asked about that President said well it was a wrong number, the caller was looking for someone help in shipping pizza making jobs to china on a 999 program.

Rex, #25

How many more thousands must die before this conversion? Seems to me these neo-cons have all seen a few funerals in their time.

Seems to me that if it is not one of their own, they don't give a tinker's damn how many die in their wars.

India: I am sorry to tell you that I do not know the answer to your legitimate question. I like Sweden's policy towards the military. They have a relatively large military. Make great military weapons that we use in the U.S. Army. The Swedes send soldiers on many UN peacekeeping missions but provoke no one. When was the last time Sweden or any of the other Scandinavian countries started a major war? America's foreign policy should be more like Scandinavia keeping up a big defense stick but keep the stick at home while diplomats speak rationally to solve problems alongside our allies in civilized meetings. I am tired of our jingoist foreign policy but I support limited counter-terror wars when we know terrorist want to hit us and we have the intelligence to prove it. If we get off of foreign oil much of our terrorist problem will go away. This is why I write all the time about Germany's green energy programs. Germany does not have to get their energy from the Middle East. So green energy and peace work together closely.

And I see so many sources for that bit of info.

They're all in his head. Along with the voices.

If that was the case the teabaggers would already be in prison.

Simple minded people like you Rachel believe anything the right tells you...

Exactly... starting to believe the right all have tin foil hats tucked away under their beds!

While Snopes agrees with you it is rather amusing as to what robmes slogan really is. "Believe in America" now where have I heard that before, let me think hum ah oh yeah thats right Kerry Used that same slogan in 2004, typical republican hasn't a original thought in his head.

I agree with you Progressive=Forward 11. I can't wait for the election to be over since Romney is leading in the polls. People please Vote, we must, we have to vote for President Obama. I read Romney told 27 lies in 38 minutes during the debate and no one is calling him out on it. The only thing I've heard is Big Bird, what is wrong with America. Republicans like you when you're strong & wrong. I have a son in the Army and I'm worried if Romney is elected he will start another unnecessary war, my son has already been in Afghanistan for 1 yr. No more WAR! This would be a scary America! Obama/Biden 2012

Who told you Bolton would be? Ed Schultz? What is it with your people. You believe everything Ed says? How stupid.

Stop talking about things you have no idea what you are talking about.

Un-necessary war? Are you kidding me? What is the taliban or Al Quaeda kidnapped your son? Would you want Obama just to hope things turn out OK?

Wake up. No one wants to start a war. Mitt Romney does not. Stop listening to Ed Schultz. You have a son in Afghanistan?...and you say the things you do?

You son is ashamed of you I would imagine. He is over there fighting for my freedom and yours and you are talking like that. Pathetic.

how to pay for it.........easy....cuts to anything the poor need and the middle class payed for.............after all entitled people are only the job creators...........and........their corporations..........heck it worked good for Bushy and friends....still trickiling up I see........

abusing that 4 letter word drip.........?

Sound pretty Dramatic. Why are you pissed off at Mitt. Did he dodge the draft. Strong statement, do you have any proof? You and I made our choices, so did Romney. Was Obama a draft dodger?

You are uneducated. Yes, Romney was a draft-dodger. That's why he went to France.

No, Obama is not a draft-dodger. There wasn't any draft for him to dodge.

Chris, you sound like a book smart individual toward this ole Vet. I better smarten up against a charactor like you, your way to fast for me.

Now back to Romney,

Though an early supporter of the Vietnam War, Romney avoided military service
at the height of the fighting after high school by seeking and receiving four
draft deferments, according to Selective Service records. They included college
deferments and a 31-month stretch as a “minister of religion” in France, a
classification for Mormon missionaries that the church at the time feared was
being overused. The country was cutting troop levels by the time he became
eligible for the draft, and his lottery number was not called.

President Barack Obama, Romney’s opponent in this year’s campaign, did not
serve in the military either. The Democrat, 50, was a child during the Vietnam
conflict and did not enlist when he was older. Semper fi Chris.

i'll tell you what makes me sick, johnny, is mitt romney spewing absolute lies to the american people and not one right wing gas hole, like you johnny, standing up and calling him on his lies.

i guess you right wingers are just as dishonest, dishonorable and cowardly as your scumbag candidate.

okay, brave Marvy...you asked for clarification from me...can you give me one example of a Romney lie??? would love to hear a factual basis for your accusations...

What I don't get is how anyone can support such a BS artist as Rompey! He is full of himself and his positions shift everytime the crowd changes. He's an as$ho##!!!

Here is a Romney lie that is as big as Texas. Romney supports $5 trillion in tax cuts by cutting 20% of the federal budget over the next ten years. He fails completely to explain what tax deductions he will eliminate to make up for the roughly $500 billion annually he needs to keep his tax cuts revenue neutral. Romney's plan will give huge tax cuts to the rich but middle class people will have huge tax increases of a couple thousand dollars. The Tax Policy Center has looked at the whole Romney tax cut proposal and called it unworkable and difficult at best. At worst Romney's plan is virtually impossible to keep it revenue neutral without middle class tax increases, huge cuts in domestic spending, and adding many trillions of dollars to the national debt with huge budget deficits that will be bigger than President Obama's deficits and President Bush's deficits. Romney's budget plan will not work because the numbers do not add up to anything coherent, let alone workable. Lack of details are a major problem for the Tax Policy Center analysis.

http: //taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/romney-plan.cfm

http: //www.npr.org/2012/10/04/162320089/romneys-tax-policy-still-has-holes-after-debate

http: //prospect.org/article/romneys-tax-plan-still-makes-no-sense

http: //www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2012/10/08-romney-tax-debate-gale

Romney also proposes $2 trillion in additional military spending over the next decade. Where will the money come from to pay for this huge expenditure? Whose taxes will Romney raise to pay for this or what government programs would he cut from the future budget? Why does Romney want to increase military spending when the Pentagon has not asked for this additional sum of money in the budget? We all would love to know more of these details because all we have from Mitt Romney's $5 trillion tax cuts are incoherent numbers and farcical hogwash.

http: //www.businessinsider.com/romney-wants-to-spend-2-trillion-on-the-military-it-hasnt-even-asked-for-2012-10

http: //www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/08/1141896/-Rachel-Maddow-Puts-Romney-s-2-Trillion-Proposed-Defense-Budget-Expansion-into-Historical-Context

http: //ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/08/budget_crunched_the_facts_of_romney_s_proposed_2_trillion_defense_increase

Hey marvilus....all you can do is repeat Ed Schultz. Lets hear you get specific about all of the lies you say Mitt Romney told in the debate. Lets hear it Mr. Know it all. You cannot do it without looking up what Ed Schultz said.

Come on Marvilus...lets hear what the lies are. I want to hear them now. I will check back in 5 minutes. You cannot have a half of a day to look up what Schultz, Matthews, and the best journalist in American...Al Sharpton is saying.

Don't you see Obama got his clock cleaned in the debate. You guys look to any excuse. Romney is not lying. The left wing media, Schultz says he is. They think they know more about how he thinks than Romney himself.

Here is the bottom line. You lefties in the media and blind followers of Schultz are reaching out to any thing you can think of to slander Mitt Romney. The Big Bird commercial. Are you proud of that?

You guys are on your way out. See ya later.

Let's not forget, Bush, chickenhawk par excellence, cut the Veteran's Administration funding by 900 million in 2006.

If they couldn't fight, he didn't need them.

i see come_and_take_it is back spewing his lies, bs and crap.

can you prove any of the fecal matter you've posted or are you just as big a liar as your "leader", romney?

CATT's a chickenhawk. Likes to flex other people's muscles.

Hey Marv, good to see you again...

Can I PROVE any of this?? Oh Sure...thanks for asking!

Muslim Brotherhood ruling in Egypt, his NSA team calls the Brotherhood "argely secular" and "not a threat", despite many of the terror organizations in the world springing from the MBH, including Al Qaida.

On the Israeli borders...well shoot, Marv, nothing to prove there, all you need to do is listen to Obama's own words: "The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states".

Medvedev...did you happen to catch the hot mike moment? No, probably not...so here it was:

Obama, during a sit-down with Medvedev in Seoul, urged Moscow to give him “space” until after November. The conversation was relayed by a TV pool producer who listened to the recording from a Russian journalist.

“This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility,” Obama told Medvedev.

Obama appeared to be asking Medvedev to relay this point to Vladimir Putin, who recently won election to return to the Russian presidency.

“On all these issues, but particularly missile defense … this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space,” Obama said.

Medvedev told the president he understood the “message about space. Space for you …”

After Obama noted he’d have more flexibility in the future, Medvedev told him: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

And finally, Libya...every day shows more and more that this was not only a security breach, but a cover up of epic proportions...this one issue alone may bring Obama down, on its own merits, if the economy weren't so ruined and first and foremost in the minds of Americans. With the State Department ignoring requests for more security, and the WHite House perpetuating lies a week after the incident in Benghazi, yes, this was an all-time foreign affairs blunder.

All of those are true and "Ripped from the headlines"...you can choose to ignore them if you want, and call them lies, but just as Romney smacked down Obama: you are not entitled to your own facts...facts are what they are...and Obama is what he is: an unmitigated disaster.

but thanks for the opportunity to clarify, Marv...would love to hear any follow up you may have, if you care to dispute any of these facts with something of substance, and not just more hate and ignorance on your part.

CATT: Don't be a chicken hawk. Why would anyone want to make President Putin or Prime Minister Medeved upset or angry with America without a damn good reason for it? Missile defense in Europe is not a reason to make Vladimir Putin angry at us. We need another new Cold War with Russia like we need a hole through our collective American heads. President Obama was trying to solve a problem started by the Bush administration's ill conceived missile defense. Missile defense is a vastly overrated technology that the Republicans worship like a religion. The reality is that the missiles will always get through in a serious attack. The costs involved in missile defense are hugely expensive with little return.

We can solve the missile problem by smart diplomacy, Strategic Arms talks, and treaties that control the numbers of warheads and missiles. Russia and the U.S. have worked closely together gathering up loose nuclear materials under the Nunn-Lugar agreement in the republics of the former Soviet Union. Much work remains to be done and making President Putin angry over an almost worthless missile defense system makes no sense politically or economically. Besides, Russia is a country that could be a good trading partner in the near future. Commercial ties often help soothe political disagreements making far reaching diplomatic agreements possible in the near future.

Let's not forget that leaders say things in private to other leaders that really are not meant for public consumption. Diplomats keep their talks private for a reason otherwise others won't trust their conversations. Often times people talk about things that are never meant for public consumption because they may not even ever come about because of changing circumstances later on. In the internet and cell phone age this is getting more difficult to do. President Obama can achieve far reaching diplomatic arrangements in a second term. Besides the U.S. has a one trillion dollar budget deficit. We can not afford increased military costs, unless of course you want to start taxing the rich at 70% of their income. So what will it be Mr. Chickenhawk? Smart diplomacy with Russia or increased taxes on the rich for more counterproductive military spending?

Wow, all of the sudden, so much name calling..."Chicken Hawk"...i guess its like being called a racist simply because I don't like Obama's policies. I'll ignore the charge, because you have no idea what you are talking about. I have served my country and would again. I'll back up any perceived bravado.

Rex, you only offer 2 false choices. One choice does not automatically exclude the other. you can have smart diplomacy and more military spending...in fact, I'd argue that to engage in smart diplomacy, you must be able to argue from a position of strength. you can't do that when you are negotiating "behind the scenes" with the perceived enemy.

i understnad that leaders say things in private that aren't meant for public consumption. sometimes they are trivial and irrelevant, and sometimes they are VERY significant. I think that this conversation was of the latter nature. I believe that this was very much an "appeasement" type statement that- you correctly point out- wasn't meant to be heard by the general public.

Plus, by making such a statement, he is telling our traditional allies in Western Europe- including Poland- "Screw you"...there are countries over there that WANT this missle shield, because they see Russia as an immediate threat. you negotiate "Off camera" with the enemy, and that will not sit well with Poland and others.

Missile defense technology has come a long way since the initial Patriot batteries we first saw in 1991. Now I am not saying the systems are flawless, but the technology isn't worth just throwing out. as you probably know, many of our weapons systems have evolved over time. the first iteration of a weapons system is never the final, or best design.

Our budget deficit is $1.3T, and has been about that in each of Obama's 4 years. and yet, correct me if I am wrong, Rex, but don't you support the massive subsides that are spent on "Green tech"? If I have you confused with someone else, I apologize. But I agree with you regarding the cost piece. and while we can't afford to increase our military costs by much, we certainly can't AFFORD to CUT those costs either. without a strong defense, none of the other spending matters.

no tax increases needed. taxing the rich at 70% would be pointless and fruitless. any honest economic assessment shows that.

thanks for your response.

The rich need to have their taxes increased substantially if you wish to increase military spending $2 trillion more than we need for our legitimate needs. Military spending has increased over the last decade to unsustainable levels after 9-11. We can no longer afford this unless you want the rich to start ponying up 70% of their income for a military Romney wants otherwise you increase the national debt and budget deficits. The threats are just not out there from nation states. North Korea, Iran, and other countries are a problem but remember we outspend all other major countries combined in our defense. To say we need more military spending is to have a solution in search of a problem. Special Operations forces like Seals, Rangers, and drone aircraft can fight counter-terror wars with a relatively light foot print. So we can safely reduce our spending and pursue diplomatic solutions to problems we face. Green energy that eliminates our need to import oil will go along ways towards achieving that goal.

Russia is not our Cold War enemy any longer. Decoys, jamming, and destruction of the vulnerable radar systems mean missile defense is only of limited value. Russia has been working on new types of missiles that can defeat our missile defenses before they even can be deployed. You forget a cardinal rule of ballistic missile defense: the attacker always has the advantage over the defender. The attacker can very cheaply mass produce decoys, jamming, and simply overwhelm the very costly defense systems with cheap systems or large numbers of missiles fired at the same time.

http: //www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2006/02/21/Outside-View-Russias-super-ICBM/UPI-79371140539643/

Germany makes solar and wind power work by putting in long term subsidies. The Germans produced 50% of the electrical power from solar power this May. Germany does not have to spend hundreds of billions of dollars carrier task force groups that cost $7.3 trillion from 1976-2007. Germany does not have to spend $4 trillion long term in Iraq or Afghanistan due to the geopolitics of the world oil trade from unstable parts of the world. Germany keeps its money invested in its own economy which is one of the strongest arguments for green energy: its a national security investment. The point is that you can reduce your military spending with an Apollo energy program of energy conservation that reduces fossil fuel consumption, increased green energy spending, and mass transit systems like bullet trains, commuter rail, and buses. Remember we subsidize a gallon of fuel to the level of $15 per gallon once environmental, health, and military costs are all added up. This makes Germany's solar, wind, and bullet trains extremely economic. Most Americans fail to realize how much our government subsidizes oil as an obsolete fuel source at a time of peak world oil and the rise of the BRIC's and Asian Pacific rim countries.

So where is Mitt Romney going to get his $2 trillion for more military spending that the Pentagon does not want? Romney never served a day on active duty but is now smarter than the Joint Chiefs of Staff on military policy. The money Romney wants to spend is for corporate welfare for large defense contractors that want to restart the Cold War again. No military writer that I know worth their salt are talking about a need to increase military spending. Romney does not explain whose taxes he will increase to pay for his unnecessary defense increase of $2 trillion and neither do you.