@heckofajobbrownie said:

You want a bone?

It's not really throwing me a bone to admit you are wrong.

the Navy said they needed more ships.

Obama pledged to cut the military even more.

Libya reminded us that we don't live in Obama's Kumbaya world.

It's a foreign policy debate.

No bone necessary.

It's a valid point.

WSS

It's the economy StuPiD!

Now get back to work. I've got stuff to write too.

WSS

These are the gray areas we live in. These are very difficult choices. Obama makes most of them personally.

Me? I couldn't sleep at night knowing I'd just killed someone's children, or hit the wrong party by mistake. I'd just have to go off somewhere and fucking kill myself.

@heckofajobbrownie said:

He's right. We kill lots of innocent people this way. And we know we're going to kill innocent people when we do this. It's immoral. Why do you think I'm arguing this with you? I've been saying this for years.

It's also an effective way to take out terrorist targets with little threat to American lives. These decisions are why presidents go gray and don't sleep very well.

Obama, like Bush before him, is a murderer.

But now it's cool?

Frankly the left hasn't been saying it for years.

They said it when Bush was president but then they quit four years ago, except maybe a subdued whisper on occasion.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/05/10/scarborough_on_us_drone_attacks_in_pakistan_we_are_just_dropping_bombs_and_killing_families_.html

He's right. We kill lots of innocent people this way. And we know we're going to kill innocent people when we do this. It's immoral. Why do you think I'm arguing this with you? I've been saying this for years.

It's also an effective way to take out terrorist targets with little threat to American lives. These decisions are why presidents go gray and don't sleep very well.

Obama, like Bush before him, is a murderer.

@heckofajobbrownie said:

Interesting comments about the drone issue from Mark Bowden.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/05/10/scarborough_on_us_drone_attacks_in_pakistan_we_are_just_dropping_bombs_and_killing_families_.html

@westside-steve said:

Are you telling me that no one in the Navy said that they needed 300 + ships and they only have 200 +?

Are you saying that was not in the debate, that it never ever happened?

There is a possibility I didn't hear that.

But I believe I did.

And if I did you are blowing smoke. Nothing more. Just like your president.

WSS

Steve, what I'm telling you is that you don't get why Romney is pushing the 1917 line. If you'd like to think it's because of a real policy disagreement about defense procurement levels (every agency, military or non-military, always requests more money than they eventually receive in appropriations) you're even more clueless about this stuff than I thought you were.

Romney doesn't mention it in every speech because housewives in Ohio need to bone up on defense procurement levels. He does it for two reasons: 1) to make people think the military is being "gutted" under Obama, which it isn't, and 2) to appeal to the crucial swing state he needs to win where they make all of the Navy's ships, and whose firms supply lots of the Navy's hardware.

Yes, Virginia, it's about Virginia.

And it's why Romney - comically - is now saying he was for offering government's plan for Detroit. That was my favorite Etch-a-Sketch of the evening. Amazing. From "IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye." To 'I was for the bailout.' It's hysterical how little he needs to completely mislead.

He's something else.

Are you saying that was not in the debate, that it never ever happened?

There is a possibility I didn't hear that.

But I believe I did.

And if I did you are blowing smoke. Nothing more. Just like your president.

WSS

in other words, when Obama says we use fewer bayonets and horses, and the Republicans get up the next morning and rally around the talking point that "We still use bayonets!" it's not much of a rebuttal, is it? Because he never claimed we didn't still use bayonets. He claimed we use fewer.

Here's the quote: "You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed."

...See? Nice try though. Hack.

@westside-steve said:

Because someone in power somewhere within the Navy said they needed more ships?

Like I said?

How could you take it differently?

By the way the Marines still use Bayonets.

WSS

Haha. No, it's not because the Navy is hobbled by its lack of ships and needs to return the total to 1917 levels. That's not what it is.

It's because they make those ships in Newport News, Virginia. It's because the Virginia suburbs are littered with defense contracting firms. It's just about votes in Virginia.

You actually took that one on face value? Jeez. Come on, man.

@westside-steve said:

Apparently so.

And right after that comes my response.

I see the pattern.

WSS

And my contempt for Obama is nothing worse than your contempt for Mitt Romney.

and your constant accusation that I can't see the big difference between 2 similar act by 2 different parties is laughable and an excuse for your own hypocrisy.

WSS

@heckofajobbrownie said:

If you could characterize my or anyone's position on the left even remotely accurately this would be a lot easier. It's always contempt first, some more contempt second, mischaracterizations third, and brain last.

Apparently so.

And right after that comes my response.

I see the pattern.

WSS

Like I said?

How could you take it differently?

By the way the Marines still use Bayonets.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

And Obama's favorite lap dog yelping about Romney pandering???

Now that's hilarious.

And sure I understand grey areas.

If a Republican Administration does something its satans own work.

When Obama does it's just wonderful.

WSS

If you could characterize my or anyone's position on the left even remotely accurately this would be a lot easier. It's always contempt first, some more contempt second, mischaracterizations third, and brain last.

@westside-steve said:

Oh by the way I thought the debate was a draw.

Sorry if I sound like a left wing crank there.

I guess I am a pole smoking left wing fag, huh?

But seriously I'm not quite sure what Navy ships line struck you as funny. I watched the whole thing and cat exactly remember which 1. Sorry.

The fact that the Navy wanted 300 and some odd ships and all they have is 200 and something?

The horses and bayonets line?

I thought that was a great line even though it had no real point.

WSS

No, it's the line that "Our Navy is smaller now than any time since 1917." And Obama's line has a clear point: that the number of ships in the Navy now compared to 1917 is a completely irrelevant comparison. Much like comparing the number of horses or bayonets.

But why is Romney flogging the idea that the Navy needs more ships? Think. And remember: this is Mitt Romney we're talking about.

Now that's hilarious.

And sure I understand grey areas.

If a Republican Administration does something its satans own work.

When Obama does it's just wonderful.

WSS

Sorry if I sound like a left wing crank there.

I guess I am a pole smoking left wing fag, huh?

But seriously I'm not quite sure what Navy ships line struck you as funny. I watched the whole thing and cat exactly remember which 1. Sorry.

The fact that the Navy wanted 300 and some odd ships and all they have is 200 and something?

The horses and bayonets line?

I thought that was a great line even though it had no real point.

WSS

I'm explaining to you why your use of the word "indiscriminate" makes you sound like a crank. And a left wing crank at that. They're not indiscriminate. And if you can't tell from my two dozen or so posts on the subject, I'm not a big fan of drone strikes. But I also understand the trade offs. But you don't do gray areas so well, so preach away.

Nor am I upset that Romney pandered to women voters last night. All Romney does is pander to voters. He's never done anything else in his entire political career. That's what makes him so special.

Any guess at the Navy ships line? Why do you think he uses that one?

@heckofajobbrownie said:

It doesn't deserve much else. I enjoyed it.

Because in your own adolescent way you think it's funny to be at obnoxious ignorant asshole.

That is actually a hallmark of the left.

WSS

So to be clear, you are upset that Romney wants to appeal to women voters, correct?

The stupid bitches who don't want to send their sons to Afghanistan how to get their ass shot off so Obama can thump his chest?

And I should be astounded, but I'm not, that you support the drone strikes knowing how many innocent people are being killed.

Again for nothing.

At least I can speak out when Romney does something I don't like.

I was watching Morning Joe this morning and was a little stunned to hear the usual round table from the left, the far left and the fringe left spouting rubbish like it's better to kill children there then let them kill children here.

And kill them before they kill us.

So I'm the crank?

Frankly I'm less concerned with Romney pandering to women then you and Obama pandering to Bunker.

Maybe they should have desecrated bin Laden's body or pissed on it so you guys could jump around like monkeys.

WSS