The Difficulty of Hearing Your Own Voice »« Moore: God is Punishing Us

Dumbass Quote of the Day

The response from Republicans to President Obama’s absolutely accurate belittling of Romney’s moronic claim about the size of the Navy has been quite amusing to watch. Paul Ryan feigned ignorance and said he just couldn’t imagine what it means. But Marco Rubio knows what it means; it means Obama hates the troops. Or something.

“I think the president belittled the military,” said Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). “He compared the modern Navy to bayonets and horses — I thought that was an amazing statement.”

Come on people. You aren’t even trying anymore. At least make the effort to appear not to be either idiots or liars.

Comments

  1. katkinkate says

    They are probably counting on a large proportion of people not having heard/seen the original dialogue and will just see their commentary on it. So whatever interpretation they make will be all some people will know.

  2. says

    Come on people. You aren’t even trying anymore. At least make the effort to appear not to be either idiots or liars.

    They are trying. The problem is they’ve shoveled so much BS that all the good crap is gone. Why, it used to be you could poke a movement conservative with a sharp stick and the finest bullshit would ooze out, but now all you get is watery brown goo.

  3. katkinkate says

    Also a lot of people are too willing to accept an authority’s word on the meaning of things said or written by others, eg. the Bible, even when the meaning seems straight forward and clear. Especially when that authority figure is one of ‘us’ rather then ‘them’. Many people don’t even want to pretend to think for themselves.

  4. Randomfactor says

    Considering Romney started this circus by stating that today’s Navy isn’t as good as the one we had a hundred years ago…

    But then, Florida senators aren’t as good as they were then, either.

  5. wscott says

    But every American infantryman and marine is issued a good, strong Made In The US* Bayonet! Obama doesn’t know a thing about the modern military! [/troll]

    * Probably, I think.

  6. Nick Gotts (formerly KG) says

    Come on people. You aren’t even trying anymore. At least make the effort to appear not to be either idiots or liars.

    The sad and indeed terrifying fact is, they don’t seem to need to.

  7. gshelley says

    Romney suggests that the massively improved technical capabilities and training that go alongside it are outweighed by having a couple fewer ships and somehow it is Obama that is belittling the military? The mind truly bogles

  8. xmaseveeve says

    It’s like the Scottish National Party insisting that, ‘Yes. I did’, clearly means NO. It’s sad that so many fall for this, in their lazy inability to think for themselves. They accuse free-thinkers of heresy, while they live little lives of hearsay.

  9. Chiroptera says

    Come on people. You aren’t even trying anymore.

    Actually, I noticed this over 11 years ago. During the early days of the Bush Administration, I was thunderstruck at how they weren’t even trying to keep their lies plausible.

    At the time was wasn’t sure where this was due to contempt at how the American electoriate is so uninformed and undereducated that they felt they didn’t have to work very hard to fool them, or whether it was a sneer at how our pseudo-democracy is so stacked against the people that it really doesn’t matter what the citizens believe any more.

    Now, at the end of the current campaign season, I’m convinced it’s the former.

  10. says

    dingojack, now you’re just being ridiculous. Santorum also has blobs and streaks in it. At least that’s what the Republican in the stall beside me told me.

  11. dingojack says

    Modus – that’s just their ‘wide stance’, wait until they ‘etch-a-sketch’ it.
    Dingo

  12. says

    “Come on people. You aren’t even trying anymore. At least make the effort to appear not to be either idiots or liars.”

    As Abraham Lincold said*:

    “You can fool some of the sheeple some of the time.

    You can fool me once all of the time.

    But you can fool all of…JESUS, Shut up! That’s why!!”

    * According to the voices in Ellis Washington’s head.

  13. says

    wscott@5
    I’ve noticed that modern soldiers never seem to have fixed bayonets anymore. I wonder if it’s because the rifles’ ammo capacity and firepower makes them obsolete. Also the rifles don’t seem as sturdy in the muzzle area. maybe a bayonet would risk damage to the barrel. Or maybe hand to hand combat is rare in these days of long range accuracy. I know nothing about this, just something I’ve noticed. Maybe someone with military experience can explain. I’ve been wondering about this for some time.

    As to Obama’s comment, it’s obvious to anyone without an agenda that he was speaking generally on the efficiency of modern weapons compared with 1916. To me it shows how clueless Romney is that he thinks he could get away with such an obviously ridiculous comparison.

  14. briandavis says

    danrobinson @15:

    I’ve noticed that modern soldiers never seem to have fixed bayonets anymore.

    This BBC story from Sep 28 says…

    A soldier who led a bayonet charge across 80m (260ft) of open ground through Taliban gunfire in Afghanistan has been given the Military Cross.

  15. says

    I would leave it up the the people who actually use them for a a professional assessment of the efficiency of modern U.S. combat rifles with attached bayonets.

    The bayonet was originally attached to muzzle loading weapons and allowed the weapon to be used as a spear or a pike when the situation would warrant such. Those weapons were heavy and quite long in comparison with the military firearms currently in U.S. by the majority of U.S. soldiers.

    Also, the bayonet used by the U.S. and other countries’ armed forces, through the early-1900′s was a formidable weapon in its own right. At lengths of up to a foot or more, the knife style could be used as such, whereas the spike style was generally not thus employed.

    Modern combat knives (those issued by the U.S. military) are dual purpose. They are intended to be the everyday knife for their user and a bayonet when necessary. They are of a shorter length and balanced for use as a tool and not just as a combat weapon.

    The bayonet is still used and its use is taught in combat infantry training. It is not, afaia, a frequently used weapon but since it is a tool as well as a weapon and is relatively light in weight it has cost/benefit utility. Black powder, cannister shot and a number of other formerly highly successful and universally used military weapons/supplies are not.

Leave a Reply