I’ll be honest; I’ve only paid scant attention to the massive blogging explosion thats gone on recently over the story of Lisa Raitt’s little “cancer is sexy” faux-pas and the story leading up to it. Why not? Because in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t really affect how our country is being run. Sure, it reflects poorly on the professionalism the political staff surrounding the Natural Resources minister, and on the same minister for letting her staff take the fall for her, but in the long run government policy isn’t really being affected, is it? At least not yet.
No doubt both Raitt and her aid are reaping what they sewed here. By going through the courts to try and block the tape, they created so much more hype surrounding its possible contents than if they just let it go, and took their knocks as they came. Add on to this Raitt’s lame attempt at deflecting criticism over her managing of the isotope crisis by attacking how long Ignatieff’s been in the country, and I’ll admit that a twisted part of me is enjoying watching this blow up in her face.
However, compared to say the repeal of the faint hope clause, or mandatory minimum sentences on drug crimes, this really isn’t that important in the grand scheme of things. No one’s lives are going to be dramatically altered because Raitt lacks confidence in Health Minister Aglukkaq.
So why is everyone talking about it? It’s gossip, and not a little bit of schadenfreude. It’s a sordid look at the inner workings of a notoriously secretive and tight-lipped political party.
This is the PerezHilton.com of Canadian political news.
max cleland: the forever war of the mind
2 hours ago
7 comments:
It could very well be the last straw in Ignatieff's decision on supporting the government, and hence lead to a gong show of government-trying-to-save-its-assedness.
So it could impact the other issues you're concerned about too.
You sure have "low" standards - it's about health idiot.
Remember, Ritz made jokes about people dying from listeriosis.
Yup, you have very low standards.
I wholeheartedly agree with Dunkler here. This is clearly a non-issue relative to the massive crap that the Cons throw. It's gossip and I'm not about to play into it since it just cheapens the REAL issues in our politics.
And Anons. Ignatieff won't call an election over this, he's more steam than Dion was. I doubt we'll have an election this year (and I say that as a card-carrying New Democrat who wants to see Harper and his TheoCons our of politics for good).
I don't get how this is a non-issue. A nuclear reactor leaks, medical isotopes become dangerously scarce, and her reaction is "throw money at it" because there is no moral issue, and it's "sexy"?
How can someone that is so flip about a nuclear reactor leaking heavy water be allowed to keep her portfolio. Just because it's less bad than other Conservative screw-ups doesn't mean she shouldn't get fired.
Hey, 4 winds, do believe you are farting pixie dust here. This is an issue. Regardless of political stripe this speaks to the integrity of the ministers of the Crown. This speaks to judgment; both Riatt's and Harpo's. This speaks to a callousness and "me-firster" kind of "career" planning that should be condemned. It speaks to a weakness that is all too apparent within many segments (regardless of party affiliation or level of government) of our political elite. It speaks to a sickness, one borne of a lack of empathy and/or appreciation of the real lives (i.e. cancer patients) of people across this country. In short, it speaks to a moral disease amongst many within our political class that must be weeded out. To say it is mere gossip is ... well, that is just too simplistic, unknowing and dare I say, words of irreverent young 'un whose yet to experience the realities of the post-grad-student world. [n.b. - no offense intended - just an observation]
If we weren't going to an election over the isotope shortage before, we're not now. This doesn't affect anything do with "health" or the functionality of the chalk river facility, it's an MP caught on tape saying something she shouldn't have. If we were to ban every ambitious career-minded person who occasionally says inappropriate things in the company of their friends from running for office, we'd have a parliament of ghosts.
And Fat Arse, that's pretty damn presumptuous of you to assume you know my life story from the short bio at the top of the page.
@ Dunkler,
Mea culpa, I did assume too much re: your personal story. No excuses, except I was probably just reflecting upon and projecting my own shortcomings some 20+ yrs ago when I was both a pothead & thinner - I do apologize. No offense intended. As for my other assertions about why this is an issue - I stand by them.
As an aside- GO DEX!
Post a Comment