Senator Kerry made an appearance on Anderson Cooper last night.

He used the phrase "Lie and Die",but he didn't seem comfortable with it. he quickly added "deploy to succeed". I like the L&D, but maybe others should used it. Larry King made a point of suggesting this phase was somehow wrong to use, when he questioned H. Clinton last night, suggesting the party was divided and it was Kerry's fault.I am contacting CNN about there coverage of the Dem's this week.


COOPER: Senator Kerry, you want to set a date for withdrawal of troops from Iraq July 2007. Why is it so important to you to set this date?

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: I think it is critical to set a date, because it is the only way the Iraqis are ultimately going to take responsibility. It is the way to shift our forces through redeployment to the real war on terror.

Iraq is a diversion from the real war on terror. And it is acting as a recruitment poster for terrorists. We can do a better job. And setting date holds everybody accountable.

COOPER: You say setting a date, pulling out is -- is a -- or redeploying is a position of strength. When in history, though, has withdrawing troops before the fighting has stopped been interpreted as a sign of strength? Doesn't it embolden the insurgents? Doesn't it make them feel like they have had victory?

KERRY: No. And I will tell you why. I will tell you why it doesn't.

And, first of all, the most important thing to point out is, when you say, when the fighting hasn't ended, what -- are you talking about IEDs and suicide bombers? Because that's what is killing our kids, and an occasional ambush.

The fact is that setting the date for redeployment actually strengthens the government, as the national security adviser of the prime minister himself said, that, when American forces withdraw, it will embolden the government itself. It will empower the government. It will withdraw support for the insurgency. It takes away one of the recruitment tools for al Qaeda. COOPER: The -- the Democrats, clearly, though, are divided on this. Last week, you and Senator Clinton, within the span of an hour, offered two very different opinions. I just want to play that for -- for our viewers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D), NEW YORK: I do not think it is a smart strategy, either for the president to continue with his open-ended commitment, which I think does not put enough pressure on the new Iraqi government, nor do I think it is smart strategy to set a date certain.

KERRY: I believe we need a hard-and-fast deadline, not an open- ended commitment of U.S. forces.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: How much does it hurt your party to not have a unified voice on Iraq right now?

KERRY: We're unified on the most essential ingredient, which is the failure of this administration, their lack of honesty with the American people about what is really happening in Iraq.

We're unified about the fact that you need to begin redeployment of American forces now. I think there is a unity in moving in a new direction.

COOPER: What is wrong with the so-called phased redeployment that -- that a lot of your fellow Democrats are proposing?

KERRY: It is open-ended. It is the same program as the president. What is the difference?

He says he's phasing the redeployment. We say it. I believe you have to have a tough policy that actually gets the job done. And the fact is, the only way to hold people accountable is to force them to stand up.

COOPER: Last week -- no surprise -- Karl Rove criticized you and Democratic Congressman John Murtha, saying -- and I quote -- "When it gets tough and when it gets difficult, they fall back on that -- on that party's old pattern of cutting and running. They may be with you at the first shots, but they're not going to be there for the last tough battles."

KERRY: Well, I would like to know when Karl Rove was ever there for any shots.

Who are these guys, who have never seen a shot fired, to be standing around talking about what is best or not best in terms of the policy?
Transcript below. He used the phrase, "lie and Die", but didn't seem to comfortable using it, he quickly added "deploy to succeed". I want to note that Larry King made a point of mentioning this phrase to H. Clinton in the form of a question on his program. Our six Senators were on his program to promote a list of issues each one is working on individually. Of course, the suggestion that Kerry has placed the party in peril in Nov. and divided the party came up also.

COOPER: Clearly, that political strategy is going to involve those three words, cut and run, cut and run.

How do you respond?

KERRY: Well, their policy is lie and die. You know, which do you -- which -- you know, it seems to me that our policy is redeploy to succeed.

Their policy means they lie to Americans about what is happening on the ground. They lied to us about what we were doing in going there. It means they have even lied about what has happened to soldiers over there. And the fact is that people are continuing to die.

COOPER: Senator Kerry, appreciate your time. Thank you.

KERRY: Thank you.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/21/acd.01.html

thing. They are not, even if Levin's amendment is not enough.

Actually, Feingold Kerry is not enough either, IMHO. It takes the wording of the Feingold's proposal (redeployment, keeping anti-terrorist forces there, ...) and add the part about an international meeting, but lets out permanent bases and oil (from the Harkin proposal) that were a great addition. I understand that it is a compromise and I am happy they were able to offer one proposal, but this proposal is weaker than what Kerry was proposing at the beginning of the week (once again, this is a compromise and I am not that purist).

Except that, it is great.

It's non-binding and Bush doesn't have to follow it. It's no different from Byrd's! Byrd's basically gave everyone an out: say we're not staying, but maintain your original position.

with the characterization that it is the same thing.

Of all the proposals I heard this last few months, the Kerry one was the best one, and the Kerry-Feingold is the next best one.

That is an excellent 3 word summary of the essence of the plan (redeploy) with the essence of the motivation (to succeed against the real threats). This should be the Democratic equivilent of the Replublicans' "Stay the course" - a positive slogan of what our policy is.

"Lie and die" is, like "stay and pay", a Democratic counterpart of "Cut and run". Just like "cut and run", they are unfair, nasty characterizations of the Republican position. I am not surprised that Kerry is less than comfortable with it, to his credit, in public comments, he seems to look for the best motive of others rather than the worst. (Though I assume that having been hit by "cut and run" for the last several weeks has likely made him feel he has to respond in kind.)

Americans love to win, hate to lose.

Thom Hartman has a very important way to do this: he says that as long as it is a "war", Americans won't want to leave--that's the "cut and run" idea. But if we can successfully frame it as an occupation--which it most certainly is--people won't see such a problem with ending it. It's not running from a fight--something Americans are loathe to do. Although it's true that a majority wants to leave, that conviction will grow stronger with the right framing.

How about "We've won, time to come home."

:) I had it recorded and put it on after the Senate was done last night--a nice surprise to see JK in a taped appearance.

What did you think of Anderson's questions? I thought they were pretty fair. My favorite part was the response to Rove's smear.

Did you see KB Hutchinson on after Kerry? She just about talked the whole Repub play book.

I fast-forwarded through her spiel!