Talk May Be Cheap, But It's All They Have

Here we go again - the Dems have had the revelation that their problem is not their policies but their rhetoric:

House Democrats have found a way to address Republicans’ polling advantage on national security: Teach candidates a better way to talk about the issue.

...

To combat the problem, House Democrats have asked Third Way, the centrist Democratic think tank, and California Rep. Jane Harman, a leader on intelligence issues in the House, to help lead training sessions on the issue.

...

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) attended one of Harman’s sessions when he was running for office in 2008. Now the president of the Democratic freshman class, he helped lead a session for other Democrats late last month. He said his party has to “avoid the trap of looking soft and weak” and that “there are strong adverbs, adjectives and verbs as opposed to weak.”

One example he offered: “I’m going to fight for American interests abroad” as opposed to “I’m going to defend American values.”

Other examples include replacing "Run away!" with "Back away slowly and calmly".  Well, or ought to.  The nasty, brutish and short Republican response:

“The fact that Democrats have to train their own candidates on how to talk about defending America is an indictment not just of their candidates but of their policies, as well,” said Ken Spain, communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee. “Our candidates’ message is simple: Stop treating terrorists like common criminals, don’t import terrorists into our communities and listen to our military and intelligence officials instead of attacking them.”

Don't attack our military and intelligence officials?  C'mon, Attorney General Holder is hoping to indict some.

Comments

[narciso]

Connolly wasn't he the one who voted to expand the madrassa, known as the Islamic Saudi Academy

[Thomas Collins]

OK, TM, we have our derivatives thread, our Krugman thread and our Dem national security talking points thread. Now we need a Massa and Emanuel in the shower thread (I can't currently get onto the RealClearPolitics site to LUN the item).

[Danube of Thought]

Hadn't realized that this guy Massa had been a "no" vote on healthcare. Hope he stays.

[narciso]

This is what I was referring to earlier in the LUN

[Clarice]

No one can get to it, TC--It must be THE item on the IT today.

[Jane]

DOT,

Massa voted "no" because there was no public option.

[lynndh]

Anytime a pol uses the word "fight" I immediately think HACK. And I hack and know that is someone that most likely will not get my vote.

[AJB]

Don't attack our military and intelligence officials? C'mon, Attorney General Holder is hoping to indict some.

FYI, the AG has already established that he is only going after people who went beyond the limits set by Yoo and Bybee (even Ashcroft had a CIA contractor indicted) and news reports since then have claimed that the only cases being looked at are ones in which detainees were beaten and/or suffocated to death.

[Thomas Collins]

YouToo Congress has a post on the Rahming of Massa and Massa's response. See LUN.

[Cecil Turner]

FYI, the AG has already established that he is only going after people who went beyond the limits set by Yoo and Bybee . . .

Speaking of whom, how's that particular witch hunt going? Not so well, last I checked.

And going after underlings who exceeded orders makes little or no sense if the contention is that there was institutionalized torture ordered from the top down. Guess we're punting on that one as well, eh?

Besides, I'll believe promises from Holder some time after he decides to prosecute Black Panther voter intimidators or stops paying ACORN for services rendered.

[Jane]

Cecil! WE heard you guys had a great waitress in Alaska!

[Clarice]

the only cases being looked at are ones in which detainees were beaten and/or suffocated to death.: Then why are we prosecuting Seals for purportedly roughing up some jiahdis who murdered 4 troops?

[Cecil Turner]

Hey Jane,

Yeah it was great fun (and she was plenty cute . . . but correctly pegged us as "no threat"). I can heartily recommend it.

[Coulda been the conversation.]

What, CT? The beer, the company, the halibut, or the it-girl?
=============