<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Friday Talking Points [Vol. 7]</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/</link>
	<description>Reality-based political commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2026 17:11:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: PlacitasRoy</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1377</link>
		<dc:creator>PlacitasRoy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 22:55:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1377</guid>
		<description>I look forward to every Friday and have recommended it to several friends, family members, and candidates. 

I want to recommend a new feature on one of my favorite sites http://www.buzzflash.com 
Ask Rockridge, a collaborative project brought to you by the BuzzFlash News Network and written by the Rockridge Institute....The Rockridge Institute experts want to answer your questions about framing the political discourse.

It&#039;s all about the message and there is so much work to do!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I look forward to every Friday and have recommended it to several friends, family members, and candidates. </p>
<p>I want to recommend a new feature on one of my favorite sites <a href="http://www.buzzflash.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.buzzflash.com</a><br />
Ask Rockridge, a collaborative project brought to you by the BuzzFlash News Network and written by the Rockridge Institute....The Rockridge Institute experts want to answer your questions about framing the political discourse.</p>
<p>It's all about the message and there is so much work to do!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CDub</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1375</link>
		<dc:creator>CDub</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 04:35:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1375</guid>
		<description>akadjian wrote:

Just wish they would do a better job of defining their principles. For example, if they were for a &quot;successful end to the war,&quot; they would have more of a leg to stand on than simply wanting to end the war. It&#039;s a small detail, but makes a significant difference.

Most of the people I know who want to end the war still feel responsible for the mess that our government has created. This sense of responsibility makes it a tough sell to say we&#039;re just going to leave.
~~~~~

You make some excellent points. The simple rephrasing of a position is a powerful tool. I also agree that most Americans feel Iraq should have some reparations from America, but there&#039;s something wrong with this picture.

How can it be that we&#039;ve gone so deep into debt destroying a country, and now we must go deeper into debt in order to make them whole?

We could use some laws that give us recourse against those who pushed for, and profited from this war. Laws with such teeth that this never happens again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>akadjian wrote:</p>
<p>Just wish they would do a better job of defining their principles. For example, if they were for a "successful end to the war," they would have more of a leg to stand on than simply wanting to end the war. It's a small detail, but makes a significant difference.</p>
<p>Most of the people I know who want to end the war still feel responsible for the mess that our government has created. This sense of responsibility makes it a tough sell to say we're just going to leave.<br />
~~~~~</p>
<p>You make some excellent points. The simple rephrasing of a position is a powerful tool. I also agree that most Americans feel Iraq should have some reparations from America, but there's something wrong with this picture.</p>
<p>How can it be that we've gone so deep into debt destroying a country, and now we must go deeper into debt in order to make them whole?</p>
<p>We could use some laws that give us recourse against those who pushed for, and profited from this war. Laws with such teeth that this never happens again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: akadjian</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1374</link>
		<dc:creator>akadjian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Oct 2007 15:47:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1374</guid>
		<description>Keep us posted, Chris. I&#039;d be interested in hearing more about a Pelosi session or Dave Helfert&#039;s memo. 

Couldn&#039;t agree more that they will gain more respect if they can show that they&#039;re fighting for their principles. Especially when it comes to Iraq. 

Just wish they would do a better job of defining their principles. For example, if they were for a &quot;successful end to the war,&quot; they would have more of a leg to stand on than simply wanting to end the war. It&#039;s a small detail, but makes a significant difference. 

Most of the people I know who want to end the war still feel responsible for the mess that our government has created. This sense of responsibility makes it a tough sell to say we&#039;re just going to leave. 

Bottom line is, you&#039;re right. More people could get behind them and they could fight more passionately if they had a better, more effective message. 

Hope they eventually get your invitation. 
Cheers
David</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keep us posted, Chris. I'd be interested in hearing more about a Pelosi session or Dave Helfert's memo. </p>
<p>Couldn't agree more that they will gain more respect if they can show that they're fighting for their principles. Especially when it comes to Iraq. </p>
<p>Just wish they would do a better job of defining their principles. For example, if they were for a "successful end to the war," they would have more of a leg to stand on than simply wanting to end the war. It's a small detail, but makes a significant difference. </p>
<p>Most of the people I know who want to end the war still feel responsible for the mess that our government has created. This sense of responsibility makes it a tough sell to say we're just going to leave. </p>
<p>Bottom line is, you're right. More people could get behind them and they could fight more passionately if they had a better, more effective message. </p>
<p>Hope they eventually get your invitation.<br />
Cheers<br />
David</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Weigant</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1370</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Weigant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Oct 2007 20:46:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1370</guid>
		<description>akadjian -

You are preaching to the choir here.  I have long been arguing for exactly that -- Democrats to start getting a cohesive message together and presenting it with some message discipline to the media.  I haven&#039;t yet seen a copy of David Helfert&#039;s memo, it was not distributed publicly and I haven&#039;t found a link to it yet, but I sincerely hope the movers and shakers in the party pay it heed.

I&#039;ve also said in the past that naming the bill correctly is a cheap and easy way to force the media and the Republicans to call it (for instance) the &quot;Healthy Kids bill.&quot;  Half the battle is won just by forcing your opponents to use your terminology.

Pelosi and others seem to be in a frame of mind to at least consider this stuff, though.  They held some sessions last week to try to get their message together with some unnamed consultants (my invitation to speak at these events seems to have been lost in the mail... ahem).  We&#039;ll see whether it does any good or not in the coming weeks.

Even if Democrats fail against Republican obstructionism, if they can project an image of fighting hard for their principles, their approval ratings will improve.  The Iraq war is obviously subject #1 for them to being doing this, but it&#039;s not the only way to show commitment to a cause.

Anyway, thanks for commenting.

-CW</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>akadjian -</p>
<p>You are preaching to the choir here.  I have long been arguing for exactly that -- Democrats to start getting a cohesive message together and presenting it with some message discipline to the media.  I haven't yet seen a copy of David Helfert's memo, it was not distributed publicly and I haven't found a link to it yet, but I sincerely hope the movers and shakers in the party pay it heed.</p>
<p>I've also said in the past that naming the bill correctly is a cheap and easy way to force the media and the Republicans to call it (for instance) the "Healthy Kids bill."  Half the battle is won just by forcing your opponents to use your terminology.</p>
<p>Pelosi and others seem to be in a frame of mind to at least consider this stuff, though.  They held some sessions last week to try to get their message together with some unnamed consultants (my invitation to speak at these events seems to have been lost in the mail... ahem).  We'll see whether it does any good or not in the coming weeks.</p>
<p>Even if Democrats fail against Republican obstructionism, if they can project an image of fighting hard for their principles, their approval ratings will improve.  The Iraq war is obviously subject #1 for them to being doing this, but it's not the only way to show commitment to a cause.</p>
<p>Anyway, thanks for commenting.</p>
<p>-CW</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: akadjian</title>
		<link>http://www.chrisweigant.com/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1368</link>
		<dc:creator>akadjian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Oct 2007 14:58:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisweigant.com/index.php/2007/10/26/friday-talking-points-vol-7/#comment-1368</guid>
		<description>Kudos, Chris for recognizing someone who &quot;gets it&quot;. I&#039;ve been arguing for a while that the #1 issue for the Democrats is that people don&#039;t know what they stand for. Democrats would do themselves a huge favor if they could get together and come up with 5 bullet points that define them. For example, bullet point number 1 (a la Dave Helfert) might be: A better future for our children. 

Think not only how this would help them pass bills like SCHIP, but also to fight against deficit spending, to fight for college spending bills, to fight for a better economic plan. The list goes on. 

Democrats need to remember that leaders set a vision. Don&#039;t get drawn into policy discussions. Ignore Republican attacks. Set the vision and stick to it no matter what. 

Republicans have done a great job setting a vision. The problem is that they have used this vision to accomplish other goals that run counter to their vision. For example, the party of &quot;lesser government&quot; is now the biggest government in history. People are tired of this. Unfortunately, however, until someone comes along and sets a better vision, it may be tough to dislodge them as they still a lot of gas left in their rhetoric. Fortunately, however, right now rhetoric is about all Republicans have.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kudos, Chris for recognizing someone who "gets it". I've been arguing for a while that the #1 issue for the Democrats is that people don't know what they stand for. Democrats would do themselves a huge favor if they could get together and come up with 5 bullet points that define them. For example, bullet point number 1 (a la Dave Helfert) might be: A better future for our children. </p>
<p>Think not only how this would help them pass bills like SCHIP, but also to fight against deficit spending, to fight for college spending bills, to fight for a better economic plan. The list goes on. </p>
<p>Democrats need to remember that leaders set a vision. Don't get drawn into policy discussions. Ignore Republican attacks. Set the vision and stick to it no matter what. </p>
<p>Republicans have done a great job setting a vision. The problem is that they have used this vision to accomplish other goals that run counter to their vision. For example, the party of "lesser government" is now the biggest government in history. People are tired of this. Unfortunately, however, until someone comes along and sets a better vision, it may be tough to dislodge them as they still a lot of gas left in their rhetoric. Fortunately, however, right now rhetoric is about all Republicans have.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
