Let's deal with STRATEGY and "CUT AND RUN" rhetoric, shall we?

Is "stay the course" a strategy? ANY novice chess-player realizes charging all your pieces straight up the board is absurd. For non chess players, the same scenario also spells disaster in checkers. Any military approach which employs such a foolish notion becomes reminiscent of spoiled rich-brat children playing cowboy with human life. "Stay the course" is not a strategy at all. At best, it is only ridiculous rhetoric. At worst, it represents a real plan that will lead to countless loss of life and ultimate defeat.

Now, let us address this absurd notion that ANY Democrat, especially a battle tested leader like John Kerry, would propose a "Cut and Run" strategy in Iraq. Like Dr. Dean, John Kerry is highly intelligent and offers a concise plan for success that has nothing to do with running or cutting. He only intends to redeploy troops in a more strategic manner and put some pressure on the new Iraq government to take a more active role in the civil war a group of true cut and run cowards started with failed policies and ignorance, which arises from a distinct lack of real military experience. It is like a thief assuming that everyone steals a little to justify their own evil actions for draft-dodging cowards to transfer their inadequacies to truly strong leaders.

Possibly media is in love with the phrase "cut and run" or, more likely, sponsors that now dictate every aspect of their news reports, are in love with profits from the kill-fest. "News reports," is a term I use loosely, because they now offer mostly talking-head repetitious rhetoric of the phrase "cut and run." Repetition is the oldest game in media. In commercials repetition sells product.

As for the phrase "cut and run," it's well past time for top Republicans to "cut" back on insulting the intelligence of America because in November voters are still going to "run" them from the hallowed halls where so many great patriots have served with distinction.

analogy. Charging all of your pieces straight ahead on the board is staying the course? You'll have to forgive me I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed. I'm trying to understand the concept but I'm not there yet.

Imagine any attempt at charging straight ahead in a conflict or strategic game. In a fight, that approach will only earn a person multiple blows to vital areas of the body. In self-defense courses they generally teach you to allow an attacker to strike at you first. Then, you can block the blow and, while they are off-balance, deliver a disabling reply to their foolish violence. Does this clear it up?

"stay the course?" What IS the course? It reminds me of the Titanic.

the green zone and their military bases and they only venture forth on occasion. Then they get hit with roadside bombs. Stupid? Yes! That's why I don't get the analogy. Charge and stay have different meanings no? It's confusing....

In all the press conference carnival shows I've seen the chimp present, I've never heard him outline a clear "course." My Op is only my personal assumptions on what his course might be, judging from a silly cowboy image he wishes to present. I can only say with authority that the word he uses most often is "uh" but it looks like his new press-secretary is trying to re-train him, judging from this mornings comments. I can still picture a sign at the student station where I learned about radio in college: It said, "DON'T SAY UH OR UM!"

n/t

that I just heard it on TV... maybe you CAN change media... did you just phone Big John?

IMO, it's pointless to address rhetoric like "cut and run," with, "this isn't cutting and running, my solution is in fact much more nuanced, let me tell you about it." You've already used far too many words.

Here's the way to beat it: simply say that Republicans want to stay in Iraq forever. Keep repeating it. Republicans want to stay in Iraq forever. Republicans want to stay in Iraq forever.

Put them on the defensive:

DEM: You want to stay in Iraq forever.

REP: No, we don't want to stay in Iraq forever, our solution is to...

Too many words already.

Alternatively:

DEM: You want to stay in Iraq forever.

REP: No we don't.

DEM: Oh, so you want to cut and run? Jeez! Flip flop!

You can believe I'll need the ammo you just furnished here in Alabama when I go out in public. thanks!

"So, Borrow and Bleed is a good policy?"

because of a war based on lies and profit.

political consultant.

any slogans to offer?

It's not as easy as you make it out to be.

What would be your response?

and didn't you say when Iraqis stand up, we can stand down?

Define "the Job" in concrete terms with a beginning and an end.

I think that covers it. :hi:

"...You must want another 9/11..."

Can you retort that in 12 words or less?

well, that's more than 12 words.

How does being entangled in a civil war prevent another 9-11?

How about we chase Al quaeda in Afghanistan then, where they are based?

When the guy pulls up his truck is embellished with Christian symbolism but that doesn't make you feel confident in his honesty or ability because you realize a true Christian will rely on deeds not symbolism to show his worth.

With some reservation, you ask him if he can fix the roof and he informs you that there is much more work required than a roof before your home is right.

So, you ask what else is needed and he says, "I can't tell you because it might reveal trade secrets."

While that comment is hard to accept, you become intrigued and ask how much it will cost. His reply: "It will be expensive but I have no idea how much you will spend or when the total expense will become due."

Finally you ask how long it will take and he replies, "I have absolutely no idea how long this job will take but we're going to stay the course until it's done."

Do you give him the "job?"

"Some egg-head on TV talking about roofs or something- I wonder if some American Idol reruns are on..." CLICK

I do agree the anecdote was too long, even for one on one debates, which we will likely face going into November. I do appreciate your assistance as Devil's Advocate on this thread but let's stick to applying these arguments to tangible realms. Overcoming talking points was my original intent and I regret that I mentioned media in the OP, at this time... my mistake but the thread can still be productive.

I dont get it- you want to overcome talking points on one hand, on the other you say that trying to impact media is ludicrous.

Last time I checked, these "talking points" we are worried about are a product of media.

If we are giving up on impacting media,then why worry about talking points it produces?

I disagree- so long as Democrats are allowed on those TV interview shows, we can indeed impact media- we can even steer the debate- but 1st we have to try.

we will face those points going into elections. I know what drives media. We were always a whore and proud of it! After Ray-gun the FCC was dismantled, allowing potential for one small group or even a single individual to buy up all the media in America. In the early days, a market with 10 radio stations spoke with ten distinct voices. Now, ALL radio in the south reflects a ClearChannel viewpoint of news. ClearChannel is just getting started. They snatch up TV, whenever they can, however, outdoor is their current focus.

All that said, I have no intention on tossing in the towel: We can change "hearts and minds" at a grass-roots level.

Watch the interviews. Democrats are often outnumbered and the spokespeople broadcasters choose tend to allow Republicans to get away with talking points, while hammering our guys when they attempt to offer real solutions.

n/t

See? They want to stay in Iraq forever.

n/t

K
I
S
S

Occupation is what it truly is, and if more people thought of it in those terms, they'd maybe realize they wouldn't want the U.S. to be "occupied", either.

But, we can come up with terms and strategies all day long, and if our leaders can't be bothered, it doesn't help much. If we can do this, why can't they, with their staffs and resources they have at their disposal?

Lack of will.

You'll find very little truth there but I agree. I also like to put the modifier "illegal" in front of "invasion" or occupation.

"Illegal" might still be a bit strong for some, and in need of much explaining, which might nullify the effort. There's no doubt of the illegality, that's for certain!

"Invasion" and "Occupation" shifts the frame a bit more subtly, but effectively.

THEN... there is the list of words I'd *really* like to use........but I don't think I want a vacation in gitmo...

;) :hi:

Call them "Betty Davis Eyes" Or Turner Classic Movies......

Were just discussing the very issues that we have been analyzing.

the Republican rhetoric it combats is aimed at people who struggle with the nuances of rock, scissor, paper.