If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Obama says he's proven "Democrats are not weak on defense" though he admits they do have some concerns in the secondary that they hope to address either in the draft or the free agent market   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 218
    More: Interesting, President Obama, Democrats, U.S. President Barack Obama, free agents, Lower East Side, military capability, jean-georges vongerichten  
•       •       •

916 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Mar 2012 at 10:45 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



218 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-02 10:57:20 AM
Thanks, Submitter, for an Obama headline that's actually funny on its own.

/Democrat who supports President Obama.
 
2012-03-02 10:57:34 AM

SN1987a goes boom: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: FlashHarry: cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY

so, had the mission gone tits-up and bin laden survived, it would have bean the SEALs fault, right?

It depends. If they were negligent and let him get away, yes. If they were not, then no, responsibility would lie with the one who came up with the operations planning

Then why doesn't credit for success lie with the same person? Remember, it was Obama who ordered the SEAL raid rather than a drone strike, making him the "one who came up with the operations planning."

Obama did not personally plan the whole operation. He ordered it, yes, but it was designed and implemented by others. If it were to fail, it would not have fallen on Obama's shoulders.

Bull farking shiat. You know exactly where the blame would've gone.


Exactly, and cman knows it. In his dark, black heart he knows it. And all knowing it does for him is make it just a little darker, and more pitiful. The wailing and gnashing of teeth this November will be so epic that I think it alone is why the Mayans thought the world was coming to an end.
 
2012-03-02 10:59:20 AM

cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY


Dude, quit badmouthing the core.
 
2012-03-02 10:59:33 AM

Pocket Ninja: You know, subby, this isn't a terrible idea. Modeling the US armed forces more after the NFL's approach to things, I mean. So there would be recruitment season, when new recruits are getting signed, but instead of them just picking a service, we could let the services pick them. Make it a draft sort of situation. Say the Army has a couple of older gunnery sergeants and wants to trade the Navy for some newer picks...deals could be worked out. Soldiers who've been enlisted for a while could go on Free Agent status; you know, maybe some guy from SEAL Team 6 sees a better opportunity in the Rangers. The high-stake soldiers might even have their own trading cards listing their deployments, number of kills, etc etc. There could even be Soldier Fantasy Leagues -- you put together your own team of soldiers deployed around the world, and track their awards accumulated, kill ratio, etc.; at the end whoever has the highest decorated (and most alive) team wins. It could all be covered by the Military Channel...I think there's some real potential here.


Lord, no. We'd have this whole Fark tab full of rumors about how Favre was coming out of retirement to sign with the Merchant Marines.
 
2012-03-02 10:59:34 AM

cman: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: FlashHarry: cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY

so, had the mission gone tits-up and bin laden survived, it would have bean the SEALs fault, right?

It depends. If they were negligent and let him get away, yes. If they were not, then no, responsibility would lie with the one who came up with the operations planning

Then why doesn't credit for success lie with the same person? Remember, it was Obama who ordered the SEAL raid rather than a drone strike, making him the "one who came up with the operations planning."

Obama did not personally plan the whole operation. He ordered it, yes, but it was designed and implemented by others. If it were to fail, it would not have fallen on Obama's shoulders.

Sure it would have been embarrassing and I am sure that Republicans would try to put the blame on him. But in all seriousness, it would not be his fault if it failed because he has no real life military experience.


Get real. If Obama can be blamed for gas prices, he can be blamed for a failed operation he signed off on.

You can't talk your way around this one, no matter how many times you respond to yourself.
 
2012-03-02 11:00:22 AM
If Obama had flown out to the Indian ocean and landed on the Carl Vinson in a fighter jet, then personally pushed bin Laden over the edge of the carrier while wearing a flight suit and standing in front of a "Mission Accomplished" banner....the GOP would love him for it
 
2012-03-02 11:00:24 AM

EnviroDude: Mr. Coffee Nerves: If it were a Republican president who oversaw the killing of Osama, helped topple Gaddafi without the loss of a single American life and held office when the Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed over 13,000 the derp brigade would be demanding he be put on Mount Rushmore and the $10 bill already.

If a republican went to war with Libya without congressional approval, the democrats would have been on the front lines screaming injustice like they did when Bush invaded Iraq. They would also be grousing about having to pay for that war like they have since Bush left office.


Meanwhile, in the real world, we didn't "go to war" with Libya. The United Nations asked for help and we, as members of the U.N. and by our own Constitution, were required to come to their aid.

Specifically, the Charter of the United Nations, being the foundation treaty of the U.N. and which we ratified on 26 June 1945, binds us, and all other member states, to all articles therein. In this case, Articles 42 - 463 are pertinent; mandating that member states be prepared to supply armed forces, and specifically air forces, if the U.N. deem it necessary.

So yeah, Obama didn't "go to war without congressional approval", he assisted the U.N., in keeping with international treaty and the Constitution of the United States.
 
2012-03-02 11:00:53 AM

cman: Obama did not personally plan the whole operation. He ordered it, yes, but it was designed and implemented by others. If it were to fail, it would not have fallen on Obama's shoulders.


Certain people from The Right are blaming the death of Breitbart on Obama... Do you really think they would not blamed Obama if the OBL raid went wrong?
 
2012-03-02 11:01:14 AM
Newt: Defeating Obama is a matter of national security.

Bush: So I don't know where he [Osama] is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him, Kelly, to be honest with you.

Obama: Take the shot.



They spent months and months telling us how if Obama got elected the few Americans left would be speaking Arabic and our country would be a socialist nightmare. We'd be Sweden only with blood running in the streets and knee-deep in aborted fetuses.

Now they're running off the same rhetoric only THIS time we should believe them because THIS time Obama isn't going to worry about getting re-elected. It's all part of Obama's master plan to be a secret Kenyan Muslim, who got a fake birth certificate, at birth, so that he could one day become President, do NOTHING the GOP pundits swore he would do if elected, only to get a second term and unleash upon this country a dark Muslim Socialist war against Religion that would completely destroy America and all that we love and hold sacred.

And they say it's the liberals who love conspiracy theories...
 
2012-03-02 11:01:26 AM
Man, the GOP *REALLY* wanted to see some dead Marines in Libya, didn't they.
 
2012-03-02 11:02:30 AM
The simple reality of American politics is that military contractors control the Pentagon, via their lobbyists in Congress, regardless of whether the Democrats or Republicans are in power.
 
2012-03-02 11:04:45 AM

Teufelaffe: If a republican went to war with Libya without congressional approval, the democrats would have been on the front lines screaming injustice like they did when Bush invaded Iraq. They would also be grousing about having to pay for that war like they have since Bush left office.

Meanwhile, in the real world, we didn't "go to war" with Libya. The United Nations asked for help and we, as members of the U.N. and by our own Constitution, were required to come to their aid.

Specifically, the Charter of the United Nations, being the foundation treaty of the U.N. and which we ratified on 26 June 1945, binds us, and all other member states, to all articles therein. In this case, Articles 42 - 463 are pertinent; mandating that member states be prepared to supply armed forces, and specifically air forces, if the U.N. deem it necessary.

So yeah, Obama didn't "go to war without congressional approval", he assisted the U.N., in keeping with international treaty and the Constitution of the United States.



This moron is actually comparing our action in Libya to invading Iraq? You're wasting bandwidth even responding to that.
 
2012-03-02 11:04:50 AM
Funny how "Tough on Defense" now means "willing to violate international law."

But yes, Mr. President, your extrajudicial killings are very illegal, and we all think you're very tough.
 
2012-03-02 11:04:56 AM

cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: FlashHarry: cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY

so, had the mission gone tits-up and bin laden survived, it would have bean the SEALs fault, right?

It depends. If they were negligent and let him get away, yes. If they were not, then no, responsibility would lie with the one who came up with the operations planning

Then why doesn't credit for success lie with the same person? Remember, it was Obama who ordered the SEAL raid rather than a drone strike, making him the "one who came up with the operations planning."

Obama did not personally plan the whole operation. He ordered it, yes, but it was designed and implemented by others. If it were to fail, it would not have fallen on Obama's shoulders.


i44.tinypic.com

Bullshiat.
 
2012-03-02 11:05:04 AM
Barack Obama gets no credit for killing Osama bin Laden, because he only gave the order for SEAL Team 6 to do the dirty work. The exact same way bin Laden gets no credit for 9/11 because he only gave the order for Mohammed Atta et al to do the dirty work.

Also, Obama gets no credit whatsoever for the Dow Jones more than doubling since his inauguration.

Also also, Obama is entirely to blame for gas prices more than doubling since his inauguration.


So Vote Republican™.
 
2012-03-02 11:07:18 AM

bulldg4life: If Obama had flown out to the Indian ocean and landed on the Carl Vinson in a fighter jet, then personally pushed bin Laden over the edge of the carrier while wearing a flight suit and standing in front of a "Mission Accomplished" banner....the GOP would love him for it would theorize it was actually to secretly pass information on to his Muslim masters and help fake Osama's death which is why this usurper must be thrown out of office!


FTFY
 
2012-03-02 11:08:33 AM
Obama hasn't changed anything.

1. Democrats still have to act excessively tough on defense to avoid being called "weak" by Republicans. "Only Nixon could go to China" is a trite saying, but it's true.

2. He hasn't nuked Iran.and exterminated every Palestinian in Israel. That makes him too weak in the eyes of a significant portion of the country.
 
2012-03-02 11:09:24 AM

what_now: Man, the GOP *REALLY* wanted to see some dead Marines in Libya, didn't they.


It would have helped them launch a "X number of US Marines have been killed by Muslims in some other country's civil war! 0bama is a blood-thirsty warmonger! IMPEACH!!!1!!11!!!1!![shift+one]!" series of talking points.
 
2012-03-02 11:09:29 AM

imontheinternet: Funny how "Tough on Defense" now means "willing to violate international law."

But yes, Mr. President, your extrajudicial killings are very illegal, and we all think you're very tough.


You better watch what you say. He can hold you indefinitely without trial now.
 
2012-03-02 11:11:16 AM
I just don't get this whole "defense" thing. It seems we're mostly on the offense. We're imposing our will and ideals on other nations via our military might. Defending ourselves is more in the hands of Homeland Security and the feathery touch of their TSA agents.

Sure, being the biggest badass on the world block has some appeal. Considering the obscene amounts we spend to be that I guess we need to use it once in a while, I suppose.

But overall, cutting that back while we try to make sure we have enough money to take care of the elderly would be nice.

In that regard, it looks like Obama wants some substantial cuts in the "defense" budget. Which is good. Certainly better than some limp-dicked Republican draft dodger drooling over a real-life Risk board while waving the American flag.

So on defense, I like Obama better.
 
2012-03-02 11:12:51 AM

BillCo: We'll be drafting a new president later in the year. Problem solved.


t1.gstatic.com
 
2012-03-02 11:13:07 AM
I'd prefer having this manly ass-kicker protecting me.

idahoagenda.files.wordpress.com

Look out, terrorists.
 
2012-03-02 11:13:07 AM

CPennypacker: imontheinternet: Funny how "Tough on Defense" now means "willing to violate international law."

But yes, Mr. President, your extrajudicial killings are very illegal, and we all think you're very tough.

You better watch what you say. He can hold you indefinitely without trial now.



Thanks to those laws the GOP wrote up, passed, and sent to the President to sign...
 
2012-03-02 11:15:10 AM
The Republicans have dibs on "special" teams.
 
2012-03-02 11:16:10 AM
If a republican went to war with Libya without congressional approval,

WE DIDN'T GO TO WAR WITH FARKING LIBYA!

Christ on his throne, you guys are tiresome farking fools.
 
2012-03-02 11:17:40 AM

Mugato: This moron is actually comparing our action in Libya to invading Iraq? You're wasting bandwidth even responding to that.


Like every awful troll, there's a bit of truth to it. They both are considered within the scope of Congressional war powers under the War Powers Resolution.
 
2012-03-02 11:18:31 AM

cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: FlashHarry: cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY

so, had the mission gone tits-up and bin laden survived, it would have bean the SEALs fault, right?

It depends. If they were negligent and let him get away, yes. If they were not, then no, responsibility would lie with the one who came up with the operations planning

Then why doesn't credit for success lie with the same person? Remember, it was Obama who ordered the SEAL raid rather than a drone strike, making him the "one who came up with the operations planning."

Obama did not personally plan the whole operation. He ordered it, yes, but it was designed and implemented by others. If it were to fail, it would not have fallen on Obama's shoulders.


You're too young to remember the Carter administration, aren't you?
 
2012-03-02 11:19:33 AM
 
2012-03-02 11:20:05 AM

pwhp_67: CPennypacker: imontheinternet: Funny how "Tough on Defense" now means "willing to violate international law."

But yes, Mr. President, your extrajudicial killings are very illegal, and we all think you're very tough.

You better watch what you say. He can hold you indefinitely without trial now.


Thanks to those laws the GOP wrote up, passed, and sent to the President to sign...


pwhp_67: CPennypacker: imontheinternet: Funny how "Tough on Defense" now means "willing to violate international law."

But yes, Mr. President, your extrajudicial killings are very illegal, and we all think you're very tough.

You better watch what you say. He can hold you indefinitely without trial now.


Thanks to those laws the GOP wrote up, passed, and sent to the President to sign...


It doesn't matter who did it. Everything is Obama's fault unless its good.
 
2012-03-02 11:21:06 AM

inkblot: Obama hasn't changed anything.

1. Democrats still have to act excessively tough on defense to avoid being called "weak" by Republicans. "Only Nixon could go to China" is a trite saying, but it's true.

2. He hasn't nuked Iran.and exterminated every Palestinian in Israel. That makes him too weak in the eyes of a significant portion of the country.


That "significant portion of the country" of which you speak is populated almost entirely by two groups of people:
A - people who decided on 1/20/2009 or earlier that they would not vote for Obama in 2012 under any circumstances whatsoever, and
B - people who think that anyone who doesn't fully and unconditionally support Israel, or who doesn't hold Israel entirely blameless in their struggle with the Palestinians, is a goose-stepping, head-shaving, Hitler-worshiping anti-semite.

I'm pretty sure there is some overlap between the two groups - although a good number of the people who are in group B but not group A are probably Jews living in NYC and South Florida, and I doubt they will be stampeding to vote for Republicans any time soon.
 
2012-03-02 11:21:48 AM

cman: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: FlashHarry: cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY

so, had the mission gone tits-up and bin laden survived, it would have bean the SEALs fault, right?

It depends. If they were negligent and let him get away, yes. If they were not, then no, responsibility would lie with the one who came up with the operations planning

Then why doesn't credit for success lie with the same person? Remember, it was Obama who ordered the SEAL raid rather than a drone strike, making him the "one who came up with the operations planning."

Obama did not personally plan the whole operation. He ordered it, yes, but it was designed and implemented by others. If it were to fail, it would not have fallen on Obama's shoulders.

Sure it would have been embarrassing and I am sure that Republicans would try to put the blame on him. But in all seriousness, it would not be his fault if it failed because he has no real life military experience.


I'm sorry dude but that's just disingenuous. You know perfectly well that Obama would shoulder every inch of the blame because the GOP would harp on it all the way to the impeachment vote. What in the past 4 years has given any other indication?
 
2012-03-02 11:24:46 AM
The GOP hates that Obama is actually getting results, where as all they could do is kill hundreds of thousands, waste trillions, and get nothing to show for it after eight years of efforts.

The GOP has no idea how to fight a modern war.
 
2012-03-02 11:25:02 AM

Masso: cman: cameroncrazy1984: cman: FlashHarry: cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY

so, had the mission gone tits-up and bin laden survived, it would have bean the SEALs fault, right?

It depends. If they were negligent and let him get away, yes. If they were not, then no, responsibility would lie with the one who came up with the operations planning

Then why doesn't credit for success lie with the same person? Remember, it was Obama who ordered the SEAL raid rather than a drone strike, making him the "one who came up with the operations planning."

Obama did not personally plan the whole operation. He ordered it, yes, but it was designed and implemented by others. If it were to fail, it would not have fallen on Obama's shoulders.

BULL shiat. GOP would be on him faster than they did on Carter for failed ops.


And Clinton for Black Hawk Down. I don't recall the Right letting Bubba slide on that one.
 
2012-03-02 11:25:33 AM

cman: TBH a draft isnt a bad idea.

It is political suicide, no doubt. But it would help solve the problems with my generation: lack of discipline, lack of direction in life, teaching you how to be an adult, etc


Don't you have a lawn you need to yell about? How did you figure out how to work this confounded intertube?

This generation's motivations are the same as every other generations' were at their age, or are you unfamiliar with the terms hippy, burnout, and slacker...
 
2012-03-02 11:25:44 AM

cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY


collider.com
 
2012-03-02 11:26:49 AM

FlashHarry: cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY

so, had the mission gone tits-up and bin laden survived, it would have bean the SEALs fault, right?


Sure, no one on the right blames Carter.
 
2012-03-02 11:26:57 AM
But can Democrats dunk?
 
2012-03-02 11:27:07 AM
Meh, I think Obama has done some things wrong foreign policy wise, especially where Israel and Iran are concerned, but as far as the "War On Terror" goes, I think he's done a pretty decent job. My problems with him are primarily on the domestic side of the fence.
 
2012-03-02 11:27:16 AM
Can someone please explain to me where the meme about Dems being weak on defense came from? Seriously, let's look at Dem presidents and think about what they did with regard to defense.

Roosevelt: won WWII, developed nukes. Enough said.
Truman: Used nukes, started war in Korea. Also responsible for the Berlin Airlift, aka "giving Stalin a HUGE middle finger."
Kennedy: Ordered Bay of Pigs, which failed, but not entirely Kennedy's fault (and certainly doesn't show cowardice or lack of aggression). Stared down Kruschev in the Cuban Missile Crisis, laid the groundwork for Vietnam.
LBJ: Escalated 'Nam. Bad idea, but again, does not show lack of aggression.
Carter: Chose to use Olympic boycotts to piss off USSR, canceled B-1 bomber. Ordered failed mission to rescue American hostages from Iran. He was kind of weak on defense, but the failed rescue mission wasn't his fault (or so some trolls would have you believe).
Clinton: Maintained no-fly zones over Iraq, fired missiles at OBL in Afghanistan, made the Serbs knock that shiat off in the Balkans. Set up an apparatus to hunt OBL, which was later dismantled by W. before 9/11.
Obama. Busted a cap in OBL's ass. Weakened al-Qeada through drone strikes and assassination. Brought around the best (realistically) possible end to the inherited-clusterfark that was Iraq.

So basically, you have a bunch of presidents who were clearly strong on defense, and then Carter, who was average-to-weak. As I said, I do NOT understand where that meme comes from. I would love if someone could explain that.
 
2012-03-02 11:27:22 AM

cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY


I love it that the Conservatives still can't bring themselves to even mention Obama's name when it comes to killing OBL. But you can bet if Bush would have got him they would still be fellating Bush today.
 
2012-03-02 11:27:27 AM

Aarontology: cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY

He ordered the operation, risked his entire presidency on it, and it succeeded thanks to the hard work of the SEALS. he didn't put it to the back burner and forget about him like the GOP did for eight years.


There was no risk. You never would have heard about a failure. Now pull your lips off 0bama please.
 
2012-03-02 11:27:51 AM

Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Republicans = 0
bin Ladens killed by Democrats = 1


bin Ladens killed thanks to policies supported by Republicans: 1
bin Ladens killed thanks to policies supported by Democrats: 0

if we had listened to Obama and other Democrats while Bush was in office, Obama would not have gotten the chance to step in and take advantage of years worth of work that started well before he was even a senator.
 
2012-03-02 11:28:44 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Then why doesn't credit for success lie with the same person?


Because black people can only be blamed for bad things, not given credit for good ones in cman's little world.

/And don't get your underwear in a knot, buddy. My justification in calling you a racist is every bit as well founded as your attempt to not acknowledge the President's role.
 
2012-03-02 11:29:17 AM

randomjsa: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Republicans = 0
bin Ladens killed by Democrats = 1

bin Ladens killed thanks to policies supported by Republicans: 1
bin Ladens killed thanks to policies supported by Democrats: 0

if we had listened to Obama and other Democrats while Bush was in office, Obama would not have gotten the chance to step in and take advantage of years worth of work that started well before he was even a senator.


Oh please, Bush would have never pulled the trigger on his party's favorite boogey man
 
2012-03-02 11:29:23 AM

randomjsa: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Republicans = 0
bin Ladens killed by Democrats = 1

bin Ladens killed thanks to policies supported by Republicans: 1
bin Ladens killed thanks to policies supported by Democrats: 0

if we had listened to Obama and other Democrats while Bush was in office, Obama would not have gotten the chance to step in and take advantage of years worth of work that started well before he was even a senator.


"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts, 3/13/02
 
2012-03-02 11:29:36 AM

HMS_Blinkin: So basically, you have a bunch of presidents who were clearly strong on defense, and then Carter, who was average-to-weak. As I said, I do NOT understand where that meme comes from. I would love if someone could explain that.


People who hate themselves tend to project their glaring insecurities onto others.
 
2012-03-02 11:30:28 AM

cman: If it were to fail, it would not have fallen on Obama's shoulders.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

People want to blame everything from gas prices to the smell of their dogs farts on Obama.
 
2012-03-02 11:30:38 AM

HMS_Blinkin: Can someone please explain to me where the meme about Dems being weak on defense came from? Seriously, let's look at Dem presidents and think about what they did with regard to defense.

Roosevelt: won WWII, developed nukes. Enough said.
Truman: Used nukes, started war in Korea. Also responsible for the Berlin Airlift, aka "giving Stalin a HUGE middle finger."
Kennedy: Ordered Bay of Pigs, which failed, but not entirely Kennedy's fault (and certainly doesn't show cowardice or lack of aggression). Stared down Kruschev in the Cuban Missile Crisis, laid the groundwork for Vietnam.
LBJ: Escalated 'Nam. Bad idea, but again, does not show lack of aggression.
Carter: Chose to use Olympic boycotts to piss off USSR, canceled B-1 bomber. Ordered failed mission to rescue American hostages from Iran. He was kind of weak on defense, but the failed rescue mission wasn't his fault (or so some trolls would have you believe).
Clinton: Maintained no-fly zones over Iraq, fired missiles at OBL in Afghanistan, made the Serbs knock that shiat off in the Balkans. Set up an apparatus to hunt OBL, which was later dismantled by W. before 9/11.
Obama. Busted a cap in OBL's ass. Weakened al-Qeada through drone strikes and assassination. Brought around the best (realistically) possible end to the inherited-clusterfark that was Iraq.

So basically, you have a bunch of presidents who were clearly strong on defense, and then Carter, who was average-to-weak. As I said, I do NOT understand where that meme comes from. I would love if someone could explain that.


In Republicanspeak, "strong on defense" means funneling unfathomable amounts of our nation's treasury to defense contractors, with whom many of them have investments, political favors owed, and/or cushy post-public service jobs waiting for them. When you see it this way, their seemingly ideologically inconsistent positions suddenly start to make sense.
 
2012-03-02 11:31:40 AM

LeftOfLiberal: FlashHarry: cman: Aarontology: bin Ladens killed by Marines = 0
bin Ladens killed by Navy SEALS = 1

FTFY

so, had the mission gone tits-up and bin laden survived, it would have bean the SEALs fault, right?

Sure, no one on the right blames Carter.


Funnily enough, no one on the right blames Reagan for the Marine barracks bombing in Beirut, or the subsequent "cut and run" from Lebanon. There seems to be something similar about all of the presidents they blame for military mishaps, but I can't quite put my finger on it...
 
2012-03-02 11:32:16 AM

randomjsa: bin Ladens killed thanks to policies supported by Republicans: 1


Yes, as you can clearly see from the video I posted above (and I'll be happy to find more for you), Republicans were strongly in favor of Obama's approach to killing bin Laden. You are so full of shiat.
 
Displayed 50 of 218 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report