Saturday, September 27, 2008


The guy who seems content to tear down on a continual basis, who can't seem to get over a very juvenile bitterness, has the audacity to accuse others of destroying what he and others "built". Warren Kinsella is obviously a shrewd man, with great political instincts, but frankly his inability to GET OVER HIMSELF is beyond tiresome. I confess to not reading Kinsella's popular blog much, but I catch certain things from others, and today I did read the post highlighted on NNW. Kinsella:
It's sad, too. Stéphane Dion and his team didn't reach out to very many experienced Grits, so many, many folks are watching the carrnage from the sidelines. But I have to say, it's sad to see what we built up get pissed away.

Why don't you cut through the bullshit Warren, because I suspect you understand the dynamics. I didn't support Dion for the leadership, truth be told he was my fourth choice, because I saw massive baggage, not easily dismissed. That said, Dion won the leadership, and it was accomplished without many of the big backroom boys blessing. If the Dion team has an air of paranoia, lacking trust and outreach, can you really blame them, or does the blame lie with the posturing of others? Ignatieff and Rae have NEVER stopped running for the job, and despite the public face, EVERYONE, including Mr. Kinsella knows darn well that the positioning continues to this day. Has Dion isolated himself, or has his team merely reacted to life within a wolves den, where loyalties are divided, where nothing occurs on its own, it's all part of a greater scheme?

You put faith in people you trust, and every campaign relies on sources who's advice is pure and isn't conflicted. If there is a hint of doubt, or if things have been said or moves noticed that cause some to question loyalty, then do you blame the team for exhibiting a seige mentality? Dion has always been an outsider with the Liberal elites, who long ago decided which two people they would back, and Warren knows well how the old camps divided in the last leadership. Did that just evaporate after Dion won, or did people begin to think about the next time? Maybe people shouldn't be on the sidelines, we are clearly stronger with everyone together, but that is a false presentation, because during Kinsella's reign many others were on the sidelines, during the subsequent reign of the "other" side, the same occurred. Teams within the team, almost hilarious to hear Kinsella cry foul now, when he thrived in that environment.

Guess what Warren? You had the benefit of a DIVIDED right, the Liberals winning within that environment about as impressive as Ralph Klein's ability to balance the budget in Alberta. In other words, it was a perfect storm, which made strategy much more elemental and simplistic. Seems to me that the current problems started during the Kinsella reign, or did Dion lose 90 000 Quebec Liberal members since 2006? That doesn't give Dion a pass on Quebec, I personally think our strategy since he took the helm has bordered on disgrace, but the erosion of the grassroots started under Chretien's watch and that is an objective fact, if Dion has failed, it's because he can't get us off the mat, a bottom he inherited.

The silliest part of the argument, if any of Dion's people actually read what Kinsella writes, they would have to be categorically insane to welcome him into the inner circle. Clearly, he lacks the most basic of requirements, the ability to put old scores on hold, the sense that any contribution is without ulterior agendas. I heard him on CBC this morning, he called himself a Liberal, but other than the declaration I frankly see no substantive evidence to support that, unless of course subjecting YL's to horrible music will bring us back to the promised land.

What was "built" might have brought electoral success, within favorable conditions, but it didn't "build" the Liberal Party from within, it relied on divisions and sides, fat cats with big wallets and self important elites with ambition. The Liberal Party became a tactical entity, and that's marvelous, but it lost it's soul along the way, prior to Dion, reaching a crescendo of pandering nothingness. I don't consider a characterization as the Canadian Karl Rove complimentary, as a matter of fact I'd be embarrassed.

If Dion is isolated, it's because the Liberal Party is such a cluster fuck of competing self interests, factions and bruised egos, it's better to adopt a bunker mentality. Kinsella chastises Dion, but really Dion is just reacting to the reality of the Liberal Party of Canada, as others have done before. And, the next time Warren is chatting with his old "experienced" Grits off the record, when the conversation turns to the post-Dion Liberal Party, he will have his answer.


Anonymous said...

Wow. I thought what Kinsella said was full of depth, but you're analysis was bang on and full of insight. You're not afraid to say what must be a series of uncomfortable truths, even though you probably won't make many friends with this post. But full props to you for calling it like it is, like you see it. It seems I've misjudged you in a big way.

Walks With Coffee said...

I been published, what, 500 times in the last 2.5 years call Mr. Harper to account for himself. Nevertheless, I never received a single call from any mothership for help... except from the CPoC to try to get me to stop. So, I have no doubt that Mr, Kinsella has not received any calls either.

You cannot win on your own. It takes a team with all kinds of palyers to win.



Anonymous said...

Oh snap!

You hit the nail on the head with this one, especially the part about having to be bat-shit crazy to trust Kinsella since his motivations would continuously be suspect.

Great post.

Walks With Coffee said...

Despite that you guys don't seem to give me any notice (sigh), I'll give you a free one.

Repeat one or the other of these memes - depending on the post - for the next two weeks (by repeat I mean say them everywhere without relenting) and your fortunes will turn significantly:

A.) There is no future in Harpernomics; and

B) Bush is gone will Harper live on?



Anonymous said...

I don't see how Kinsella could even be characterized as a Liberal anymore. By his own account, he supported the Harper Conservatives in the last two elections. As for this one, you, and he, hit the nail on the head. He's for himself. Unless you make Warren in charge and let him wage war on his enemies real and imagined, he blames you.

I wonder if there is a medical term for this condition...

Karen said...


Deb Prothero said...

Good analysis, now it's time for all good Liberals to get to work. Anyone not helping for the next two weeks is part of the problem and if that includes Kinsella - that is HIS choice.

RuralSandi said...

There's one little detail that Kinsella forgets with his grudge holding - Chretien did to John Turner what Martin did to Chretien. That's a fact.

And, I don't know how anyone could be truly objective when they hold so much anger and grudges and petty sulking.

Kinsella doesn't seem to care what happens to Canada.....his ego and immaturity and sulking are getting in the way...and hey, he's a consultant that will work for anyone who pays him.

He's not only hurting the Liberal party, but hurting all those in Canada that are Liberals at heart - thanks Warren.

About those waiting in the wings - there are people waiting in the wings in all the parties, but we don't hear about it from the MSM.

Möbius said...

WK loves to gloss over the reason for the decline of the LPC, and it sure as hell is not Dion.

It began with his hero Chretien, and will continue until all associated with him are gone from the party. I suspect this will happen after the next election, but then I thought the same after the previous election.

Austin said...


Finally, people are starting to get what Warren Kinsella is about.

All these "inside sources in high places" are undoubtedly the same "guys on the sidelines" that no one is bothering to consult. Miserable shits the lot of them.

These windbags need to understand that the reason they are out is precisely because that kind of brand of politics they espouse has no business leading the country, regardless of political stripe. Leave it to the fuck-ups that call themselves the CPC.

But I am continually astounded at the extent to which they heap their derision on Dion's leadership.

Good luck to them in their private lives. Cockroaches usually scurry when the lights are turned on.

These peacocks should lose their vanity and the I-was-a-somebody-don't-you-forget-it schtick, and really, just REALLY shut the fuck up.


JimmE said...

I've liked Mr K's comments in the past, but he lost me in the lead-up to this election. Perhaps he should read the story of the black Donnellys. Mr K and more Liberals should look for a role model to Sheila Copps.

Dame said...

I wholeheartedly agree with AUSTIN... very well said.!!!
These self serving "wannabe" Bigwigs are The most disgusting sickos we are flustered and they just can't get enough "hits' on their pages ... they are our tiny mavericks doing all kinds of outrageous statements just To be " controversial" and therefore famous in their own mind ... Do they Really care For the Country??? or the Liberal party??? or their childrens future??? OH NOOOOOO.. they live for the moment counting the "hits' on their Blog like addicts ...
Pitiful sad windbags.


Blues Clair said...

Well written. Though I do enjoy reading Kinsella, his Team Chretien schitck gets a little tiring. I'm no fan of Paul Martin and Co. but I do find it funny that WK blames all the Liberals woes on them.

Carrie said...

Excellent post.

But if it makes anybody feel any better, I'm just an average Canadian who votes. And I saw all of this in WK 2+ years ago.

So don't lose hope thinking the little people don't realize his b.s.

We do. It's juvenile and pathetic. that's why I don't listen to him and I'm sure many other average voters don't either.

Anonymous said...

Wow. I thought what Kinsella said was full of depth, but you're analysis was bang on and full of insight.

And the next Liberal bashing from someone else will be even better, won't it, Lycan Stark?

Good post, Steve. Honest, as usual.


Demosthenes said...

Kinsella is a symptom, not a cause.

The symptom is Liberals who are so dedicated to their particular faction that they have little loyalty to the party itself. Whether it's Chretien, Martin, Ignatieff, Rae, or whoever, their only concern is that their guy should be the boss, and that the other guys should be out in the cold. They'll be more than happy to screw the party to benefit their faction or hurt the other one. Just like Kinsella.

The Liberals are hardly alone in this; the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan is going through similar problems, and is if anything in far, far worse straits than the Liberals.

The cause, though, is a party that has lost touch with its beliefs. Either it's because it never really had them in the first place, like the LDP... or because it's become so afraid of standing for something for fear of losing votes, like the Liberals, that it becomes a strictly tactical party of power. It isn't always like that; to argue that Pearson or Trudeau didn't stand for anything is ludicrous. But it happened under Chretien, and it happened under Martin, and Dion's been powerless to do anything about it.

Sad thing is that Kinsella does have insight. His book had some good information about messaging and handling the media. But as much as he's a knowledgeable political consultant, he's just not really much of a liberal anymore. In any sense of the word.

In any case, the Liberal party needs to articulate what it stands for, who it means to attract, and, yes, whose votes it's willing to forfend in the name of those beliefs. Harper's done it, by aping the Republicans. The Liberals now need to do it too. And quickly.

Demosthenes said...

Funny thing: if he had written all of this AFTER the election, nobody would have cared. He probably would be lauded for his insight.

But he's playing the same game that has maddened people about the "anonymous Liberals" in the media: attacking his own supposed allies while the conflict goes on. It can't make a positive difference, and they know that, but they (like him) just want to twist the knife.

Austin said...

WK craves the limelight. He wants his 15 minutes of fame back, so he'll do what spoiled rich kid punker wannabes will do: just vandalize.

Why? Because he can. And he knows he has an audience of sycophants to egg him on.

And yes, I suppose he is symptomatic of a larger problem. But as long as the LPC and Dion in particular continue to speak to the public directly, all this will hopefully be moot come the 15th.


Dante said...

I have to say that I strongly agree with you and could go further. There are many from the right of the Canadian centre who look at the current Conservative Party with some chagrin. Say what you will but the old Reform party were a bunch of idealists with some really good ideas in my opinion. Harper's Machiavellian style was an evolution in response to a brand of politics Kinsella and Chretien adopted. In order to win power, they were forced into a game of personal destruction, smears and political homicide. They couldn't win without it. What we are looking at here folks is a mirror image of the that team. Good ideas are killed and well meaning politicians are destroyed. Either victimize or be a victim. It is sad that the Liberals still can't see that. They now just look like a bunch of has beens who didn't keep their powder dry. Secret agenda...Bush apprentice...all just scholl yard insults now.

Jacques Beau Vert said...

What you say is in my opinion inarguable - excellent post, and a must-read.

Anonymous said...

Kinsella is nothing except a Liberal. He will be involved again but with a winner. My guess is McGuinty or McKenna. He will not be working for any of the current bunch because he knows they can't win.

The impressive thing about Kinsella is that he predicted Dion would win long before you or any other did.

Demosthenes said...

He appears to be calling you out, Steve.

(And yet is also being quite pro-liberal at the moment. I'm wondering if the comments are getting to him.)

Walks With Coffee said...

Get a grip, unless you are willing to relentless communicate like the following, you cannot be saved:

"There is no future in Harpernomics"

The surprise in Nanos numbers is that Ontario would go Harper since its Harper that shafted Ontario losing a few hundred thousand in quality jobs.

"Bush is gone; will Harper live on?"


Other than my comments, not a single comment here is focused on the actual election... just personal attacks.

Get focused!



Steve V said...


And, all you seem to be focusing on his your own pity party, waiting by the phone. Get proactive.

Steve V said...

"He appears to be calling you out, Steve. "

Who's that?

Omar said...

Who's that?

WK, the Clown Prince himself.

Steve V said...

I don't see it, am I missing something?

Walks With Coffee said...

"And, all you seem to be focusing on his your own pity party, waiting by the phone. Get proactive."

good grief... I've been published over 500 times in the last 2.5 years; I think I'm proactive. How about you?



Steve V said...

Well stop bragging about whatever and go work for the party then. You seem to have a big chip on your shoulder, like the world owes you something.

Walks With Coffee said...

There is no future in Harpernomics

"Well stop bragging about whatever and go work for the party then. You seem to have a big chip on your shoulder, like the world owes you something. "


Bush is gone; will Harper live on?

He will if *you* don't stop shooting at friendlies.



Steve V said...


If this superficial tripe you're offering is your idea of a winning strategy, I wonder why the phone isn't ringing. Good grief, that's your big revelation for the campaign, two stupid lines that are about as effective as a cocked rubber band against a wild grizzly. If only they would listen, their loss I suppose...


Walks With Coffee said...

There is no future in Harpernomics.

Gayle said...

Steve - great post, but then, given my comments here you probably already know I agree. :)

Anonymous said...


Well done. WK might be the most overtly vindictive human being on earth. Ballsy going after him. And is it just me, or are you a lot more grumpy lately? I like grumpy Steve.

Steve V said...

I doubt he notices. A little more on the grumpy side for sure :)

Omar said...

Is there some point to this duel?

Steve V said...

Absolutely no point, other than keeping crazy spam off the blog. Somebody needs new meds.

Anonymous said...


I saw that last comment. You're the grumpiest. Still, it makes for fine reading.

Also, I get the impression that WK patrols his online reputation very closely. You're on the hit list for sure.

Möbius said...

I doubt he notices. A little more on the grumpy side for sure :)

WK still hopes for the return of the Chretien era, not caring that his negative effect on the LPC remains.

Demosthenes said...

Steve, WK appeared to take a shot at "commentators not to be named."

Considering the only anti-WK response from a Liberal that hasn't already cut ties (Cherniak principally) was yours, I assumed it was you.

Steve V said...


I guess so...