Skip to comments.TRENDING: 'Horses and bayonets' shows Obama's debate strategy
Posted on 10/22/2012 10:30:02 PM PDT by Qbert
(CNN) - Perhaps it only makes sense that a candidate who prepared for a presidential debate near Colonial Williamsburg would choose to slam Mitt Romney's plan for more Navy ships by using the phrase "horses and bayonets."
President Barack Obama's quip - meant to make the point that modern warfare doesn't require the type of equipment it did in the past - appeared part of a larger strategy of casting his opponent as stuck in a time warp on important issues. And Republicans, seeing an opening, are making sure shipbuilders just down the road from President Barack Obama's Virginia prep location are aware of the president's suggestion their industry is a thing of the past.
Obama made the jab Monday at his final debate with Mitt Romney.
"You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916," Obama said in a pointed jab at the GOP nominee. "Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets because the nature of our military's changed."
He continued, "We had these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines. So the question is not a game of battleship where we're counting ships. It's 'What are our capabilities?'"
That was in response to an allegation from Romney that "our Navy is smaller now than at any time since 1917."
"The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission," the Republican candidate continued. "We're now at under 285. We're headed down to the low 200s if we go through a sequestration. That's unacceptable to me."
Yet Republicans say Obama's lumping together of Navy ships with "horses and bayonets" could harm him in the key battleground of Virginia, where some of the Navy's largest shipbuilding...
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
"We had these things called aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines."
What a childish embarrassment.
So snarky and condescending. Just like every lib I have ever met.
But did Obama call Romney a silly English pig-dog, threaten to fart in his general direction, or call Romney a wiper of other people’s bottoms?
That seems to be about the level of Obama’s discourse...
King Arthur comes face to face with the silly Frenchman.
oh, this was Obama’s best argument of the night according to the big brains over at DU.
They summarize the three debates with pictures of Big Bird, a binder, and a horseback soldier that looks like Pacho Villa holding a short sword (I guess they figure it’s bayonet-ish enough)
Which tells you about all you need to know about who won the debates, the intellectual lever of the DUmp, and who will be our next President.
Yet Republicans say Obama’s lumping together of Navy ships with “horses and bayonets” could harm him in the key battleground of Virginia...”
...this is ridiculous. I hope it’s true but I can’t see anyone casting their vote based on this stupid line. Especially in Virginia.
I half expected him to then say: "And they have these gizmos and thingamajigs on them that go boom!"
“So snarky and condescending. Just like every lib I have ever met.”
Oh, you don’t have to tell me. I work in Hollywood and surrounded by these scum bastards.
How does one control the blue waters with fewer than 300 ships?
Obama has declared war on Par 5s. No need for horses or bayonets.. unless the out of bounds are mined, then a bayonet could still come in handy retrieving his errant shot(s). I guess a horse could pull the caisson with his beer cooler and freezer bag full of shaved ice and ice cream.
In the opening weeks of the U.S. war in Afghanistan American Special Forces soldiers rode into battle on horseback alongside their Northern Alliance cohorts.
"...this is ridiculous. I hope its true but I cant see anyone casting their vote based on this stupid line. Especially in Virginia."
It's not simply the line- it's everything behind it. Sequestration is going to cause havoc in VA.
Little barry bastard boy gave responses at the level of his supporters, so guttering his jibes was right on target for whom he expected to sway. ... And that is telling, since at this late date he shouldn’t have to be trying to get his dead-heads to vote for him. Little petulent barry boy behaved on par with his low nature and responded just as a drug-addled liberal would expect. Even axelgreasy can’t polish that turd!
"oh, this was Obamas best argument of the night according to the big brains over at DU."
That may play well with Obama's base... but it's starting to become very apparent to almost everybody else why Washington has become so nasty and divisive the last four years.
The question is, are Voters so stupid as to think that response had anything to do with the fact that our Navy says it needs 300+ Ships and Pharaoh Obama thinks 200 Ships is just about right?
Was Obama an Admiral? I think the closest he gets to that Rank is when he eats Captain Crunch for breakfast when Moochelle is on one of her Vacations.
I am sure this will go over well like Big Bird, Binders, etc. They keep looking for a silver bullet.
The navy doesn’t need horses or bayonets, but yes it needs more ships. Including the types of “things” Obama mentioned- more subs and aircraft carriers, as well as destroyers, anti missile ships, etc.
I never saw the debates as I was on set for a production company. I actually thought horses and bayonets’ was what obama called Moo-chelle...
"we have fewer horses and bayonets ..." but ... "we have aircraft carriers where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines."
Therefore, he argues, a trillion dollar cut to the military budget will not hurt.
Not sure I follow the logic. Is he saying bayonets and horses cost more than nuclear submarines????
It was typical Obama, he said we don’t need horses and bayonets anymore, we need ships- and people will fall for this when Romney’s whole point was we need more ships?