"We had these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines."
What a childish embarrassment.
So snarky and condescending. Just like every lib I have ever met.
oh, this was Obama’s best argument of the night according to the big brains over at DU.
They summarize the three debates with pictures of Big Bird, a binder, and a horseback soldier that looks like Pacho Villa holding a short sword (I guess they figure it’s bayonet-ish enough)
Which tells you about all you need to know about who won the debates, the intellectual lever of the DUmp, and who will be our next President.
Yet Republicans say Obama’s lumping together of Navy ships with “horses and bayonets” could harm him in the key battleground of Virginia...”
...this is ridiculous. I hope it’s true but I can’t see anyone casting their vote based on this stupid line. Especially in Virginia.
I half expected him to then say: "And they have these gizmos and thingamajigs on them that go boom!"
How does one control the blue waters with fewer than 300 ships?
Obama has declared war on Par 5s. No need for horses or bayonets.. unless the out of bounds are mined, then a bayonet could still come in handy retrieving his errant shot(s). I guess a horse could pull the caisson with his beer cooler and freezer bag full of shaved ice and ice cream.
In the opening weeks of the U.S. war in Afghanistan American Special Forces soldiers rode into battle on horseback alongside their Northern Alliance cohorts.
I am sure this will go over well like Big Bird, Binders, etc. They keep looking for a silver bullet.
The navy doesn’t need horses or bayonets, but yes it needs more ships. Including the types of “things” Obama mentioned- more subs and aircraft carriers, as well as destroyers, anti missile ships, etc.
I never saw the debates as I was on set for a production company. I actually thought horses and bayonets’ was what obama called Moo-chelle...
"we have fewer horses and bayonets ..." but ... "we have aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines."
Therefore, he argues, a trillion dollar cut to the military budget will not hurt.
Not sure I follow the logic. Is he saying bayonets and horses cost more than nuclear submarines????
First, obama admitted he wants to cut the navy and not build anymore ships.
Second, Romney should have pointed out that our enemies have the same technology we have so we need more of it.
Ships don’t go under water.
Boats do.
Number of USMC in WW2 485k. In 2010 there were 203k.
So, yes, there were fewer bayonets and horses. There were also fewer MRE’s, socks, etc...
I read on another site that “ships that go underwater” are called “sunk,” because submarines are “boats,” not ships. I don’t know if this is right or not, but it made me laugh out loud.
Barry’s little SNL skit didn’t change any minds tonight.
Is that sentence structure coming from a Harvard Grad? We “had” Aircraft Carriers? Where did they go?
Aircraft Carriers “where” planes land on them? Huh?
We have “these” ships that go underwater? Yes, we have Submarines, and everyone knows they go underwater.
I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, as many FReepers can attest, but really, WTF? This is some brilliant retort when discussing the purposeful wholesale dismantling of our Navy? God help us if this MORON gets reelected.
In short, Romney decided to let Obama figuratively hang himself politically. And boy, did Obama oblige.