As was already pointed out, the very first quote in the linked article has Bush saying “We will stay the course, we will complete the job in Iraq.” He’s claiming that anyone who wants to set a timetable will end up not finishing the job. I don’t agree with him on that, but that’s the implication of what he says.
And you have an amazing capacity to misread posts. Of course “pull out now” has had few supporters. That’s way I said it “cut and run” was an unfair way to paint the opposition.
Don’t worry, John – I have complete trust that you will eventually have the courage to completely regret casting your vote for George… 
huh. who knew that the only qualification for being a “Bush appologist” was disagreement about a single point. Never mind thousands of posts. never mind any other stance - a single act of disagreement = BUsh appologist. wonder how the hell I got away w/my voting record all these years. shouldn’t I be richer?
These days, I just think of it as the Republican Mind Trick.
“These aren’t the lobbyists you’re looking for. They can go about their business. Move along.”
Nah, we weren’t fooled for an instant.
and I woulda gotten away w/it if it weren’t for those meddeling kids! ::shakes fist::
Yeah, yeah. Here, don’t forget your rubber mask…
So in other words, W is Humpty Dumpty
Petard, and it derives, appropriately enough, from the French word for “fart.”
Our Fearless Leader is once again counting on the “so-called liberal media” to roll over and die, instead of actually doing their job. After all, nobody wants to lose access or get disinvited from the annual turkey-pardoning ceremony at the White House.
Apos, my problem with you cutting a politician slack on an issue like this is as follows:
If you and I are having a friendly debate about something and you mis-speak or use an ambiguous term and then I accidentally or deliberately straw man you, then it is completely fair enough for a neutral observer to say “hey, that’s not fair, that’s not really what **Apos said or meant [or whatever]”.
But that’s not what has happened here.
Politicians (like salesmen, brochure writers etc) are masters of deliberately using terms that, when analysed closely, do not mean quite what they sound like they mean, or which give a particular impression in a particular context, but which (when taken out of context later) can be denied to have ever been intended to give that impression.
Politicians who use this technique, allow an impression to be gained, do nothing to correct it, then deny they ever meant what everyone thought they meant later do not deserve a millimetre of slack.
The thing is, “stay the course” originates from horse racing:
It holds within it not just the (main) idea of staying, enduring to the end, but also the (subsidiary) sense of keeping to a prescribed route – the course.
So, at least to me, Bush’s “stay the course” mantra suggests not only sticking it out until (whatever the hell the current definition is of) victory, but doing so without deviating from the course laid out at the beginning of this Glorious Adventure in Democracy-Spreading.
Stay the course!
Slay the horse!
Flay the corpse!
You could go one better, and ask that he be sent to Baghdad to complete the military service he’s claimed to have performed many times.
Petar is an acceptable, if someone archaic, spelling too. In fact, the phrase “hoisted with one’s own petard” derives from “hoist with his own petar”, coined by Shakespeare in Hamlet.
John Kerry was eviscerated for his “I voted for it before I voted against it” comment, in which he was making a perfectly reasonable point that required an extra moment of thought. Apparently, one moment too much.
He was universally criticized for being “too nuanced” for Joe Voter.
Apos’ explanation isn’t even nuanced, it’s tortured. But I hear torture’s okay these days so, you know, no worries.
I think that making Bush complete his guard duty would be a great idea. If not Bagdad, let him patrol the Mexican-US border.
Thanks, re petar/d. I have always seen it petard, but our own Divine Cecil-let none unworthy breathe his name-has it as petar in a column, so I wasn’t sure.
From WMD to “we’ll be welcomed as liberators” to Mission Accomplished to this–and I am sure I have missed many along the way. How can anyone vote for these people? I heard a GOP pol (didn’t catch the name, but he’s from AZ) say yesterday on NPR that the Reps have lost their way. He either has brass balls or sees that he must find fault and distance himself from the GOP to win. I was impressed that he had that amount of candor. I would like to see a GOP not hijacked by the neo-cons/fundamentalists (whom Bush & Co might have played like a fish, per Kuo’s book). We need a decent debate in this country-not polarizing spin.
I laughed at the Humpty-Dumpty reference, but I thought of The Princess Bride --I do not think [those] words mean what you think they mean…
Come on! Really, Apos and wring, I’m surprised at your take on this. It is exactly the “imminent threat” bullshit redux. “Stay the course” has always meant “stay on my course” for Bush. Do you really mean to suggest that you think Bush has been changing and altering strategies and working closely with his military commanders to have an evolving and responsive “course” upon which to stay? He’s always used the military commanders as an excuse (“If my generals told me they needed , I would provide .” Oddly enough, they get fired or reprimanded whenever they do suggest that they need .) He has not used them as counsel in any way that “stay the course” could mean anything like what the administration is now trying to suggest.
For a fucker who is perfectly willing to misrepresent his opponents with a catchphrase and use it blindly as a cudgel, he wouldn’t get a moment of the benefit of the doubt for me if the process was turned around upon him. Furthermore, in this case, it isn’t unfair at all. Stay the course has meant nothing more than do not question my course.
His course has been an abject failure. There is no reason to condemn him for insisting that we stay upon it.
That’s not what I was arguing with (speaking of reading comprehension). I was saying that “stay the course” has always been used to distinguish its proponents from “cut and run,” not that doing so was based in any kind of truth. “Cut and run” has always been a strawman, built up in order to be support the “stay the course” position.
Silly bunnies, doubting The Leader!
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/World/Iraq
Well, there you have it! Just a couple three more Friedman Units and all will be well! Of course, the next few months will be crucial. And kinda bloody. But if we all just rally behind The Leader and stay the curse…course, stay the course…
Wasn’t “stay the course” something his dad said regularly? I remember something along those lines, although the only specific ones I can recall exactly are the Dana Carvey enhanced “wouldn’t be prudent,” “not gonna do it” and “thousand points of light.”