Judging by social media commentary since yesterday evening’s presidential debate on foreign policy, Obama’s quote about the US military having fewer “horses and bayonets” today has become quite popular—especially among Romney supporters attempting to hold it up as an example of how clueless our president is.
In case you missed the debate last night, Romney criticized Obama on military spending cuts, pointing out that America’s navy is at its smallest size since 1916. Obama retorted: “Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military has changed.” Cue social media explosion as thousands of angry Romney supporters swarm Twitter and Facebook to point out that the military still trains with bayonets, and even utilizes horses from time to time.
Even GOP vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan had something to say on the subject. In an interview that aired this morning on CBS’s This Morning, Ryan stated “To compare modern American battleships and Navy with bayonets, I just don’t understand that comparison”.
Paul Ryan, like much of the American public, does not understand how analogies work.
An interesting video clip showcasing a good example of extreme voter ignorance & prejudice was taken at the VP debate yesterday:
(the action starts at the 30 second mark; you can click here to skip right to it)
This woman hates Obama so much that she is willing to literally scream “communist!” over and over in a crowded forum. When she finally does get called out, she is unable to explain what a communist is—or really, say anything intelligent whatsoever. All she can do is repeat “just study it out” in response to a reporter’s basic questions about her obvious penchant for parroting things she’s heard but obviously doesn’t understand. Oh, the irony.
Despite the fact that she is clearly a fantastically uninformed & prejudiced lunatic, it’s a good bet that she’ll be exercising her right to vote in November. Go go democracy!
Since Mitt Romney declared that he would cut funding to PBS during last week’s presidential debate, whether or not taxpayers should continue to fund public educational TV programs like Sesame Street seems to have become one of the key issues surrounding the coming election. Facebook and Twitter are both abuzz with people bickering over the issue. Obama’s camp even released a (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) campaign ad dedicated to attacking Romney over his comments.
Whether you’re a fan of Sesame Street or not (and really, who isn’t?), anyone taking part in a debate over whether or not PBS should continue to receive public funding is probably an uninformed idiot. Romney should have been laughed off the stage for even mentioning Sesame Street last Wednesday—cutting funding to PBS is essentially the equivalent of the average American family holding a serious discussion over whether or not they should cut one cup of coffee out of their entire yearly budget in order to help them overcome hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt. It’s simply idiotic.
Mitt Romney held a fundraiser in Beverly Hills this past weekend, where he briefly commented on his wife Ann’s recent scare on-board a plane that was forced to land after an electrical malfunction filled the cabin with smoke. Romney was upset about what he apparently considers a glaring safety oversight on current passenger planes, offering this tidbit in a short commentary about the incident:
“When you have a fire in an aircraft, there’s no place to go, exactly, there’s no—and you can’t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don’t open. I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem.”
Windows that open on airliners? Who hasn’t wanted to pop theirs open while cruising at 600 mph and 35,000 feet for a bit of fresh (and delightfully invigorating, at about -50 degrees Celsius) air? It’s genius. No wait, it’s that other thing—what is it? Oh right, it’s abysmally fucking stupid.
I just caught Congressman John Duncan’s recent speech about domestic anti-terrorism spending on YouTube (or if you prefer, you can read the transcript on Duncan’s website). His comments are right on the mark, and it is refreshing to see somebody in our government standing up to speak out against the “security at any cost” mindset that has gripped America.
I was especially intrigued by Duncan’s rant against the TSA’s Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) program. Duncan claimed that a USA Today report asserted that more air marshals have been arrested than the total number of arrests made by air marshals (I was able to locate the article here). Considering that taxpayers are putting up nearly $1 billion every year to pay for the FAMS program, it doesn’t sound like we’re getting a very good deal.
I read some more and discovered that Congressman Duncan has been on a crusade against air marshals for awhile now. In 2009, he delivered a speech on the House floor criticizing the FAMS program for being “useless” and wasteful. Reading his speech, I was shocked to learn that while we have about 4,000 air marshals in service, the entire organization manages to average only 4.2 arrests per year.
Yesterday, the Indiana State Senate passed a bill that allows the teaching of various religions’ origin stories in public school science classes, alongside the scientific theory of evolution.
Senator Dennis Kruse, the bill’s sponsor, has made it clear that his goal with the bill is to encourage the teaching of creationism in science classrooms. Kruse has expressed contempt for evolution, calling it a “Johnny-come-lately” theory.
While the original text of Kruse’s bill specifically mentioned “creation science” (a term banned by the Supreme Court in the 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard case), the bill was later re-written to encompass a variety of religions—including Scientology. Kruse has stated that he is aware that his bill violates the precedent set in the Edwards case and will likely be challenged if it becomes a law. He pointed out that “this is a different Supreme Court” than the one we had in 1987, and he believes that they “could rule differently.”
Since Mitt Romney declared that he would cut funding to PBS during last week’s presidential debate, whether or not taxpayers should continue to fund public educational TV programs like Sesame Street seems to have become one of the key issues surrounding the coming election. Facebook and Twitter are both abuzz with people bickering over the issue. Obama’s camp even released a (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) 
Recent Comments