“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


In Tuesday’s Sun: Boring? Good

Interesting.

“May you live in interesting times,” sayeth the font of all acquired wisdom – ie., Wikipedia – is an ancient “Chinese curse.” As in, if you live in an interesting age, you’re not going to be terribly happy.

By that measure, federal Liberals who endured their party’s first leadership debate should be deliriously happy.

That’s because the first Grit leadership debate was not very interesting, and that’s putting it mildly. It was more boring than an Antiques Roadshow marathon. It was more boring than a week-long jazz festival.

It was boring. It was not interesting.

There were some attempts at making Sunday’s debate in Vancouver less dull, inadvertent though they were. The pitiless moderator, for instance, recalled Austin Power’s ‘Dr. Evil,’ but with none of the charm. 

For reasons none could fathom, the audio was also wildly out of sync with the candidate’s lips. It was like a Sergio Leone spaghetti western, but with none of the requisite carnage to keep you glued to your seat.

And finally, there were no less than five (5) contestants who could not recently win a seat in the House of Commons, but who feel that they should be leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

They were sort of interesting, too, but only in the way that unbridled immodesty and sheer gall are interesting. You kept asking yourself: “Why do these people think they can win the country, if they couldn’t win their own hometown?”

Other than that, it was – as noted – coma-inducingly dull. Justin Trudeau was a little less dramatic than before (good), and Marc Garneau was a little more dramatic than before (also good). They both acquitted themselves well.

Now, we know what you’re thinking: “It’s better to live in interesting times, isn’t it? Better than being dull, no?”

Well, no, actually. Per the Chinese aphorism, being too interesting is still bad. Especially in politics.

Liberals, for instance, had a series of debates in 2006 that were highly captivating. They were extremely interesting.  Contestants like Michael Ignatieff, Stephane Dion and Gerard Kennedy went at each other hammer and tong. They were fiercer than a bunch of cobras at a sock hop.

At the time, they probably thought they were making things interesting, and that interesting was good. Except that, when the election rolled around, the Conservatives ran ad after ad showing the interesting Liberal leadership aspirants scratching and clawing each other.

Their message: “These clowns are more critical of each other than we are. Do you really want them running the country?”

Short answer: no.

Journalists, naturally, love conflict. It makes their bells go off. So, too, the Libs’ political opponents. They adore knock-down, drag-’em-out political leadership races.

Blood sells papers. And, for a Conservative, it’s always better to see Liberal blood spilled blood than your own. 

Thus, Liberals are being very, very careful this time around. They are disinterested in giving the media more prime time Grit fratricide. And they are particularly disinterested in giving Stephen Harper more fodder for TV attack ads.

May you never live in interesting times? Damn straight.

Those ancient Chinese sayings-makers knew what they were talking about.



8 Responses to “In Tuesday’s Sun: Boring? Good”

  1. MKS from durham says:

    Warren,
    I missed the debate, but would like to see it. Could not find it on YOutube. Any suggestions on where to find it.

  2. kit says:

    I liked the debate. Very well done by the front runners. Reinforced that some others should call it a day and enjoy watching from the sidelines. But they will find out on their own how well they make the front runners appeal to voters.

  3. Constance says:

    The whole thing was scripted; didn’t you see them looking down at their podium notes after the questions from the audience… particularly Garneau and Martha H-F with her spectacles hanging on her nose… they all knew the questions in advance!

    Maybe when they get to the short strokes of the campaign debates they might tee off on one another. I loved Debbie Coyne and her appeal that the next leader must have “substance” likely alluding to Justin’s handicap.

    I guess the Liberal backroom boys instructed the candidates to stick to the script or else it will show up in CPC attack ads come 2015.

  4. Glen says:

    There was a Liberal leadership debate?

  5. Sean says:

    Exactly right, Warren.

  6. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Warren,

    I guess both our party and the NDP believe there is strength in numbers!

    I don’t plan on pushing my candidate. He’s doing all right without any help.

  7. Paul says:

    This one. How can you forget Dion blubbering “This is unfair! Do you think it’s easy to set priorities?” I almost felt sorry for the guy.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw0ME-t99Xg

    “Leaders set priorities. Leaders get things done. Stephane Dion is not a leader.”

    Perfection.

Leave a Reply

*