A little context to Romney’s proposed Navy expansion

As part of his plan to increase defense spending by $2 trillion over the next decade, Mitt Romney has repeatedly cited the factoid that the United States has fewer ships in its Navy today than it did in 1916, suggesting that our naval power has declined since then. He is also campaigning on a pledge to boost the number of ships from 285 to 313. saying “I will restore our Navy to the size needed to fulfill our missions by building 15 ships per year, including three submarines.”

Our current ship-building rate is 9 to 10 per year.

Two points regarding that issue:

1.) As it happens, two political scientists at Florida State University recently completed a historical study that compares naval strength among the major powers from 1865 to 2011. They conclude:

“In 1916, the U.S. controlled roughly 11% of the world’s naval power. This is an impressive number that ranks the US third in naval strength behind the UK (34%) and Germany (19%), and just ahead of France (10%). What about the US navy in 2011? In 2011, the US controlled roughly 50% of the world’s naval power putting it in a comfortable lead in naval power ahead of Russia (11%).”

In Romney’s view, the fact that 4 percent of the world’s population controls a mere 50 percent of the world’s naval firepower, almost five times the amount of the second-ranked power, leaves that 4 percent dangerously vulnerable.

2.) Why is Romney stressing naval expansion in his campaign remarks? Take a look at the map of swing states. Virginia is critical to his election hopes. Virginia is also home to Newport News Shipbuilding, which with 21,000 employees is a major contractor with the U.S. Navy. The additional submarines that Romney keeps mentioning are nuclear-powered Virginia-class subs, built in part at Newport News at a cost of $2.5 billion per copy.

In other words, Romney is dangling billions of taxpayers dollars and government-financed jobs in front of Virginia voters, hoping that it wins him the presidency.

– Jay Bookman

measure of state naval strength for all countries from 1865 to 2011detailing the

716 comments Add your comment

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 24th, 2012
3:37 pm

Jay

You got a dangling incomplete sentence at the end of this piece.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 24th, 2012
3:39 pm

Oh, and FIRSTIES!

Take that, DDR.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

October 24th, 2012
3:39 pm

How long before someone will falsely claim that Obama did not know that boats that go underwater are called “submarines”?

getalife

October 24th, 2012
3:39 pm

“measure of state naval strength for all countries from 1865 to 2011detailing the”

Lost line under your name and yes it is pandering to Virginia voters.

How does a 2 trillion increase to the military they don’t need cut spending?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

October 24th, 2012
3:41 pm

Mitt plays military cronyism….. while saying stupid things

Keep Up the Good Fight!

October 24th, 2012
3:42 pm

How will the 2 trillion be paid for? Oh wait, in conned world, its okay to add to deficits if its a Republican.

josef

October 24th, 2012
3:43 pm

IMAM

The rest of the story, please,,,finally, at long last, here’s a topic of more than sound bite, nyanh-nyanh interest putting your education and knowledge to use. There’s a lot more to this than just election year pandering, though I would agree that’s probably forefront…

Moderate Line

October 24th, 2012
3:44 pm

Poltifact ruled Romney’s claim false:

The U.S. military is at risk of losing its “military superiority” because “our Navy is smaller than it’s been since 1917. Our Air Force is smaller and older than any time since 1947.”
Mitt Romney, Monday, January 16th, 2012.

Ruling: Pants on Fire! | Details

But unlike Jay to be fair Obama’s claim that Mitt supported the Arizona immigration law is false.
Says Mitt Romney “called the Arizona law a model for the nation.”
Barack Obama, Tuesday, October 16th, 2012.

Ruling: False | Details
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/17/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-says-mitt-romney-called-arizona-/

I really don’t believe anything politicians say nor do I believe anything that the media says. Now Jay is not lying but he is definetly cherry picking the truth he reveals.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jan/18/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-us-navy-smallest-1917-air-force-s/

josef

October 24th, 2012
3:47 pm

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

October 24th, 2012
3:48 pm

JAY,

We are all getting BS’d on defense spending..whether Romney is right about his comments or BO is correct about underwater ships is irrelevant..

We need to cut at least 25% out of defense budget now…it’s terribly offensive to taxpayers to continue to spend so non-discriminitory defense contractors pour obscene amounts of cash into DEM and GOP coffers..

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

October 24th, 2012
3:51 pm

KEEP

We can’t afford either President Trillions spending or Ken (of Ken and Barbie) spending concepts…its a moot point

Mr. Snarky

October 24th, 2012
3:52 pm

Another pander by the Weasel…big surprise!

Keep Up the Good Fight!

October 24th, 2012
3:52 pm

Stevie, far from moot.

vietnam vet

October 24th, 2012
3:53 pm

Have you noticed that Romney/Ryan always talk about more military equipment, for the Military Industrial Complex, but never talk about military personnel. Under Ryan’s budget proposal, money to the VA would be cut by 12-20%, the same rate that Bush had. To Hell with the wounded, we need to Job Creators for the MIC. The warriors just want more entitlements.

alex

October 24th, 2012
3:53 pm

Jay, you really do pick your facts in such an idiotic fashion, for 1 if you or some fsu assistant professors think that 11% of worlds sea power was adequate in 1916, you or they are not understanding of geopolitics in that era, READ MAhan or massie’s castles of steel or dreadnaught before you spout your ridiculous material
as to newport news, I lived there for 20 years , blue collar workerswho will vote like that have always voted either influenced by the union or there color, yep that’s about it JAY, nothing fancy but man can you pick your “facts” I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again PATHETIC- ooppps NOW I’ve hurt your sensibilities….sheesh

Keep Up the Good Fight!

October 24th, 2012
3:55 pm

josef, shouldn’t that be updated to “In Mitt’s Navy, you can use your bayonets with ease.”

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
3:56 pm

“In other words, Romney is dangling billions of taxpayers dollars and government-financed jobs in front of Virginia voters, hoping that it wins him the presidency.”

Is that (if true) somehow different from Obama working to ensure the Delphi pensions of union workers were preserved while those of others were not? Just curious…

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
3:57 pm

“Poltifact ruled Romney’s claim false…”

Oh…goodness…then it MUST be false.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

October 24th, 2012
3:57 pm

VA voters …..and

Romney foreign policy adviser John Lehman stands to profit immensely from Navy build-up

Paul

October 24th, 2012
3:58 pm

Yet they see nothing contradictory in redistributing wealth to people who engage in make-work activities.

The Department of Defense should not function as a middle-class welfare scheme.

Paul

October 24th, 2012
3:59 pm

Stevie Ray

Glad to say I agree with you.

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
4:00 pm

“The Department of Defense should not function as a middle-class welfare scheme.”

So are you thereby saying welfare is not good or only good by your definition?

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

October 24th, 2012
4:00 pm

This could be funny…horses and bayonets and all…

but can’t we make fun of Trump today?

(I know….blogspot is ready when I am)

ObamaLovesJay

October 24th, 2012
4:01 pm

Romney talks about adding ships requested by the military. Obama lectures Romney on the modern military and introduces him to “aircraft carriers”. Pretty sure those are ships, Obama. Perhaps you need to be introduced to military as well.

They BOTH suck

October 24th, 2012
4:02 pm

Back door Keynesian economics at its best. Just another name applied to it (increased military spending to protect the USA) because calling it what it is would not be a great selling point.

Reagan was the master at it.

josef

October 24th, 2012
4:03 pm

One of the great lessons the North learned during the Wah-uh was the importance of a Navy…they lost the war at sea and it was a mistake the unified nation would rectify and not repeat. The Navy is what propelled the country into the imperialistic age, what made it possible to come out of WWI as not just having pulled Britain’s and France’s chestnuts out of the fire, but established the republic as a, if not the, major world power. The Japanese recognized this and tried to destroy that asap. They failed. The mobility of the warship has continued to be of critical importance in protecting our vital interests around the globe, commercially, militarily and, subsequently, politically.

So, yes, it should be a priority. But as far as numbers are concerned, it ain’t the meat, it’s the motion.

bookman parrot

October 24th, 2012
4:03 pm

Jay “falseness”
It is good to know that BHO is above porkbarrelling.
LOL.
Also the “horse and bayonets” comment shows how big a horse’s backside “our” president
and followers have become.

ragnar danneskjold

October 24th, 2012
4:04 pm

Leftists remain in denial about the real upgrading in the Chinese Navy. There is a growing threat in the Pacific, and even the Vietnamese want a more significant American presence there.

From another view, with a fully-funded Navy, it is possible that we could have placed bodies on the ground during the seven hour al Qaeda attack in Libya on Sept 11 this year, and that those guys who died in the last hour of the fight could have been saved. Leftists prefer to scrimp on security, to distribute taxpayer cash to their donors for pie-in-the-sky green energy proposals.

Patrick

October 24th, 2012
4:04 pm

“Why is Romney stressing naval expansion in his campaign remarks?”

Because of the intimate, life-long association that he and all his sons have had with the miltary.

What? None of them have ever served in the military? NONE of them??

Nevermind.

Paul

October 24th, 2012
4:05 pm

Town crier

Neither.

josef

October 24th, 2012
4:05 pm

Good Fight…

That’s Ryan’s navy… :-)

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

October 24th, 2012
4:06 pm

Can we get some bayonets up in this mutha?

gasux

October 24th, 2012
4:06 pm

@vietnam vet. It only goes to show that the unAmerican, draft dodger who hides his money in foreign countries to lessen his taxes would care more about making money than taking care of people. It’s in Romney’s DNA.

Aquagirl

October 24th, 2012
4:07 pm

Because of the intimate, life-long association that he and all his sons have had with the miltary.

Cue josef’s video……

Patrick

October 24th, 2012
4:08 pm

Aquagrrl and Josef– :)

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
4:08 pm

“How will the 2 trillion be paid for? Oh wait, in conned world, its okay to add to deficits if its a Republican.”

I do believe that Romney understands probably MUCH better than does Obama (or Bush) the danger of “running in the red”. He has said that everything is premised upon revenue neutrality. If he is elected president, I guess we will see.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

October 24th, 2012
4:08 pm

Let’s just get the actual Obama quote out there, not that it won’t stop the distortions.

“You mention the Navy, for example, and the fact that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916. “Well Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets,” said the president. “We have these things called aircraft carriers and planes land on them. We have ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines.” Obama drove the point home, “It’s not a game of Battleship where we’re counting ships, it’s ‘What are our priorities?’”

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

October 24th, 2012
4:09 pm

Obama’s grandfather served in WW2. Did none of Romney’s relatives serve in the military?

No wars? Not one person served? Really? Not a one? Not even in the Civil War? They couldn’t be bothered to pick a side?

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 24th, 2012
4:09 pm

When Romney was governor of Massachusetts, he was offered binders full of ships.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

October 24th, 2012
4:10 pm

Rags

“From another view, with a fully-funded Navy, it is possible that we could have placed bodies on the ground during the seven hour al Qaeda attack in Libya on Sept 11 this year”

uh….

pretty tight parking that battleship in the lot out front

DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman

October 24th, 2012
4:10 pm

26h!! No wait! 27th!! Darn it! 28th!!!

HA! Take it back Kam!!! :)

Jay: Why is Romney stressing naval expansion in his campaign remarks?

Im thinking its because he invested heavily OR bought a couple of defense companies. I figure the man is a vulture capitalist ………… his only purpose is to become as rich as he can through the quickest most expedient means possible. What better way than by buying up a bunch of defense contractor companies, (in 2011), then running for president in 2012?

If he wins, he’s sitting on a gold mine of perpetual funds via Uncle Sugar. If he looses this round, he’ll just sit and wait until the Dems are out of the white house and strike again. Like a true vulture.

I mean the man used Cheney’s rise to rapid wealth as his blue print.

Donovan

October 24th, 2012
4:10 pm

It seems to me that Mr. Romney is one heck of a smart man. Not only in business is he smart, but also in politics. You Democrats have been doing the D.C. two-step for generations and don’t have the the franchise on its vote getting.

The real story is the Obama regime’s cover-up, deceit, and lies about Benghazi. It won’t go away and it is getting bigger as we get closer to Nov.6. Don’t want to talk about it? I guess not.

The Reuter’s bomb shell today is so damning for your Team Obama. Looks like the chickens are all coming home to roost.

Butch Cassidy (I)

October 24th, 2012
4:10 pm

Has Indiana gone blue yet? Or, do they still endorse the miracle of birth due to rape?

Tinkerella

October 24th, 2012
4:12 pm

@Finn….now that’s funny

Jefferson

October 24th, 2012
4:12 pm

“When the ships were made of wood and the men were made of steel”

stands for decibels

October 24th, 2012
4:12 pm

blogspot is ready when I am

yep, but I think I’ll mention that it was news to me that Germany would be opening a memorial to the Roma who were slaughtered during WWII.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/24/14672261-germanys-merkel-opens-roma-holocaust-memorial-in-berlin?lite

ridiculously overdue, of course.

/drive-by

liberal hack

October 24th, 2012
4:12 pm

1. I agree with Granny, Trump needs to be ridiculed. Elections should be about issues, not character assasinations.

2. Jay chides Romney for wanting to increase military spending and some say the DoD shouldn’t be a gov’t program to support the middle class but are completely alright w/ using the Dept. of Education, the EPA, NPR, Planned Parenthood, Dept of Agriculture, or the various “green job” investments to support the middle class and the 1%. Either you are for cutting spending or you are not. What I’m seeing here is the Democrats are completely alright with increased spending, as long as it’s on it’s “pet” projects. Before you call me a hypocrit, I completely think the DoD could use a huge cut, I mean a true cut, (not the liberal version of a cut) a definite reduction in it’s budget. But while we are at it, we can stop meddling in other foreign countries issue….Something Democrats are just as guilty as Republicans in doing!

Steve-USA

October 24th, 2012
4:13 pm

“Obama’s grandfather served in WW2. Did none of Romney’s relatives serve in the military?

No wars? Not one person served? Really? Not a one? Not even in the Civil War? They couldn’t be bothered to pick a side?”

That was really weak.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

October 24th, 2012
4:13 pm

Looks like the chickens are all coming home to roost

Well at least Obama kept his chicken in every pot promise… Romney only offers binders full of chickenshyte….

Jefferson

October 24th, 2012
4:13 pm

Fund SS and medicare, best programs for working Americans.

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
4:13 pm

“Neither.”

Well, Paul, since you characterized DoD spending as (at least in part) a “middle-class welfare scheme” (and I am not necessarily disagreeing), it occurred to me you were making that judgement according to some criteria and that you had your own belief as to what constitutes legitimate welfare. What would you say?

Paul

October 24th, 2012
4:14 pm

Ragnar

What ships Romney has proposed would have gotten ground troops to Benghazi in a few hours?

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

October 24th, 2012
4:14 pm

PAUL,

If our politicians had balls and weren’t owned by special interest, our budget problems could be easily fixed…take 25% out of military and 10% out of everything else…sometimes the most obvious answer it correct..

I vote McHales Navy

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

October 24th, 2012
4:15 pm

Romney is pricing elevators for his ships.

rightwingextreme

October 24th, 2012
4:15 pm

Jay, you’re article misses the point. Comparing who controls the amount of naval power isn’t the question. It’s who has the ability to control the seas and have force projection. Not every nation needs a navy with the capability of the United States. Consider that our vital interests are overseas whereas Russia’s aren’t and China’s to a lesser extent.

Since the 1930s we’ve maintained a philosophy of a two ocean navy in order to protect those interests. To maintain those interests today we have to have at least 11 carrier battle groups. Consider that not all of these carriers will be available at one time due to upgrades, refits, training, etc.

In Desert Storm (1991) we were able to put 6 carrier battle groups in the Persian Gulf (each battle group contained around 8-12 support ships)….that was half of the carrier fleet at the time. If another conflict had occurred we would have probably been able to deploy two-three carriers at most.

China is acquiring carrier technology and they continue to upgrade their submarine fleet. However, China’s sea mission is more sea-denial than sea-control. They are primarily interested in the SW Pacific. With the development of their cruise missile technology they don’t necessarily have to have a large navy. Just one big enough to deny our navy access to the SW Pacific…or the Middle East. they can always import oil via a pipeline. We can’t.

Russia’s navy has a similar strategy….more sea denial than sea control.

We HAVE to have sea control due to the need to import oil and other natural resources to keep our economy going and to feed our population.

So yes…maintaining our navy is an important security goal and it does require a certain number of the right mix of ships.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

October 24th, 2012
4:15 pm

Romney brings a bayonet to a nuclear submarine battle.

Jefferson

October 24th, 2012
4:15 pm

Will the enlisted men still be in the 47% ? Are they parasites ? I think not.

jd

October 24th, 2012
4:15 pm

Eisenhower warned us to be vigilant against interests of the military-industrial complex — now it has morphed to the industrial-military complex — the military understands the strategy of being light, fast, and powerful — ships cannot get to the scene of terrorism in a matter of hours (unless they happened to be stationed near by). Romney’s strategy will send tax dollars to the corporations instead of the field to support our troops, and at home to support our vets.

Butch Cassidy (I)

October 24th, 2012
4:15 pm

Paul – “What ships Romney has proposed would have gotten ground troops to Benghazi in a few hours?”

I belive he was referring to the USS Enterprise NCC 1701 and the Battlestar Galactica. :)

Welcome to the Occupation

October 24th, 2012
4:15 pm

The crassest form of cronyism and clientelism comes naturally to the Republicans.

It’s their life blood.

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

October 24th, 2012
4:16 pm

JEFFERSON,

You do realize that to fully fund for SS or Medicare would cost us over 50 trillion?

DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman

October 24th, 2012
4:16 pm

Granny – to be fair, we can make fun of trip EVERDAY! Just so he won’t feel left out!!
==========================================
Have you noticed that Romney/Ryan always talk about more military equipment, for the Military Industrial Complex, but never talk about military personnel.

You know I haven’t. That’s a great and valid point you brought up — I’m going to research the numbers/data on that, I find your comment insightful.

PS: I LOVE to research data!! Your comment just gave me another reason to do it! :)

Patrick

October 24th, 2012
4:16 pm

“Ragnar

What ships Romney has proposed would have gotten ground troops to Benghazi in a few hours?”

Apparently, ones with warp drive and a transporter.

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

October 24th, 2012
4:16 pm

Either you are for cutting spending or you are not.

There are only two types of people in the world — those that think the world is made up of only two types of people, and then there’s the rest of us.

josef

October 24th, 2012
4:16 pm

PAUL

That would depend on where those ships were deployed…

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

October 24th, 2012
4:16 pm

I have to agree with Debbie, Romney has some defense stocks somewhere. That guy doesn’t look twice unless he can triple his investment.

East Cobb RINO, Inc. (LLC)

October 24th, 2012
4:17 pm

Why stop in Virginia? Romney should go ahead and promise to build 20 million cars for Ohio, a dozen more casinos and brothels for Nevada, 10 cigarette factories for North Carolina, and 5 theme parks for Florida a year.

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

October 24th, 2012
4:17 pm

WELCOME

Take it easy now…the only bi-partisan thing in DC is cronyism…it is impossible to remain in DC otherwise…that’s the 800lb gorilla that is getting larger while we debate whether to wrap it in blue or red..

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
4:18 pm

“Im thinking its because he invested heavily OR bought a couple of defense companies. I figure the man is a vulture capitalist ………… his only purpose is to become as rich as he can through the quickest most expedient means possible. What better way than by buying up a bunch of defense contractor companies, (in 2011), then running for president in 2012?”

Well…your degree of cynicism matches that of those who claim Obama is a closet Marxist wanting to turn America into a socialist state, DDR. Thanks for telling us how you really feel.

Jefferson

October 24th, 2012
4:18 pm

50 trillion is bs.

Tinkerella

October 24th, 2012
4:18 pm

I have worked for a company that makes nuclear submarines (among other goodies for the military). We have more technology right now to control it all. Be for real….we don’t need to add this much. This was a direct pander to Virginia and the boat makers there along with the military vote.

Paul

October 24th, 2012
4:19 pm

Finn

Utah didn’t’ become a state until the Civil War had been over 30 years so I don’t think the Romney ancestors did not serve is not valid.

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

October 24th, 2012
4:19 pm

Quickest way for Romney to lose the military vote? Call them boats instead of ships. “We need more boats”

Aquagirl

October 24th, 2012
4:20 pm

We HAVE to have sea control due to the need to import oil

Of course we need imported oil….How else would we keep those big-@$$ ships going?

Con logic there.

liberal hack

October 24th, 2012
4:20 pm

ok Kamchack, I get your little joke, I’ve never read anything from you saying you agree with budget cuts, as far as I know you love bloated big spending gov’ts. I’m saying cut the military spending, but you and others can’t even come up with one other area to cut.

Jay

October 24th, 2012
4:21 pm

“I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there, and in some ways it was frustrating not to feel like I was there as part of the troops that were fighting in Vietnam.”
– Mitt Romney, 2007

I don’t tend to make a big deal about politicians who haven’t served in the military. Yes, such service expands their perspective in ways that might prove important, and it demonstrates a commitment to national service. But it’s not a necessity by any means.

But saying that you “longed” to serve when in reality you sought and received four deferments is a little much. Again, if Obama had ever said such a thing ….

Pizzaman

October 24th, 2012
4:21 pm

I don’t like Willard because he’s a draft dodger. But one of you just gave me another reason. John Lehman. He was Reagen’s SecNav while I still served. The biggest self promoter, with no value, I’ve ever known. He somehow bought a set of Naval Flight Officer wings. If this jerk is anywhere near Willard’s ear and Willard wins this Country’s in serious trouble.

Paul

October 24th, 2012
4:22 pm

Liberal hack

Who here says or thinks what you allege about NPR etc?

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
4:24 pm

DannyX

October 24th, 2012
4:25 pm

Romney will also upgrade the Air Force. We need to spend billions on a problem that plagues our fighter jets. Someone earlier questioned Romney’s commitment to our servicemen, well he does understand their needs. Here is proof.

Romney said…”When you have a fire in an aircraft, there’s no place to go, exactly, there’s no — and you can’t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don’t open. I don’t know why they don’t do that. It’s a real problem,”

DownInAlbany

October 24th, 2012
4:25 pm

When you cannot run on your record, run down the opponent. Just saying…

Keep Up the Good Fight!

October 24th, 2012
4:26 pm

O’Keefe the convict? :lol:

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
4:26 pm

Jay

October 24th, 2012
4:26 pm

What ships Romney has proposed would have gotten ground troops to Benghazi in a few hours?”

Submarines.

That is, submarines equipped with tunnel-digging technology, like the ones that Iran uses to tunnel under Iraq so it can use Syria as its route to the sea, just as Romney described in the last debate.

Paul

October 24th, 2012
4:26 pm

Crier

Briefly I am typing on a droid – with this scheme of Romney’s there is no need stated by the services. It is not like we have a working poor person who needs food assistance.

DownInAlbany

October 24th, 2012
4:27 pm

This was a direct pander

Isn’t this what ALL politicians do? Duh…

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
4:27 pm

Regnad Kcin

October 24th, 2012
4:29 pm

“Utah didn’t’ become a state until the Civil War had been over 30 years so I don’t think the Romney ancestors did not serve is not valid.”

I’m pretty sure people from the territories DID serve…

Jay

October 24th, 2012
4:29 pm

Welcome to the Occupation

October 24th, 2012
4:29 pm

liberal hack: ” What I’m seeing here is the Democrats are completely alright with increased spending, as long as it’s on it’s “pet” projects”

Huh?

That makes no sense.

The Republican party feeds its 20 mil lb pet monster the military industrial complex like one giant Keynesian magic coin box of patronage — getting out of it no small amount of social discipline to boot, in return — and you criticize Democrats for spending on “pet” projects? Wow, that’s rich.

Paul

October 24th, 2012
4:30 pm

Butch

Battlestar Galactica?

Scratch everything I’ve written. I’m in!

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

October 24th, 2012
4:30 pm

Nothing says run down an opponent like pointing out a position that has changed in 96 hours.

OH THE HUMANITY!

SUCH CRUELTY!

Jesus wept…from laughing so damn hard.

H. E. Pennypacker

October 24th, 2012
4:30 pm

One of Romney’s military advisors is former Sec. of the Navy John Lehman. His firm owns several shipbuilding companies and stands to make millions if more ships are constructed. It is no surprise that he is suggesting the Navy needs more ships.

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/10/big-business-romneys-navy/all/

DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman

October 24th, 2012
4:30 pm

Granny here ya go:

Before it was blabbed out by Trumped earlier, here are the top answers to the question, ‘What do you think Trumped’s Obama surprise is?”:

(1) During his many travels, Trump’s private investigator discovered an articulate homeless man named “The Doctor,” who wears a tinfoil hat and claims to have delivered Barack Obama at Port Reitz District Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya in 1961.

(2) Obama is gay married to a Kenyan he met on Easter Island during the filming of “Star Wars, Why The Hell Do We Care About Another Fraking Episode”. They were seen holding hands and cuddling. Close inspection of the man reveals that he looks surprisingly like Karl Rove.

(3) After being repeatedly disproven in his theory that Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery, does Trump give up? No. His private investigator unraveled a convoluted conspiracy amongst the paper and photo editing software editing industries that traces all the way back to Obama.

“Obama has his tentacles in the paper industry and the photoshopping software biz,” Trump will likely tweet. “His wife’s best friend’s uncle owns stock in both Adobe software and the company that produces paper for the ‘Hawaiian hospital’ where Obama was ‘born.’”

But it doesn’t end there. Trump’s P.I. found that the digital photography experts who debunked the “forgery” conspiracy are actually paid shills for the Chinese government and OPEC. And their orders came straight from President Obama, who called up China and said “Get OPEC in on this. I’ll go soft on you guys if you cover up my birth certificate. K thanks, bye.”

(4) Obama is actually the son of communist poet/labor activist Franklin Marshall Davis, who happened to live in Hawaii around the time Obama was born.

But Trump’s private investigator discovered something that DESTROYS this puny little conspiracy: Obama is actually a time traveler who is Frank Marshall Davis’ real father.

(5) Remember when Glenn Beck infamously said that President Obama is a “racist” and “has a deep-seated hatred for white people”?

Trump’s private investigator discovered that it’s actually true. So true that every morning when he wakes up, the president punches himself on the one side he considers his “white half.”

(6) Trump’s private investigator discovered that Bo Obama’s little collar tag says “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet.”

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

October 24th, 2012
4:31 pm

JEFFERSON

You are correct..my bad…The total is actually closer to 60 trillion..if you include healthcare law…its right around 90 trillion..shocker eh? that’s over the next 75 years.. I can understand folks don’t trust Sen Sessions so the government report is linked at bottom of the page.

http://budget.senate.gov/republican/public/index.cfm/2012/3/sessions-health-law-s-unfunded-obligations-more-than-double-that-of-social-security

loyd george

October 24th, 2012
4:31 pm

In my day, Sir Jackie Fisher was quite adamant about having an extrodinary navy, I must say came in quite handy for the germany blockade and they had subs!! Well they had to build the ships somewhere and since Newport News is the ONLY shipyard capable of building the new class of carriers ,somewhat makes sense they are manufactured there. The fact that the world’s largest navy base is a few nautical miles away might be important….Hmmmm.. Interesting how the facts might support SOME reality… Yes, yes, good old Jackie, a bit of a cad really, he and winston with there secret planning before the GREAT war (and thank goodness they were doing just that)..

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN and her navy…..

H. E. Pennypacker

October 24th, 2012
4:31 pm

Jay beat me to the link……

Towncrier

October 24th, 2012
4:32 pm

Paul

October 24th, 2012
4:33 pm

Out for a while – car’s ready.

Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...

October 24th, 2012
4:34 pm

JEFFERSON,

Or 63 Trillion over next 75 years..just for medicare and medicaid….the numbers on health care law are debatable….but we all know we will end up paying out the arse for this as well..what government insurance program hasn’t originally indicated a number that is fractional to later costs?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75603.html