This was one of Romney’s biggest burns



Like it? Share with your friends!

146
146 points
  • 8008135

    How is Obama comparing the numbers (size) of the force to the technology? The OP and the guy who made this are retarded…

    • Max

      I don’t understand. You mean 100 arrows are better than an automatic machine gun?

      • 8008135

        No, you don’t understand if you’re comparing ammo to a weapon (ironic, isn’t it?)

        • Max

          No it’s not ironic. Although it is ironic that you found it ironic.

          Anyway, so are you saying a 100 bows are better that 10 machine guns?

    • Marian

      you’re right, comparing size to technology is dumb. Everybody knows that 50 guys with bayonets will take on a tank anytime and wipe the floor with it

  • Jim Kick

    Odumber is inconsistent at best

    • Jayken

      Most of the people who complain about raising the debt ceiling don’t understand it.

      • Rev. Analbumcover

        Balancing the budget will result in a bad recession, and that’s career suicide for politicians.

        Not balancing the budget will eventually result in economic catastrophe for the US.

        Not for the politicians, though. They have diverse portfolios which presumably contain a lot of foreign investments. They’ll be hurt, but they’ll still be rich. And they’ll blame some scapegoat, most likely whatever party they’re not in, so they might even be able to keep their jobs.

        • Jayken

          Balancing the budget without causing a recession is actually possible, but no politician is going to support it. Federal Law (mainly tax law) is due for some serious overhauling. Not to mention that if we can keep congress from “borrowing” from the SS trust and made some minor reforms to it and medicare we could balance those out for the next 20-30 years.

          • Rev. Analbumcover

            I’m not sure how you balance the budget without causing a recession.

            I mean, you can cut spending, or increase taxes or both. If you cut spending, well, the problem is that the government uses almost exclusively US-produced goods and services. A lot of businesses rely mostly or solely on government contracts. If you cut spending by, say, 300 billion, that means 300 billion less spending on US businesses all of a sudden, which causes massive layoffs if not outright bankruptcies and company closures. This means higher unemployment, and also many thousands of taxpayers suddenly stop paying taxes and start collecting unemployment, which reduces tax revenues, partially eliminating any reduction in deficit spending. So cutting spending by 300 bil won’t even reduce the deficit by 300 bil–it will reduce it but not that much. And it will increase unemployment.

            Raising taxes enough to make a serious impact would also be difficult to do without having a choking effect on the economy. Closing loopholes and increasing taxes for the top 1% will help, but that alone isn’t enough.

            Taxes have to be raised and spending has to be cut. But both of these actions tend to cause economic slowdowns.

            Furthermore, with the baby boomer generation, which is generally the highest tax bracket, is beginning to retire–meaning they’re going to go from paying taxes to collecting social security. And we’ve got new expenses involved with health care reform.

            Maybe there’s something I’m missing about this. I certainly don’t know all the facets of the situation. I accept that there’s more to know about the intricacies of the economy than probably any one person can know. But I think it’s possible to understand the major forces at work and how they interact…if I have the right info.

          • I am Sancho

            Are you still pushing that bullshit argument that federal spending is keeping the economy afloat?

            Quit paying people not to work and see what happens to the economy when millions of lazy fucks get back in the workforce and add productivity to the economy.

            Quit blocking US energy production.

            Get the federal government off of the backs of business.

            Follow the Constitution.

            The parasites will throw a shit fit, but I don’t really care. And any business that can’t stand without using the federal government to rob the tax payer deserves to fail.

            I forgot to mention inflation. Do you understand that concept?

          • Das Puggy

            I can see where you think that. The problem is that convincing businesses to hire people they don’t need because no one can afford to purchase their goods is pretty difficult. You can have zero payroll and business taxes, but if no one can afford anything, who will be working?

            FWIW, I’m certainly not a parasite. But you will say I am because I’m a foreigner who relies on the rebuilding and maintenance of the US infrastructure to make a living.

          • I am Sancho

            Why would no one be able to purchase their goods? If the federal government quits putting their boot on the throat of American business, prices would drop, demand would increase, business would expand.

            Also explain to me how forcibly taking my income to give it to someone who doesn’t want to work a good thing. Now tell me how it’s right to do that to future generations.

          • Das Puggy

            If no one works, then no one has money. No one with money, no good can be purchased. No goods being purchased, no businesses making money, creating less employment, and a vicious circle.

          • I am Sancho

            This isn’t Canada, bro. The federal government doesn’t employ everyone.

          • Jayken

            Well I’m hardly an authority on the matter either, but from my own research on the subject i think I have a grasp on it. Flimsy though it may be.

            The Joint Chiefs has been trying to get Congress to consider it’s budget proposals for a long time now will little to no avail. Those cuts would be more than enough if we could get Congress to close the foreign money loop holes. Wouldn’t even need to raise taxes that much either. Maybe 1%. The economy would experience a slight constraint but nothing like a recession.

            As far as the baby boomers, that is a tougher problem to fix because it’s more related to education and employment opportunities for the younger generations.

          • Max

            I enjoy reading your comments greatly. They are very informative. Do you write any blogs or any such stuff? I would love to read them.

          • Rev. Analbumcover

            I thank you and appreciate the compliment. I don’t write a blog. I don’t usually have that much to say until I get wound up by these “Andrew Ryan” type corporate butt-puppet plutocrat dupes (usually self-professed ‘libertarians’) who think the free market (letting corporations do anything they want) will somehow make everyone prosperous as opposed to putting all the wealth into the hands of the rich (as has always happened throughout history.)

            I would, though, encourage you to question everything–including what I write–and look up the facts as directly from the sources as possible.

            Also, study bullshit. Learn its forms and disguises. I could use Andrew Ryan’s posts as examples. For instance, the “taxes are rape” comment. This is a classic example of rhetoric. Obviously, taxes are not rape. If you disagree with taxes, then you could see them as theft. But why would someone call the rape? Because the crime of rape is emotionally-charged. People tend to have a strong emotional response when they think of rape. So if you want people to hate taxes, you imply that taxes and rape are the same. That makes an emotional connection in their mind. This is known as rhetoric.

            The reason rhetoric is a signal for bullshit is because rhetoric is an attempt by the writer or speaker to control your emotions. Why? Why not just state the facts? Because they know there’s a big chance the facts won’t cause the same emotional response in your mind. They want you to have the same opinion they have. They are not trying to inform you, they are trying to control your viewpoint through emotional manipulation.

            When you’re an extremist whose radical views aren’t supported by facts, the only way to bring people around to your way of thinking is by emotional manipulation. Andrew is as much a victim of this as he is a perpetrator. He’s essentially parroting the plutocratic propaganda of the pseudo-right.

          • I am Sancho

            It may be time for you to start questioning the things you “know”. So much of it is incorrect.

      • I am Sancho

        Bullshit

        • Jayken

          I’m convinced you’re a troll.

          • Rev. Analbumcover

            He seems serious, but considering how hysterical and he gets, not to mention the name-calling and belligerent responses like the above, in addition to his cartoonishly simplistic view of the world, he seems to be just around the age of fourteen. He may be older physically but that’s where I put his emotional age.

          • I am Sancho

            And here’s the hypocritical name calling troll who can never seem to get his “facts” straight.

            How are you doing this fine day my Marxist friend?

          • I am Sancho

            Sure kid. You make a statement like that with absolutely nothing to back it up, I call your bullshit, and that makes me a troll.
            Whatever.

          • Jayken

            I didn’t say everyone, you may very well be exempt. I was, however, including Obama in what I said. He clearly didn’t understand the debt ceiling back when he made that first statement.

            As the president he’s learned that he has very little say in the budget. Even though he’s constitutionally required to spend the money the way the budget lays out he’s also the one that takes it on the chin if the budget has a deficit.

            The debt ceiling was passed as an artificial limit on how much the country could borrow. The idea was that it would force Congress to keep the budget balanced and the President would also have more power in vetoing unbalanced budgets. As we’ve seen, however, the debt ceiling has been used to try and gain concession from the president rather than help to keep the country’s finances in order.

          • I am Sancho

            There are two kinds of people who oppose raising the debt ceiling:
            Those, like Barry, who just were playing politics
            Those who want the out of control spending stopped.

            Barry knew exactly what the debt ceiling was.

            The people who oppose raising it know what it is.

            Most people aren’t dependent on government spending. Most of those would thrive if they weren’t being bled dry by the parasitical hand of government.

          • Jayken

            If you tear down one government people will build another one and that new one will also collect taxes.

            If you remove the government, even just dial it back, something else will take it’s place.

          • I am Sancho

            Who wants to tear down the government?

            You are certainly correct on your second statement. Liberty will replace it.

      • Jim Kick

        including Odumber

        • Theinsomniac

          You do realize that you’re making yourself look like a complete moron by using the type of insults which would be considered childish in preschool, right?

          • Jim Kick

          • Rev. Analbumcover

            I don’t find it offensive and I don’t think he did either. And it’s not that you dislike or criticize Obama or his policies, it’s about how you express yourself and how it reflects on you as a person.

            How do I explain?…ok, some 20-30 years ago or so there was this boxer who was going to fight Tyson, I think, and he went on the national news and said something like, “Anybody thinks I can’t beat the other guy they got a big dump in their pants. Yeah. Anyone who says I can’t beat him, they got a big dump in their pants, that’s what they got. A big dump.” I’m paraphrasing, but that’s about what he said. No one responded, pretty much nobody even spoke about it because we all felt sympathetic humiliation on his behalf that a grown man could in all seriousness say something so repulsively childish and inane on national news.

            If you’re in your 20s or even 30s you might not relate, because nowadays pretty much anything goes on TV. In fact, the more you can make a fool of yourself, the better chance you have of getting your own show. But back then we were shocked and saddened that a man with obvious brain damage would not only be allowed to fight a world champion boxer, he would even be shown humiliating himself on the national news. We all experienced a sort of collective societal cringe and no one ever mentioned it again until this moment.

            If I recall correctly, he went down before the end of the first round or something. But it was a long time ago and I’m not a boxing fan.

            That’s what it’s like.

            It’s like someone pointing out that you stepped in dog shit and your response instead of scraping it off your shoe is to take your shoe off and wave it in peoples’ noses or wipe it on the curtains while laughing maniacally. Oh sure it’s funny to think about, but in polite company it would simply have the effect of making people cringe at your exhibition of shamefulness, and desperately pity you.

            Missing the point entirely (as evidenced by the “offended Yoda” meme) adds to the effect.

            No, I’m not offended and I suspect neither is @disqus_0NqotNyG90:disqus (he basically said the same thing I’m saying here, just more concisely.) Offended we are not.

  • Dogshit

    The only man alive chosen for the job, based on the colour of his skin. Nice work.

    • Jayken

      If that was the only reason he was chosen he wouldn’t have been elected.

    • I am Sancho

      Happens all the time

      • Frank Thebunny

        I love your way to sarcasm, boy

  • Mehdi Yasaee

    Isn’t this saying basically what the debt ceiling problem is all about: “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t”.

  • MrForceQuitexe

    besides his side burns? HEY OH!

  • https://www.facebook.com/groups/1403484759910224/ Jeremiah Wolfwood

    Yeah the difference is that we still have a navy, and use it.

  • Phyuck Obongo

    This is fucking stupid, anyone upvoting this is solely doing it because muh Obongo!

    Literally makes no sense and the analogy is awful.

  • Marvin Gardens

    The US Marines still use bayonets for close in work. The Taliban fear them. Obozo is a wise ass punk who doesn’t know jack about the military he commands. Men are dying on his watch and he could give a flying fuck. It’s all politics to this phony. We’re in deep shit with this guy at the helm.

    • The Ragin Pagan

      To be fair, he did say fewer, not none at all.

  • mrs. anderson

    Just because Romney is an idiot, does not mean Obama is right. Semantics can make someone sound right to dumb people. Anyone who thinks Obama is actually doing a good job does not understand the actual state of things.

Choose A Format
Image
Photo or GIF
Gif
GIF format
Video
Youtube, Vimeo or Vine Embeds
List
The Classic Internet Listicles