07.28.2016 10:51 AM

Twitter tough-guy talk: sick of it

My friend Charles Adler again had me on his popular Sirius XM radio show the other night – link here – and he stirred me to unburden myself of a few thoughts about the likes of Jason Kenney. I’m expanding on them in next week’s column(s), but here’s the gist:

Here’s what I said, almost word for word: “I’ve written a lot of words for politicians over the years. So I tend to be skeptical about a lot of things they say. And I’m particularly skeptical about Twitter tough talk. Donald Trump has built a career on Twitter. What matters is what Bill Clinton did [after the Oklahoma City terror attack]: he hunted them down, he applied justice, and he put them to death.”

So Charles let me go on: “Jason Kenney is full of crap. When he was there, and when he was in a position to do something about terror…he didn’t. I don’t think we should be taking any lessons from Jason Kenney. And, you know, I’m just kind of sick of political people, and a lot of cops, talking tough about this stuff – but, every day, bad things keep happening, like what happened in France.

So, you know what, guys? Maybe you should all get off Twitter, and get your heads out of your asses, and maybe you should start doing something different from what you’ve been doing – because your little Twitter wars really aren’t protecting us, the citizens. Because, the Twitter wars, about who can express themselves with a tougher adjective? They’re crap.”

Sorry for the Earthy language, but I’ve just had it with the likes of Messrs. Kenney and Trump. You want to show you are tough on terror, boys? Do what Bill Clinton did when he was President – hunt these dogs down, give them a fair trial, and then put them to death.

That’s how you make us safer, tough guys.  Not with a fucking tweet.



  1. Aongasha says:

    Nobody’s really paying attention anyway except media. And folks are ignoring them according to latests polls. Only 20% in US believe what they say. Maybe a little higher here but not much. Look at Tootoo coverup, they all knew about reasons, protected Libs again.
    Kenney and rest not much for Cons, but then again neither are Lib gang anything to write home about. Or are the 2 candidates in US. Terrible choices for folks there. Parade of rich and stars at conventions merely hilites difference between elites and the front porch crowd. Lots of unhappy people these days and they are not taking directions from anyone anymore.

  2. Francis says:

    My god, Warren. I was just on Twitter and was thinking the exact same thing while I saw a few Kenney tweets. In fact, I’ve been thinking about this more and more over the past few weeks since Kenney announced his candidacy for the PC party and noticed his substantially useless presence on Twitter.

    Its not just that he’s on Twitter so goddamn much, but the quality of his tweets are just fucking atrocious. As is, Jason Kenney is a really hatable guy with an attitude of arrogance and self-righteousness that makes you want to punch him (I’ve met him once and can’t see how anyone could think that Jason is an amiable guy). His activity on Twitter is unsurprisingly shallow and transparently self-glorifying. For all the talk about Kevin O’Leary, I truly believe Jason Kenney is the Trump of Canada. He is only comparable figure who embodies the extreme narcism of folksy-fact-making and the demagoguery of Donald Trump, but just with a little more grace than the Donald. There’s no doubting that Jason Kenney is well-versed in some of the issues he’s championed previously — having been privy to that much information, it would be hard not to. But Jason Kenney doesn’t display the type of intelligence that would come with that kind of knowledge base; rather, he conveys the kind of abject stupidity of an anonymous Twitter troll looking for any fight to pick he can to catch the limelight.

    And thats the crux of Kenney’s relevance in Canadian politics: his lifeline is his Twitter account and its fuelled by the same kind of “look how terrible persons x,y and z are, I can do so much better than them, but let me tell you more about how much they suck”. The fundamental basis of his modus operandi is to be a provocateur. Unfortunately, just like Donald Trump, inciting anger, frustration and even hate is not sufficient enough to make one a leader. I think thats the most vexing point about Kenney: that he believes he possess leadership qualities and can simultaneously present himself in such a gauche manner.

    • Francis says:

      Doesn’t matter, its the only plausible comparison once could come up with on the Canadian side the border. He consistently displays similar tendencies to Trump, but with a Ted Cruz twist of patriotic feel-goodism.

      Plus, our political landscape in Canada is much different that Americas so our situation isn’t breeding the same kind of dialogue as the US. Kevin O’Leary is self-proclaimed as “very socially liberal” with fiscal conservatism. I think for the most part, O’Leary doesn’t understand the Canadian system of bureaucracy in the role it plays in the business/private sector enough so he chooses to rail against the entire thing as being too meddlesome. To his defence, our system is seriously over-complicated and is in need of reform, but he can’t become Prime Minister on a single issue like that and he knows it. Thus, I think the comparisons to Trump are overblown. O’Leary is brash, but he’s not an unhinged narcissist.

      So, again, Kenney is the only thing relatable on our side. But I share your sentiments about Albertans quashing his hopes. 19 years is a long time to be at the tax-payer’s teat and still claim to be a business minded, fiscal conservative. I think voters should give this guy the finger so he can start looking for a job in the private sector.

  3. Kelly says:

    The US has roughly 700 military bases around the world. Would there be less terrorism in the world if the US built some more bases, or do we have as much terror as we do because of those bases?

  4. the salamander hordes says:

    .. can’t find a kind word for Jason Kenney.. not a one

  5. Ian Howard says:

    I’m not sure how killing people, who have repeatedly shown the desire to kill themselves for a cause in any way serves as a deterrent. It may satisfy a primal need to strike back but it is a meaningless gesture in an era when self radicalization and technology provide the motivation and the means to inflict damage upon the society from which an individual is alienated.
    The only effective solution is to identify individuals who are at risk of cultural detachment and either persuade them that there is a place for them in society or constrain them from doing harm. Inevitably there will be intelligence failures and some will pay a heavy price but it is delusional to believe that by getting tougher we can alter the impact of those who seek to use terror.
    Technology has become such a force multiplier, that disillusionment and alienation find easy and soft targets for horrific acts of violence. A scorched earth policy of retribution will not change that only refuel those deluded enough to consider attacking the innocent.

    • Warren says:

      Killing them before they kill others tends to impede their effectiveness. But if you want to give them a good talking-to, fill your boots.

  6. Peter says:

    Twitter is the perfect medium for releasing one’s inner id. The superego and even the ego demand more than 140 characters.

  7. Brian says:

    Ummm… Warren? Bill Clinton. Osama bin Laden. World Trade Centre. Underground Garage Bombing. He did nothing. Caught no one. Chased nada. Catching a couple of hicks in old Okie, is one thing… Had Bill Clinton done his job, as you say, and proved he was tough on terror, he would have gone after the real threat… Sad but very tru fact.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.