OBAMA'S "NO MORE HORSES AND BAYONETS" REMARK TO ROMNEY.

     Considering All the turmoil in the world, particularly the tremendous growth of the most dangerous people on the globe, the radical Muslims, Obama said in the debate that having a stronger military wasn't necessary.
     He remarked it wasn't the days of horses and bayonets anymore. Aircraft carriers and Drones will do. It makes you wonder where his obviously politically inclined military advisers got their strategical training from, Napoleon?
     The first problem with that isn't just contending with bayonets and horses, it's contending with camels and rocket propelled grenades. Romney isn't that far off the mark. In Barack's caustic, demeaning remarks to Romney, he desperately wants us to dismiss the fact that Islamic beliefs and intentions don't exist anymore. He obviously thinks they don't, or to be precise, wants us to have a memory lapse and "think" they don't. Ask the foot soldiers of this country if bayonets and horses don't exist anymore, particularly in Afghanistan. (Try not to step in the Camel poop while you're asking!)
     Well, it's nothing new, because for four years, he's been assuming just that! We're stupid. The more important question is, "WHERE HAS HE BEEN, in between Hollywood Celebrity parties and golf games?
     The point I wish to make though is, the purpose behind Barack Obama's intention to reduce our Military isn't because he wants us to be "powerful" with the aircraft carriers and modern weapons we have, as he so deceptively indicates, but to realistically reduce our Military might in the world in order to make our very dangerous adversaries such as Iran who presently trains Al Qaida fighters and Hezbollah, Islamic "Al Qaida" fighters themselves,and "Shariah Law" less behind in Military might to us.
      He has skillfully positioned himself so he can go either way if he gets caught in the middle. An excuse if it suits him, and a denial if it doesn't. He operates on the premise we're too stupid to recognize it.
      A "magician in deception". Now you see it, now you don't!
      I think it's quite plain that his monetary reason he gives for reducing the Military is not the reason at all, looking back at his record of spending. It's not to strengthen it, but to weaken it for whatever his devious purposes may be.
     A far cry from what Mitt Romney has in mind, which is to at least keep our Military in a position of power that would be decidedly to our benefit should a conflict occur. Obama and his Regime would like us to believe Romney is a war monger, all in defense of their "defenseless" situation. Don't go for it. Romney is proven to be nothing besides honest, sincere, capable of running the country's affairs in every sense, and can be trusted to exhibit sound judgement militarily and otherwise.
      This isn't a Chicago style poker game, at which I'm sure, Obama's an expert at, it's the financial and Military security  the un-american thinking Barack is playing with. What possible Military experience does he have?
     After having viewed the tape of the debate, since I missed it the first time, I see an offensive manner used by Obama that is typical of the Marxist/Socialist's way of debating. Whether or not they're being truthful in there accusations toward the opposition or not, their ploy is to be offensive, regardless of the sincerity of it, by overtalking, interupting and bullying their way through.
They know you aren't prepared in a debate to produce the evidence necessary in the middle of a debate to counter their false claims, thereby making them look triumphant at the time. Sadly enough though, it works. Even more sad is the idea they would be that disingenuous and guiltless to do it. But Atheists bear no guilt. Keep that in mind when you want to trust them with your loyalty and tax money.   Just sayin'.