Can you spell A-I-R-C-R-A-F-T C-A-R-R-I-E-R?

The funniest (and pithiest) moment in last night’s US Presidential debate was Obama comprehensively making Romney look like a total idiot on the future of the US Navy.

This great article on Think Progress not only shows (in a very useful graphic) that Obama has actually done a great job of protecting the US Navy’s interests, but also replays the relevant segment of the debate for us all to enjoy again.

If you haven’t seen it, this moment may well be considered historic in the future – do yourself a favour and click on the link and watch.

#horsesandbayonets is the leading Twitter item in the US right now, hours after the debate. I reckon this is – just possibly – a gotcha moment.

And I will say again what I have said before – if the Obama of Debate #2 and #3 had turned up in Debate #1, this thing wouldn’t even be a race right now.

And by the middle of this week, it might not be so again.

#horsesandbayonets indeed

  1. Im sorry to burst your bubble, but Obama did not make Romney look like an idiot. Romney is right about the size of our Navy and Military Force. There is strength in numbers, and if you go back to Pearl Harbor our US Navy Fleet was pretty much bare boned after the Japanese attacked us on Dec 7th 1941. They knew where our weakness was, and fortunately we still had 4 carriers available that came to the beckons call. We defeated the Japanese with just 4 carriers, and it was a struggle. Doing more with less is not a stance our Military has ever been put through. It means that more and more people are performing extended tours of duty over seas and dealing with poorly maintained equipment. As it is now, our Military is stretched extremely thin across the globe.


  2. Proof is in the numbers, and I have seen first hand the cuts that the Navy has under gone since 2009 and is nerve racking, and it makes me feel even less safe and more worried about our National Security. Many of those ships that are being built have been already approved in previous contract talks with various contracting firms.


    • Nevertheless the ships have and are being built. I do not dispute that times are tough but Obama has done a good job defending the Navy. As he points out, in the middle of a domestic crisis America STILL spends more on the military than the next ten biggest spenders PUT TOGETHER. Do you SERIOUSLY agree with Romney that the USA should spend ANOTHER two trillion? Seriously?


  3. The US Military has seen drastic cuts in all ranks, and the people who are being greatly impacted by these cuts are those that have the talent and the skill needed to train new recruits who are just entering the Military. Yes I do agree with Romney the US Military and our Department of Defense can use the extra money to beef up our crippled infrastructure and to provide greater assets to perform intelligence analysis. Anyone who has served in the US Military understand the impact of Obama’s Defense Policy, and it is troubling. Also for just more clarification here is the Military Budget: so please enjoy the facts as you see the numbers decline. Ask yourself this: Are you safer then you were 4 years ago? The answer is inevitably no.


  4. James Mahoney says:

    That was a funny line if you like your Presidents to be acerbic and condescending (Obama can be condescending? Who knew?). And it certainly resonates with died-in-the-wool Obamites. For this genuinely undecided voter, it was a rehearsed bit that played well to the base, but (much) less so to those of us who were looking for substance. After he got his sophomoric funny bit out of the way, he got to the actual meat of the point, which is more than he did in a few other instances.

    For me, the debate was a draw, or close to it. Romney raised some very good points for which Obama had no response. Obama obviously had strong points of his own. The bottom line is that there’s no appreciable difference between them when it comes to foreign policy. The difference would be one of approach and “presentation.”

    And while it’s looking likely that I won’t be voting for Romney, I am continually impressed by his remarkable ability to maintain his professional, mature composure, to stay on-point, and to not get drawn in by gratuitous jabs and personal attacks. He’s demonstrated that over the course of two presidential election cycles that included two bruising primary contests.

    I think that’s a great asset for a President (or anyone else, for that matter). But, of course, it alone is not enough.


    • Well, I guess I like my Presidents on top of their game, and for me he was. But there are genuine differences on foreign policy, not least that Romney wants to dramatically – dramatically – increase defense spending at a time when the country simply cannot afford it.

      I also dread and fear the return of the Cheyney-ites to influence in the White House, which Romney would invite. That thought alone makes it worth voting for Obama in my opinion.

      Good luck with your choice and thanks for commenting.


      • Obama has not been on top of his game he has been skirting around it and making a mockery of his time in office. Obama has missed so may security briefings that he doesn’t know what is going on in the world that could impact the US. It came as a surprise on 9/11/2012 that terrorists attacked us in Libya and that is why he has been handling this issue like a hot potato like the rest of his administration. Also with that 2 trillion dollars many Military bases could afford much needed upkeep on barracks and on base housing upgrades. Have you been on board any US Military installation and looked at their housing? It is down right pathetic and they look like the projects. 500 Billion alone could improve the housing of soldiers who live on base, 500 billion could be used to beef up protective gear and to replace older weapons with newer modern ones, 500 Billion could be used to upkeep the United Navy and the US Marine Corp Fleets with new targeting systems and better quarters, the other 500 billion can be used for education and payment to those who deserve raises for being on call 24/7/365. And it grossly disgusts me to see people like you support a president who does not want this to happen. he has not given them any raises at all in the 4 years hes been in office a 1.7% raise is nothing compared 4.6 and 5% under the previous administration. Many soldiers and sailors are coming back home in debt and losing their homes because of Obama’s inability to stop spending as community organizer aka a socialist. Also the inability to provide yearly raises to Government Employees is a sign that the Government is not in control of money and where it goes. Your choice for president is WRONG.


        • I completely respect your right to disagree Daniel and I thank you for taking the time to stop by and comment. Nevertheless I stick to my guns. The factor you leave out of the last four years dragging the economy out of the worst crisis since 1929. And it is still too fragile to warrant increasing military spending. Obama has – and will – spend money where it is needed. Until we are out of this mess then the military need to take their own share of the pain just like everyone else.


          • It is a fine nation we live in where we can openly discuss our differences, but to me and to many people I know all Obama has done is put a band aid on the inevitable. Once our credit rating gets lower and lower so will our ability to get loans to cover excessive spending. At that point our recession will get worse, and many people will get hurt by the policies that prolonged the inevitable. Prior to Bushes Administration there was put into action Banking Deregulation allowing anyone to get loans for which they couldn’t afford, and there were high impact loans that were interest only, and after 8 years your interest was paid off then people saw their principles go up and that is when the housing market crashed and put into play our recession. Bailing out banks and businesses was irresponsible, Now they will have the attitude that Daddy (big Government) will take care of me in the future. Also prior to Bush’s administration the Department of Defense saw the greatest decrease in funding, and in that 8 year time span we were being targeted by Bin Laden and Al Quaida in New York City. On 9/11/2001 we had our pearl harbor moment, and 3000 people lost their lives. Had our Military been strong maybe it wouldn’t have happened.


  5. jvdix says:

    The United States is currently spending FIVE TIMES what the next biggest military spending nation in the world is spending, China to be specific. China is spending twice what #3 Russia is spending. And you think we need more? Daniel, you are worried the military is losing people “that have the talent and the skill needed to train new recruits who are just entering the Military.” Train them to do what? To out-spend every other country in the world? Also, please do not answer questions for me, I can answer my own. Safer than four years ago? From all other countries, absolutely. From my own military, not so much. Eisenhower had it right. And if you try to tell me I don’t understand because I have not served, I will come and beat you with my DD-214 which shows 10 years of active service. James, the reason you saw no difference in foreign policy position in the third debate was because Romney came to the debate having decided to parrot Obama’s foreign policy position. That is not what he had previously been saying. And, while he says that today, what will he say tomorrow? Particularly if, as Yolly points out, he drags in with him the morally bankrupt Cheney crowd? We will make ourselves so hated we will never be safe again.


    • America actually spends as much as all the next ten nations put together. You really have to ask, is that value for money? That’s what the President is asking, and like so many of the questions he insists on having answered, it is a courageous question.


    • I would rather take orders from President Bush then a president who goes on an apologetic tour, The training I was referring to was Cyber Security and Computer Network Operations that include Computer Network Defense, Attack, and Exploitation which Obama touted to be of prime concern. The certifications and training requires funding and the certifications are expensive. A+ Cert is 178 every 3 years, Net+ Cert 253 every 3 years Sec+ 276 every 3 years and these are just the basics that are required and that will make you DoD 8570 compliant for you to work behind a computer. That all adds up and costs money to build a strong cyber security team. There are other certifications that managers would require to get, and one is the CISSP which is 500 bucks per test. There is also diminishing Tuition Assistance and other programs that are going away. I felt a lot safer under Bush then I do now under an Apologetic Muslim Nation Sympathizer.


      • Well the notion of an Apology Tour is offensive and ridiculous. If you think trying to find common ground with Islamic populations rather than slaughter them is the mark of a poor President than you are a fool.

        I have allowed your comment because I believe in free discourse but the comment is dismissive and ludicrous Fox News crap.

        As a test, list the comments Obama made that you consider “apologies”, regardless of any question of whether his comments were wise and appropriate. I’m betting you can’t list one. You are swallowing propaganda.


  6. Richard Ember says:

    LOL, LOL, LOL, yet again when somebody says something the great liberal disagrees with, he plays the ‘offensive’ card. The liberals’s ‘intolerance of intolerance’ is, well, intolerable. Stick to your guns, Daniel and remember one thing – at least you have a vote in this election.


    • I pass every post you make Richard – I can’t be that thin-skinned. I totally respect Daniel’s right to hold his point of view. It’s just crap. Neither of you can find a single example of Obama being on an apology tour, you’re both full of piss and wind.


      • I wont waste my time scouring the internet finding the apologies that Obama has stated in his 4 years as a failed president, because I will just get from you “That is not what he meant by that.” Quite frankly, if you respect a mans opinion, you do not call it crap. I take great offense to that, and as such I am removing myself from your blog because it is leaning so far left that you are over the horizon. Have a good life, and may you learn to be more open minded and critical of what people say and their actions and their tone when they speak.


        • As you wish Daniel. The simple fact is you cannot support your opinions with facts. If you are bored reading my point of view then of course you will go elsewhere. I made a point of saying I respected your opinions until you started simply repeating pro Romney propaganda.


What do YOU think? That's what matters. Please comment!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s