Tuesday, April 12, 2005


Disclaimer: Lets not drag the ever so popular Canadian blogosphere debate between pro- and anti- Warren Kinsella folks into this post, I'm just blogging here.

Warren Kinsella (no perma-links, you know where to go) makes a good point today when he writes,

Can Stephen Harper win big? Sure he can - if he was leader, caucus and CPC membership rolled into one person, that is. Google "blogging Tories," an you'll see what I mean. Preston Manning used to say a bright light attracts a lot of bugs. That's true. So if I was Stephen, I'd get out the industrial-strength Raid, and pronto.

The CPC might be on their way to a big win in the next election (I think it's safe to assume one is coming). Obviously a big win means a lot of Conservative MPs getting elected, a lot who will have no experience in Parliament, a lot who will win not because of any individual merit but simply because they were not the Liberal candidate. I'm even struggling to think of current Conservative MP's who have experience governing on any level. I shudder to think that Stockwell Day might be among the most experienced having served in the Alberta cabinet.

Let me be clear that this is not an argument to re-elect the Liberals. I am of the firm opinion that the Liberals have to be defeated. However, we're looking at electing a party that has next to zero institutional memory of governance. Sure, everyone has to learn sometime, but the learning process might not be pretty.

Immediately following that post, Kinsella then makes, what he should have realized, is an utterly bad point. Kinsella writes,
You want greed? You want corruption? You want kick-backs and toll-gating and all that? Here you go.
The link takes you to the Amazon page for the book, On the Take: Crime Corruption and Greed in the Mulroney Years, and one gets the impression that Kinsella is attempting to defend the Liberal party. Oh, how clever Warren, to remind people of the curruption of a past prime minister. By doing so I am immeditely reminded of how Canadians decided to deal with that prime minister and his corruption. Is Kinsella trying to defend Chretien or sabotage Martin with this post?

Posted by Matthew @ 7:21 p.m.