Dingwall's Defenders

PoliticsWatch has this article on Dingwall's resignation.
Apparently, the Treasury Board President thought Dingwall should have remained at his post. After all, he did an "excellent job." Those who pointed out the error of his ways were merely trying to "assassinate" his character.
(Mr. Alcock, need I remind you that one cannot assassinate something that does not exist?)
Our good Prime Minister is not much better.
In the House of Commons, the prime minister praised Dingwall's handling of the Mint when asked about the resignation. "May I just simply say that under his tutelage at the Mint, the Mint has now been returned to profit," the PM said.
Praised his handling?
So, in other words, as long as the Mint is profitable, that's all that matters?
The NDP and the Conservatives are in agreement over this issue, and that's a dangerous thing for the minority government.
"Why isn't the prime minister saying that this behavour ... is not acceptable?" Layton asked."Why can't the prime minister simply stand up and also say he's changing the rules so that this kind of thing can't happen again? It's not like it's the first time."
[Conservative MP] Pallister said he was "very surprised" by the PM's reaction and said he was taking a major risk by "becoming a defender and an apologist for this kind of abuse of spending practices.
"This happened under his watch. These kinds of abuses didn't happen during the Chretien era. They happened right under Paul Martin's nose. And I'm extremely disappointed that he wouldn't have taken responsibility for that today and that he wouldn't apologize for frankly the lack of proper governance and oversight practices."
The Liberals really need to be taken out of office. It is simply too dangerous for the average Canadian to have them remain. If they do, we shall turn around one day and discover that we are poor and uner the grip of a corrupt and criminal dictatorship.