President Bush reiterated today that we’re a-stayin’ in Iraq until “the mission is complete.” It’s been pretty well-documented that although our leader claimed that “We’ve never been ’stay the course’” before the election, he’s was being pretty darn stay-the-coursey up until that moment.
And now I’m trying to figure out how “staying until the mission is complete” is different from “staying the course.” I’m pretty sure that the best explanation would turn nautical, and that if I spent an afternoon with an old-timey neocon pirate captain (as I do from time to time), he’d explain it this way:
See, if yer sailin’ somewhere, laddie, you have what I’ll be callin’ a destination. The place yer goin’. So ya sets yer course and off ya go.
Now let’s say ya see an uncharted island in front of ya. Or a reef. Or a continent. Or a floatin’ sign that tells ya you’re goin’ the wrong way. Or ya notice that you’ve accidentally dropped anchor and haven’t actually moved in a couple o’ months. Or ya hit some sort o’ gigantic insurgency. Somethin’ like that. It happens alla the time, lad. Doon’t look at me like that, ya dog. Navigation’s not a science, y’know. It’s an ART.
Well when you’ve run afoul o’ one o’ those obstacles, that’s when you’ll be a-changin’ yer course, understand, though yer destination be the same. And that’s what we be a doin’ right here…
See? It sort of makes sense in the mouth of Captain Con.
Until you start pointing out that the current course deviations have been tiny and that if our destination is “peace and freedom in Iraq and the entire Mideast,” then we might want to jigger the route a LOT more than that. Because right now our route is about as effective as Columbus’ original course to India. And I should point out that Columbus never actually made it to India. And that then, as now, the main obstacle to getting there was America.





39 comments
Jim (OJNTNJ)
November 28, 2006 at 12:55 pm
1Why do you think the neocons insist that global warming is a hoax?
To open up the northwest passage and provide a curveball shot to India from Spain.
See, Columbus wasn’t wrong, he was simply premature.
I’m not sure how this relates to the current course, erm, destination of America, but I’m just sayin’….
t.a. barnhart
November 28, 2006 at 1:32 pm
2“stay the course” is but 3 words; “staying until the mission is complete” is 6 words. so while the former is simplistic and does not reflect the great complexities involved in shoving democracy down the Iraqis’ throats, the latter reflects that complexity and difficulty by using twice as many words to communicate our purpose. this is how great thinkers think, and it’s the nature of the great thoughts what they think. powerfuller minds at work than we mere citizens can think at.
Harold
November 28, 2006 at 1:37 pm
3The mission ain’t complete until sombody hangs up a big “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED” banner. And, since Dubya is The Decider, he’ll decide when we hang that banner.
(nt) Pete
November 28, 2006 at 3:03 pm
4Another point Cap’n Con neglected in fleshing out his nautical metaphor is that the intended grand transoceanic voyage was inadvertently launched into a small landlocked lake and the planners foresaw no need to pack a paddle.
Dan Meehan
November 28, 2006 at 3:50 pm
5I find that most politics is better explained via nautical metaphors.
That’s how i learned about the electoral college.
Mojo
November 28, 2006 at 4:02 pm
6Although we are in a boat of sorts, the body of water we’re in isn’t the ocean but a specific sort of creek and our location is “up it”.
Maximum Bob
November 28, 2006 at 4:45 pm
7“Aye, laddie, when President Bush asked me what the ol’ Cap’n thought of his plan for Iraq, I looked ‘im in the eye and said, ‘Avast!’”
nato
November 28, 2006 at 5:10 pm
8The mission is simple: Stay the course until there are no Americans left alive in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Julia
November 28, 2006 at 7:06 pm
9And when, as they say, you find yerelves sorta marooned, say, due to that dropped anchor — be well forewarned: more than one matey will end up bending over before the ship moves again.
cooper
November 28, 2006 at 7:11 pm
10Off target: Our buddy, Mo Rocca, does a TV commentary on the budding friendship of Paris Hilton and Britney Spears and those other twins, Jenna and Barbara. Go to this site and click on the “Worst Person in the World” (amusing in its own right) and then the “Double Trouble” story which is next in the queue. BTW, from my experience, the videos on this site play much better on IE6 than Mozilla, for some very complicated and technical reason that only Harold can explain.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15934446/
Rebecca
November 28, 2006 at 7:36 pm
11(If you’re not math inclined, I suggest you stop reading this about now. Which probably means no one will read this comment, but I can live with that.)
The difference between “Stay the Course” and “Stay Until the Mission is Complete” in my terms:
** “Stay the Course” is like the quadratic formula (x = [-b +/- b^2 * (square root of 4ac)] / 2a). It’s a tad bit confusing to most people, but it is a commonly used solution which everyone has heard before.
** “Stay Until the Mission is Complete” is like completing the square (the end result is the form a(x+(b/2a)^2) + (c-(b^2/4a))). It looks more complex and fancy than the quadratic formula, but in the end you still need to do the quadratic formula to finish the problem.
Basically, they’re the same, except one takes a few side steps to do a fancy move, and then throws you right back into the stuff you’ve heard a million times.
And neither have anything to do with THE math, just so we’re clear.
Oh, and GW, if you’re reading this, this is something from math called “algebra.” I’m sure one of your daughters might be able to start to explain it to you. If not, try Condi.
Maximum Bob
November 28, 2006 at 9:30 pm
12Rebecca, the other similarity between “Stay the Course” and quadratic equations is that sometimes the solution is entirely imaginary.
Rebecca
November 29, 2006 at 4:38 am
13Bob,
That’s very true - I wish I had remembered that.
I also want to thank cooper for the link - that video totally made my night last night. And anyone who can compare Britney to Iraq is brilliant (thus, Mo is brilliant).
David
November 29, 2006 at 5:24 am
14Aye, ’tis the buried treasure. Only mysteries to me are all the blather about other reasons and the incredible stupidity of our current captain and crew, those unboundingly entertaining Fossil Fools.
JOHN MURPHY
November 29, 2006 at 8:34 am
15WELL SAID!!
In fact I think it is the best description I have ever heard of this cluster we are in currently. Please someone forward this to W
Keep up the good work
Murray
November 29, 2006 at 10:29 am
16If you factor in America’s inability to remember anything beyond two days, its inability to process a thought greater than 5 words, and its preoccupation with only things sexual, you can understand how Rove would think that this would fly.
When one set of meaningless words no longer work, don’t find a solution, find a new set of meaningless words.
Mieke
November 29, 2006 at 11:55 am
17Staying the course implies some sort of movement, a “course”, if you will. Staying until the mission is complete could mean anything, but allows for much more “staying”. Presumably the mission is to wallow in an increasingly out-of-control civil war. That mission is not entirely complete. We have more flailing to do.
Shoelimpy™
November 29, 2006 at 12:51 pm
18Staying in Iraq until the mission is complete is not the same as “staying the course.” There are multiple courses of action which can be taken in Iraq to complete the mission. President Bush understands that we might have to change our strategy to achieve victory in the region, but we MUST achieve victory. If we don’t achieve victory, then we lose. And that is something we just cannot afford to do. Period.
siobhan
November 29, 2006 at 1:39 pm
19Oh, now that you were shut down on Crooks and Liars, you’ve decided to visit us… goodie.
cooper
November 29, 2006 at 2:10 pm
20Keep up the good work. John Murphy, you’re approaching this blog with the wrong frame of mind. “Don’t think of this as work, think of it as play.” Okay, so I stole that line from Animal House. It was a good line 30 years ago; it’s still a good line!
Kinky Friedman was on Talk of the Nation, doing a post mortem of his unsuccessful gubernatorial race in Texas. Oh yeah, and he’s selling a book that by his own admission, he only spent about 3 weeks writing. Adam, don’t have a stroke. I’m sure it’s shallow, has loose ends, & doesn’t flow hilariously to a satisfying conclusion. And no science, I’ll bet.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6555135
Shoelimpy™
November 29, 2006 at 2:17 pm
21There is a difference between staying in Iraq and staying the course. I think that even the Democrats in Congress understand that.
gillian
November 29, 2006 at 5:57 pm
22(Some of you may be interested in this post. Shoelimpy, you may recognize this. Have a nice day!)
How to Handle an Open Thread on Liberal Blogs,
Liberals, being the lazy sons of guns that they are, often have open threads on their blogs. That way they can keep visitors interested in talking amongst themselves, keeping them on their blogs without having to actually do any work. (I won’t be so lazy, if I didn’t smoke so much dope. You holding, Shoelimpy?)
For us conservatives this presents a wonderful opportunity, if we choose to act on it. Remember, anyone is allowed to post on an open thread. There is no determined topic. This is your chance to take control of the blog and direct the flow of conversation the way you want it to go. (Grab them by the balls and GO! GO! GO!)
Rule #1: Attack. Hit the liberals where it hurts. (Please, Shoelimpy, not my vigina again!) This is your time to take control of the debate. Don’t pull any punches. You want them on the defensive the minute you’re there. Liberals generally aren’t very quick thinkers (Harsh, dude!), if you hit them hard in the first post they won’t know how to respond. (I don’t know how to respond.)
Rule #2: Attack, but always be courteous. The liberals will troll you, flame you, insult you, (%@*#!!&*) use every dastardly trick within their arsenal to assault you (Don’t worry. I refuse to light farts. That’s one liberal trick I’ll never use. I’ve always thought that is so gross!) without actually joining in any sort of debate. Always keep the higher ground and do not resort to their level. More people are reading these threads than posting on them, and they will acknowledge you for your courteousness and attempts at reason being thwarted by irrational liberals. (Interesting theory. Anyone think this actually works?)
Rule #3: Don’t be scared off by hordes of liberals trolling you. You may be in their territory, so to speak, but you are right. Don’t let yourself be swayed by the growing influx of parrots all chirping nonsene at you like mongrel hordes of dogs. (What?)
Rule #4: Join in the side chatter. Remember, this is an open thread and there will be discussion that isn’t directly pointed at debate. While you shouldn’t let it sidetrack you from the topic at hand, the topic that you began, joining in non-debate discussion will ingrain you into the community. (Be wary of this strategy, liberals, and watch always for ingrained wing-nuts.)
Rule #5: You are in charge. Don’t let yourself be swayed by the liberals. Keep to your point, and don’t let yourself be drowned out. If these people are ever to see reason, it will be through your efforts and the efforts of others. (I want to see reason. Please help!)
Rule #6: Always keep in mind that your reading audience is far larger than the few liberals who will be responding to you. You probably won’t reach those who actually post, but lurkers and those who are just reading the blog will see what you say and pay attention. Remember you are writing for them too. (Lurkers beware!)
Rule #7: Have Fun! (Shoelimpy, do you let lesbians play?)
siobhan
November 29, 2006 at 6:29 pm
23Side chatter: Parrots don’t chirp. They squawk. (like the one on my shoulder is doing at the moment.) We strive for ornithological accuracy here.
Gillian, thanks. I knew it was out there somewhere, but being the lazy liberal that I am, I couldn’t be bothered to look for it.
David
November 29, 2006 at 7:51 pm
24siobhan,
Possible ascendance of flaming liberalism, invoking of ornithological accuracy, wallowing in reality-based thinking. What is post-election America headed for? I shudder to think.
Oh, yeah, saw a mockingbird chowing down on berries on a “weed” I left alone in the yard at the family homestead. Love leaving bits of native vegetation, especially those pesky “weeds,” to see what will show up. Happy to report the notion of nurturing native vegetation in people’s yards is gaining popularity.
cooper
November 29, 2006 at 11:00 pm
25David, speaking of nurturing native vegetation, my backyard has a natural area, which my anal retentive & born-again (even became a wing-nut Republican during his post-partum depressive period) Christian neighbor referred to as “The Jungle”. Birds love it, even if he never did. Did I mention that he moved away (Yahoo!)?
Dale
November 29, 2006 at 11:10 pm
26Hope those ain’t poisonous berries. Wouldn’t want to kill a mockingbird!
siobhan
November 30, 2006 at 4:38 am
27If they were pyracantha berries (not native), the mockingbird could get nice and drunk before he starts singing all night. Sorta like our old neighbor.
When we moved here three years ago, the garden was lovely but very, very formal - trees and bushes all clipped into perfect spheres and cubes. I waited a year so I could see each of the plants through a full cycle, then started culling a bunch of uninteresting ones in favor of natives. At first it looked like hell with all of these spindly little sticks poking up, but after two years, it’s filling in nicely and I have much more interesting birds in the yard, even though I rarely fill the feeders.
David
November 30, 2006 at 6:49 am
28No dead mockingbirds. Also, not pyracantha, so no inebrious feathered friend. At least now I know the stories I’ve heard are true. I think I heard a story on NPR about a town in Texas which has a drunk tank for pyracantha-plastered birds. Fowler, do you know anything about that?
Luckily, no anal retentives next door. Glad to hear the dropped again moved on.
Aaron
November 30, 2006 at 7:13 am
29Shoelimpy (who trademarks a name like that, by the way?) wrote: “If we don’t achieve victory, then we lose.”
Hmmm. So by that logic, if we don’t completely lose, than we win. Ergo, by not admitting defeat, we have already achieved victory. I get it! Thanks for taking control of the debate.
Stephen
November 30, 2006 at 8:20 am
30Shoelimpy
So can you share with us any course changes that have happened in Iraq? I haven’t seen any.
nato
November 30, 2006 at 10:01 am
31Stephen, just look at the original post. We’ve changed course from “Stay the course” to “Staying until the mission is complete.” What more do you want from poor shrub? By the time Bush is either impeached or leaves office on his own, I’m sure we will have changed course again and managed to add another word or three to the revised statement (maybe throw in some shock and awe with words like freedom or democracy, i.e. “We will stay the course until the mission to free the Middle East from all possible influences of freedom and democracy is complete”).
Murray
November 30, 2006 at 10:52 am
32Gee, I read Shoelimpy’s first post as a sarcastic rant and found it much more satisfying than when I read it straight. I guess he was just too subtle.
As far as controling open threads goes, it has always been the trolling right wingers who scream and curse. This is a very civil place except for their screed.
Adam Felber
November 30, 2006 at 11:31 am
33Everyone - ease up on Shoelimpy a bit. I (now) realize that he has a history on other blogs’ comments… but so what? To this point, he’s only been civil and reasonable, and - with all due respect to other blogs - there are very few places on the net where conservatives and liberals don’t slam each other at first sight. This, as you know, is one of those places (at least part of the time).
Shoelimpy - as for what you actually SAID, I don’t disagree with any of it. Except this: “President Bush understands that we might have to change our strategy to achieve victory in the region.” While I think that this is true in general, I think that he has been tragically slow in adjusting his strategies, and those adjustments have been tiny rather than the overhaul that we’ve needed.
We didn’t have to invade Iraq as stupidly as we did (Rumsfeld’s “small footprint” was an unmitigated disaster - it neither secured the country nor had the intended effect of making Iraqis feel less violated and occupied), we didn’t have to alienate our allies, and the biggest tragedy of all is that we’ve wasted a year in which it was CLEAR we weren’t winning because the Bush administration didn’t want to make any gigantic (but necessary) changes in an election year.
So all that jazz about how we HAVE to win in Iraq and that staying in Iraq and staying the course aren’t the same thing and etc…. Yeah. I know. If you’d spent any time here, you’d know I don’t disagree with that. Honestly, your posts read like you were arguing with some Generic Dumb Liberal that you enjoy taking down a peg.
But even though staying in Iraq isn’t the same as staying the course, what we have actually been doing in Iraq IS staying the course. A friend of mine who works in a military think tank says that most of the DoD has been fuming about this very fact and has been convinced Iraq was going to dissolve into chaos for more than a year.
So… there you go. If I’m feeding a troll, so be it. Otherwise, welcome.
SeattleDan
December 1, 2006 at 9:35 pm
34As the official thread-killer, I don’t want to leave it to Adam, kind-hearted soul that he is. But Mr. SL hasn’t shown up since, and maybe that’s a good thing.
siobhan
December 1, 2006 at 10:15 pm
35I like our conservatives (hi Fowler!) who try to provoke thoughts rather than provoke flame wars.
SD, I can stop ‘em dead in their tracks, too. Let’s take turns.
SeattleDan
December 1, 2006 at 10:21 pm
36This is your turn, siobhan. And fowler is our wingnut guy, and I feel protective of him. Attack his ideas, fine, but don’t attack him personally. He’s a good guy. But SL, well, I’ll let Adam’s comments stand. Now, siobhan, you kill the thread.
David
December 2, 2006 at 5:37 am
37Fowler,
Your ‘Horns are playing the traditional role of my Gators this year. Hope my Gators get to play the role of your ‘Horns.
I didn’t take SL seriously, whatever that means about me. Eighteen to thirty demographic went Democrat 2:1. Now if Democrats will embrace what that means for what we should be doing in Congress.
Harold
December 2, 2006 at 11:26 am
38Well, I’m hoping Adam picks this up on a new post, but did anyone else hear Dumbass warn the country today that we must not DESERT the effort in Iraq? Because if there’s one thing our chickenshit Commander-in-Thief knows - other than how much Jack Daniels it takes to make every woman at the party beautiful, and how much coke it takes to get them to go home with you - it’s desertion. Shirking your duty by avoiding even the cushy never-gonna-see-combat service you signed up for by deciding that working on someone’s campaign is the same thing as serving in the National Guard during wartime. Yeah, let’s not do that
David
December 2, 2006 at 2:08 pm
39Loud huzzahs from the amen corner, Harold. Chickenshit captures our C in C like no other image I can think of.