find it very rare these days to find a politician risking his/her own job security for the sake of "problemed people".  [Why spend money on "the poor" when a government's real interests are about economic strength and productivity?  It was the British who sent their "problem children" to work the tobacco fields for England's wealth and future prosperity.  Look what that brought a country that thought they could simply ship-off their problems to a new part of the world!  I believe Revolutions and public uprisings are the result of people saying, "We have had enough of you!"]

In any case, is it just me who thinks "crisis interventions" are usually needed because a corrupt political/religious hand got involved in a problem, in the first place?  [After all, it seems every crime has a price that can be paid to someone willing to "offer protection".... ]


re: What's in a politician's best interest, anyway?

The problem with many career politicians is their lack of authenticity. Most of what they say is said to please the voter, much of what they do is done to please their contributors. Just today I read somewhere that when you contact a representative, the first thing that is done is check if you are a registered voter. If not: Fuck you.

Though I think there are crises people really inflict upon themselves, most crises are the result of a whole lot of circumstances in which politics as well as religion have played  huge part. Many crises have to do with poverty and bad education, both of which politics have either not done much about and often have contributed to.

"crisis pregnancy"

I believe that's one such crisis that can be caused by a parent, priest or politician, but then....  what the hell do I know!



MOST politicians are VOTE-WHORES!
Priests/preachers/pastors can cause a pregnancy
to become a CRISIS by their own choice of being either Christ-like or
Parents, IMO should never consider a pregnancy a crisis, whether
it is their own or anyone else's. 
That's how children become the throw-away society.

One Step Up From Bottom,

Pound Pup Legacy