More political folly from Paul Ryan

[Thanatos 2,847]

Lancaster, Ohio – The Romney-Ryan campaign has seized on Vice President Joe Biden's assertion during Thursday's debate that Ohio-made M1 Abrams tanks are no longer needed. The GOP ticket began running radio ads and making automated phone calls in Ohio on Friday featuring the vice president's quote, according to Republican state communications director Chris Maloney.

 

"The military says we need a smaller, leaner Army. We need more special forces. ...We don’t need more M1 tanks. What we need is more UAVs,” Biden said while he sat opposite of Republican vice presidential nominee Rep. Paul Ryan, at the debate in Lexington, Ky. The vice president's words, which broke no new policy ground, were a reminder of the Pentagon's decision this year to halt the production line from 2014 to 2017 as the vehicle is redesigned.

 

Ohio is home to the only tank production site in the country, and M1 tanks were spotlighted during Ryan's first joint appearance with Mitt Romney after the vice presidential debate.

"When you say it's OK to impose these devastating cuts on our military…that we don't need any more Lima-built M1 tanks, what we are doing is we're projecting weakness, and when we project weakness abroad our enemies become more brazen," Ryan said to a crowd of thousands in the town of Lancaster. The critique, made in conjunction with more blistering remarks about President Obama's handling of the terrorist attack in Benghazi, tied Ohio jobs with U.S. foreign policy.

 

Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, who introduced the two candidates, made M1 tanks the central focus of his remarks.

 

"Joe Biden said a lot of interesting things, one was at a time of increasing danger all around the world," he said. "He said we ought to be cutting our military. Specifically, he said that we don't need any more M1 tanks. Did you hear that? Guess where those tanks are made, folks -- right here in the state of Ohio. We need M1 tanks because they're part of the greatest military on the face of the earth. They will ensure that we have a military second to none so that we can keep the peace. We need M1 tanks."

When Ryan campaigned in Lima, Ohio, in September, he called the Pentagon's tank proposal a "budget gimmick."

 

The military has calculated that idling the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center would save up to $3 billion, but General Dynamics Corp. and Ohio members of Congress say it would cost more money to idle production than to keep it going at a slow click. House and Senate committees have passed measures to restore funding but critics accuse lawmakers of falling prey to political donations, pointing to the thousands of tanks being stored in California and their vulnerability to IED attacks.

 

This is yet another example of a politician engaging in complete and total misdirection, and there is no way Ryan doesn't know it.

 

Obviously Biden doesn't want our military to be second in the world, yet the mere fact that he wants to cut tanks out and streamline the military is used as a propaganda piece by Ryan to try to say that he does. Biden is absolutely correct, we don't need more M1 tanks. His argument is so dumb it is just mind-boggling.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Whether you agree or not with Biden's premise that we don't need more tanks... Do you really expect RR to not take the fight to a battleground state like Ohio? That's cash right out of their pocket...

 

If, completely hypothetical... RR proposed to shut down car manufacturers in Detroit, would you not expect Obama and Biden to campaign against that policy directly to the people of Michigan and Detroit?

 

I don't really see the gripe here.

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

Whether you agree or not with Biden's premise that we don't need more tanks... Do you really expect RR to not take the fight to a battleground state like Ohio? That's cash right out of their pocket...

 

If, completely hypothetical... RR proposed to shut down car manufacturers in Detroit, would you not expect Obama and Biden to campaign against that policy directly to the people of Michigan and Detroit?

 

I don't really see the gripe here.

 

It's not about the location, it's the misinformation that he is peddling...

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

It's not about the location, it's the misinformation that he is peddling...

 

What is it that, exactly?

 

It has EVERYTHING to do with the location.

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

What is it that, exactly?

 

It has EVERYTHING to do with the location.

 

Thanatos didn't mention that it was in Ohio or that he gave a shit that they're doing it in Ohio. The problem he and I have is that they're claiming that Biden is asserting that our military fall by the wayside and become second-rate, while ignoring the fact that he said he wanted less tanks, more UAVs, and a streamlined and more efficient military. Set up camp and vilify Biden for his stance all you want, just vilify him for the actual position he's put forth rather than making one up to fit your argument.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

You are taking one sentence out of the article and twisting it... Talk about misdirection. lmao

 

READ the article. Joe Biden wants less M1 tanks (not that I disagree), Ryan and Romney have thus ramped up ads in Ohio... Where the only tank producer in the country lies. Do you not think that this is a HUGE political issue for the population of Lima and the state of Ohio to consider when voting for the President of the United States?

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

You are taking one sentence out of the article and twisting it... Talk about misdirection. lmao

 

READ the article. Joe Biden wants less M1 tanks (not that I disagree), Ryan and Romney have thus ramped up ads in Ohio... Where the only tank producer in the country lies. Do you not think that this is a HUGE political issue for the population of Lima and the state of Ohio to consider when voting for the President of the United States?

 

Did you read the article?.. They state multiple times that Biden wants to impose "devastating cuts" on the military in "a time of increasing danger around the world", et cetera. They are spreading propagands to convince people that Biden wants our military to be severely cut back while, as I said earlier, making no mention of his stance on increasing special forces and streamlining the military.

 

You keep arguing about the ads, which neither of us give a shit about. Pump in as many ads as you like, just quit making them misleading and stating that Biden wants to slash the military to shit.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

$300 million dollars and 5000 jobs being taken away from Ohio is pretty devastating to those people. It might not effect you in Nebraska or me in Iowa... But it makes a huge difference to those people. Just because YOU don't see it as a devastating cut to the military doesn't mean that is isn't important to somebody.

 

EDITED

As far as the "weakness" comment. The Taliban are getting stronger by the day and will reclaim the territory that we are currently holding. They are dividing us and the Afghan troops. There is so much distrust between the two "allies" right now that it is almost impossible to get anything done. They obviously don't see us as particularly strong. And the image of the United States being the worlds watchdog surely doesn't reflect positively on us.

Edited October 13, 2012 by Favre4Ever

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

$300 million dollars and 5000 jobs being taken away from Ohio is pretty devastating to those people. It might not effect you in Nebraska or me in Iowa... But it makes a huge difference to those people. Just because YOU don't see it as a devastating cut to the military doesn't mean that is isn't important to somebody.

 

As far as the "weakness" comment. The Taliban are getting stronger by the day and will reclaim the territory that we are currently holding. They obviously don't see us as particularly strong.

 

If they want it to be about the jobs, then they should argue that. That would be a valid point, but the fact is that they're not arguing that. They are pointing fingers and making incorrect assertions. Biden states that the money being spent on the tanks is frivolous and, like the article mentions, there are already thousands of tanks in CA and they are vulnerable to IEDs.

 

Replacing these tanks with UAVs and special forces (and saving money in the process), which is what the military has suggested, is what Biden is a proponent of. Ryan claims that Biden wants to cut back the military and made mention of our military becoming second rate, lol. The cuts that would have to be applied to our military to make it second rate are ASTRONOMICAL. Biden has said nothing of the sort. That's the problem Thanatos mentioned and that I agreed with.

 

I personally think we should withdraw completely and cut the military budget in half. I don't care if they build tanks or UAVs, as long as the spending is cut and we are using the technology for defense. I disagree with Romney/Ryan's view that we need to strengthen the military. I do think the case against these tanks is nice and all, but I also believe that Obama/Biden's promises are empty and that I can't trust them to do anything they say regarding the military or foreign policy (or much of anything else, for that matter). I'm not arguing the positions here, because I think both sides are retarded.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

If they want it to be about the jobs, then they should argue that. That would be a valid point, but the fact is that they're not arguing that. They are pointing fingers and making incorrect assertions. Biden states that the money being spent on the tanks is frivolous and, like the article mentions, there are already thousands of tanks in CA and they are vulnerable to IEDs.

 

From the article:

 

The critique, made in conjunction with more blistering remarks about President Obama's handling of the terrorist attack in Benghazi, tied Ohio jobs with U.S. foreign policy.

 

Replacing these tanks with UAVs and special forces (and saving money in the process), which is what the military has suggested, is what Biden is a proponent of. Ryan claims that Biden wants to cut back the military and made mention of our military becoming second rate, lol. The cuts that would have to be applied to our military to make it second rate are ASTRONOMICAL. Biden has said nothing of the sort. That's the problem Thanatos mentioned and that I agreed with.

 

He said nothing of the sort. He said it will project weakness and the cuts proposed to the tank program are devastating. Projecting weakness is kind of a flimsy statement, I agree but there is nothing here to indicate he is saying what you think he is.

 

I personally think we should withdraw completely and cut the military budget in half. I don't care if they build tanks or UAVs, as long as the spending is cut and we are using the technology for defense. I disagree with Romney/Ryan's view that we need to strengthen the military. I do think the case against these tanks is nice and all, but I also believe that Obama/Biden's promises are empty and that I can't trust them to do anything they say regarding the military or foreign policy (or much of anything else, for that matter). I'm not arguing the positions here, because I think both sides are retarded.

 

We aren't leaving the middle east for a long time. While I despise the foreign policy of RR, they are at least being honest about their intentions.

[Thanatos 2,847]

"Joe Biden said a lot of interesting things, one was at a time of increasing danger all around the world," he said. "He said we ought to be cutting our military. Specifically, he said that we don't need any more M1 tanks. Did you hear that? Guess where those tanks are made, folks -- right here in the state of Ohio.

 

This is the quote.

 

"At a time of increasing danger around the world." Clear propaganda. That is called emotive language, and it's designed to provoke an emotional response. My god, we can't cut back on tanks at a time of increasing danger? What type of idiot would do that?

 

He said we ought to be cutting our military! What type of moron would cut our military at this time of increasing danger? Never mind that that is *not actually what he said.* Little things like facts don't get in the way of our campaigning.

 

And finally, even if he is trying to get people to be against cutting back on making M1 tanks because of the jobs value. That is a ludicrous argument. It is an argument made to make people afraid of what might happen, rather than thinking about the military we already have. Sure, cutting back on military spending that *we don't need* will cost jobs in that sector, but it will open up billions of dollars in other sectors. Saying its going to cost them jobs, while true, is engaging in fear tactics to override the perfectly reasonable conclusion that we need to cut back on military spending.

 

Whether or not Obama/Biden engage in the same foolishness is completely irrelevant. This is just something that I was linked as an article by my folks that was on Fox News and was an article that was positive about Ryan, and I simply couldn't believe that this little stunt was overlooked entirely.

[Guest Phailadelphia]

Yay fearmongering!

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Cutting the military is not a good thing. Cutting the civilian contracts that have thousands of people who dont get out of bed for less than $2,000 is a good idea. All that stuff gets lumped in with the defense budget. THAT is where all this money is tied in. But dont cut them yet....let me get about 5 more years out of it guys or until I make 600K. then by all means slash them.

 

However when I was in soldiers do need to be paid more and then lose those cats like me now.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

This is the quote.

 

"At a time of increasing danger around the world." Clear propaganda. That is called emotive language, and it's designed to provoke an emotional response. My god, we can't cut back on tanks at a time of increasing danger? What type of idiot would do that?

 

He said we ought to be cutting our military! What type of moron would cut our military at this time of increasing danger? Never mind that that is *not actually what he said.* Little things like facts don't get in the way of our campaigning.

 

And finally, even if he is trying to get people to be against cutting back on making M1 tanks because of the jobs value. That is a ludicrous argument. It is an argument made to make people afraid of what might happen, rather than thinking about the military we already have. Sure, cutting back on military spending that *we don't need* will cost jobs in that sector, but it will open up billions of dollars in other sectors. Saying its going to cost them jobs, while true, is engaging in fear tactics to override the perfectly reasonable conclusion that we need to cut back on military spending.

 

Whether or not Obama/Biden engage in the same foolishness is completely irrelevant. This is just something that I was linked as an article by my folks that was on Fox News and was an article that was positive about Ryan, and I simply couldn't believe that this little stunt was overlooked entirely.

 

 

Isn't that a quote from the Senators speech?

[Thanatos 2,847]

Isn't that a quote from the Senators speech?

 

Yup, it is, I was thinking that was from Ryan. Ryan says much the same thing in his speech, its simply not quoted in the article.

 

"When you say it's OK to impose these devastating cuts on our military…that we don't need any more Lima-built M1 tanks, what we are doing is we're projecting weakness, and when we project weakness abroad our enemies become more brazen," Ryan said to a crowd of thousands in the town of Lancaster.

 

And this quote that they do use is pretty much just as ludicrous. "Devastating cuts?" How about, needed cuts? The Republicans have played on the fear of people about our military being cut back for as long as I've been watching politics, and it's absolutely ridiculous. We do not need to be spending as much as the next ten countries combined on the military, especially not at a time of economic crisis. It's just pure common sense, but the Republican ticket is playing people's fears, making it seem like if we cut back on the military, even by like 5%, it's somehow going to lead to the terrorists winning.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Yup, it is, I was thinking that was from Ryan. Ryan says much the same thing in his speech, its simply not quoted in the article.

 

 

Ryan and the Senator said the same exact thing in two speeches right after each other? I wonder if the people realized... Might need some new speech writers if they can't even change the wording. Regardless, you guys quoting the Senator and calling it "Political Folly" from Ryan is a bit sheepish, don't you think? Misguided, maybe? lol

 

And this quote that they do use is pretty much just as ludicrous. "Devastating cuts?" How about, needed cuts? The Republicans have played on the fear of people about our military being cut back for as long as I've been watching politics, and it's absolutely ridiculous. We do not need to be spending as much as the next ten countries combined on the military, especially not at a time of economic crisis. It's just pure common sense, but the Republican ticket is playing people's fears, making it seem like if we cut back on the military, even by like 5%, it's somehow going to lead to the terrorists winning.

 

Just like I told Zack... I don't particularly disagree that cuts are needed. My stance on foreign policy has been stated numerous times in this section. However, it's a matter of perspective. 5,000 jobs and 300 million dollars a year means a lot to the people of Lima and the state of Ohio.

 

It's like the ethanol issue here in Iowa. It's a HUGE deal and big political focus... However, people down in Florida or out in California probably don't give two shits about it.

 

And the rest of your post is acting like Obama is actually going to cut spending in the military. Just because we aren't building tanks anymore doesn't mean the money isn't going into the military. We are going to be in silly Unconstitutional wars with either Obama or Romney. It's just that the Republicans, for whatever reason, are trying to use war to their advantage. It's stupid, I concur, but that's their brilliant strategy. "Brilliant".

 

REPORTING FROM MAZAR-E-SHARIF, Afghanistan -- Afghan and U.S. officials said Sunday they had agreed to the broad outlines of an accord governing the long-term American presence in Afghanistan after the Western combat role ends in 2014.

 

LA TIMES

 

We are going to have a continued presence in Afghanistan for the next decade, which is undoubtedly going to cost billions upon billions.

 

I am sure we will move onto yet another petty, unconstitutional war, however.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Ryan and the Senator said the same exact thing in two speeches right after each other? I wonder if the people realized... Might need some new speech writers if they can't even change the wording. Regardless, you guys quoting the Senator and calling it "Political Folly" from Ryan is a bit sheepish, don't you think? Misguided, maybe? lol

 

Just like I told Zack... I don't particularly disagree that cuts are needed. My stance on foreign policy has been stated numerous times in this section. However, it's a matter of perspective. 5,000 jobs and 300 million dollars a year means a lot to the people of Lima and the state of Ohio.

 

It's like the ethanol issue here in Iowa. It's a HUGE deal and big political focus... However, people down in Florida or out in California probably don't give two shits about it.

 

And the rest of your post is acting like Obama is actually going to cut spending in the military. Just because we aren't building tanks anymore doesn't mean the money isn't going into the military. We are going to be in silly Unconstitutional wars with either Obama or Romney. It's just that the Republicans, for whatever reason, are trying to use war to their advantage. It's stupid, I concur, but that's their brilliant strategy. "Brilliant".

 

The senator was introducing Paul Ryan, I believe, and made some opening remarks. Both the Republicans and the Democrats are morons for continuing these unconstitutional wars, that's not the point of this. I'm pointing out the Republicans in particular because they continue to do this, play on the fears of the populace, in order to prevent things that we need doing from getting done, and they do it all the time in regards to the military. Both parties are at fault in numerous ways, the Republicans just happen to be more at fault on this particular issue.

 

The Democrats are guilty of their own various falsehoods, you know where I stand on them. I just call out hypocrisy wherever I see it, regardless of which political party is doing it.

 

I don't see where I implied that Obama is going to cut anything. Biden did say that we need to "streamline" the military, whatever that means, although it is Biden, so maybe the Admin didn't want him saying that. That happens often enough.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

[Guest Phailadelphia]

Socialism? Really?

[OSUViking 505]

People are still claiming Obama is a socialist?

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

[Guest Phailadelphia]

 

This dumb shit is pretty much exactly what Thanatos is talking about. In 2010 the Right was claiming Obamacare would be a total government takeover of health care, that it was socialism. Or that the Obama administration was going to "inflate the dollar away" with the stimulus and the Fed's quantitative easing. Now it's that the Obama administration will make American vulnerable to terrorists by decreasing defense spending. It's nothing but fear-mongering bullshit.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

The upside of Obama getting re-elected is that all of our tax money will go to compensating blacks for all of their hardships over the course of American History.

 

Yeehaw!

[Vin+ 3,121]

 

This dumb shit is pretty much exactly what Thanatos is talking about. In 2010 the Right was claiming Obamacare would be a total government takeover of health care, that it was socialism. Or that the Obama administration was going to "inflate the dollar away" with the stimulus and the Fed's quantitative easing. Now it's that the Obama administration will make American vulnerable to terrorists by decreasing defense spending. It's nothing but fear-mongering bullshit.

 

Welcome to Politics. You seem new.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Welcome to Politics. You seem new.

 

At least somebody gets it.

 

Obama campaigns on "Hope", "Change", and Anti-War.. He gives us 4 years of dog shit down our throats by cramming a record number of drone strikes up the collective ass of the world and is now campaigning on "Forward" claiming that it isn't about the last 4 years, it's about the next 4.

 

Fuck you and any other mainstream Democrat and Republican. You all suck.