So who won the third and final presidential debate last night at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida? Mitt Romney certainly edged out Barack Obama during the 90-minute battle over foreign policy. Obama got no real help from Bob Schieffer, the moderator, unlike in earlier debates. He attacked Romney as not being ready to be Commander in Chief several times, but the arguments did not score. Romney achieved what he needed to do. First, to end any propaganda about him being a war monger, ready to bomb Iran on Day One of his administration. Mitt skillfully disarmed Obama twice, beginning with Romney′s best line of the night, ″We cannot kill our way out of this mess.″ This nullified Obama′s spiking the ball about killing Osama bin Laden and other Al Qaeda leaders. Romney also parried well accusing Obama of using personal attacks to cover his lack of an agenda for the next four years. Now we shall see how this impacts the upcoming presidential polls for the remaining two weeks.
Obama tried to torpedo Romney about his charge that our Navy has fewer ships now than in 1917. In response, Obama said that Romney does not understand our military, since we no longer use ″horses and bayonets.″ This backfired, since it shows how little Obama knows about our military. To begin with, we still issue our soldiers and Marines bayonets, our rifles still have bayonet rings and our troops train to use them. As for horses, I′m sorry to remind Obama that our Navy has never really been very big on using horses in the first place. The Army is the branch that typically had cavalry. Before World War One, the U.S. Army only had a standing force of about 35,000 troops, mostly infantry and artillery, as well as support and logistics units. Oddly enough, in our first war of the 21st Century, the Defense Department had to scramble to get horse cavalry equipment to our special ops troops in Afghanistan working with the Northern Alliance against Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
This whole argument reminds me of one of my favorite books and movies, ″Starship Troopers.″ One soldier during training complains about why he needs to learn to use a knife when facing an enemy who just has to push a button to fire a nuke? The ever wise Sergeant Zim has the recruit put his hand on the target and proceeds to throw a knife, impaling the hand. Zim tells the other soldiers, ″If you disable your enemy with a knife, he will not be able to push a button!″ Then Zim calls for a medic. Hah-Hah! Oh how true, Sgt. Zim! But what else can we expect from Obama, whose Democrat Party showed pictures of Russian naval vessels on the jumbo screen during their alleged salute to our armed forces? Speaking of the Russians, Romney also delivered a good zinger on Obama about his ′secret message′ to Putin about being more flexible after the elections.
Pundits will argue that Romney played it safe last night. That he avoided battling Obama on many issues, such as Libya. Apparently, Romney decided himself that he would not allow himself to get suckered into any fights. A wise strategy straight out of Sun Tzu′s ″The Art of War.″ If I were to use a football analogy, each debate, including the second between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden, were quarters of the same game. In the first quarter, Romney racked up a huge lead, pounding Obama 21 to 0. Ryan added points making it a 31 to 3 game at half-time. In the previous debate, both teams played a fairly even game, ending with a score of 38 to 10. Last night was the fourth quarter, where Romney managed to run the clock out putting up two field goals to Obama′s one. So Mitt Romney won the overall debate game 44 to 13, sending Barack Obama to the showers to sulk.
If you ask who won the third presidential debate last night, Mitt Romney clearly edged out Barack Obama at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida. Obama got no help at all from moderator Bob Schieffer, who kept the playing field fairly even. With just two more weeks of campaigning to go, we will now see how this series of debates impacts the upcoming presidential polls. In my opinion, Romney still has momentum on his side and we can expect to see major shifts in the swing states, as well as other in other states, like Pennsylvania, which Obama may now lose his lead in. If you missed it last night, you may watch the full debate video below.
October 23rd, 2012 at 7:10 am
Mitt the beached fish lost this one. The man simply can’t stop flip-flopping on just about every issue. Here’s one example that comes to mind, straight from last night’s debate:
“We can’t kill our way out of this mess.”
2 minutes later after asking for his strategy:
“Well, my strategy is pretty straight forward, which is to go after the bad guys, to make sure we interrupt them, to kill them, to take them out of the picture.”
October 23rd, 2012 at 7:18 am
Also, did you see how Fox was trying to spin the whole bayonet comment, saying that the military still in fact uses them (Obama never said they didn’t use them, just that they use fewer).
Fox – by idiots, for idiots.
October 23rd, 2012 at 7:44 am
If we are in a war that has devolved to bayonet use, we have lost.
That means hand to hand combat with China. We lose that war, but it is also a method of combat that is irrelevant.
Your next warriors will be manning keyboards.
October 23rd, 2012 at 8:28 am
Nice try Snow.
Romney knows killing the bad guys takes them out of a picture that holds other players that are more cooperative.
And then he wants to give aid to those players, which has never worked.
But still, your statement is asinine and cherry picked.
And please, everytime you moonbats accuse someone of flipping you look like the biggest hypocrites ever.
Barry has held two positions on so much sht I’ve lost count.
And no, we do not have “fewer bayonet’s”, they are standard issue to all Marines which we have many more of now than when they were horseback.
================
@ Buzz.
Who is suggesting such a stupid scenario ?
Maybe we could use really big slingshots and moonbats as ammo ?
October 23rd, 2012 at 10:18 am
Yes Buzz and Snow, our president of the free world reduced to one liners. What I heard in the debate is that Obama has 40 ships less than the navy wants. But even that is minutia nobody cares about. I’m sure Americans will concur with you (and care a lot) that Obama is knowledgeable about bayonets.
Polls are moving more toward Romney this morning. Looks like he’s going to be the next president.
October 23rd, 2012 at 10:44 am
Mr. Romney won. It was a contest to see who can be the better President. That’s Mr. Romney. Obama did show himself to be the bigger smartass but who needs that. His little pissant comment about having ships that planes can land on and other ships that can live underwater was petty.
October 23rd, 2012 at 1:32 pm
The only way we can fix our foreign policy is with more green jobs and union teachers.
Obama made this point several times.
Therefor he won
October 23rd, 2012 at 3:04 pm
Bob Schieffer did a pretty good job. He asked questioned and got out of the way. He kept the debate on track.
Most Amercans want a leader who knows what to do. Obama is certainly not that leader. Cannot be a positive influence on the planet if you economy is in the toilet. Romney knows this and he is consistant about that through out the three debates. Flip Flop where? Romney says things the liberal do not like or want to hear. Tough!!!
October 23rd, 2012 at 4:36 pm
The problem with using our economy as a foreign policy talking point is that its not a doctrine that defines ones policy. True, you need money to execute the intentions behind the doctrine/policy.
But, if our economy is going to fix anything in the middle east green jobs and more union teachers will have no effect, if any, for generations.
Funding science and research at the college level would make more sense.
October 24th, 2012 at 4:55 am
Patrick,
Here’s a nice graphic showing the active carriers around the world
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/carriers-2012.gif
The first two columns are the US, the last ONE column is everyone else in the world. Our military is larger than the next ten countries combined and we have the most advanced technology. We can easily send drones across the world and we have over 5,000 nuclear warheads.
I think we’re pretty good now.
I know the right loves to profit off of war (at the expense of national debt and American lives). Lehman, one of Romney’s advisors (and former Navy secretary) profited millions by building ships. It’s like the whole deal with the Abram tanks. We have thousands just sitting around and the Army has stated that they don’t want any more, yet congress is pressing the pentagon to accept the production of more tanks.
October 24th, 2012 at 5:27 am
Snow, if the Army only had about 35,000 troops, with bayonets, before WWI, and we now have some 561,000, then we actually have more bayonets today then back then.
Patrick is correct in that the Navy has fewer ships than they are asking for, which is still fewer ships than we need to cover all oceans. Obama has changed our doctrine where we are no longer capable of fighting wars on two continents. The end result is that our ability to project power is diminished and those serving in the Navy will have to remain at sea for longer periods, straining personnel and equipment.
October 24th, 2012 at 5:32 am
Dont worry Snow.
Barry will sell those tanks to Syria and Egypt.
“I know the right loves to profit off of war (at the expense of national debt and American lives).”
What are you ? Some 60s reject ?
Are any of your thoughts original ?
Before you cop a nut and stain your Geranimals I suggest you try to make sense out of Barrys stance on military spending.
“First of all, the sequester is not something I proposed, it’s something that Congress proposed,” Obama said. “It will not happen.
Sequestration defense cuts were “not me, that is Congress.”
Guess what Snow.
He signed on to the deal.
“It will not happen.” ?
Of course it will because unless Barry backs down and totally caves, he will allow any defense cuts to go forward as long as the rich get bent over in the name of “fairness.”
John McCain;
“I was astonished, I almost fell out of my chair when the president said, ‘Don’t worry, sequestration won’t happen.’ We’ve been begging the president to sit down with us to avoid what his own secretary of defense said would be a devastating blow to our national security. He just said, ‘Don’t worry, sequestration won’t happen.’ He’s not a dictator yet,”
October 24th, 2012 at 5:40 am
“The first two columns are the US, the last ONE column is everyone else in the world. Our military is larger than the next ten countries combined and we have the most advanced technology. We can easily send drones across the world and we have over 5,000 nuclear warheads.
I think we’re pretty good now.”
Thats alot like Barry saying “at some point you’ve made enough money”
Lets level the playing field and cut our fleet in half.
Snow would feel better
October 24th, 2012 at 5:44 am
“We can easily send drones across the world”
Not !
They need air craft carriers and bases in close proximity to launch from.
October 24th, 2012 at 5:47 am
No, I think we should maintain what we have. When you have more than the next largest 10 countries COMBINED then I’d say you’re pretty good. Just one of those aircraft carriers would pay for something like 400,000 college educations!
We have over 5,000 nukes, and we aren’t afraid to use ‘em!
October 24th, 2012 at 6:35 am
“Maintain what we have” and being the tech leaders are two different things.
After a while it makes sense to buy a new car instead of duct taping your Pacer together.
We need to operate at higher volumes since our allies are cutting production and our foes are increasing theirs.
Right now were very vulnerable should some diabolical scheme arise that calls for us to fight two battles at once.
Look, you arent even aware of bayonets being standard issue today, or that equipment overstocks are given/sold/loaned to allies if as part of a defense coalition they might need them. You’re also not aware that drones are not capable of global reach without carriers or bases so you have no business trying to sound intelligent on military and security policy.
Any think tank would boot your ass to the curb in a heart beat.
Do yourself a favor and stick to your feel good social issues
October 24th, 2012 at 6:35 am
“Maintain what we have” and being the tech leaders are two different things.
After a while it makes sense to buy a new car instead of duct taping your Pacer together.
We need to operate at higher volumes since our allies are cutting production and our foes are increasing theirs.
Right now were very vulnerable should some diabolical scheme arise that calls for us to fight two battles at once.
Look, you arent even aware of bayonets being standard issue today, or that equipment overstocks are given/sold/loaned to allies if as part of a defense coalition they might need them. You’re also not aware that drones are not capable of global reach without carriers or bases so you have no business trying to sound intelligent on military and security policy.
Any think tank would boot your ass to the curb in a heart beat.
Do yourself a favor and stick to your feel good social issues
October 24th, 2012 at 6:37 am
Can I abort one of my twins ?
October 24th, 2012 at 7:04 am
Micky, you’re just twisting sh*t.
It’s obvious that the bayonet comment Obama made was in jest and he was saying they have less horses and bayonets in use. This is obviously talking about use in battle, not during martial arts training (MCMAP). So STFU already.
I said we have drones that can reach across the world and I’m absolutely correct. HALE (high altitude, long endurance) drones (such as the Boeing Phantom Eye) have an indefinite range.
Low let’s see your little tap-dancing game.
October 24th, 2012 at 7:37 am
IN FACT, we’ve had drones since the 80s that have enough range to reach across the planet. The Boeing Condor (developed in the late 80s) has a 20,000 mile range!
And I’m the idiot who knows nothing about the military? LOL
October 24th, 2012 at 7:40 am
And yes I realize the Condor was not used in military operations, I’m just saying we’ve had the tech since the 80s.
October 24th, 2012 at 8:13 am
“Micky, you’re just twisting sh*t.
It’s obvious that the bayonet comment Obama made was in jest and he was saying they have less horses and bayonets in use. ”
Yeah right.
Moron in Chief used it as an attack on Romney to somehow make look like an idiot.
How’d that work out ?
“This is obviously talking about use in battle, not during martial arts training (MCMAP). So STFU already.”
How the fck do you know whats obvious ?
If you’re right, that just reinforces my claim that you’re both idiots who know nothing of our militarys most basic weapons.
And yeah, what is obvious is that you somehow think mentioning an obsolete aircraft shtcanned because it sucked makes your point.
We “had the tech” is hardly the same as you saying we have drones that can reach across the globe.
No we do not, its in a museum.
The drones we have require the components I mentioned.
You were wrong, again.
Boeing referred to the Condor as having “lack of stealth.” Along with its large size and slow speed, made it too vulnerable for use in military operations.”
I said nothing about bayonets used in training.
So dont talk to me about twisting sht
Its a fact thousands (Buck M9) were standard issue in the last couple years alone.
Once again, proof that your heads up your ass.
Quit while you’re ahead, have some self esteem.
The point is that if you’re going to be a smart ass with someone or attack them on their lack of understanding a topic its a good idea to know wtf you’re talking about.
Since both you and Barry are guilty of saying anything without knowing wtf you’re talking about, not even knowing how to pronounce “Colonel”, then its you and him who should shut the fck up.
October 24th, 2012 at 8:33 am
Micky the MQ-4 Global Hawk has a range of over 15,000 miles! LOL!
How the fck do you know whats obvious ?
Because of the context. It’s really not that hard to figure out. Romney was arguing we need more military power and that we need more ships, Obama responds with the horses and bayonets comment. You’re a dense one, sweetie.
October 24th, 2012 at 9:29 am
“Because of the context. It’s really not that hard to figure out.”
Context is subjective.
You’re an idiot.
Heres the proof.
First you said we had drones that can reach across the planet.
Not one drone you’ve mentioned has the range to cross the globe.
Then you brought up the Condor but researched it too late so you thought covering your ass in post #21 would go un-noticed.
“And yes I realize the Condor was not used in military operations, I’m just saying we’ve had the tech since the 80s.”
Wrong asshopper.
The tech you brandished so foolishly is in a museum collecting dust.
We are not using the flawed tech of the Condor therefor we dont have it.
“Romney was arguing we need more military power and that we need more ships, Obama responds with the horses and bayonets comment. You’re a dense one, sweetie.”
Huh ?
Me dense ?
I’m not the fckin idjut who couldnt respond without getting it completly wrong.
Now, ya little fudgepacker, rumprustler, fanny phantom.
Is Obama going to cut military spending or not ?
This is the crux of the matter that you’ve danced around for two hours now.
Tell me.
Will he stop the sequestration he actually signed on to ?
Jan 05, 2012
Obama announced a new military strategy on Thursday that will cut the Pentagon budget by hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade and another 500 billion in cuts awaits a congressional vote.
Now dickhead says it wont happen.
You figure it ass hole. I’m not the one bobbin on his knob
October 24th, 2012 at 9:57 am
“This backfired, since it shows how little Obama knows about our military. To begin with, we still issue our soldiers and Marines bayonets, our rifles still have bayonet rings and our troops train to use them. As for horses, I′m sorry to remind Obama that our Navy has never really been very big on using horses in the first place. ”
Little does Barry know that the initial invasion of Afghanistan was done by special ops on horseback because that was the most viable means of traveling the worst terrain on earth.
You’d think the largest owner of Unicorns would know this.
Come to think of it.
The war would of been over long ago if we bought a couple hundred thousand camels and dressed our troops up like camel jockeys.