Has anyone ever bothered more people and got up more noses recently than Warren Kinsella?
If you read some of the blogs you’d think this guy was evil incarnate.
So he sues people. When was that no longer a right for Canadians who feel they’ve been unfairly besmirched?
So he’s outspoken. I support anyone who blows the whistle on anti-Semites (no, I’m not Jewish), racists and other scum bags who pollute our country. Warren does it regularly and with great effect.
So he has strong opinions about politics. Seems to me the whiners who rant and rave about him are more rabid and fanatical in their political views than any column I’ve ever read in Kinsella’s blog.
So he plays in a punk band. OK. He’s not perfect.
Kinsella stirs up more political jealousy and gets male testosterone zapping around the web like no one else I know. But I like him. I know him and I think he is honest about his opinions, open enough to say flat out what he thinks and I admire that he does so under his own name. I don’t and most of the twits who fire shots at him don’t either.
Kinsella’s political opinions may not jibe with yours and mine all the time but he lays his views out clearly and is willing to engage in debate with those who disagree with him. Last time I looked that was the essence of democracy.
Here’s to you Warren. You can tell a lot about a man if you know who his enemies are and you’re in good shape – the shrill, dyspeptic ranters who try to bite at your ankles (they can’t reach higher) are a good indication that you should just keep on keeping on.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Much of what you say about Kinsella is fair enough. But I think you're missing the crux of why folks often dislike his act...
He is an inveterate name dropper. That's no crime, but neither is it evidence of good character.
His is quite hypocritical, actually, in his approach to political conflict, complaining when others speak poorly of him, but engaging in vendetta style campaigns frequently. Note his current Hillier feature.
In the end Kinsella is paid attention too because he generally creates some kind of dramatic shitstorm, and that is entertaining. He panders to this, he is, I'm sure, quite aware of how it works, as I said, he complains about it, but works both sides of the street.
John Daly
He goes way overboard sometimes, and does have a tendency to go crazy on people sometimes, but he is honest about his opinions, and isn't afraid to speak his mind or to call out the bad guys, whoever's team they're on. There are many others who we should be getting on the case of before WK.
Not sure if you can square "honesty" with the kind of tactics he has both preached and practised. He was outted, last week, on another blog, smalldeadanimals, for a blatent distortion of a quote he used to smear this Hillier fellow.
That is clearly not honest. Now...effective. That's another matter.
Kinsella attracts the animus he does because his dishonestly is a beacon, of sorts.
Kinsella is, among other things, a breath of fresh air in the wonderful world of punditry. Moreover, the guy frikin' knows what works in the way of political strategy and he knows what it takes to win. (Yeah, so what if he didn't win a seat once upon a time... his boy Chretien is the winningest PM in Canada's history and some of those winning strategies can be attributed to Kinsella)
Kinsella offers a blunt assessment of what flies and what fries in Canadian politics and perhaps his most remarkable quality is that he is one hundred percent loyal to those he is close to. Cripes, the guy would take a bullet for Chretien... that's rare in Canada.
Sean Cummings: "Cripes, the guy would take a bullet for Chretien... that's rare in Canada."
Yes, that certainly is rare. You won't find too many Canadians willing to hold a door for Chretien, let alone take a bullet for him.
And while we're fawning over WK, let's not forget this little Kinsella attack:
http://keyes.ca/journal/2007/05/10/warrens-chew-toy-of-the-week-revisited/
Chew To of the Week
>>Yes, that certainly is rare. You won't find too many Canadians willing to hold a door for Chretien, let alone take a bullet for him.<<
Which explains why Chretien is the winningest PM in Canadian history. (Rolls eyes... cough, cough..)
All I know is that if you're in a political fight and the other guy has a "Warren" and you don't, then the other guy is probably going to win...
That doesn't mean he always wins or that his whole life is about politics or that he's genius. It just means that everyone loves to crap on guys like Warren, who are willing to say what they think -- a very rare quality -- but we all line up to find guys like him whenever we need a tough job done.
So, really, who's the hypocrite?
Kinsella is a grifter, a psychopathic liar and a crook. But hey, what's wrong with that?
The answer is, Michael, that we're all hypocrites at one time or another. Kinsella would have you believe he is operating on some other level and apparently it's all ok because it's the game of politics. If this is so, then why does the boy need to threaten folks who criticize him with John Law all the time?
Why can he not just be the tough guy he claims to be, get some dirt on him while he's dishing it out?
Anyhow, he's fucking entertaining and he is to be given some credit for that.
We were sent here expecting "hatred" (3 references), "violence" (1 reference), and perhaps even violent hatred from the "worst" haters themselves.
In doing so, before we even read the post, we either 1) refuse to agree with him by being nice to him, or 2) we do exactly what he predicts by calling him a "psychopathic liar and a crook".
Either way, he wins with a grin because his point of view is coated in teflon, leaving the "violent", the "haters", and the "violent haters" scrambling in the frying pan. That is why so many love to hate him, hate to love him, or just sue.
I simply enjoy the spectacle of those who choose to play.
(But just to make sure, I'll stay anonymous, thanks)
Thanks for that, Warren.
Kinsella is a psychopath. That's not hate talking. Look up the definition of psychopath, look at Kinsella's writings, and the definition fits like a glove.
Now, maybe he likes to be reminded he's a psychopath. No accounting for taste.
That's Mark Bourrie posting under the name of Warren's wife. That's the criminal offence of personation. Look it up.
I'm sending this string to Kinsella, in case he hasn't already seen it.
Prove it.
Bourrie isn't the only person you've pissed off, Warren.
There's the folks at Navigator and the many people you've smeared and libeled over the years.
I haven't posted anything on this thread, but, if memory serves, Warren was "personating" me on Facebook yesterday. Click the link to my blog and catch his act.
You see what I mean about Kinsellaism being a laugh riot a minute? It's just tons of fun to watch an asshole (Kinsella) practise assholery (open his mouth, approach his keyboard...) and then complain bitterly about the results.
Whether he is a sociopath or not is a clinical matter and would require a large glass being placed over him, with extra large tweezers to handle him and a really really big microscope for the study.
But, as Randy Jackson is fond of saying, check it out, dude:
Kinsella puts a link on his blog to this blog, then predicts it will attract "haters". Does he mean critics? Is he important enough to attract actual "haters"? Of course he is. Just ask him.
Then when a few folks gather to engage in the holy ritual of Kinsellaism, he posts another silly ass thing about come-to-lunch I'll take your photo etc.
It's just endless shit from the shithead. And I LIKE the guy. Go figure.
What's not to like?
Hmm, could one of the reasons people get annoyed with Kinsella be that he does things like write "Hey, Lawrence, here’s my take on your insight: it makes me want to puke" in response to a Lawrence Martin article criticising the war in Afghanistan, an insight he posts a few days after linking to a banal and vague anti-war song like "White People for Peace"?
Post a Comment