Instead of only citing a list of cold facts and figures, the President needs to borrow a page from the Gipper’s book and personalize the message he is delivering. Quin Hillyer suggested that the public be told some of the stories of the heroes of the Iraq war – modern day Audie Murphys and Sergeant Yorks and that he present news of the progress in Iraq along with photographic images. He makes the point that the public has only seen the “ugly” images from Iraq and that those should be balanced by showing some positive images to allow the public to see the whole picture.

With so many cable channels today, even when a presidential speech is carried by the big networks many of the people I know simply switch to the Home and Garden Network or The Discovery Channel. In order to get the maximum number of people to watch, it is necessary to build the speech up as a major event so that even those who are not politically involved will think it is important enough, or simply be curious enough, to watch. Since the Iraq War is the major issue of the day, it should not be too difficult to persuade the media that an address on the subject is major news that should be covered live. What would ensure that a buzz was created though, would be to utilize an innovative approach not normally used by presidents.

One way to do that would be to intersperse throughout the President’s address, statements from some of those giving reports from Iraq. Most people will not see the report General Petraeus delivers to Congress on the progress of the counteroffensive. Instead they will see the 30 second sound bite chosen by the media that most likely will consist primarily of any bad news included in the report. I would love to see the President give a prime time television address in which he states the reasons it is important to succeed in Iraq and then calls General Petraeus (as well as possibly others) to the podium to provide the details. I would love to see a big screen in the background that would allow the General to show maps of the region and other images that would make the nature of the conflict and our new approach to it easier to understand as the briefings by Norman Schwarzkopf did in the Gulf War. If the President is accused of conducting a dog and pony show, then so be it. After being called a modern-day Hitler, he should be able to withstand that kind of criticism. Even with low poll numbers and vicious enemies, the President still has the bully pulpit. If he does not use it now, on this most important issue, then he might as well give up and surrender to the terrorists.

In addition to what the President must do, those of us who believe it is critical that we succeed in Iraq have important roles to play. Through groups like the Victory Caucus we can stay informed and find out ways we can influence those in Congress. One thing I am surprised we have not already seen is a series of “Harry and Louise” type ads explaining the importance of completing the mission in Iraq and the catastrophic consequences of defeat. A message from veterans who support the mission, with those who have fought in Iraq voicing in their own words the reasons it is so important for the mission there to succeed, could be quite persuasive. It is time the public realize that the consequences of failure in Iraq go far beyond a defeat for the Bush administration and that the possibility to achieve success in Iraq still exists. It is up to the President, and anyone else who believes that, to make the message loud and clear.