When a war's going badly, you replace the General (Bush)

[SoCalDemocrat]

Republican talking points have Bush attacking Kerry over his stance on Iraq. They claim we didn't change horses during WWII, we didn't pack up our bags and go home. They also use the analogy that we didn't just give up when fighting Communism during the Cold War.

These analogies are easily debunked with the right sound bites.

We're not talking about giving up and going home. What we need to do is replace the leader that's led us to failure time and time again. That failed leadership came from George W. Bush.

We need to replace our general so we can win the war, both in Iraq and on terrorism.

I firmly believe that John Kerry was born for this moment in history.

He was tempered in battle in Vietnam, only to return home and fight the war on a new front to win the peace. We were being lead by amoral men who put political gain above common sense, the advice of their own generals, and the lives of Americans. Now we have the same situation all over. Bush is lying once more to the public about the conditions in Iraq in a desperate attempt to hold on until the November elections. He must be defeated, and John Kerry is the man to do it.

[AndyTiedye]

1. When the Horse is Trying to Take You Over Niagara Falls, CHANGE HORSES!!!

[SoCalDemocrat]

2. Bush is going to use war analogy's not horses

The latest talking points have teh Republicans using WWII and Cold War analogies. We need to have a suitable comeback. I think the analogy of replacing a failed general is WWII might work. I've heard Kerry use the horse reference, that may work depending on how Bush comes out in the debates.