I don't see how anyone could be swayed in either direction with such bad over-acting and exaggerated political positions.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal
"8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc."
I've just taught you something, if you were smart enough you'd thank me. But you're not.

This message has been deleted.

I have always leaned a bit liberal but remain open-minded.
Wait, I thought liberal
meant
open-minded?:)
It's funny how most people say this is a liberal movie by a liberal director and yet the most compelling arguments were made by the Republican Senator. He has the facts, he admits mistakes, and he has a plan. I'd trust Irving over the characters played by Streep and Redford.
I was really affected by Irving's response to when Streep suggested they pull the troops out of Iraq. He made a case as to why that would be A Very Bad Idea. Of course it's just a movie so who knows how much is really accurate, but I'm not so sure my view is correct anymore.

skjelbred, I appreciate the response.
The major problem with our invasion of Afghanistan is that their country was not directly responsible for attacking us. Al Qaida may have been based in Afghanistan, but we can't defeat them once and for all if we aren't willing to pursue them wherever they go. If we are going to flex our military muscle, let's at least accomplish our objective. If Al Qaida is the problem, we should go after them 100% unti they are extinguished. If some small sects are hiding in Pakistan and other neighboring countries, we need to make a very straightforward proposition to all of their neighbors- harbor Al Qaida and you are a violent enemy of the United States. Unfortunately, nuclear technology makes that a very slippery slope.
As far as your question about the "windsock undermining", I think you bring up an interesting point. On the surface, it appears he is undermining his own goal because he encourages her to think for herself and that's exactly what she ends up doing. What we need to remember here is that Cruise's character is essentially a salesman during this whole interview. He doesn't need to tell Streep anything to launch his military strike. He chooses to because he hopes to win her support (and thus the support of the media and of public opinion eventually). From the moment she walks into the office, he is more than accomodating- ready when she arrives, offers coffee or tea, gives her a full hour, no PR people present, etc. He sets up the entire interview in an attempt to pitch Streep on the idea that his new strategy is the roadmap to success, hoping for her support. He insults her profession and personal integrity (calling her a windsock) because he wants to pursuade her to join his team, his cause. He knows she is a liberal, anti-war, so he has to say something drastic to try and bring about a change in her. It is sales 101 to first convince the prospect that he is doing it the 'wrong way' already and to suggest a beneficial solution (and guess what? I'm here to help!).
I am still not sure how to interpret the last scene of the movie, when the student is watching the newscast in his frat house. It's clear that the news network Streep represents has decided to run the story just the way Cruise wanted. Does that mean Streep gave in to the pressure and decided to just go with the story- pressure from her boss, colleagues, big money corporations, etc.? Or does it mean that the station had no problem circumventing her and running the story without her?

Great post about a great film, bjp! First off, I'm not so sure the decision to invade Afghanistan and Iraq were wrong, because as Cruise said, you don't answer attack with diplomacy. Especially when you've got the greatest military in history. However, his Cruise's approach is narrow-minded. Streep let's fall a comment about how Cruise doesn't have a plan for the day after the attack, he's "all helicopters and marines" and that is the crux of the matter. I believe an invasion in Afghanistan was necessary to break the sting off of Al Qaida, but the conflict is won by promoting society through building schools, hospitals and infrastructure, sharing technology and expertise, stuff like that. Simultaineously it may be nessecary to uphold a military presence for security reasons, but not as an occupational force.
Anyways, one thing I didn't get about the film was why Cruise on one hand tried to sell his story to Streep, while on the other hand telling her not to be a windsock, but think for herself. Seems to me he undermines his own goal

Your fave film is Garden State, but I don't hold it against you.