Boykin: Obama Bases Policy on Communist Manifesto »« Obama’s Coming for the Guns!

Inhofe: Obama Wants to Disband the Military

James Inhofe is not only the dumbest and craziest person in the U.S. Senate today, he’s among the dumbest and craziest people ever to serve in that body. Here he is talking to the equally unhinged Frank Gaffney, claiming that Obama and liberals want to disband the military completely.

Gaffney: I just have to ask you about this. President Obama made a statement yesterday that just is stunning. He said to a group of nuclear disarmament enthusiasts: ‘We’re moving closer to the future we seek. A future where these weapons never threaten our children again. A future where we know the security and peace of a world without nuclear weapons.’ Senator, I suggest to you that represents national security fraud. I just wonder, knowing what you do about the proliferation of nuclear weapons not just in Iran but the buildup by the Chinese that have just tested a new long-range missile from mobile launchers capable of reaching this country, what on earth is the president doing misleading the American people?

Inhofe: I think that you and I have a problem. We don’t stop and realize that we are dealing with people—the far-left doesn’t think we need a military to start with, they really don’t. You’ve heard me say this before, they really believe if all countries would just stand in a circle and unilaterally disarm and hold hands then all threats would go away, they believe that. They would never say that but they do believe that.

Evidence? That’s for those pointy-headed liberal intellekshuls. Red-blooded American patriots rely on gut feeling and projection, the way God intended it.

Comments

  1. says

    they really believe if all countries would just stand in a circle and unilaterally disarm and hold hands then all threats would go away

    Actually, wouldn’t that be true by definition that if all countries would stop threatening each other that the threats will go away? The only thing is that nobody seriously think that’s going to happen, and definitely not anytime soon.

  2. says

    Actually, it’s his fellow AGW-denialist libertarians who want to defund the military, along with the rest of our elected government. But of course Inhofe can’t attack his fellow anti-government ideologues, so he has to scapegoat liberals instead. Again.

  3. thalwen says

    What a horrible world, where children don’t live in abject fear of nuclear warfare. I’m glad Inhofe and others like him are here to keep that from happening.

  4. dingojack says

    [points] Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! [/pointing]
    [pauses for a deep inhalation]….

    [Rinse & repeat as long as is necessary]

    Dingo

  5. Michael Heath says

    President Obama made a statement yesterday that just is stunning. He said to a group of nuclear disarmament enthusiasts: ‘We’re moving closer to the future we seek. A future where these weapons never threaten our children again. A future where we know the security and peace of a world without nuclear weapons.’

    Do I need to state the obvious? That sentiment was equivalent to the conservative’s god, Ronald Reagan, in both rhetoric and policy.

  6. dmcclean says

    Senator, I suggest to you that represents national security fraud.

    “What’s that?” I hear you ask. Well, it’s something I just made up in an effort to sound erudite while simultaneously demonstrating that I don’t understand the meaning of the word “fraud”, of course.

  7. matty1 says

    they really believe if all countries would just stand in a circle and unilaterally disarm and hold hands then all threats would go away, they believe that.

    If all countries disarm together it isn’t really unilateral is it? Anyway if we’re talking about believing crazy things isn’t it time for Mr Pot to be properly introduced to Ms Kettle?

  8. matty1 says

    Frankly the US military could use a bit of defunding especially in the nuclear department. Do you think they could cope with only being able to destroy the world once?

  9. Michael Heath says

    The behavior of American conservatives who make a living at politics is increasingly reminding me of this Jerry Lewis quote (paraphrased):

    I get paid to do what children get punished for doing.

  10. Nick Gotts (formerly KG) says

    That sentiment was equivalent to the conservative’s god, Ronald Reagan, in both rhetoric and policy. – Michael Heath

    Well, no. Reagan’s “policy”, if one can even apply that term to a completely impractical piece of nonsense, was focused on, and depended on, his ludicrous Star Wars fantasy.

  11. wscott says

    the far-left doesn’t think we need a military to start with, they really don’t.

    Well, I have known a handful of people on the Far Left ™ that believed that. But no one that far out gets elected to national office, I don’t care what district you’re from. And the notion that Obama is on the Far Left is just ridiculous.

    @ 7: Good point re: “unilaterally.” He keeps using that word; I don’t think it means what he thinks it means.

  12. says

    “A standing army is one of the greatest mischief that can possibly happen.” –James Madison

    A number of the founding fathers believed we should not have a standing military. Why does Inhofe hate the founding fathers?

  13. raven says

    Obama’s military record is far better than Bush’es.

    1. Obama got Osama bin Laden. That was a high risk daring operation. Of the two helicopters sent in, one crashed and was left. And bin Laden was “hiding” very near a Pakistani military base.

    2. Libya. We managed to win one of those little brush fire wars for once in less than a decade.

    All Bush did was start two wars at once. Iraq was unnecessary and did nothing but cost money and bleed us out. We are still bogged down in Afghanistan.

    What a horrible world, where children don’t live in abject fear of nuclear warfare. I’m glad Inhofe and others like him are here to keep that from happening.

    Sure.

    I learned very young in school what to do in case of a nuclear attack. Get under my desk. Then join the family and head for the nearest Fallout shelter. Which didn’t exist.

  14. Sastra says

    You’ve heard me say this before, they really believe if all countries would just stand in a circle and unilaterally disarm and hold hands then all threats would go away, they believe that. They would never say that but they do believe that.

    I’ve heard people say something very like this: it was in the context of a coming Spiritual Awakening. Apparently there’s some tipping point where the enlightenment of the few manages to lead to a general evolution of humanity to the Next Level, one of peace and understanding and a letting go of ego as we all realize we are one but interconnected consciousness. Or something like that.

    Yes, it was coming from New Agers on the liberal left. But this is no different really than what more traditional religions on the political right see happening once Jesus comes back, or once Islam subjugates the world. It sounds to me like Inhofe is confusing religious rhetoric with serious political policy. Quelle surprise.

  15. slc1 says

    Re raven @ #14

    All Bush did was start two wars at once. Iraq was unnecessary and did nothing but cost money and bleed us out. We are still bogged down in Afghanistan.

    If Dubya, instead of invading Iraq, had put that effort into Afghanistan, the Taliban would have been totally defeated and we would have been out a long time ago.

  16. matty1 says

    I looked up Mr Infohoe on this here intertube and these are some of the things he considers more sane than wanting world peace.

    - US policy towards Israel should be based on his personal understanding of the Bible
    -God is preventing global warming by magic
    - James Infohoe should be listened to on questions of public policy

  17. says

    Nick Gotts (formerly KG) “Well, no. Reagan’s ‘policy’, if one can even apply that term to a completely impractical piece of nonsense, was focused on, and depended on, his ludicrous Star Wars fantasy.”
    Buy a copy of The Dead Hand. The world is rarely as simplistic as we’d like it to be.

  18. Michael Heath says

    Modusoperandi,

    KG can’t be helped, he apparently already read Dead Hand. That only reinforced his worldview that Ronald Reagan was all bad, in the very same way conservative Christians know that President Obama is a commie-Nazi/Muslim-atheist.

  19. slc1 says

    Re MH @ #18

    Hell, even Frankenberger wasn’t all bad. After all, he built the Autobahn, set up the Volkswagon company, and reduced unemployment a lot faster then Roosevelt did.

  20. TxSkeptic says

    they really believe if all countries would just stand in a circle and unilaterally disarm and hold hands then all threats would go away

    Kind of the way all the xians stand around holding hands in a circle praying for all their troubles to be taken away by god?

  21. imthegenieicandoanything says

    Inhofe is one of the very few people who, when they die, I will simple say, “I’m glad, but it’s more than a little late to make up for anything he did or was.” One of the vilest insults I could hurl would involve comparing something or someone in some way to James Inhofe. The entire state of OK is now forever on my shit list, and anyone who was born there or had residence is essentially “on probation” in my mind, given Inhofe’s presence in the Senate. Jesus Christ himself would leave the faith if he really existed, knowing that Inhofe prayed to him. He’s proof that stupidity itself, if purely applied, can be utterly evil without being anything other than 100% stupidity.

    And yet, with Steve King in the House, Inhofe isn’t even within sight of being the worst, most stupid, useless, evil human being ever elected to national office.

    America sucks, and will suck until the current “Republican” Party is as dead as the KNow-Nothings they so perfectly imitate.

  22. ospalh says

    I just remembered.
    Technically Barack Obama got a price – three years ago to the day – because he was

    the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.

    Which is a reason why the Nobel Peace Prize is pretty much a joke.

  23. Rodney Nelson says

    What did Reagan do which was good? Triple the national debt? Make Grenada safe for medical students? Get 241 Marines killed in Lebanon? Watch while the Soviet Union imploded due to its own internal contradictions? Dismantle the Air Traffic Controllers Union? I’ve never understood why anyone thinks St. Ronnie was anything other than an actor playing the part of a mediocre president.

  24. vmanis1 says

    I’m no Reagan fan, but it’s fair to say that the two START treaties came about because of him. He proposed what became START I in 1982, but things went off the rails because of SDI (`Star Wars’), which the USSR interpreted, somewhat reasonably, as both crazy and a threat. In the late 80s, Reagan started negotiating with Gorbachev, and that resulted in START I being signed in 1991.

    I recall reading somewhere that Reagan seriously started to push nuclear arms control after seeing The Day After, the TV show about the effects of a nuclear war.

  25. says

    What did Reagan do which was good?

    Well, when Gorbachev seriously offered to dramatically reduce nuclear stockpiles (less than 100/country) if the US followed suit, Reagan blew it off because he couldn’t bear to shelve Star Wars. Which has to make him one of the worst political leaders of all time, from a standpoint of basic human interest.

  26. says

    I recall reading somewhere that Reagan seriously started to push nuclear arms control after seeing The Day After, the TV show about the effects of a nuclear war.

    If you’re interested in Reagan at Reykjavik, I highly recommend Reed’s “At The Abyss” which gives a fairly even-handed description of what an utter fuckwit Reagan was. You’re right, though – Reagan saw the TV show and took it as gospel, concluding that the way to prevent such a horrible thing happening to the US was to have a defense system. Apparently he was completely incapable of letting go that idee fixe. He was probably already losing his mind by that point, the poor guy. But his incompetence and illness could have helped extinguish the majority of mankind.

  27. slc1 says

    Re dan4 @ #30

    When I was an undergraduate, we used to refer to him as Schickelgruber. As in heil Schickelgruber. Shit by any other name would stink as bad.

  28. slc1 says

    Re vmanis1 @ #27

    Ronnie the rat got off one of his better one liners relative to relations with the Soviet Union. When asked by reporters why he hadn’t met with Soviet leaders, he responded that he wanted to but they kept dying on him. Brezhnev, Andropov, and Chernenko.

  29. says

    You were that infantile in COLLEGE? I got bored with excrement jokes in junior high. Grow the fuck up, dude, you’re embarrassing yourself and us.

    Hitler by any other name really isn’t that witty.

  30. dingojack says

    SLC – if you don’t have any kind of rebuttal argument, then say so. At the very least it would lower your “I’m complete dick” index from the standard ‘maxed-out’ position (if only briefly).
    Dingo

Leave a Reply