In last night's debate, Obama's most memorable moment was not his most presidential. Governor Romney brought up the fact that our navy has the "fewest ships since 1917*". Now reasonable men can argue about the size navy we need to carry out America's mission around the globe. Unfortunately, Mr. Romney couldn't find a reasonable man to have the discussion with! Obama could have addressed the efficiency of modern warships, or their capabilities. Instead, Barry turned to what he knows best: children's games and things he learned on the Turner Movie Channel.
"Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines. And so the question is not a game of Battleship, where we're counting ships. "
Wow! Barry's going after the condescending snark vote! But back in the real world, in the face of China's growing blue water navy and worldwide terrorist attacks, the size and use of a worldwide navy to serve as a projection of US power around the globe is a discussion we should be having.
Overlooking the ignorance of our Commander in Chief on the use of both bayonets and horses in modern warfare, why not discuss how appropriate the size of our navy is to the task? Seems to me, if Romney's observation was unfounded or misguided, to be an excellent way to demonstrate your command of military doctrine and tactics as well as the fiscal responsibility to manage resources in times of debt and deficit.
Instead, we have the childish condescension of what may be the extent of Obama's knowledge on the subject: planes land on aircraft carriers and submarines are "ships (sic) that go underwater". (BTW, Mr. Obama, the navy refers to submarines as "boats", not "ships". Don't believe me? Ask the nearest "corpseman"!)
And then, instead of a serious discussion or even an honest answer, the Bamboozler-in-Chief sarcastically tells Gov. Romney that military preparedness is "not a game of Battleship".
Neither is a presidential election, Mr. President. You had a platform and an opportunity to address the American people on a matter of national security. Instead, you took a cheap shot at a political opponent, which had the effect of making you look petty and ill informed.
You know, Mr. Obama, there may be some who might say, given your juvenile performance, that all you know about military strategy you learned from playing Battleship. Not me! I'd say you saw the movie, too!
*Actually, it was 1916
Cross posted at LCR, Say Anything.