Meet the new war sound bite; slightly worse than the old war sound bite

August 14, 2006

RNC Chairman Ken [tag]Mehlman[/tag] has used “[tag]cut and run[/tag]” so many times, I suspect he’s close to developing a nervous twitch over it. Nevertheless, while he’s been smearing Dems, Mehlman has been stuck with “[tag]stay the course[/tag].” Yesterday on Meet the Press, Mehlman tried to replace it with a new soundbite. See if you can spot it.

“Look, the fact is that our mission in the war in Iraq is critical. We agree on that; we agree it’s wrong to cut and run. But look, we’re not coming in and saying ‘Stay the course.’ The choice in this election is not between ‘Stay the course’ and ‘Cut and run,’ it’s between ‘[tag]Win by adapting[/tag]‘ and ‘Cut and run.’

“Let me tell you what we’re doing. The fact is, before the successful Iraqi elections, the number of troops went up from 137,000 to 167,000. That’s adapting to win. Recently, the increased troops in Baghdad, adapting to win. We changed how the training of Iraqi forces occurred to involve more Iraqis. That’s adapting to win.

“I acknowledge that when you’re facing any war, the enemy is smart, the enemy thinks, and particularly in this kind of war, it requires you to [tag]adapt to win[/tag]. We’re going to adapt to win.”

Mehlman is nothing if not subtle.

Well, nothing, that is, except wrong and dishonest.

First, as TP noted, Mehlman’s assertion that conservatives are “not coming in and saying ‘Stay the course’ in Iraq is absurd. Amanda found multiple instances of high-profile Republicans, including the president himself, saying exactly that. Oddly enough, “stay the course” isn’t one of those bumper-sticker slogans Dems came up with to mock the GOP policy; it’s one of those bumper-sticker slogans Republicans crafted to describe their own policy. It’s a little late for Mehlman to distance himself from it now.

And second, what does “win by adapting” even mean? After more than three years of tragic mistakes, it appears to mean “make it up as we go along.”

The “win by adapting” phrase seems to respond to the notion that Americans believe the president doesn’t have a plan to succeed. This little soundbite seems to argue, “No, of course he doesn’t have a plan. He shouldn’t have a plan because plans lock you in. The president is constantly adapting to the situation.”

No one, anywhere, will buy this nonsense, but be prepared to hear “win by adapting” several million times between now and November.

We’re winning so much, we need to adapt by sending more troops.

  • “win by adapting” = Buckle up true believers we have retread lies to pass before your eyes.

  • I wonder why they didn’t stick with “Mission accomplished”? That sounded so much more muscular.

  • Win by adapting is Newspeak for flip-flop. I think Rahm Emannuel should start accusing the GOP of having situational policy positions (like situational ethics). Get out there and state that the party that see’s things in black and white had al of a sudden discovered gray!

    I also think that win by adapting is a poorly conceived turn of phrase. It is clumbsy, and kind of ugly. This one is short lived (and stupid).

  • Also by Mehlman,
    “The fact is, for a generation terrorists have made war on America. From the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich to Mogadishu to Beirut to the East African bombings, to the USS Cole.”

    1972 Olympic Games? Really? Classic GOP fact-checking.

    “Mogadishu to Beirut…”
    Operation Restore Hope in Somalia- 1992-93
    US Embassy & Marine Barracks bombing- 1983
    Might be just nit-picking on my part, but how do you go from 1992 to 1983?

    “…East Africa bombings…:”
    When Clinton DID respond, he was attacked for “wagging the dog” to divert attention away from the Lewinsky witchhunt.

    “…USS Cole…”
    So what did the NEW administration do to respond to this? Bombed Iraq. Really left Osama shaking in his books, I’m sure.

    Then there was this little tidbit:
    “What changed was that after September 11, this president recognized in fact we’re at war. ”

    After saying that “for a generation terrorists have made war on America”, it took the most horrific attack ever on US soil (so far) for Bush to wake up to the fact that we were already “at war”??
    Just what the fuck were they doing in the previous 8 months?

    And what the hell is with his calling Howard Dean “Chairman Dean”? Is it supposed to be some kind of sophmoric reference to “Chairman Mao”?

  • So NOW they’re going to start adapting? What a bunch of geniuses.

    I’m sure the “win” part doesn’t have anything to do with some elections that are coming up, either.

    I keep hearing reports from all over that Mehlman is gay, and that it’s no secret to a lot of people in the Republican party. I wonder if the Republicans could “adapt” to him coming out of the closet?

  • From the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich

    2Manchu, good catch. This is a tacit admission that BushCo sees US and Israeli interests as indistinguishable.

  • How about adapting by redefining the purpose for invading Iraq and the goal of the war, i.e. by redefining “winning”? We really need to get a straight answer out of these guys — what is it that we can possibly achieve in Iraq now? A unified, democratic country? A hopelessly chaotic mess held together indefinitely by the brute power of the US. A fractured nation, divided into three federations with constant border clashes and fights over oil proceeds? A Shiite southern nation allied with Iran?

    Come on Mehlman! What is it? Adapting to cover Bush’s ass? Or adapting to help the US survive the fallout from this fiasco?

  • So what’s new? The Republicans have been adapting history and their facts to political objectives for years. Mehlman was just describing their domestic political strategy.

  • Dean should jump all over this by comenting that the Repubs are finally admitting their strategy is wrong and is in need of change, which is what the Dems (including Ned Lamont) have been asking for all along. Maybe the media will start exposing the many failures of this poorly though-out occupation. George Lakoff had a great quote about ocupations: you don’t win occupations, you can only leave.

    Mehlman isn’t cutting and running: he’s cutting and pasting from the Dem playbook.

  • Very good petorado.

    LOL

    Republican’ts can spin, but they can’t hide.

    They – are – a – total – failure.

  • “adapting to win” … so lame.

    I kinda liked “stay the course”. I could picture an election time cartoon with that slogan on a flag being waved by the Regal Moran in a boat going toward Niagara Falls.

  • “Adapt to win” with Bush at the helm. Fat Chance.

    This guy could adapt his way out of a wet paper bag.

    He has already said that he’s outsource the decision of when to leave iraq to the next President.

  • “win by adapting”

    Another example of trumpeting what should be standard operating procedure as brilliant strategery.

    1. adapting implies there was a plan, which there seems not to have been. Their policy seems to be more of a band-aid approach that any serious attempt to adapt an actual plan.
    2. if sending in a few thousand troops into Baghdad is an example of adaptation, then the serious flaw in this plan is that those in charge are idiots. The root cause of the conflict between Shiites and Sunnis is in no way addressed by adding troops, nor does it take into account the nature of the violence. It will always be possible for very small cells of people to commit the acts that are threatening to cause full-blown civil war.
    3. all this darn adaptin’ doesn’t seem to have secured Baghdad, has it?

  • Real men don’t adapt. They power through the opposition. This is wimpy, like something the Democrats would come up with.

  • “Win by adapting” is much catchier than “It’s hard work!” It’s a little less whiny, too.

    Of course, I’d like to hear a concrete definition of a “win” in Iraq, without any of that “stand up, stand down” bullshit.

  • They (repugs) read the liberal blogs.

    They (repugs) have realized that “stay the course” is “Loserman” language.

    So they (repugs) are reframing the debate w/o altering the reality on the ground.

    They (repugs) know exactly what they are doing:

    “IT AIN’T ABOUT THE QUALITY OR TRUTH OF OUR IDEAS… IT IS ABOUT THE PROMULGATION AND PRESENTATION OF OUR IDEAS.”

    Repugs know that you can sell ashes to the devil (or even big unwieldy boxes on wheels as sexy sport vehicles) if you can manage the language of presentation properly.

    Ever wanted to know what they (repugs) meant when they said they wanted to run your government like a big business?

    Now you know!

    What they (repugs) meant wasn’t the sleek efficiency of a corporation, but rather, –the control of ideas via an advertising budget and an advertising campaign… often financed by taxpayers.

    Welcome to the brave new Republican world everyone!

    Meet your new “World Controllers.”

    Like it or not… you are now either partially or completely under the corporate Republican thumb.

    “MOST” everything you now read and see is within the purview of their control.

    Karl Rove is not your big brother.
    He is your master.

  • I think you’re reading too much into it. Ken is just playing a drinking game with his friends at home. They have to take a shot everytime he says “adapt to win.”

    Obviously, he wants to get them so hammered they’ll actually believe his bullshit.

  • “Win by Adapting” is MehlmanSpeak for either:

    (1) “We messed up. We messed up really, really bad. It’s unbelievable just how badly—how HORRIFICALLY badly— we messed up. However, in the finest tradition of the Republican Reich, we will not admit that we’ve messed up—and we’ll continue to fix this thing that’s broken beyond all hope of repair by breaking it some more.

    or:

    (2) After consulting with our illustrious soothsayer, the Great and Glorious Rove, we have decided to continue our endless efforts to resurrect a dead conservative horse by beating it. However, we think the problem is that the dead conservative horse has been laying on its disgustingly-liberal left side. We’ve actually been pounding the daylights out of the “properly-right side” of the dead conservative horse—which is a bad thing for a conservative horse-beater to do to an obviously-intelligent, dead conservative horse. Thus, we are going to roll the dead conservative horse over on its intellectually-proper, morally correct and superior, right side, and pummel its liberal-fringe-whacko-terrorist-loving-tree-hugging left side into complete oblivion.

    Consider this your “poke fun at a hilariously-funny conservative” moment.

    *p.s.—The Mehlman hates being made fun of….

  • Iraq is a catastrophic foreign policy debacle. Bush idiocy, his inestimable incompetence, has alienated us from our allies and generated hatred among Muslims across the world. He has weakened our military, forcing our troops into an extended occupation in the midst of a growing civil war for which they have neither appetite nor training. He has created a recruiting boon for al-Qaida. He has sorely weakened our foreign policy influence, as demonstrated graphically in the current conflict in Lebanon. He has cost nearly 2,700 American lives, over 20,000 Americans wounded — and an estimated 150,000 Iraqi deaths. He has compromised our budget priorities, spending about $400 billion on this ill advised war already — with the estimated cost likely to exceed $1 trillion. The budget is a statement of our moral choices — and this is a deeply immoral choice. Hell, why can’t we cut and run from this Bush idiocy?

  • I agree with Petrado (#13). Much like Bush just did with Lebanon, we should just declare victory, loudly and boldly. “We welcome President Bush to the responsible position the Democrats have taken all along: that his current approach is not working, and its time for a change. He calls in an adaptation; that’s fine. He still now admits that his approach to Iraq has not achieved any kind of a win, and it is time to find a strategy that provides us, and the people of Iraq a better chance. We hope he will also consider our other positions: that the US and Iraq would be better served if this administration worked more closely with allies and other countries, rather than just trying to boss them around. Thatsmart bombs aren’t enough, we need smart leaders. That General Powell was correct that before entering combat we should always (a) know our purpose (b) have a clear exit strategy and (c) go in with sufficient strength to overwhelm the opponent. While we still aren;t ready to accept him into our party — our tent is big, but it does have it liits — we see this admission of error and willingness to correct his course as a positive step. Thank God the Democratic Party has been here to help him find his way before it was too late.”

  • “Adapting to win.” To quote Rummy, “Good grief and my goodness. How incredibly stupid does Ken Mehlman thing we are? [Pretty stupid, I guess.] As stupid as the press who let him spew this substance-free crap without challenge? [Possibly] Does he have any respect for the American electorate? [Obiviously not] Should he have respect? [I can’t say that he should] Is there any statement Mehlman could utter that would cause that lying smirk of his to bust out in a full-blown ‘Even I can’t peddle this sh*t’ guffaw? [I’m guessing, ‘No’]”

    Kenny Boy’s looks are not relevant to anything, but I have to say that Ken Mehlman is a horse-faced whore for whom there is a special place reserved in hell. It appears, however, that the MSM are really impressed with the relentlessness with which he is willing to prostitute himself. They are too willing to overlook the fact that everything he is selling is retreaded and insulting to the intelligence to anyone who is even moderately dialed in to reality. Mehlman may be a very tired “tart,” but the MSM love the “discipline” so much that they don’t bother their pretty little heads about the “message” itself. Ken does what he does because no one lays a glove on him – let alone slaps him hard.

    As for the “Chairman Dean” moniker, it serves at least a couple purposes. In addition to the obvious and stupid “Commie” connection, it denies Dean’s stature as a former governor. These people are low but they view themselves as cute and clever. They never miss and opportunity to marginalize and disrespect their opposition. Give ’em their due; that is their right. It’s been said many times that politics ain’t bean bag. But, every day they demonstrate why “bipartisanship” and compromise with them is a pipe dream. It is important to understand that and act accordingly. I continue to hope that LiarChairman Mehlman lives to regret his lyingdisingenuous ways – soon.

  • Petorado #13
    I agree. The “cutting and pasting from the Dem playbook” is “Adopting to Win.” But the “win” is in November not in Iraq and not in that fabulously handy (to Bush) GWOT.

    • Comments are closed.