What do they mean by "Decisive Action?"

[betsy]

After all is said and done, opposition strategists still keep reiterating that "Harper did not take any decisive action" regarding the Ritz fiasco. Are they not listening? Are they sleeping? Or worse, they don't even know what they're bleating about? Harper did deliver a very decisive action and it went over their heads!

Harper had made a clear decision when he decided that Ritz's gaffe does not warrant his removal from office, and he explained why. Ritz was not fired or forced to resign. That was Harper's decisive action!

The oppositions may not agree with his decision but that does not mean Harper did not take any decisive action. It only means that the opposition does not agree with Harper's decision.

And with quite a resounding decisiveness at that, may I add. Even amidst some public outrage that also showed one victim's son speaking out against Ritz.

Unlike somebody we know who anxiously offered the heads of his MPs on a silver platter just to soothe ruffled feathers, this Prime Minister really sticks to what he thinks is right.

And the media/journalists panel at a CBC show all agreed with Harper that Ritz should not be fired or be forced to resign for his stupid comment. One journalist even went as far as explaining the danger of firing people just for stupid comments, since everybody makes a mistake every now and then.

Edited September 27, 2008 by betsy

[independent]

After all is said and done, opposition strategists still keep reiterating that "Harper did not take any decisive action" regarding the Ritz fiasco. Are they not listening? Are they sleeping? Or worse, they don't even know what they're bleating about? Harper did deliver a very decisive action and it went over their heads!

Harper had made a clear decision when he decided that Ritz's gaffe does not warrant his removal from office, and he explained why. Ritz was not fired or forced to resign. That was Harper's decisive action!

The oppositions may not agree with his decision but that does not mean Harper did not take any decisive action. It only means that the opposition does not agree with Harper's decision.

And with quite a resounding decisiveness at that, may I add. Even amidst some public outrage that also showed one victim's son speaking out against Ritz.

Unlike somebody we know who anxiously offered the heads of his MPs on a silver platter just to soothe ruffled feathers, this Prime Minister really sticks to what he thinks is right.

And the media/journalists panel at a CBC show all agreed with Harper that Ritz should not be fired or be forced to resign for his stupid comment. One journalist even went as far as explaining the danger of firing people just for stupid comments, since everybody makes a mistake every now and then.

http://www.thestar.com/article/502636

"Minister Ritz has repeatly disappointed scientists who work for him during the listeria crisis" institute president MICHELE DEMERS said in a statement. "for sure I was a Tory. Now this is going to change me. No doubt about it."

Edited September 27, 2008 by independent

[independent]

http://www.thestar.com/article/502636

"Minister Ritz has repeatly disappointed scientists who work for him during the listeria crisis" institute president MICHELE DEMERS said in a statement. "for sure I was a Tory. Now this is going to change me. No doubt about it."

http://www.canadaeast.com/news/article/418658

There is all kinds of news coverage on Minister Ritz several mistakes in judgement. Its not just the NDP or the Liberals that think Ritz should Quit . We are talking about a Minister of Agriculture on official business not watching what he is saying.

The press will not let this go. It will be a distraction to the conservatives. Anyone who supports poor judgement like that should certainly not be in public office.

Edited September 27, 2008 by independent

[betsy]

http://www.thestar.com/article/502636

"Minister Ritz has repeatly disappointed scientists who work for him during the listeria crisis" institute president MICHELE DEMERS said in a statement. "for sure I was a Tory. Now this is going to change me. No about about it."

And yet the title of that article is: "Harper pressed to fire Ritz for listeriosis jokes"

It would've been a different story if he was being pressed to fire Ritz for something serious like mis-management or negligence, but even that statement of Michele Demers did not really say anything specific.

Disappointed how? And isn't it odd that if Ritz had "repeatedly disappointed" scientists, why only bring it up now? If it's repeatedly happening - this so-called disappointing of scientists- it means it's been going on for quite some time.

She picked quite a good timing for this revelation, didn't she?

If Ms Demers had seen or known any serious mis-management on Ritz' part that could be detrimental to the health of Canadians, isn't she being negligent as well for keeping a lid on it all this time? What took her so long to come forward? What, if the listeriosis joke didn't happen, she'll just keep mum about it?

I also notice that no one else in that article cited any other reasons other than that insensitive joke - a joke that was said in what was supposed to be a private meeting.

[betsy]

http://www.canadaeast.com/news/article/418658

The press will not let this go. It will be a distraction to the conservatives. Anyone who supports poor judgement like that should certainly not be in public office.

It's already been let go!

The only time Ritz is being mentioned at all lately is when the pundits ponder in awe about how all these gaffes seem to have just bounced off Harper.

What more, with the journatlist panels from the CBC - imagine that, the CBC of all networks - agreeing that Harper did the right thing in not firing Ritz only increased the leadership score and credibility of Harper!

I seriously think that with all the obvious dirt-digging all the way back from the Cadman affair to the Elections Canada fiasco etc..., all those did was innoculate Harper.

People are so tired of the cheap tricks that came out one after the other from the oppositions that now, they're just like the boy who cried wolf!

Edited September 27, 2008 by betsy

[betsy]

Of course, as usual Dion and Layton had placed themseves in a corner again.

Quickly jumping in with their mouthy self-righteous demands for Harper to get rid of Ritz, I guess they can't do anything else but force the resignation of their own erring MPs.

Imagine how it was for these two opposition leaders when the journalist panel agreed with Harper's decision. Furthermore, one of the journalists talked of the danger of firing a minister over stupid petty mistakes!

Ouch.

Layton was asked today how he hoped to win over Harper since he already lost a number of MPs.

Somebody should've taught Dion and Layton to "look before you leap." That's one of the top qualities of a true leader.

[independent]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/politics/home

Article about food safety has been largely ignored for years but has gone from bad to worse under HARPER.

Looks like Harper may not have had a Decisive Action.

[OddSox]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/politics/home

Article about food safety has been largely ignored for years but has gone from bad to worse under HARPER.

Looks like Harper may not have had a Decisive Action.

Union officials quoted in the Globe and Mail with a misleading headline - I guess you think that's responsible journalism. Just about the only fact in the story is "Dr. Brian Evans, the chief veterinary officer at the CFIA, has said the number of inspectors at the agency climbed from 2,820 in 2006 to 3,020 in 2008."

[independent]

Union officials quoted in the Globe and Mail with a misleading headline - I guess you think that's responsible journalism. Just about the only fact in the story is "Dr. Brian Evans, the chief veterinary officer at the CFIA, has said the number of inspectors at the agency climbed from 2,820 in 2006 to 3,020 in 2008."

http://www.canadians.org/wordwarriors/2008/aug-28.html

Here is another site with more information where you can ignore information especially about the firing of the whistle blower. You keep closing your eyes too the facts you will not be able to make an informed opinion. And what is worse your misinformation will deter others from making an informed position so I hope people will read the post and decide for themselves what is believable and what is not.

[segnosaur]

http://www.canadians.org/wordwarriors/2008/aug-28.html

Here is another site with more information where you can ignore information especially about the firing of the whistle blower.

Ummm... if you go to that link and look up information about the author, you'd see the following in his biography:

He is also a leading activist and analyst in the movement against corporate globalization....

He is a research associate and board member with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and has published six studies for the Centre including examinations of the Canadian tax system, charter schools and a study, "In Defence of public services."...He is a past executive board member of the Council of Canadians...

So basically the author of that particular work has been involved with every left-wing lobby group and movement that's out there.

In short, he's not exactly the type of person you should expect an unbiased opinion from.

[independent]

Ummm... if you go to that link and look up information about the author, you'd see the following in his biography:

He is also a leading activist and analyst in the movement against corporate globalization....

He is a research associate and board member with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and has published six studies for the Centre including examinations of the Canadian tax system, charter schools and a study, "In Defence of public services."...He is a past executive board member of the Council of Canadians...

So basically the author of that particular work has been involved with every left-wing lobby group and movement that's out there.

In short, he's not exactly the type of person you should expect an unbiased opinion from.

Their is no one out their with an unbiased opinion. You have to look at both sides and see which one makes the most sense. Or see if it needs further investigation. Often when their are problems their are all kinds of warnings signs we have ignored.

[betsy]

Their is no one out their with an unbiased opinion. You have to look at both sides and see which one makes the most sense. Or see if it needs further investigation. Often when their are problems their are all kinds of warnings signs we have ignored.

So you've based your opinion on some media reports. So far all is quiet again.

If there is truly some legs to this so-called food safety mishandling, don't you think the oppositions, most especially the Liberals who are so desperate these days that all they do is fish for muck to save their neck, don't you think they won't be latching on to this?

Face it. This is nothing more than just another desperate action by the Liberals. That's the only decisive action they're good at - digging up dirt ! Years of experience, my friend.

[Wild Bill]

http://www.thestar.com/article/502636

"Minister Ritz has repeatly disappointed scientists who work for him during the listeria crisis" institute president MICHELE DEMERS said in a statement. "for sure I was a Tory. Now this is going to change me. No doubt about it."

"Sure I was a Tory! Honest! For years and years! Since I was a baby!"

Firesign Theater said it best years ago:

"You can believe me, because I never lie!"