RW Bloggers Frothing Over Facts of Obama “Horses and Bayonets” Statement

OK.  Quick test of listening comprehension.  Does President Obama say “no horses and bayonets” or does he say “fewer horses and bayonets”?  (Apologies for the commercial.)

OK, so obviously this is a trick question because of course Obama says “fewer horses and bayonets”.  Right wing bloggers, however are not known for reading or listening comprehension, to wit, executive editor at Tucker Carlson’s Bucket O’ Fail Daily Whiner David Martosko’s sad attempt to “fact check” the claim.  And reports back that bayonets ARE still used by marines and, and in the early stages of the Afghanistan war some soldiers rode, wait for it, wait, HORSES!!!  FACT CHECK FAIL, RIGHT!!

Well not so much if you are actually blessed with reading and listening comprehension but, again, we’re talking about right wing bloggers here.

Over at the home of the world’s dumbest person we hear the following:  “Now here’s the truth…Marines still use bayonets.  Horses were used by the military during the Iraq invasion.”  And bonus!  Submarines aren’t ships, they’re called BOATS!!  Nyah, nyah, nyah Obummer, you big poopy head. 

Venturing into the land of pajamas and night-night stories we hear that:  “Point of fact: US special forces used horses to drive the Taliban from power in Afghanistan. Point of fact: The US military still uses bayonets.”  And again:  “Point of fact: Submarines are not called ships. For historic reasons they are called boats.”  Point of fact:  people in PJ’s apparently can’t understand the meaning of the word “fewer”.

Moving along we get the jawamissedpoint being:  “A statue of a member of the U.S. Special Forces on horseback was just unveiled at Ground Zero in New York City. When our Special Forces invaded Afghanistan post-9/11, many did so on horseback. I personally remember sitting for a lecture in Austin, TX in 2005, given by a member of one of the first Special Forces teams to arrive in Afghanistan. He talked at length about their reliance upon horses.

Our Marines still train with bayonets”  And finally the head scratching conclusion:  “Mr President, you FAILED at honoring our military with those comments.”  OK, whatever.

I think we all get the point.

Then defacto Romney surrogate Jennifer Rubin chimes in to fact check the fact checkers of the so-called “apology tour” that Obummer so definitely did so take! 

I will focus on two major apologies that have been deliberately and forcefully delivered by the president and/or top aides.

The first is our handling of the war on terror. Liberals don’t even see that Obama’s excoriating his predecessor is apologizing for this nation, but of course it is. George W. Bush wasn’t acting as a private citizen, and whatever he [sic] actions he took were done in the name of the United States.

So it most certainly was an apology (often repeated) when Obama decried: “Unfortunately, faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions. … I also believe that all too often our government made decisions based on fear rather than foresight; that all too often our government trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions. Instead of strategically applying our power and our principles, too often we set those principles aside as luxuries that we could no longer afford. And during this season of fear, too many of us — Democrats and Republicans, politicians, journalists, and citizens — fell silent. In other words, we went off course.” That version was delivered on national TV, albeit from U.S. soil but it was a confession to be sure

Other “apologies” include acknowledging that our own country’s record on civil rights has been less than stellar in the past and an acknowledgement that the U.S. has been less than diplomatic *cough*Dubya*cough* in the past.  So, got it.  In Rubin’s universe any admission of problems in the past is AN ABJECT APOLOGY TO THE WHOLE F’N WORLD ON HIS KNEES WITH HIS BUTT IN THE AIR TO BOOT!!

Right wing bloggers.  The fauxrage is amped up to 11 every day.

UPDATED to correct Daily Whiner link.

Posted by marindenver on 10/23/12 at 05:51 PM • Permalink

Categories: PoliticsBarack ObamaBedwettersElection '12MittensVulture/Voucher 2012NuttersTeabaggery

Share this post:  Share via Twitter   Share via BlinkList   Share via del.icio.us   Share via Digg   Share via Email   Share via Facebook   Share via Fark   Share via NewsVine   Share via Propeller   Share via Reddit   Share via StumbleUpon   Share via Technorati  

Jennifer Rubin should be an embarrassment to the editors of Kaplan Prep Test Daily but obviously isn’t. I live in the DC Metro area and while we have a subscription I read the NYT instead.  She is so swamped by her puellile (since she’s a woman) ideology that she doesn’t even know what an apology is.  Moran.

I don’t think liberals have noticed all the horses on the decks of the aircraft carriers.

That commie motto “FORWARD” must be driven back into the Syrian Sea! Using our noble Cavalry, and bayoneting left and r—well left, anyway!

BACKWARD! TROT!

One of the joys of being a right-winger is being equipped with a magical auditory filter that allows you to hear only what you want to hear, whether or not it bears any relation to reality.

And hey, who’s that jumping onto the bandwagon? Why, it’s everyone’s favorite escaped mental patient, Rep. Allen West!

Comment by Frank Stone on 10/24/12 at 12:24 AM

Ah, epistemic closure, the most wingnutty closure of all!

“Point of fact: Submarines are not called ships. For historic reasons they are called boats.”

Point of fact: Synonyms exist.

FSM help me, I’ve been assigned to work another day at the crazy winger dentist’s office.  I know I will be hearing this meme today, along with his standard set, all derived from Dinette D’Sousa’s “Obama 2016”. 

Pray for me, and watch your local news for an ‘RDH strangles DDS’ story.

OK, OK, the military still uses horses and bayonets. The navy still has ships.

Please proceed.

Yes, the conflation of “fewer horses and bayonets” with “none at all” is pretty typical winger stew. Cf. the assumption that since liberals want a reduction in fossil fuel usage, we really want no use of oil for any purpose anywhere, so that even a hippie using petroleum to lubricate a bike chain is a giant hypocrite.

Page 1 of 1 pages

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.

<< Back to main