The third debate

Mitt Romney's performance in the third debate can be summed up in four words:
"Yeah, what he said."

I started a new debate thread before I saw yours.

Quote :

BREAKING: CBS NEWS INSTANT POLL Who won the #Debate? OBAMA: 53%; ROMNEY: 23%, TIE: 24% (Margin of Error: 4%; Sample Size: 521)

These numbers are officially worse than Obama's in the first debate.

That's OK, the only conservative here will have absolutely nothing to say about Willard's ass whipping.

This One Picture Sums Up Mitt Romney's Foreign Policy Knowledge

Quote :

In a sane US journalism world, where forced and desperate centrism for ratings would not be tolerated, this would be the lead story of the day and the entire rest of the week.

Instead, it's just swept under the rug by the David Gregory's and Chuck Todd's of the world.

It really is wonderful to see Romney's 8th grade study night on Sunday evening produce one of many idiotic lines like this on Monday, October 22, 2012.

I guess John Bolton, Dan Senor, Donald Rumsfeld and Sir Cheney from afar and his other neocon advisers most have gotten their Halliburton maps mixed up.

The next time the DNC chooses a spokeswoman, they should probably make her submit to either a drug test or an IQ test.




http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/331411/debbie-wasserman-schultzs-alternate-reality-nathaniel-botwinick#


Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s Alternate Reality

By Nathaniel Botwinick
October 23, 2012 1:42 P.M.


DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz seems to reside in a different reality than the rest of us. After the debate last night she said:

What I was surprised about Greta, during the entire section of the debate on the Middle East, Mitt Romney didn’t bring up Israel once and I think it just shows he isn’t committed to Israel as he says he is and has really only used the issue as a political opportunity.

happy jack wrote:

edge540 wrote:

That's OK, the only conservative here will have absolutely nothing to say about Willard's ass whipping.

[b]I listened to almost all of the debate on the radio and felt that Obama came off better overall than Romney last night.
But hardly an "ass whipping".

Had you been watching on TV you would have seen your boy Mittens sweating like he was Richard Nixon.

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

Had you been watching on TV you would have seen your boy Mittens sweating like he was Richard Nixon.

[b]And that means what?

Figure it out yourself,troll

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

Had you been watching on TV you would have seen your boy Mittens sweating like he was Richard Nixon.

[b]And that means what?

Figure it out yourself,troll

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

You spend an inordinate amount of time whining about women's contraception being covered under insurance yet you are strangely silent when it comes to erectile dysfunction drugs. I don't recall you ever making an issue of that. Any explanation for that?

[b]I don’t recall the issue ever coming up, but now that it has, what are you asking me in regard to erectile dysfunction drugs?

Too stupid to figure it out? How sad

My, my, my.
I’ve asked you two sincere, straightforward, innocuous questions today, and you have responded with nothing but nastiness.
Why so testy?
Are you having trouble with your ladyparts again?

happy jack wrote:

edge540 wrote:

That's OK, the only conservative here will have absolutely nothing to say about Willard's ass whipping.

I listened to almost all of the debate on the radio and felt that Obama came off better overall than Romney last night.
But hardly an "ass whipping".

Oh, well then maybe he got his "clock cleaned."
That's according to your hero Rush Limbaugh:

Quote :

"At any rate, something else that I find fascinating. You know, the biggest problem, well, not the biggest problem -- one of the complaints, the biggest rap on Romney that we're hearing from the media this morning is he agreed with Obama too much. In fact, a lot of people on our side thought he agreed with Obama too much. A lot of people on our side didn't like that debate last night, folks, I'll just tell you. If my circle of friends is any indication, a lot of people thought Romney got his clock cleaned, didn't like it at all, think the election's lost. I'm not kidding you."

Why Romney’s “Route to the sea” gaffe is way worse than you think

Quote :

In last night’s debate, Mitt Romney said this:

“Syria is Iran’s only ally in the Arab world. It’s their route to the sea.”

This is not the first time Romney has said this. In March, he said, “Maybe one of the few bright spots in the Middle East developments in the last year has been the rising of the people in Syria against Assad. Obviously, as you know, Syria is Iran’s only Arab ally in the region. Syria is the route that allows Iran to supply Hezbollah with weapons in Lebanon. Syria is Iran’s route to the sea …” When he said that in March, the Washington Post called him on it, but apparently his campaign ignored the correction.

Romney’s assertion that Iran is landlocked is wrong at several levels, but even the fact checkers and press are ignoring the truly alarming reason why this wrongness must be taken into account when considering Mitt Romney’s ability to manage US foreign policy.

. . .

Remember how Afghanistan and Pakistan are next to Iran, to the right? Afghanistan is where Osama bin Laden (no relation) originally hid out, US forces cornering him in the early days of the war, neighboring Pakistan is where he was killed by special forces units sent in by President Obama (no relation). Why was Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan to begin with? He’s from Saudi Arabia, why was he not there? The US has very little military and intelligence presence in the most populous Islamic nation in the world, which is all covered with Jungle, why not hide out there? He was in Afghanistan because Afghanistan was his second, adopted home, because Osama bin Laden was a freedom fighter there, working with the Mujahideen there, which in turn was a resistant movement fighting against the Soviet Union, which had invaded Afghanistan in late 1979.

Why did the Soviet Union invade Afghanistan and fight a ten year long war there, which happened to spawn a resistance movement supported by the United States under the Reagan Administration, which ultimately led to the rise of the radical Al-Qaeda led by resistance fighter Osama bin Laden? It is extremely complicated and there are many levels at which to consider this, but one overarching theme that has influenced Russia and Soviet policy in the region is this: Pre-Soviet Russia and the USSR lacked sufficient routes to the sea that were winter-free and with good access to the Indian and Pacific oceans. The history of Russia and the USSR can be partly written in reference to this one thing. Having said that, it isn’t just the route to the sea thing, but also influence and control in the whole South Asia region. The point is, that for hundreds of years, Russian and Soviet diplomatic and military activities have involved poking around in, occasionally invading bits of, and working out deals with all of the nations to the south and along or near either the Indian Ocean or a sea that leads to the Indian Ocean. This is still going on (remember the invasion of Georgia a few years ago?).

So here’s the thing. Long term, over centuries. Russian and Soviet mucking around along this southern frontier has been a key factor in all military, economic, and political considerations of the region. Most countries bordering the Indian Ocean directly or indirectly have received some kind of attention from the Russians or Soviets, and this has been of great concern to the rest of the world. One of the most significant events of the last half of the last century was the ten year long war in Afghanistan. Had that war ended in Afghanistan becoming part of the USSR, or a good ally, then guess what would have happened next.

Iran would today be Russia’s “Route to the Sea” in the south.

And the struggle to determine that outcome gave birth to modern geopolitics in the region, to Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, to the dicy situation in Pakistan, and to the radical faction of the global Islamic movement that people like Mitt Romney like to scare us all with.

Yet, he seems to know nothing about it, because if he had even a middle schooler’s level knowledge of history and geography of the region it would be utterly impossible to not know that Iran is a key coastal country of southern Asia, and that this geographical position is key in Iran’s role in geopolitics of the present and last centuries.

And this guy wants to be president.

happy jack wrote:

edge540 wrote:

Oh, well then maybe he got his "clock cleaned."
That's according to your hero Rush Limbaugh:

No, that's not according to Rush Limbaugh - that is according to the people Rush Limbaugh is citing.
Pay attention first, edge - post later.

No problem, according to your hero Rush Limbaugh a "lot of people" on his side and a "lot of friends" in his circle said that your boy Mittens got his "clock cleaned."
That's the weasel way of projecting.
"They"/Rush say "clock cleaned," I say ass whipping.

Pretty much the sanme thing, IMHO.

Yeah that's funny stuff.