Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Words cause permanent damage | Main | Sorta like Paul Martin »

Thursday, May 26, 2005

Backscratching back

Since Warren Kinsella was kind enough to plug Mark Steyn's Western Standard column on his blog (even if it was as a pretext to launch into a criticism of Canadian conservatives), I'll give him a little free publicity, too.

Scroll down to yesterday morning's entry (gosh, I wish he'd get permalinks) about his evening with Jean Chrétien:

Charlie and I had dinner with our pal JC last night, here in TeeOh. Walking along Front with him afterwards, near the Hockey Hall of Fame, Charlie and I watched as people ran up to him for autographs, to get their pictures taken, to high-five him, to shake his hand. Not a disapproving word was spoken. It was a useful reminder that, however much lesser people like this and this  try, they will never, ever break the bond of affection Canadians have for my friend."

Ever notice how when Liberals talk about "Canadians" they're using it to mean people in downtown Toronto?  How much you wanna bet that Jean's reception would have been just a tad cooler had he been strolling down the main street of Rimbey, Alta. or Bourlamaque, Que.?


Posted by Kevin Libin on May 26, 2005 | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Backscratching back:


Remember the famous video during the Iraq War of Saddam Hussein, supposedly walking about in free public space ...and the images of people rushing up to him, to kiss his hand, to smother him with affection? That was obviously staged and pre-taped. There were no people elsewhere in the background, no cars, no activity.

I'd suggest that the scenario of people rushing up to Chretien was an equal fiction - in the mind of Kinsella. What proof do you have?
Note the wording - 'People came up to him'. Hmm. How many? One? Two? None?

Posted by: ET | 2005-05-26 5:03:38 PM

It would be nice if we could leave comments on Kinsella's blog as well. Mind you, he'd probably have to resort to Coyne's latest and shut the comments off because of intemperate idiots.

Posted by: Pete Scholtens | 2005-05-26 5:07:03 PM

High fiving him? Maybe when they saw him they assumed it was a holdup and were putting their hands in the air.

Posted by: Justzumgai | 2005-05-26 5:45:55 PM


I'm not kidding about the violence stuff. Knock it off or you'll lose commenting privileges.

Posted by: Scott | 2005-05-26 6:51:22 PM

People in Toronto are dirtbags. Chreitien and whoever these other liberal slimeballs are might get handshakes in Toronto... But they would probably need body guards in Alberta.

Posted by: Pro-Alberta | 2005-05-26 8:32:52 PM

Right on Pro-Alberta! People from Toronto are nothing but goddamn dirtbags. Personally, I'd argue that they're also sorry sacks of piss. The whole lot of them!!! I hope one day Chretian and some of his dirtbag/piss-sack Toronto (and/or Toronto-loving) buddies make the mistake of showing their faces in Alberta! Woo-hoo! A few less dirtbag/piss-sacks to worry about, if you catch my drift, eh Pro-Alberta?! Yaaaaaa!!!!!

Posted by: Syd | 2005-05-26 11:35:15 PM

I have no reason to doubt the existence of the positive reactions to Jean Chretien which Kinsella describes, and I don't find such reactions at all suprising. Powerful people who believe themselves to be above the law turn into folk heroes,eventually, as long as they never repent.

Hmm, I feel a folk song coming on....

Posted by: EBDresen | 2005-05-26 11:36:38 PM

Guys, guys, guys. Sigh.

It happened in Toronto because, um, it happened in Toronto. For what it's worth, I've walked around with him in Western Canada, too, recently, and it was the same reaction.

And, as an expat Albertan, please stop with the East-West stuff, for the love of Pete. If Mr. Harper is ever to get elected, you guys - the guys who supposedly support him - have to get your minds around the fact that you can't form a Parliamentary majority with Western seats alone. You need the whole country.

Carry on as you were. I'm off to hug people on Front Street.

Posted by: Warren K | 2005-05-27 8:39:11 AM

Warren, what are the liberals to do without Quebec? Buying off Ontario seems to be the ONLY option...and that is NOT my idea of a whole country.

It is too bad you do not "allow" comments on your blog, Warren. But that is the way you like it, eh.

Posted by: tss | 2005-05-27 9:44:51 AM

Yep, you got me there. Ouch. Another gutless wonder who doesn't use his/her real name when dishing out insults. (You should work in Ottawa, you'd be right at home.)

I don't have comments on my wee web site because - like Coyne has discovered, like Wells' employers already knew - there aren't enough hours in the day to remove libellous postings by unemployed nitwits. And, if you leave said libellous postings up, you'll get your ass sued. It's that simple.

Case in point: about four inches north of my first contribution, here, the owners of this web site removed some offensive comments. That's all well and good, if you are a multi-millionaire magazine publisher like my pal Levant, with a huge staff to protect you.

But I don't. It's just little old me, and I'm getting sued often enough, thank you very much.

Yours in Faith,


Posted by: Warren K | 2005-05-27 10:36:59 AM

Mr. Kinsella - saying or writing something 'doesn't make it so'. Therefore, regardless of your written testimony of how people love your friend, Chretien, I remain, more than a tad sceptical of that testimony. Perhaps I'm influenced by the scepticism of Mr. Gomery towards some of the testimony of various Friends of Liberals.

You see - what I find problematic in your assertions is that your claim of universal love is inconsistent with reality. It's not simply the letters against Chretien on the various editorial pages; it's not simply the call-in shows that reveal how greatly Canadians dislike Chretien. No. It's your words. It's the paucity of real information in your text and the fact that most of what happened, you leave up to the reader to 'fill in the blanks'. That's what bothers me. It's what you haven't said.

You haven't informed us:
1) Exactly how many people rushed up to Chretien in Toronto to hug/kiss/photo-op him? Be specific.

2) Were they absolute strangers or members of The Party? Friends of yours? Of him? You know, that does indeed make a difference, doesn't it?

3)We get Other Famous Faces in Toronto as well. Lots of movie stars. Gov't officials. Media moguls. And strangely enough, most people don't run up to 'high-five', to ask for autographs, to get their picture taken. Run up? Heck, most people don't even walk up to any officialdom or public figure.

How odd, how very odd, that you make this claim about Chretien - a man who has seen his party steal millions of dollars from the taxpayer, who has openly denigrated the Gomery inquiry into this theft, who has demonstrated his contempt for Canadians again and again.
Yet - you say that Torontians went up - sorry, they RAN up, to 'high five' him. Hmm. And you claim they did the same in the West! Hmm.

How strange that you think that Canadians 'ought' to love him. I use the word 'ought' with intention, Mr. Kinsella, for you seem to claim that 'love and affection' for Mr. Chretien is his due. Mr. Chretien, as we know, has a narcissistic personality and most certainly feels that such love and adoration is his due. You appparently go along with the glue of narcissism.

However, I, myself and a great many others, cannot understand on what basis you can make such a claim. You are ignoring the very real antipathy to Mr. Chretien that exists in this country.

And, I, personally, don't believe a word of your story. High five. Sure. Was it your hand that did it? Or Mr. Chretien's left hand not knowing what his right hand was doing?

Posted by: ET | 2005-05-27 11:16:00 AM

There is nothing gutless or wonderous on my side and I refuse to work in Ottawa (the stink is obnoxious).

You can always use my Email address to respond DIRECTLY to me. By the way (BTW), use your mouse to point at "tss" if you do not understand my previous sentence.

Posted by: tss | 2005-05-27 11:49:47 AM

Mr. K. is right. Those people are not unemployed because our socialist policies kill jobs - they're unemployed because they're nitwits. It's safe to ignore anything that they have to say.

Posted by: Liberal Brain Trust | 2005-05-27 11:56:21 AM

Warren "Oh Look Mommy, I'm A Poonk!" K:

"You guys have to get your minds around the fact that you can't form a Parliamentary majority with Western seats alone. You need the whole country."

Uhhh, sure we can form a Parliamentary majority with Western seats alone.

For the nation formed out of Western Canada. Then we would have the whole country. Thanks buddy for all your corrupt and depraved shenanigans that're driving Quebecers away in shame.

Posted by: Brian O'Neill | 2005-05-27 12:02:46 PM

Who cares what the reception would be in Alberta or Quebec? Those people are lousy Canadians anyway, so I don't care if the term isn't applied to them by default. Proper Canadians wouldn't cry and whine about secession every time they find their pet causes in the minority. For a community that loves to drone on and on about respect for veterans and the sacrifices of the military, you people don't seem to understand how contemptible actual veterans would find your treasonous sentiments.

Not that Jean Chretien would get a high-five from me, mind you...

Posted by: Jim in Toronto | 2005-05-27 4:06:55 PM

Please, define a "Proper Canadian" for us, Jim in Toronto. I'm sure we're all interested to hear how you think the rest of us ought to behave to be considered worthy of sharing citizenship in your Canada with you.

And Ontario/Toronto wonders why there's so much resentment toward them in the rest of the country. Sheesh.

Posted by: Ian in NS | 2005-05-27 5:03:51 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.