“Warren Kinsella's book, ‘Fight the Right: A Manual for Surviving the Coming Conservative Apocalypse,’ is of vital importance for American conservatives and other right-leaning individuals to read, learn and understand.”

- The Washington Times

“One of the best books of the year.”

- The Hill Times

“Justin Trudeau’s speech followed Mr. Kinsella’s playbook on beating conservatives chapter and verse...[He followed] the central theme of the Kinsella narrative: “Take back values. That’s what progressives need to do.”

- National Post

“[Kinsella] is a master when it comes to spinning and political planning...”

- George Stroumboulopoulos, CBC TV

“Kinsella pulls no punches in Fight The Right...Fight the Right accomplishes what it sets out to do – provide readers with a glimpse into the kinds of strategies that have made Conservatives successful and lay out a credible roadmap for progressive forces to regain power.”

- Elizabeth Thompson, iPolitics

“[Kinsella] deserves credit for writing this book, period... he is absolutely on the money...[Fight The Right] is well worth picking up.”

- Huffington Post

“Run, don't walk, to get this amazing book.”

- Mike Duncan, Classical 96 radio

“Fight the Right is very interesting and - for conservatives - very provocative.”

- Former Ontario Conservative leader John Tory

“His new book is great! All of his books are great!”

- Tommy Schnurmacher, CJAD

“I absolutely recommend this book.”

- Paul Wells, Maclean’s

“Kinsella puts the Left on the right track with new book!”

- Calgary Herald


Byline, Oct. 17: Liberal love, even for Lilley



10 Responses to “Byline, Oct. 17: Liberal love, even for Lilley”

  1. Al in Cranbrook says:

    I think your guy is in trouble…

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/158048/romney-obama-among-likely-voters.aspx

    Oct. 17 update (post debate) among “Likely Voters” has it: Romney 51% – Obama 45%

    I have this theory.

    The unabashedly Liberal media has spent the last 6 months dumping on Romney at every turn, while cranking Obama to the moon. This massively lowered expectations for Romney, and raised them through the roof for Obama. In both debates, but especially the first, Romney hugely exceeded expectations. In the first Obama even more so underachieved, and only very marginally (depending on whom one listens to) lived up to them in the second.

    Always too cute by half, the Liberal MSM ultimately may have torpedoed their own chosen one.

    An ironic lesson? Or a lesson in irony?

    • Conservative Socialist says:

      The poll is an outlier — not even the GOP-friendly Rasmussen shows a narrower lead for Romney. But, if Gallup is ahead of the curve, then other pollsters will follow. So we’ll wait and see on that.

      I think that Romney has a puncher’s chance versus Obama, because the winning conditions for the Republicans in 2012 is much more favorable to them as compared to 2008 when their party’s name was pure mud. The momentum on his side aside, I think realistically that he has a 1 in 3 chance of pulling off the win.

      However, in spite of Romney being ahead in the polls, he can’t seem to pull ahead in the crucial state of Ohio. Without Ohio, MR would need to win areas like New Hampshire, Wisconsin to make up the difference. I actually can foresee a situation where Romney wins the popular vote, but loses the electoral college. That’s analogous to Joe Clark losing the popular vote to Trudeau in 1979, but winning a majority of seats. If Obama wins in that manner, then that means that the regions he won in were by narrower margins than Romney won the red states. Big states like California and New York have been an electoral no-man’s land for the Republicans for two decades now. Dubya had to win all of the swing (ie: persuadable) states, and he won by the bare skin of his teeth in 2000 AND 2004. Consider that if 50,000 votes went Kerry’s way in ’04 in Ohio, Kerry would have become President IN SPITE OF having lost the popular vote by 3 million.

      There was question of Bush’s legitimacy for a claim of a mandate in 2000 because he himself lost the popular vote, but the margin was by only 500,000 votes over all. But if the scenario I describe above happens (and I think there’s a strong possiblity that it might occur), there will be huge unrest among the electorate. Obama might have to be extra-conciliatory.

      The irony of course, is that the Republicans would definitely fast track the abolition of the electoral college via constitutional amendment.

      • Conservative Socialist says:

        So if Bama loses the pop. vote by let’s say, 4 million but wins the EC. Would he have to offer the V-P slot to a Republican in order to quell the manure storm that he would be about to endure?

        Interesting times.

      • Conservative Socialist says:

        Ugh, I wish there was an edit function.

        “not even the GOP-friendly Rasmussen shows a narrower lead for Romney” should read “shows such a wide lead for Romney”

        And Joe Clark didn’t win a majority of seats, but he won the most. My bad. I blame time constraints.

    • Outsider says:

      “Liberal media” … further proof of one of two things:

      *You are one of those who believe any myth, as long as it gets told enough;
      *You don’t closely monitor the U.S. media landscape.

  2. Dan Calda says:

    Liberal media?

    Go back to your fantasy world…Alice.

  3. Philippe says:

    I find that guy so belligerent – not willing to engage in an intelligent debate. All he wants is to push his opinion without truly engaging. Typical of that whole network.

  4. Andy says:

    Typical Sun response. It bewilders me as to why you still take a paycheque from these arseholes – I mean, I understand that the Liberal party and liberal media in general doesn’t hand out soapboxes to ‘just another liberal guy’, but I’m sure there is a niche for you somewhere with a reputable news organization. I have to say you’re still the only reason I buy the Sun every so often, and although I don’t watch Sun News, I might more often if I knew you were going to be on to poke a few holes in the ‘we hate everything that isn’t reactionary’ crowd’s case.

    You’ll note I didn’t use an article with liberal media above, because I don’t think it a thing to be feared, just acknowledged. And here’s another sweeping generalization – Canadians don’t mind that their news sources have brains, common fecking courtesy and journalistic integrity. I wouldn’t believe these guys if they said the Earth was round – in the midst of all their failings comes one white knight, The Warren, to save the day with a little decency yet again.

    It may easily be that you’re the only reason anyone with a brain watches these morons.

Leave a Reply

*