Smallc Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 And no, I'm not talking about Raitt, who, so far as I've been able to see so far, hasn't really done or said anything wrong. Of course not, she's one of the good guys....now if she were a Liberal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 She is both a liar and a fool in my opinion. She should be dismissed out of hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 (edited) Both Harper and Raitt attack the opposition. As I understand neither Prentice nor Aglukak had received any apologies from Raitt. Note that John Baird swiftly apologized to David Miller. How much do Conservatives value each other? Edited June 10, 2009 by daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Both Harper and Raitt attack the opposition. As I understand neither Prentice nor Aglukak had received any apologies from Raitt.How much do Conservatives value each other? There is a very large game being played out within the party. They are preparing for a fight, and Harper is letting these people do what they want to do as he decides which way he goes from here. Iggy has changed the game, Steve is working on his options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 She is both a liar and a fool in my opinion. She should be dismissed out of hand. Could you perhaps go beyond your personal invective to give examples? And btw, if we "dismiss" all the politicians who lie we'll have none left. Nor do Canadians seem to attach a lot of importance to truth. Chretien was a notorious liar on almost every issue but he was repeatedly re-elected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Both Harper and Raitt attack the opposition. As I understand neither Prentice nor Aglukak had received any apologies from Raitt. Actually, I think the Health Minister did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Of course not, she's one of the good guys....now if she were a Liberal. If she were a Liberal I would still see nothing wrong in what she's done on these issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Could you perhaps go beyond your personal invective to give examples? And btw, if we "dismiss" all the politicians who lie we'll have none left. Nor do Canadians seem to attach a lot of importance to truth. Chretien was a notorious liar on almost every issue but he was repeatedly re-elected. Examples, well how about how she has handled herself in question period with respect to questions placed surrounding the current problems? What about what she has said to other ministers to their face and what she has been caught saying on tape? Dismissing liars from government, you think that is a bad thing Argus? You would see these scum protected and then pensioned off? Chretien was re-elected, then again so was Mulroney, both were liars and both lost the respect of the public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 (edited) Examples, well how about how she has handled herself in question period with respect to questions placed surrounding the current problems? What about what she has said to other ministers to their face and what she has been caught saying on tape? What about them? Examples please. Engage your brain and tell me exactly what she said - not what someone says she said - and why that was wrong or dishonest. Dismissing liars from government, you think that is a bad thing Argus? You would see these scum protected and then pensioned off? Chretien was re-elected, then again so was Mulroney, both were liars and both lost the respect of the public. I have little stomach for it but that is the system. The best we seem able to hope for is to try to support ones who lie less often than the ones we don't vote for. Edited June 10, 2009 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 What about them? Examples please. Engage your brain and tell me exactly what she said - not what someone says she said - and why that was wrong or dishonest. From Government transcripts...http://www2.parl.gc.ca/housechamberbusines...58163#TopSearch Carolyn Bennett - St. Paul'sMr. Speaker, the issue is not a staff member. The issue is the minister and the oath she took. If the Minister of Natural Resources cannot even manage her secret documents, why should Canadians be surprised that we have an isotope crisis? Lisa Raitt - Minister of Natural Resources Mr. Speaker, clear procedures were in place in my office and, as indicated, they were not followed in this case. We have taken strong and corrective action. The person who was responsible for the documents has offered to resign and I have accepted it. That is clear accountability. Carolyn Bennett - St. Paul's Mr. Speaker, ”Ministers are always responsible for the protection of classified documents”. Who said this? The Prime Minister of Canada. So who is responsible and accountable according to her boss, the Prime Minister? Is that clear accountability? Is it an honest response to a valid round of questions regarding government "SECRETS" and the competence of a Minister of the Crown? I have little stomach for it but that is the system. The best we seem able to hope for is to try to support ones who lie less often than the ones we don't vote for. I will suggest that such a means has not to date been very damned effective at making the scum accountable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Both Harper and Raitt attack the opposition. As I understand neither Prentice nor Aglukak had received any apologies from Raitt. Note that John Baird swiftly apologized to David Miller. How much do Conservatives value each other? [/quote Swiftly compared to Raitt yes but he didn't apologize until yesterday AM on the phone, did question period have anything to do with it?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 I just got a phone call from a friend that said she heard on the news, that some very rich Tories supporters are withdrawing their financially support. The "sexy" thing really made them angry. Don't be surprised if the Tories get lawsuits, if people start dying because of the shortage of isotopes. I wonder if they'll go from 145 down to 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 I just got a phone call from a friend that said she heard on the news, that some very rich Tories supporters are withdrawing their financially support. The "sexy" thing really made them angry. Don't be surprised if the Tories get lawsuits, if people start dying because of the shortage of isotopes. I wonder if they'll go from 145 down to 2? Sounds like the old lawyer joke... What do you have when two lawyers are up the their necks in sand? Not enough sand. I would giggle to see Harper go down that hard, but I would not bet a single dime on it happening, he will lose power but not to that extent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 About 20 minutes ago, Raitt was on nation wide apologizing and even had tears, or tried to, to cancer patients in Canada. She tried to give reasons why she said what she said then talked about her dad and brother dying of cancer. Well, knowing her own relatives died of cancer and yet she said what she did, means little to me. I swear to the God above, if my spouse can not get the medical help he may need to check on his cancer, I will sue Raitt and Harper personally! I'm sure there will be class action suits if this appears to be the direction of people dying . I heard on C-Pac this AM, at the committee meeting from yesterday, the head of the nuclear medicine, stressed the situation is beyond crisis mode, and he also had tears in his eyes when he thought of the children that need those isotopes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 About 20 minutes ago, Raitt was on nation wide apologizing and even had tears, or tried to, to cancer patients in Canada. She tried to give reasons why she said what she said then talked about her dad and brother dying of cancer.... I wonder if she cried with Sven Robinson when Sue Rodriguez died. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 I think you're a little ahead of yourself on class-action lawsuits. Maybe look into it a little bit further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 The guy who wrote the books .. for dummies, well, he better hurray and print the one for "Minister of Natural Resources for dummies"! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver King Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 And no, I'm not talking about Raitt, who, so far as I've been able to see so far, hasn't really done or said anything wrong. Your inability to appreciate Raitt's insensitive scheming and flippant remarks is appropriate to a supporter of a party which reserves unto itself every type of gutter politics, be it tasteless negative TV ads or the financial destruction of it's opposition. Your hypocracy is insufferable and overwhelms that single moment of good humor you served up months ago when you declared, "I am not a partisan". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Your inability to appreciate Raitt's insensitive scheming and flippant remarks is appropriate to a supporter of a party which reserves unto itself every type of gutter politics, be it tasteless negative TV ads or the financial destruction of it's opposition. Your hypocracy is insufferable and overwhelms that single moment of good humor you served up months ago when you declared, "I am not a partisan". Argus should know that it is wrong to think that death is only a money issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Your inability to appreciate Raitt's insensitive scheming and flippant remarks is appropriate to a supporter of a party which reserves unto itself every type of gutter politics, be it tasteless negative TV ads or the financial destruction of it's opposition. Your hypocracy is insufferable and overwhelms that single moment of good humor you served up months ago when you declared, "I am not a partisan". Oh dear, don't burst a blood vessel or something! Look I detest the way the government has dealt with this issue as well. Raitt's emotional response was not something that I saw, but I find it very distasteful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 I just got a phone call from a friend that said she heard on the news, that some very rich Tories supporters are withdrawing their financially support. The "sexy" thing really made them angry. Don't be surprised if the Tories get lawsuits, if people start dying because of the shortage of isotopes. I wonder if they'll go from 145 down to 2? The isotope issue isn't just effecting Canada, so I don't really see what particular grounds their are to sue anyone on. It's like suing because a gas station runs out of gas due to refinery problems. I'm afraid some commodities are rare, difficult to come by, and supply can be interrupted. The real fault for the shortage, to my mind, is an insufficient number of reactors around the world that can produce these isotopes. But back to Raitt, I think Harper made a huge blunder in not accepting her resignation. She can't very well re-tender it, and even if she did, Harper would look like a fool for accepting this time, and not the last time. The real lesson here is, well, I dunno what the lesson is. Only think impure thoughts, don't speak them? Get better staffers? Apologize more quickly, and not after defending moronic comments by stupid statements like "it was private!"? I don't necessarily think Raitt's a bad minister, I think she's an unlucky one. Unfortunately, in politics, there is no difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Oh dear, don't burst a blood vessel or something!Look I detest the way the government has dealt with this issue as well. Raitt's emotional response was not something that I saw, but I find it very distasteful. Here's the video................ http://www.ctv.ca/news Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 The isotope issue isn't just effecting Canada, so I don't really see what particular grounds their are to sue anyone on. It's like suing because a gas station runs out of gas due to refinery problems. I'm afraid some commodities are rare, difficult to come by, and supply can be interrupted. The real fault for the shortage, to my mind, is an insufficient number of reactors around the world that can produce these isotopes.But back to Raitt, I think Harper made a huge blunder in not accepting her resignation. She can't very well re-tender it, and even if she did, Harper would look like a fool for accepting this time, and not the last time. The real lesson here is, well, I dunno what the lesson is. Only think impure thoughts, don't speak them? Get better staffers? Apologize more quickly, and not after defending moronic comments by stupid statements like "it was private!"? I don't necessarily think Raitt's a bad minister, I think she's an unlucky one. Unfortunately, in politics, there is no difference. Canada's is the largest supplier of isotopes and IF she knows her jobs, she knows that reactor has to stay active. By saying it would only take money to fix the problem shows she either didn't pay the money or she doesn't know what she taking about and therefore ,endangering people's health in Canada and around the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Here's the video................ http://www.ctv.ca/news Okay now I am offended! She did not apologize at all! She expressed sorrow for anybody who took offense to the comment, she did not say she was wrong in saying it in the first place. She expressed no regret for the remark at all. It seems that that bad staffer taped her talking in private where her real feelings could be spoken aloud. I have no sympathy for her at all. I think that is one cold hearted women who would call such a crisis sexy, a crisis which took the lives of so many of her own family, she would seek a power struggle with another minister to grab the credit for fixing it. The moral question that she did not see, is a question I would leave with her to answer whether or not it was a moral thing to say and do considering her background and relationship with cancer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted June 10, 2009 Report Share Posted June 10, 2009 Canada's is the largest supplier of isotopes and IF she knows her jobs, she knows that reactor has to stay active. By saying it would only take money to fix the problem shows she either didn't pay the money or she doesn't know what she taking about and therefore ,endangering people's health in Canada and around the world. Like I said, this is an international issue. Having such a substantial part of a global supply of a rare commodity resting on just a few installations is inevitably going to lead to these situations. This is not Raitt's fault. It's a long-term flaw that is bigger than the person that the current PM tosses in charge of a portfolio. What can she do precisely? Keep a reactor going even when the experts are saying it's not a good idea? I sympathize with her, and I'm certainly glad that tape recorders aren't running when I say stupid things. She's blundered, or rather a staffer has blundered, she's taking the heat, that's fine. But we would be in this boat right now if the Liberals were in power. The reality is that in our system of government, ministers are first and foremost politicians. Condemning them for acting like politicians is like screaming at helium for being lighter than air. I suspect 95% of the people sitting in the House of Commons see everything through the political lens; "I'll look really great if I can solve this problem, so my constituents will vote for me, and the party leader will pat me on the back, and then I'll get out of this shitty committe/portfolio and into something much better." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.