Why can't we all get along? Republicans and democrats are at each others' throats. I think it's worse this election than in years past. There are those who think Obama is on the side of God, and those who think it is Mitt. I have lost respect for so many people this time around. Have you? I have voted Republican, and I have voted Democrat in years past. Have you? Why does this election feel different?
Just looking at the discourse, there is a disconnect. What supporters of one candidate find amusing and appropriate for one candidate they cheer. When the other does the exact same of getting in a good and thoughtful zinger, they boo. I'll give a few examples. I'm tired of going back and forth with friends and losing respect for them.
Fox News Channel and Wall Street Journal have touted the Denver debate (the last one) as a loss for Obama and a win for Romney. Really?? The result has been that the Republicans completely misquoted and misunderstood exactly what was stated. Just so you know, I'm sticking to these big soundbites of the evening because that's where I focused my efforts.
1. Romney: "Syria is Iran's only ally in the Arab world. It's their route to the sea."
Romney's serious gaffe revealed that he doesn't know geography. And those who have any military science background (I do) should know that geography can literally decide who will win the battle. Iran has TWO coasts. There is one along the Caspian Sea, and another along the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf which lets out into the Arabian Sea. Of course, you can always check out this article on "The Popular Beaches of Iran." Or you can stick your head in the sand and sincerely believe that he can learn geography from his advisors who clearly told him he should hammer away at this theory.
2. Romney: "The size of our Navy is at levels not seen since 1916"
In truth, the Navy's smallest size in terms of ship force counts was under Bush in 2007. Shocked??? You should be. If you want to actually check facts, go to an objective Naval history website which keeps just such a count. Apparently, Romeny's plan is to build more "amphibious" ships. That means troop transports for beach landings. Uh, is that what we realllllly need? I honestly can't agree with that. With missiles and drones we might not even need to get troops to a location. It might even be better and faster to fly them in.
3. Obama: "We also use fewer bayonets and horses."
This was a great zinger. A prime put-down. If Romney had said it, it would be lauded. Do we use fewer bayonets and horses? Of course we do! The Civil War involved 3 million troops, brother against brother with cavalry, cannons, swords, and of course bayonets and horses. Fast forward to today, the Marines use 312,000 bayonets. But never you mind that, they want you to believe that the President is lying because the Marines still use bayonets, and there is still some use of horses. However, generally speaking, the President's comment was spot on! Horses and bayonets were not the main method of warfare even in World War II, though there was still a call for them in the trench warfare of World War I.
4. Obama: "The question is not a game of 'Battleship' where we're counting ships. It's: What are our capabilities?".
It really isn't a game. The kind of ships we have and need are completely different. For example, the first aircraft carrier had 468 crew, a modern aircraft carrier has 10 times that at 4680. Obviously aircraft then and now are very different. Obama isn't wrecking the Navy, he approved a new class of aircraft carriers. The real question here is not how many, but what kind and at what cost. Read up on Navy ships at the Navy's own website. The Washington Post had an interesting fact check on this also.
5. Romney: Did he say Russia is our number one geopolitical foe?
Yes Romney did say it, but what are we supposed to do about it? Russia isn't the USSR anymore. If Romney is suggesting battling with Russia, Napoleon already tried that with 600,000 troops along with a complement of bayonets and horses. It did not turn out well at all. Russia may not agree with us as they are on a different continent and must protect their own interests, but they don't see us how Mitt thinks. Perhaps Romney's views are a little bit too 1980s for his own good.
Well, this my not be conclusive evidence. I'm not a political writer, but my ultimate verdict is that we would be better off with Obama than changing to Romney. His promises sound pretty empty and I'm not so sure that Romney is anything more than a military yes man. So far the arguments don't quite resound with me. And I think Republicans in congress are purposely giving Obama a bad time.
What I really can't stand about this is when people make it about your faith, that you can't possibly call yourself a Christian or be "filled with the spirit" if you agree with one candidate over another. Please read this deep, meaningful and very well thought out article by Relevant Magazine, 7 Things Christians Need To Remember About Politics.
Thanks for reading! Please leave a comment! Commenting is now open to everyone! (Or write to me. SavvySingleChristian@yahoo.com)