"We cannot simultaneously fight two ground wars, but will this compromise our safety and national security?" What the.....? What is something stupid you've heard a news anchor say lately?
They’re talking about a new plan to slash a lot from the defense budget, so this anchor stated we cannot fight or fund two wars at once, but then suggested our safety and national security could be compromised because we’re not fighting multiple wars?
What is wrong with these people. The fear machine is on full power it seems.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
10 Answers
Ha! I just jumped in to ask a similar question and saw this.I guess the news jock’s “thinking” is that the more fronts you fight on, the more secure you get. Funny, didn’t Hitler already try that and end up in a crushing defeat? That’s a line that would have me arguing with the TV set for sure.
Out of curiosity, what network was this on?
From Fox News, this fits their editorial stance.
MSNBC – this would be a surprise.
I think the Pentagon’s policy objective was to be able to fight one war, while “containing” a conflict on another front. The idiot anchor just showed how stupid he is. Besides, why would anyone want to fight two wars at once at any time.
One reporter slipped up and instead of saying congrats on the big hoosiers win he said conggrats on your big hooters, to the female host XD
I stopped listening to news anchors other than comedians (Colbert, Stewart, Mercer) after realizing that those comedians were far better journalists and closer to the truth than any mainstream media news-er-tainment.
The most recent stupidity that comes to mind was actually from the GW Bush era, when anchor person Reagan Jr. was defending GW as being a smart person… sigh.
@Zaku
GWB is a relatively smart person, just not a “slick” person with lots of words.
@CaptainHarley Smart relative to what? A typical modern TV news reporter? Sure, he pulled off getting elected twice. Sure, GWB and Ronald Reagan (and I would say GWB was clearly smarter than Reagan) were smart relative to the intelligence applied in electing them by modern newsies and TV audience attentions, but how far can that bar fall and still be taken seriously by anyone? If I listen to a recorded speech by say, FDR, and then listen to GWB… I am amazed at the fall from intelligence, humanity, and leadership, down to near-illiteracy, folly, and dis-ingenuousness.
Listen for example FDR’s four freedoms speech.
When I then listed to some GWB, I do notice that GWB has some smarts… but not enough to lead a country, and I am struck by how what smarts he has seem to be dedicated to trying to be convincing… and not to trying to come up with an actually wise policy. He’s like a cowboy bully trying to fake everyone into going along with him. More of a smart ass than anything.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
