kerry better clean up his language...from a linguistic POV

he looks and SOUNDS like an ass everytime he says 'stay the course'. In adopting BushSpeak he comes across disingenuous in the extreme. Further, as the USofA will/is losing Iraq War of Invasion and will have to fight a hugely bloody retreat throughout July/August, Kerry will be tied into this mistaken war and the military defeat in real time by his language.

What Kerry's People fail to grasp is that the Iraq/ME situation 'tipped' a while back and now they will not be able to react to events without a very different view of the developing situation and the future it portends.

Further, Bush/Rummy/Wolfowitz will not allow pentagon to plan for a fighting retreat (read up on history, the first British Campaign in Afgahnistan =135 thousand lost fighting their way out...or the British retreat from Iraq)....anyway, what the USofA is not doing, British planning people are....that is, planning to fight their way out this summer as the country, globe and hell heat up.

So what will Kerry be saying when the USofA suffers a defeat on as grand a scale as Stalingrad or Dunkirk or Waterloo or Transvaal? If he keeps using the lexicon of the past few months, he is screwed....

So will Nader win? Or Kucinich?

Just remember, everything, that is *everybloodything* in the way of USofA illusions about our own power in the world started changing a bit ago and seriously falls off the cliff in July.

Just wait til the bank holidays (shutdowns) in September....

He was very eloquent then and needs to bring back those arguments now.

We can't win, our troops don't want to be there, the Iraqi's don't want us there, we are losing our credibility with each passing day. We don't need a fresh start-we need to come home.

And is probably most effective that way

When he said we need an alternative to what * is doing in Iraq. He doesn't think we are being offered options in this campaign because both candidates want to "stay the course in Iraq."

I want an alternative from Kerry because I will not vote for Nader.

which is to get the UN much more involved. Kerry's alternative has been on the table for months now, so I am wondering how long it needs to be there before some people realize that.

And I also wonder how long it will be before people realize the Russert's MO is to ignore what the Dem has actually said, and that they'd be better off NOT relying on Russerts mischaracterization of politics and instead, read what Kerry is actually saying (Hint: Kerry doesn't say "Stay the course". I can only think of one time when he said that)

But I am not convinced that we should stay in Iraq. Especially after the torture pictures have been released.

If you can only think of one time that he said "stay the course", that means he said "stay the course". How many more people need to die to we can save face?

Edit: Russerts point was that many Americans were becoming uneasy about what was going on in Iraq and this election should be a referendum on the war. I didn't see him mischaracterize anything. We have the choice of staying or staying. It was his opinion that wasn't much of an option.

it's a whole other thing to deny that Kerry has presented an alternative.

If you can only think of one time that he said "stay the course", that means he said "stay the course".

I made that statement in reference to the original post which implies that Kerry has been repeating that phrase. He hasn't.

Russerts point was that many Americans were becoming uneasy about what was going on in Iraq and this election should be a referendum on the war. I didn't see him mischaracterize anything.

Look again. According to your earlier post, Russert claimed that Kerry hasn't offered an alternative, an assertion that even you agree is false, while at the same time saying that Russert hasn't mischaracterized anything.

We have the choice of staying or staying. It was his opinion that wasn't much of an option.

And again, I suggest a little less reliance of cravenly partisan "journalists", especially when they say things that you KNOW are not true.

Maybe I should have carefully worded my post. What I should say is it is my opinion we are not being offered much of an alternative. I don't rely on Russert or anyone else to form my opinion and I think you were reaching in making that assumption. Just because I agreed with his point doesn't mean that I rely on him for my judgement of Kerry's Iraq plan.

Again, we are being offered the choice of staying or staying and I don't think that is much of a choice considering I am not all that certain we can be successful in the end. Do I think it would be good to get NATO and the UN involved? Absolutely. Is that a gaurantee? No. Do I think Kerry will work hard to try and make it happen? Yes. But more and more, it seems like a no win situation and I want a candidate who is willing to address that issue. What happens if they refuse involvement? What is Plan B? We need an honest discussion about this and I feel strongly we aren't getting one!

I don't think anyone knows the true consequences of pulling out versus staying but it should be a topic that is on the table and I would like Kerry to bring it there. I want to know more.

Several of the Dem candidates in the primaries supported a US pullout in Iraq. The overwhelming majority of Dems voted for someone else.

I don't think anyone knows the true consequences of pulling out versus staying but it should be a topic that is on the table and I would like Kerry to bring it there. I want to know more.

Ask Kucinich. Ask Sharpton. Ask Nader. You have choices. Unfortunately, this is a democracy, and the majority (as well as the majority of DEMS) disagree with you. You shouldn't expect the Dems to supply you and every other minority (within the Dem party) with a choice when there is only ONE Democratic candidate for President.

The majority of Dem primary voters made THEIR choice. It may not be yours, but the idea that alternatives have not been offered is just not true. You may not think it's much of an alternative, but there are millions of Democrats who think it is. No Democrat is going to give up THEIR opinions and principles in order to accomodate yours.

Again, it's reasonable to disagree with a candidate, particularly on such an important issue. However, the idea that alternatives have not been considered is nothing more than propoganda designed to exploit people's disappointment at not getting their way. That's why the idea that choices have not been offered can only be defended by resorting to subjective and emotional reasonings, such as "it's not much of an alternative in my opinion"

Your opinion does NOT determine if something is an alternative. Your opinion only determines whether or not you like the alternative that has been chosen, and I would add, chosen by a democratic (small 'd') process.

Sorry, just heckling ya. :-)

But seriously, how often has Kerry said "stay the course"?

I recall this as part of the "heckler debate," but nothing recent.

can you provide a link, because my understanding is that he is in no way saying stay the course, in fact the opposite. He's saying we need a change of direction.

Anybody have a link?

but I suspect it will be difficult to wring it out of him/her

.

everyone on the Internet CAN'T be wrong!!!

:crazy:

HOW DARE YOU CRITICIZE THE INFALLIBLE JOHN KERRY! YOU MUST WANT BUSH TO WIN!



:eyes:

if you'd look at the responses on this thread, they don't resemble your parody.

You'll see that we've questioned the factual premise of this poster's impassioned criticism of Kerry, and you'll also notice that the poster has not responded.

Did Kerry even say what this poster is complaining about?

Albeit, it was in 2002...

"We have to be prepared to stay the course over however many years it takes and to commit the necessary financial and technical resources, which could amount to billions, to succeed."

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2002_1009.html

Face it, Kerry is pro-war. Anti-war Dems and Indies do not have a choice in the presidential election. Very little will change in regards to the war, no matter who is "elected".

can't find his keys to Theresa's time machine. I guess he won't be able to clean up his linguistic act.

Another opportunity lost.