Clearly Mitt Romney looked more confident, more knowledgeable, and more PRESIDENTIAL!

Obama has demonstrated nearly four years of indecisiveness except when it comes to blaming America.

By the way, Mr. Obama, this nation's military still has plenty of bayonets. The Army's Combat Action Badge is based on the symbolism of the bayonet and taking the fight close in to the enemy.

In the end, do you really want a repeat of the last four years?

You have to be kidding! What debate did you watch?

Ha ha ha! JohnGalt is drunk.

Of course he did. Romney agreed with everything in the Obama foreign policy and walked back from every position he has ever stated about Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Egypt.

At one point he said that the reason why Iran is Syria's strongest ally is that Syria is Iran's pathway to the sea...

WHAT???

It doesn't work that way.

You can't just convince yourself of something and then close your eyes really tight and hope that when you re-open your eyes reality will change to your liking.

But nice try, though.

Dee Dee Dee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It doesn't work that way.
>
> You can't just convince yourself of something and
> then close your eyes really tight and hope that
> when you re-open your eyes reality will change to
> your liking.
>
> But nice try, though.


Precisely -- I listened to what was actually said and Romney is clearly the winner. You can pretend that Obama looked and spoke presidential but that simply was not the case.

Dee Dee Dee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It doesn't work that way.
>
> You can't just convince yourself of something and
> then close your eyes really tight and hope that
> when you re-open your eyes reality will change to
> your liking.

Conservatives can!

That's why Mittens is the GOP nominee.

JohnGalt338 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dee Dee Dee Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It doesn't work that way.
> >
> > You can't just convince yourself of something
> and
> > then close your eyes really tight and hope that
> > when you re-open your eyes reality will change
> to
> > your liking.
> >
> > But nice try, though.
>
>
> Precisely -- I listened to what was actually said
> and Romney is clearly the winner. You can pretend
> that Obama looked and spoke presidential but that
> simply was not the case.

I was directing my comment to you.

But don't worry, your nightmare will soon be even worse.

Romney took the same dumb teabagger arguments of the past four years and made them seem amateurish. He has no foreign policy experience whatsoever. His ideas agree with that of the current administration, with one glaring exception: he disagrees with it!

Romney is an amateur who will need to hire Bush-era neocons in order to remain popular with his ignorant base for 4 years.

Obama is a new republican in just about everything but about 4 percentage points in the top marginal tax rate.

JohnGalt, I'm afraid you are in a clearly defined minority. Check out the various online snap polls. Romney blew it big time.

If Mittens had triangulated his foreign policies any closer to the Presidents, they would have been wearing the same suit.

What about Romnesia has said several times previously that Obama's biggest mistake was announcing a date for withdrawal from Iraq. Tonight Romney said, "we'd bring all of our troops out of afghanistan...We'd be finished by the end of 2014 if I am elected President". Romney can't make up his mind on what he actually believes and constantly is changing his position on mulitple issues.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/22/2012 11:09PM by sam vest.

He did win. Obama needed a knockout and, again, he didn't get it.

All Romney had to do was not make any major blunders and look like he wasn't a war hawk.

He was smart to stay away from hitting Obama too hard on Lybia. He's going to let the facts and Obama hang himself on that one.

It seemed like Romneys plan was not deviate to much from Obama wrt Obama's foreign policy. Which is fine because foreign policy is to much in the weeds and hypothetical and typically does not resonate. Romney had to much to lose by going into details that would distract voters from Romney's economic message.

Obama on other hand looked petty, sophmorish and unpredsidential.

Libya will probably take care of its self and Obama was probably waiting for it. By not bringing it up Obama could not take the position of being privy to info that Romney had as the situation was happening.

Eloafa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Romney took the same dumb teabagger arguments of
> the past four years and made them seem amateurish.
> He has no foreign policy experience whatsoever.
> His ideas agree with that of the current
> administration, with one glaring exception: he
> disagrees with it!

The glaring exception is that he has to maintain this idea that Obama is fundamentally wrong about everything, except all those things where he isn't, but even in those cases, since he's Obama, he probably did it the wrong way anyway.

>
> Romney is an amateur who will need to hire
> Bush-era neocons in order to remain popular with
> his ignorant base for 4 years.


It would almost be fun to watch Mitt screw up the economy even more, reversing all the gains we've made (moderate gains, sure) and then listen to all the water boys coming up with yet another new reality to describe why this time it really is the fault of the guy who was in the white house before their hero.

He doesn't stand a chance of winning, thank god.

I'm reading on the Wall Street Journal blogs how conservative hawks are pissed off at Romney for agreeing with Obama 95% of the time.

At some point you flip just one too many times. People lose trust in you. Tonight Romney completely adopted the Obama foreign policy and people are rightly pissed off.

Howard Cosell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He did win. Obama needed a knockout and, again,
> he didn't get it.
>
> All Romney had to do was not make any major
> blunders and look like he wasn't a war hawk.
>

That's what they're tellling the base on Fox News. And in essence, it is true. Except that it only maintains his lead among the people who are going to vote for him no matter what.

He just needed to not fuck up to maintain 100% approval in the polling of that demographic.


> He was smart to stay away from hitting Obama too
> hard on Lybia. He's going to let the facts and
> Obama hang himself on that one.


He was definitely smart to stay away from Libya. The only people who are caught up in that are the same ones who get worked up with words like "solyndra" or "socialist". Everyone else is sick of hearing Mitt and his supporters whine and rant about it.

The Polls will probably indicate Obama won but thats because there was probably a precipitous drop off in viewer ship with MNF and baseball and it was mostly sissy Democrat Obama fanboys watching....and me



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/22/2012 11:22PM by Hay Zeus.

Thats what they told me Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Howard Cosell Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > He did win. Obama needed a knockout and,
> again,
> > he didn't get it.
> >
> > All Romney had to do was not make any major
> > blunders and look like he wasn't a war hawk.
> >
>
> That's what they're tellling the base on Fox News.
> And in essence, it is true. Except that it only
> maintains his lead among the people who are going
> to vote for him no matter what.
>
> He just needed to not fuck up to maintain 100%
> approval in the polling of that demographic.
>
>
> > He was smart to stay away from hitting Obama
> too
> > hard on Lybia. He's going to let the facts and
> > Obama hang himself on that one.
>
>
> He was definitely smart to stay away from Libya.
> The only people who are caught up in that are the
> same ones who get worked up with words like
> "solyndra" or "socialist". Everyone else is sick
> of hearing Mitt and his supporters whine and rant
> about it.


Well, I was watching CSPAN and CNN and they were saying about the same. As it appears most others are as well.

The undecideds in this election are already predisposed to go with the challenger anyway so as long as he didn't do a complete flame out, then he'll be OK with them. virtually nobody is basing a decision on foreign policy this time around. It's still the economy stupid. (not referring to you just to be clear)

The problem with the economy is Obama -- get rid of him and his horrible policies and fears of what he might do and business will take off. Millions will go from welfare to working - from taking tax dollars to paying taxes.

Look at what Obama did for his first bill signing - the Ledbetter Act. This didn't bring about pay equality, the Equal Pay Act did that decades ago. The Ledbetter act simply got rid of the statute of limitations period of discrimination complaints. Think about what software and hardware companies used just ten year ago - now ry to find a computer that runs that system. Now go back 20 years and you'll find punch cards and floppy drives the size of an LP.

Look at Obamacare. How many businesses want to expand when going over some employee threshold will expose the business to huge costs.

As for unions, I don't know where they are getting legal advice. All their attorneys have been appointed to courts and boards giving ludicrous decisions.

Look at the NLRB that wanted to stop Boeing from building a new plant in South Carolina that would not take a single high paying union job from the Seattle area.

Now as a business leader, Obama truly sucks. His 1/2 billion dollar taxpayer funded bet on Solyndra was a colossal failure.

The problem isn't our economy - it's Obama.

Cant trust reality Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [Mittens] doesn't stand a chance of winning, thank god.

+1

Cant trust reality Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [Mittens] doesn't stand a chance of winning, thank god.

+2

Hay Zeus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Polls will probably indicate Obama won but
> thats because there was probably a precipitous
> drop off in viewer ship with MNF and baseball and
> it was mostly sissy Democrat Obama fanboys
> watching....and me

Sure, Zeus, whatever makes you feel better after watching Mittens' chance of winning evaporate like the morning mist.

Cant trust reality Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> He doesn't stand a chance of winning, thank god.


+3 and +4

I got ho's in diffrnt area codes.

kittens! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cant trust reality Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > [Mittens] doesn't stand a chance of winning,
> thank god.
>
> +2


^ At least make it less obvious idiot. lol

Romney is clearly winning the Gallup poll. It has been a long time that they have been wrong. Sorry people obummer is going to loose

My favorite part was when Romney said that Syria is Iran's pathway to the sea. But my second favorite had to be when Romney went on a rant saying that we have less ships than 1916 and fewer airplanes than 1947.

Then the president said that comparing those numbers is ludicrous -- "In 1916 we had horses and bayonets... We now have ships that have airplanes land on them. We have ships that go under the water -- nuclear submarines."

Crazy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You have to be kidding! What debate did you watch?

That's exactly what I thought.

Saying Romney won because he "looked more presidential" is basically saying Romney got his ass kicked on every topic.

That's like saying Obama won because he had a better suit on and smiled more.

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My favorite part was when Romney said that Syria
> is Iran's pathway to the sea. But my second
> favorite had to be when Romney went on a rant
> saying that we have less ships than 1916 and fewer
> airplanes than 1947.
>
> Then the president said that comparing those
> numbers is ludicrous -- "In 1916 we had horses and
> bayonets... We now have ships that have airplanes
> land on them. We have ships that go under the
> water -- nuclear submarines."


Pathway to the Mediterranean.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Pathway to the Mediterranean.

Please... Through Iraq? Is there some canal system I don't know about? Perhaps he was talking about the Suez?

When you look at the map, Iran has plenty of coastline -- the PERSIAN Gulf and the Indian Ocean.

No one watched this fucking borefest with MNF and NLCS on.

Obummer did his damage by laying a turd in Debate One. Had he been able to define Romney then, he may be sitting pretty right now because the media loves to ignore his faultering economy and cluelessness.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Pathway to the Mediterranean.
>
> Please... Through Iraq? Is there some canal system
> I don't know about? Perhaps he was talking about
> the Suez?
>
> When you look at the map, Iran has plenty of
> coastline -- the PERSIAN Gulf and the Indian
> Ocean.


No, there are these things called trucks that take goods to port.

JohnGalt338 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The problem with the economy is Obama -- get rid
> of him and his horrible policies and fears of what
> he might do and business will take off. Millions
> will go from welfare to working - from taking tax
> dollars to paying taxes.
>
> Look at what Obama did for his first bill signing
> - the Ledbetter Act. This didn't bring about pay
> equality, the Equal Pay Act did that decades ago.
> The Ledbetter act simply got rid of the statute of
> limitations period of discrimination complaints.
> Think about what software and hardware companies
> used just ten year ago - now ry to find a computer
> that runs that system. Now go back 20 years and
> you'll find punch cards and floppy drives the size
> of an LP.

Holy shit. You really are out of touch. You obviously base your ideas on things you've heard from other people, not actual experience.

I have computers in my house from 10 years ago that run modern software. Loaded Windows 7 on an old Pentium II.

20 years ago floppies were the size of LPs and we used punch cards? Oh fuck, hate to break it to you, it's 2012, not 2000. If it were 2000, you could say that SOME computers were still using punch cards 20 years ago. But not in 2012.

>
> Look at Obamacare. How many businesses want to
> expand when going over some employee threshold
> will expose the business to huge costs.
>

That's exactly why companies aren't expanding. It certainly doesn't have to do with the fact that a business cannot expand if there is not enough demand for their product or service to justify expansion. It has to be Obama and the Affordable Healthcare Act.

> As for unions, I don't know where they are getting
> legal advice. All their attorneys have been
> appointed to courts and boards giving ludicrous
> decisions.
>

They probably get their legal advice from the same source where you get your knowledge of computers and business.


> Look at the NLRB that wanted to stop Boeing from
> building a new plant in South Carolina that would
> not take a single high paying union job from the
> Seattle area.
>

I'm looking. What am I supposed to be seeing? I'm outside the bubble, could you describe it for me?


> Now as a business leader, Obama truly sucks. His
> 1/2 billion dollar taxpayer funded bet on Solyndra
> was a colossal failure.
>

Thank god for that one example. Keep beating it to death.

> The problem isn't our economy - it's Obama.

Well Fuck! That's all it was all this time? So why did the economy begin tanking in 2007?

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, there are these things called trucks that take
> goods to port.

So rather than put oil on ships in its own ports, Iran would put it on trucks and drive through Iraq?

Wingnut, stop digging.

Poor, sad JohnGalt, WingNut...and where is that other idiot, Uncle.Ream.Us? Oh well, better luck in 2016!

Wingnut is right though. I'm sure not that many people watched the debate tonight with all the other sports. Foreign policy isn't going to win this election unfortunately.

People have already made up their mind because of the economy and religious reasons (gay marriage). They have already forgotten about the war in Afghanistan.

Romney has a lot of momentum and the challenger has a lot of strength in a bad economy.

It comes down to Ohio and Iowa now. I wouldn't bet against a Romney win.

Romney's foreign policy experience is right in line with Miss South Carolina who ran for Vice President....Sarah Palin.

"I believe that our education like such as in South Africa,
and the Iraq,
everywhere like such as…
and, I believe they should uh,
our education over here,
in the U.S. should help the U.S.
or should help South Africa,
and should help the Iraq and Asian countries so we will be able to build up our future, for us.”

sam vest Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Romney's foreign policy experience is right in
> line with Miss South Carolina who ran for Vice
> President....Sarah Palin.
>
> "I believe that our education like such as in
> South Africa,
> and the Iraq,
> everywhere like such as…
> and, I believe they should uh,
> our education over here,
> in the U.S. should help the U.S.
> or should help South Africa,
> and should help the Iraq and Asian countries so
> we will be able to build up our future, for
> us.”
>


You actually bring up a frightening point, though. Go to youtube and look at all the comments defending that twit for being stupid.

For a lot of people, she sets the high bar.

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wingnut is right though. I'm sure not that many
> people watched the debate tonight with all the
> other sports. Foreign policy isn't going to win
> this election unfortunately.
> Romney has a lot of momentum and the challenger
> has a lot of strength in a bad economy.
>
> It comes down to Ohio and Iowa now. I wouldn't bet
> against a Romney win.

Discussions about the drubbing Mittens suffered tonight will be on every radio station and TV channel in America.

It won't matter if 70 million tuned in.

Mittens is going down. Hard.

This is Romnesia in action. Romney even said, "People will check the facts" and they have.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/22/romney-auto-bailout-debate_n_2004021.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama sparred during the debate over whether Romney said in 2008 that General Motors and Chrysler should fend for themselves without government help.

Obama brought up the subject by saying: "If we had taken your advice, Gov. Romney, about our auto industry, we'd be buying cars from China instead of selling cars to China."

Romney fought back: "I said they need -- these companies need to go through a managed bankruptcy, and in that process they can get government help and government guarantees, but they need to go through bankruptcy to get rid of excess cost and the debt burden that they'd built up."

"You keep trying to ... airbrush history here," Obama responded. "You were very clear that you would not provide government assistance to the U.S. auto companies even if they went through bankruptcy. You said that they could get it in the private marketplace. That wasn’t true."

Romney did oppose a government bailout of the U.S. auto companies in a 2008 New York Times op-ed, "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt." At the end of the op-ed, he noted: "The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk."

But post-bankruptcy financing is not the same as financing during the bankruptcy process, when these companies were still vulnerable and needed outside money to keep functioning. And in late 2008, lending had frozen. As The Huffington Post's Dave Jamieson noted last week:

Those companies did, in fact, eventually go through managed bankruptcy, as Romney noted. But back in 2008, Romney had argued against federal aid for the automakers. Given how difficult it was to borrow money during the financial crisis, it's doubtful that the GM and Chrysler would have made it through the managed bankruptcy process without the intervention of the federal government.

sam vest Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is Romnesia in action. Romney even said,
> "People will check the facts" and they have.
>

Here's the actual editorial. Rather than being told what to think by Huffington, et. al., you can read it for yourself.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney.html?_r=0

dat nigga won!!

1st-hand better than 3rd-hand Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Here's the actual editorial. Rather than being
> told what to think by Huffington, et. al., you can
> read it for yourself.
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney
> .html?_r=0


Obama's right all the time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2012 12:44AM by sam vest.

And... ?

Everyone knew that Romney was a lightweight on foreign policy before the debate. This is not something you can learn in a cram session. Understanding world affairs and politics requires an understanding of history, geography and world culture. Romney is so obviously not interested in any of these things.

George W. Bush was exactly the same way. When he visited Moscow, he toured the entire Kremlin complex in 20 minutes. Trust me, you cannot see the sights around Red Square in 20 minutes unless you pretty much sprint through or just quit.

The one thing that W had was the fact that daddy was head of the CIA and H.W. Bush was a master of foreign policy. W pretty much inherited his father's advisers and close friends -- he also had Dick Cheney, who pretty much wrote the Bush Doctrine.

Romney has hired these Bush people and has tried to talk the talk. This is 2012 not 2001 though and the general public is not interested in this attitude towards the world. Americans are generally not interested in fighting wars and have had their fill of wars in the deserts on the other side of the planet.

What has bothered me about Romney from the beginning is that he has no foreign policy -- just like W. Nature abhors a vacuum and the Republican Party seems to have only one attitude toward the world -- that of the Neoconservatives and the former Bush Doctrine. There has been no replacement for those policies articulated. If Romney wins, no one knows what his policies will be.

sam vest Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 1st-hand better than 3rd-hand Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Here's the actual editorial. Rather than being
> > told what to think by Huffington, et. al., you
> can
> > read it for yourself.
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opinion/19romney
>
> > .html?_r=0
>
>
> Obama's right all the time.
>
> Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2012 12:44AM by sam vest.



lol. Just like a lib to try to edit history.

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> like W. Nature abhors a vacuum and the Republican
> Party seems to have only one attitude toward the
> world -- that of the Neoconservatives and the
> former Bush Doctrine. There has been no
> replacement for those policies articulated. If
> Romney wins, no one knows what his policies will
> be.

I can venture a fairly educated guess. Whatever surprises pop up, the answer will be provided by the people who have the most to gain from sending troops to respond. Carlyle Group and the MI Complex.

Campaign contributors get to take boat loads of tax dollars for their own profit, and Romney will get to look tough on whatever enemy happens to get our attention at the moment.

Of course... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> lol. Just like a lib to try to edit history.


I am actually not a lib, I just play one on tv.

"Syria is Iran's path to the sea". Whatever else you can say about Mr. Romney, geography is not his long suit. Perhaps he was confusing Elohim's world (this one) with the one in which he will be god (maybe in the Andromeda or Crab Nebula galaxy) in which he can reshape the land with his mighty finger or a blast from his mighty nostrils.

C'mon, you could see it in his eyes while he was impatiently waiting to speak, "Someday, I'll smite you black man, and your little dog too".
Attachments:

^ +1 Trillion

Romney's "Path to the Sea" gaffe speaks volumes about his Middle Earth Foreign Policy and his Narnian followers.

They are running against a fictional character, with a fictional performance record, in a fictional land of make-believe, with fictional geography.

All the Super PAC money in the world and they can't get even the most basic facts straight. Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea border on the Southern Border of Iran. Caspian Sea on the Northern Border of Iran. Land-locked to the West and the East. Big chuck of Turkey and Iraq between Iran and Syria "The Path to the Sea."

Pathetic. Sad. But really, really scary.

LMFAO!

Romney is a complete idiot. If you can't read a map and don't know basic geography, you can't bullshit your way to the Presidency.
Attachments:

Ito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course he did. Romney agreed with everything in
> the Obama foreign policy and walked back from
> every position he has ever stated about
> Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Egypt.
>
> At one point he said that the reason why Iran is
> Syria's strongest ally is that Syria is Iran's
> pathway to the sea...
>
> WHAT???


More half truths and lies from the sheeple Ito. Here's what Romney said:

"Syria is Iran's only ally in the Arab world. It's their route to the sea. It's the route for them to arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of course, our ally, Israel. And so seeing Syria remove Assad is a very high priority for us."

Romney was discussing why the civil war in Syria is important to the region, the world and the USA. Baaaaaaaaaah goes the Ito.

Not so fast.....

Uncle.Ream.Us Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> More half truths and lies from the sheeple Ito.
> Here's what Romney said:


It may be a half-truth, but it is definitely not a lie. Of course you identified it correctly as a half-truth, that's the one thing Romney's water boys know well.

>
> "Syria is Iran's only ally in the Arab world. It's
> their route to the sea. It's the route for them to
> arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of
> course, our ally, Israel. And so seeing Syria
> remove Assad is a very high priority for us."


Okay. So his overall point has some validity. But it doesn't excuse his lack of knowledge, and saying that Syria is Iran's path to the sea is still an indicator of poor knowledge. It made me realize that Mitt Romney is typical of that middle american "family values" mentality. He'd make a great local politician like a mayor or a governor, but he shouldn't be involved international affairs and definitely shouldn't be president.

I also know that North Korea can become a threat to Pacific Rim peace and economic prosperity, and they threaten all the nations who share a border with them, like the Philipines, West Korea and China.


>
> Romney was discussing why the civil war in Syria
> is important to the region, the world and the USA.
> Baaaaaaaaaah goes the Ito.

Well good for him. He watches the news like the rest of us.

Fuckster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ^ +1 Trillion
>
> Romney's "Path to the Sea" gaffe speaks volumes
> about his Middle Earth Foreign Policy and his
> Narnian followers.
>
> They are running against a fictional character,
> with a fictional performance record, in a
> fictional land of make-believe, with fictional
> geography.
>
> All the Super PAC money in the world and they
> can't get even the most basic facts straight.
> Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea border on the
> Southern Border of Iran. Caspian Sea on the
> Northern Border of Iran. Land-locked to the West
> and the East. Big chuck of Turkey and Iraq
> between Iran and Syria "The Path to the Sea."
>
> Pathetic. Sad. But really, really scary.
>
> LMFAO!


Unfortunately, too many dumb Americans are willing to give a Republican a pass on knowledge of foreign affairs. For one thing, they aren't intellectually curious enough, themselves, to even care about it, and for another, they would much rather just nuke any country that crosses us anyway.

Don't forget, Bush was pathetic in this same manner, but he got a pass and won in 2000.

Here's an example:

"Can you name the general who is in charge of Pakistan?" asked Hiller, inquiring about Gen. Pervaiz Musharraf, who took over last month in a military coup.

"Wait, wait, is this 50 questions?" replied Bush.

Hiller replied: "No, it's four questions of four leaders in four hot spots."

Bush said: "The new Pakistani general, he's just been elected – not elected, this guy took over office. It appears this guy is going to bring stability to the country and I think that's good news for the subcontinent."

Hiller persisted, saying "Can you name him?"

Bush said: "General. I can name the general. General."

Amerigo Vespucci Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Uncle.Ream.Us Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > More half truths and lies from the sheeple Ito.
>
> > Here's what Romney said:
>
>
> It may be a half-truth, but it is definitely not a
> lie. Of course you identified it correctly as a
> half-truth, that's the one thing Romney's water
> boys know well.
>
> >
> > "Syria is Iran's only ally in the Arab world.
> It's
> > their route to the sea. It's the route for them
> to
> > arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of
> > course, our ally, Israel. And so seeing Syria
> > remove Assad is a very high priority for us."
>
>
> Okay. So his overall point has some validity.
> But it doesn't excuse his lack of knowledge, and
> saying that Syria is Iran's path to the sea is
> still an indicator of poor knowledge. It made me
> realize that Mitt Romney is typical of that middle
> american "family values" mentality. He'd make a
> great local politician like a mayor or a governor,
> but he shouldn't be involved international affairs
> and definitely shouldn't be president.
>
> I also know that North Korea can become a threat
> to Pacific Rim peace and economic prosperity, and
> they threaten all the nations who share a border
> with them, like the Philipines, West Korea and
> China.
>
>
> >
> > Romney was discussing why the civil war in
> Syria
> > is important to the region, the world and the
> USA.
> > Baaaaaaaaaah goes the Ito.
>
> Well good for him. He watches the news like the
> rest of us.


Do you really believe that Romney doen't know that Iran sits on the Persian Gulf (Persia being Iran) or that the Strait of Hormuz is the opening between the Gulf and the Arbian Sea. Romney was obviously talking about the Mediterranean, where they have no easy access and where Israel and our dwindling other allies in the region are most concerned about Iranian ships sailing. You Obamabots trying to make this something it is not smells of desperation. And desperation smells bad. Real bad.

Andy Hiller Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Unfortunately, too many dumb Americans are willing
> to give a Republican a pass on knowledge of
> foreign affairs. For one thing, they aren't
> intellectually curious enough, themselves, to even
> care about it, and for another, they would much
> rather just nuke any country that crosses us
> anyway.
>
> Don't forget, Bush was pathetic in this same
> manner, but he got a pass and won in 2000.
>
> Here's an example:
>
> "Can you name the general who is in charge of
> Pakistan?" asked Hiller, inquiring about Gen.
> Pervaiz Musharraf, who took over last month in a
> military coup.
>
> "Wait, wait, is this 50 questions?" replied Bush.
>
>
> Hiller replied: "No, it's four questions of four
> leaders in four hot spots."
>
> Bush said: "The new Pakistani general, he's just
> been elected – not elected, this guy took over
> office. It appears this guy is going to bring
> stability to the country and I think that's good
> news for the subcontinent."
>
> Hiller persisted, saying "Can you name him?"
>
> Bush said: "General. I can name the general.
> General."


Maybe if someone had asked Obama where capital expenses goes in a general ledger in the debates of 2008, we'd have seen that this clown has no idea how business works or the basics of an economy. Then our economy wouldn't be in the toilet like it is now.

Uncle.Ream.Us Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Amerigo Vespucci Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Uncle.Ream.Us Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > More half truths and lies from the sheeple
> Ito.
> >
> > > Here's what Romney said:
> >
> >
> > It may be a half-truth, but it is definitely not
> a
> > lie. Of course you identified it correctly as
> a
> > half-truth, that's the one thing Romney's water
> > boys know well.
> >
> > >
> > > "Syria is Iran's only ally in the Arab world.
> > It's
> > > their route to the sea. It's the route for
> them
> > to
> > > arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of
> > > course, our ally, Israel. And so seeing Syria
> > > remove Assad is a very high priority for us."
> >
> >
> > Okay. So his overall point has some validity.
> > But it doesn't excuse his lack of knowledge,
> and
> > saying that Syria is Iran's path to the sea is
> > still an indicator of poor knowledge. It made
> me
> > realize that Mitt Romney is typical of that
> middle
> > american "family values" mentality. He'd make
> a
> > great local politician like a mayor or a
> governor,
> > but he shouldn't be involved international
> affairs
> > and definitely shouldn't be president.
> >
> > I also know that North Korea can become a
> threat
> > to Pacific Rim peace and economic prosperity,
> and
> > they threaten all the nations who share a
> border
> > with them, like the Philipines, West Korea and
> > China.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Romney was discussing why the civil war in
> > Syria
> > > is important to the region, the world and the
> > USA.
> > > Baaaaaaaaaah goes the Ito.
> >
> > Well good for him. He watches the news like
> the
> > rest of us.
>
>
> Do you really believe that Romney doen't know that
> Iran sits on the Persian Gulf (Persia being Iran)
> or that the Strait of Hormuz is the opening
> between the Gulf and the Arbian Sea. Romney was
> obviously talking about the Mediterranean, where
> they have no easy access and where Israel and our
> dwindling other allies in the region are most
> concerned about Iranian ships sailing. You
> Obamabots trying to make this something it is not
> smells of desperation. And desperation smells
> bad. Real bad.


Okay. So mitt romney already won the election. I just saw Papa Bear on CBS morning news, he said so, too.

We can all go home now. Mitt is the next president.

Desperate Bad Smelling Libtard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Okay. So mitt romney already won the election. I
> just saw Papa Bear on CBS morning news, he said
> so, too.
>
> We can all go home now. Mitt is the next
> president.


Not yet, but it's looking more and more like that's the case. Romney has multiple paths to victory now. Ask yourselves, would you rather be where Romney is or where Obama is?

Uncle.Ream.Us Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Maybe if someone had asked Obama where capital
> expenses goes in a general ledger in the debates
> of 2008, we'd have seen that this clown has no
> idea how business works or the basics of an
> economy. Then our economy wouldn't be in the
> toilet like it is now.


Nobody had any idea back in 2008 that the only argument the Mitt Campaign and Fox News would have in 2012 would be that the slightly improved economy after the worst recession since the great depression which started in 2007 is actually a horrible mess caused by Obama and his radical leftist ideology.

Two weeks!

Mitty acted like a submissive dog last night.Rolls on their back and offers their belly . Embarrassing what the Republicans offer up. Maybe he should be elected so the rest of the world will know we are not the greatest country anymore.
I guess he wants more ships to stop Syria.
I have become comfortably numb.

Mitt Romney for President Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mitty acted like a submissive dog last night.Rolls
> on their back and offers their belly .
> Embarrassing what the Republicans offer up. Maybe
> he should be elected so the rest of the world will
> know we are not the greatest country anymore.
> I guess he wants more ships to stop Syria.
> I have become comfortably numb.


Bush already proved that.

His whole ships and world war one argument is silly. But of course, most average americans are just as silly.


He fails to take into account that we still had wooden hulled ships with smooth bore cannons in 1916. We have single ships that can dominate entire seas now. We have ships that can sit on the littoral and threaten an entire nation.

JohnGalt338 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The problem isn't our economy - it's Obama.

With this one sentence my friend, you have lost all credibility.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JohnGalt338 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The problem isn't our economy - it's Obama.
>
> With this one sentence my friend, you have lost
> all credibility.


Yeah Bill, you're the arbiter of cred on FFXU. What a putz.

Ahhh, Uncle.Ream.Us has arrived. With JohnGalt and WingNut already posting their psycho ramblings, the Three Stooges have now left their mark on this thread.

Coming from the King of the Putzes I will take that as a compliment.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ito Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > WingNut Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Pathway to the Mediterranean.
> >
> > Please... Through Iraq? Is there some canal
> system
> > I don't know about? Perhaps he was talking
> about
> > the Suez?
> >
> > When you look at the map, Iran has plenty of
> > coastline -- the PERSIAN Gulf and the Indian
> > Ocean.
>
>
> No, there are these things called trucks that take
> goods to port.

Interestingly enough, there are also these magical flying birds made of metal called airplanes, and iron horses referred to as trains.

Whatever way anyone looks at it, the point is that Syria is Iran's lone puppet at this moment (Iraq and Astan are on the edge). We can block the Strait of Hormuz and effectively shutdown direct Iranian maritime shipping, but with increasingly chummy relations with Iraq they'll have no problem pushing more of their garbage through their proxy Syria.

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Coming from the King of the Putzes I will take
> that as a compliment.

Well said, Sir!

Just want to clarify that the OP got the names correct. Obama was the black guy.

OBlomney Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just want to clarify that the OP got the names
> correct. Obama was the black guy.


So, if the OP was correct, then Romney won. Welcome to the side of enlightened reason and reality OBlomney. You have been too long in the darkness of liberal nonsense.

If you vote for Mitt then you vote for Mitt to continue to strip companies of the career minded american when he sends your job to china.

You have no right to your job- will be Mitt Romneys motto.

I was at the Association of the United States Army Conference today. Went through about 3/4 of mile of exhibits by various vendors. I did not see one bayonet vendor on site. Might have missed one or two aisles in that labyrinth of advanced weapons, but I'm pretty sure the bayonet vendors were pretty much non-existent.

I was impressed with the incredible advances in warfighter technology. I was impressed with how many companies and jobs this industry creates.

And after watching the debate last night, I was impressed by the fact that Mitt Romney does not have a fucking clue about our military, how our Government and Military play such a vital role in the economy, and our absolutely incredible technological advantage over any potential enemy we may face on any battlefield.

More ships?! Syria is Iran's path to the sea?!

The GOP is in fucking La La Land with this guy as a Presidential Nominee.

How fucking sad!

AUSA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was at the Association of the United States Army
> Conference today. Went through about 3/4 of mile
> of exhibits by various vendors. I did not see one
> bayonet vendor on site. Might have missed one or
> two aisles in that labyrinth of advanced weapons,
> but I'm pretty sure the bayonet vendors were
> pretty much non-existent.
>
> I was impressed with the incredible advances in
> warfighter technology. I was impressed with how
> many companies and jobs this industry creates.
>
> And after watching the debate last night, I was
> impressed by the fact that Mitt Romney does not
> have a fucking clue about our military, how our
> Government and Military play such a vital role in
> the economy, and our absolutely incredible
> technological advantage over any potential enemy
> we may face on any battlefield.
>
> More ships?! Syria is Iran's path to the sea?!
>
> The GOP is in fucking La La Land with this guy as
> a Presidential Nominee.
>
> How fucking sad!


Sure loudmouth. The US Army has over 330,000 M-9's issued since 1989. It attaches to both the M-16 and the newer M-4's. You don't have a clue about US military hardware or much of anything else apparently.

Nothing better than watching a typical smug-ass, snarky Lib who thinks that they're smarter than anyone else step right in dog shit.



0--Weapons.
Solicitation Number: W56HZV12R0109
Agency: Department of the Army
Office: Army Contracting Command
Location: ACC - Warren (ACC-WRN)(DTA)


Solicitation Number:
W56HZV12R0109
Notice Type:
Solicitation
Synopsis:
Added: Dec 05, 2011 3:20 pm

THIS SOLICITATION WILL BE ISSUED AS A 100% SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE FOR THE M9 BAYONET AND SCABBARD. A FIRST ARTICLE TEST WILL BE REQUIRED. THE RESULTING AWARD WILL BE A FIRM-FIXED PRICE CONTRACT WITH A 100% OPTION.

THIS REQUIREMENT IS FOR THE M9 BAYONET AND SCABBARD, NSN: 1095-01-227-1739, P/N 12011860, QUANTITY OF 40,000 EACH WITH A 100% OPTION QUANTITY OF 40,000 EACH. THE PACKING AND PRESERVATION FOR THE M9 BAYONET AND SCABBARD IS MILITARY B. INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE WILL BE ORIGIN AND DELIVERY WILL BE FOB ORIGIN. THE CONTRACT WILL ALSO REQUIRE SUBMISSION OF PHOSPHATE COATING PROCEDURES AND ACCEPTANCE INSPECTION EQUIPMENT (AIE).

THE TECHNICAL DATA IS EXPORT CONTROLLED. OFFERORS WILL BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS IN ORDER TO ACCESS TECHNICAL DATA.

Please consult the list of document viewers if you cannot open a file.
M112S482M1
Sensitive/Secure Package: Yes
Posted Date: February 16, 2012
Login Required

Solicitation 1
Type: Solicitation
Posted Date: February 21, 2012
http://contracting.tacom.army.mil/perl_scripts/sol.p...

Description: See Solicitation
Amendment 1
Type: Mod/Amendment
Posted Date: February 28, 2012
http://contracting.tacom.army.mil/perl_scripts/sol.p...

Description: See Solicitation
Contracting Office Address:
U.S. ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND, WARREN, MICHIGAN 48397-5000
Place of Performance:
U.S. ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND, WARREN, MICHIGAN 48397-5000
48397-5000
USA
Point of Contact(s):
MICHAEL ALSIP,Contract Specialist,(586)282-2490 or KERRI M. BROMAN,Contracting Officer,(586)282-6017

U.S. ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND






https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=961c5a03e1ddce6152482a2f2f5ef7be&tab=core&_cview=1

Are you REALLY obsessed with knives?

4 more years, II Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are you REALLY obsessed with knives?


No, I just took 1 minute to Google "bayonet solicitation."

Like somebody on Obama's debate prep team should have done before letting him use that dumb-ass line and making a fool of himself.

The last major US Army bayonet charge during combat op's was in 1951.

I think the current protocol is to call in a drone strike, an air strike, a mortar or artillery barrage, or a close quarters grenade launch.

Why the fuck are we spending US tax dollars on bayonets? C'mon people Wake the Fuck Up!

Romney is a complete imbecile on this topic regardless of who is wasting money on bayonet procurements.

AUSA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The last major US Army bayonet charge during
> combat op's was in 1951.
>
> I think the current protocol is to call in a drone
> strike, an air strike, a mortar or artillery
> barrage, or a close quarters grenade launch.
>
> Why the fuck are we spending US tax dollars on
> bayonets? C'mon people Wake the Fuck Up!
>
> Romney is a complete imbecile on this topic
> regardless of who is wasting money on bayonet
> procurements.


Bayonets are useful other than in a "charge" smart guy. lol

The current bayonets are intended as mutli-purpose tools. In addition to attaching to the M16/M4, they also serve as CQ battle and utility knives. Yes, soldiers do still use them.

And, as above, most of these procurements go directly to small businesses and likely are a lot more effective as far as 'stimulus' than much of the other money wasted.

AUSA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The last major US Army bayonet charge during
> combat op's was in 1951.
>
> I think the current protocol is to call in a drone
> strike, an air strike, a mortar or artillery
> barrage, or a close quarters grenade launch.
>
> Why the fuck are we spending US tax dollars on
> bayonets? C'mon people Wake the Fuck Up!
>
> Romney is a complete imbecile on this topic
> regardless of who is wasting money on bayonet
> procurements.

+1

Yes, indeed he is.

To bayonet or not to bayonet is not the question.

Ever since the push button president learned about plug and play predator drones, he has seen no reason for any military anywhere.......with the exception of the guys supporting the drones on the ground that is.

Welcome to the future my friends.

Soldiers don't need bayonets, and as President I will stop the sale and distribution of bayonets.