"Cut and run" vs. the alternative

[Mythsaje]

The Republicans like to accuse the Dems of wanting to "cut and run." It's a fairly effective strategy, since the Dems don't seem to be able to come up with anything as short and concise...soundbytes are more a Republican talent than a Democratic one.

I've got an idea. What do you think?

*******

"Republicans say we want to 'cut and run.' Well, their alternative is to "stay and bumble.' That's what you get when you don't have a clear plan. Bumbling. Iraq is turning into a comedy of errors that's more like a tragedy than a comedy. Bumbling is funny when you see comedians do it on a TV show, but when the American military, following contradictory and primarily politically-charged orders from on high, try to conduct a war, it's not funny at all.

"It gets soldiers killed. It gets civilians killed. It destroys families, and destroys America's reputation abroad. It doesn't make us safer. Quite the opposite. It reveals us as incompetent and simply strengthens our enemies' resolve.

"Tough talk doesn't fool anyone, especially when our military is demonstratively unable to get any kind of a handle on the insurgency. Oh, we can kill the Al Qeida leader in Iraq, but it's like fighting a mytholical hydra. You cut off one head, another grows in its place.

"As much as I hate to put it this way, but it has to be said. Between the two options--"Cut and run" and "Stay and bumble," cutting and running is the SANE option. The other is just more idiocy from a criminally incompetent bunch of politicians who see our soldiers as pawns on a chessboard. As a group, they have no military experience that's worth mentioning. Yet they run the war THEIR way and ignore, ridicule, or fire those who disagree with how they're handling it.

"America is growing weary of their vile lies and disinformation. America wants real results. America wants our soldiers home. IRAQ wants our soldiers to leave.

"Better to 'cut and run' than stay and die to no purpose."

edited to fix a typo...

[ComerPerro]

1. Each of your ideas is too long for the average moron American

"Cut and Run" and "Flip-Flopper" work so well because they appeal to the part of average Americans that doesn't want to think, at all, ever.

[pat_k]

8. "Cut and run" and "flip flopper" are personalized accusations.

They work with folks who are "people focused" not "idea focused"

As I note in the post below, folks who are people-focused, not idea-focused, are most vulnerable to fascist propaganda. Instead of seeking solutions, they look for people to blame. They attack ideas by attacking the people who promote those ideas, not the ideas themselves ("cut and run" is in essense and accusation that Dems are cowards).

The BEST way to fight them is to get on the Impeachment bus -- full speed ahead. Impeachment IS Our Positive Agenda. Committment to True American Principle is Our Turf and Impeachment takes us there (for more, see 22-Apr post and 25-Jun post).

Impeachment is not just the right thing to do, it is the winning thing to do because you are going after INDIVIDUAL wrong-doers -- something that grabs the people-focused folks.

[ginnyinWI]

2. no, this criticizes the troops too much

"stay and bumble" sounds like a criticism of the military. I think saying the Repubs want "more of the same" is pretty good, and makes people remember everything that they've heard up until now.

[judy]

3. Again, and I am repeating myself, cut and run or stay whatever is

a false problem. The problem is not with the troops.
The beginning of the solution, is realizing that this language is fed to us by the propagandist, to obscure the real problem.

The real problem is that the troops are there to protect the war profiteers who are pretending to do reconstruction, but instead are swindling the US Taxpayer and the Iraqi people, who after 3 years still don't have any infrastructure.

The answer is simple:
Pull out all the war profiteers and their contractors and mercenaries. Give the Iraqis back their jobs, and the task of rebuilding their country, paid for by the US of course, but at real not gouging prices.
Then, the troops can leave. At 80% unemployment in Iraq, having jobs and a task they can accomplish with pride, will do more to stop the insurgency than killing civilians...

Any Iraq "solution" that doesn't involve stopping the gouging, the profiteering, and the privatization for profit of foreign companies, is moot.
But...who in Congress, and elsewhere, is talking about this? Where is Howard Dean on this one?

[NJCher]

5. yes, take out the profit

And the problem can be solved. That is what is so sad about America today: the right decisions are not being made on anything--from foreign policy to energy--because it is all about protecting entrenched interests.




Cher

[pat_k]

9. Impeachment is the way out of the quagmire in Iraq

Looking for a way out of the quagmire in Iraq?

Step 1 is simple: Impeach Bush Cheney

A rogue regime seized the power of the American presidency on January 6th, 2001. The people of other nations have long known that they can no longer appeal to good will of the American people because we surrendered the sovereignty of We the People.

Every day, more of our fellow citizens are seeing the truth about this regime, but far to few understand that as long as we leave governing power in the hands of men who are a law onto themselves, options that would be available to a legitimate American President will remain closed.

The conflict and chaos that is spreading inhumanity and destroying lives in the Middle East is not inevitable. There is only one way out - Impeachment. We can transform resignation into hope right now by reasserting our collective sovereignty, forcing Bush and Cheney out of power, and turning them over to the Hague to answer for their war crimes.

If we restore legitimate leadership in the White House, the doors of possibility that are closed to the fascist war criminals will open

Legitimate American power can be transformed into a force for good overnight. We can commit our nation to the task of engaging the critical players (Sunni, Shia, and Kurdish blocs, ourselves, the EU, Turkey, Russia, China, the Arab League. . . ) and helping them to find solutions that can work because all the parties have a stake in making them work.

If, because of our complicity in the horrors committed by this regime our continued involvement is rejected, we must get out of the way, withdraw our troops, and begin to redeem ourselves by setting aside reparations that would be paid as negotiated milestones and conditions are met.

[pat_k]

4. Never repeat or deny their accusation

We are firmly on their turf when we deny or defend against their accusations and labels.

When we respond by denying or arguing THEIR bogus accusations, we do them a service, because we are actually reinforcing the accusation in people's minds. When we go after them with accusations/labels/slogans of our own, in a sense we are responding, but we're not doing it in a way that reinforces their crap. We are moving the game to our turf, and dragging them with us.

To be effective, our labels/slogans must not only capture core truths, they must not be denials of their labels/slogans.

For example, after the 2005 election theft, "No Mandate" started showing up on bumper stickers and signs.

"No Mandate" is a classic "Don't think of an elephant" denial. Even people who never heard Bush's claim to a "mandate" get the notion that Bush could have a mandate planted in their heads when they see "No Mandate."

The way to effectively counter the "Bush Mandate" notion is to label the election a STOLEN ELECTION or to call Bush an ELECTION THIEF.

When we accuse, and they deny, they are doing us a favor. Every time they deny the election was stolen, they are actually giving the idea legs.

Regarding their "Dems just want to cut and run" accusation

If we mention/deny the accusation, no matter how logically or well we think we can do it, we are on their turf, squarely in "Don't think of an elephant" territory ("Don't think we are cutting and running"). We must ignore the accusation, and just go after them with one of our own. Something like:

The Republicans are determined to



"Stay the Off Course" may not be the best, but whatever we say, we must go on the attack in a way that keeps us out of a "Cutting and running or not?" argument. "Stay the Off Course" is a salvo that takes it back to our turf, where we can talk about:

• How horribly far "off course" they have taken the nation;


• How "holding firm" to lunacy is lunacy;


• How deploying American military power as an occupying force has been disastrous. How it is long past time to change course and defuse the situation by becoming in reality what we say we are -- not an occupying force, but rather, a powerful ally with sufficient military muscle deployed in close proximity to deter aggression and support critical air or ground operations.

Moving the debate from "cutting and running or not?" to the more meaningful "On or off course?" is a productive move, but the BEST way to fight them is to get on the Impeachment bus -- full speed ahead. Impeachment IS Our Positive Agenda. Committment to True American Principle is Our Turf and Impeachment takes us there (for more, see 22-Apr post and 25-Jun post).

Folks who are people-focused, not idea-focused, are most vulnerable to fascist propaganda. Instead of seeking solutions, they look for people to blame. They attack ideas by attacking the people who promote those ideas, not the ideas themselves. "On or off course" is a debate of ideas, and as such will not be as effective as a personalized accusation ("cut and run" is in essense and accusation that Dems are cowards). With Impeachment, you are going after INDIVIDUAL wrong-doers -- something that grabs the "people-focused" folk.

------------
BTW, many people on our side are so lousy at labels and catch phrases because they assume others think the same way they do. That is, they firmly believe that conclusions always follow a process of reasoning from a set of premises, so, if they present a set of premises, others will draw a logical, knowledge-based, conclusion. The assumptions about how others think make many incapable of just asserting a conclusion, absent of the premises.

The problem is that there are a whole bunch of people who simply don't reach conclusions in that way. See belief -people v. knowledge people

[Mythsaje]

6. I don't think ignoring their soundbytes is a good strategy...

They're too effective to ignore. That's why they use them, and that's why they're repeated over and over again.

[pat_k]

7. We are WAY too hung up on what they are saying, might say, thinking. . .

Like a battered spouse, we are so focused on what our abusers are thinking, feeling, might do next, that we are incapable of taking any steps that allow us to escape.

Until we learn to stop playing their game, and make them play ours, we will continue to be victimized by their abuse. As long as we allow them to keep us "on the run," responding, defending, denying, we are playing their game. It is just about impossible to be on the run and on the attack at the same time. You must chose.

When we stop pussy-footing around and go after them, no holds barred, and demand Impeachment, we are doing what we must to defend our constitutional democracy' we are accusing them of REAL crimes, and we are ignoring them and their threats of "backlash" and their bogus accusations.

Ignoring their propaganda, and doing what what morality and principle demand of us is the ONLY effective way to defeat their propaganda.

[salin]

10. Easy response:

Those doing the planning (strategies/etc.) need to divorce themselves from politics. Considerations of "how the president polls" need to be stripped out of the equation. Never again should the timing of a war "debate" and a war "invasion" be based on domestic campaign election cycles. Never again should the planning (which was devoid of any post occupation planning) be guided by ideology mixed with political staging to make the president look good for the next election. And never again should the End Goal of a war be domestic political goals rather than based strictly upon national security needs (in this case to solidify into the future - one-party domination in DC.)

All of this drivel needs to be set aside.

Match the message to the reality. ALL the war decisions have been made for political reasons. On some level or another, MOST americans know this. Remind folks of this by tying the GOP current rhetoric back to that same trend - the current rhetoric is about elections - not about creating more successful and effective strategies for creating stability in Iraq. It is about trying to salvage Ws reputation - and thus symbolic moments get touted as "wins" and "progress" rather than real investment in real benchmarks. On some level, most folks realize that this is still the truth.

This strategy invokes the superficial and opportunistically political motives (and misuse of the military) - while allowing the Dems to deal with the issue with DISMISSIVENESS, rather than be boxed into a GOP designed corner.

[DUgosh]

11. The alternative is sooooo simple it's Run and Cut

Run and cut. The possibilities are endless.

Run - barge in a country and - Cut up and kill innocent

Run - in an election and - Cut up swiftboat up your opponent

Run - in an election and - Cut out the part about counting the votes

Run - a campaign and - Cut opportunities for minorites to run

Run - out with a WMD lie - Cut up at home for a diverision

Run - in and yell terra terra terra - Cut up with a diversion at home &raise color alert

Run - a state government - Cut up the districts to your advantange.

Run - an oil company - Cut out the middle man and raise gas profits for the rich