Reaction to President Obama's "horses and bayonets" line depends on party affiliation.
WASHINGTON -- The most talked about line from Monday night's presidential debate was President Barack Obama's comment that "we also have fewer horses and bayonets." It was in response to Republican Mitt Romney's statement that the U.S. now has fewer ships than at anytime since World war I and that he would change that as president as part of his plan to increase military spending.
Moderator Bob Schieffer, center, watches as Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama shake hands before the start of the last debate Monday at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla.
Members of Congress reacted to Obama's rebuttal along party lines, with Republicans quick to say a strong Navy, with a robust fleet of ships, is vital to keeping the United States strong. Democrats said the president was just making the point, effectively in their view, that technological advances mean the U.S. can do more with less.
Obama's point at Monday's debate was that military needs have changed as the United States developed more advanced and sophisticated ships and battle systems.
"You mentioned the Navy, for example, and that we have fewer ships than we did in 1916," Obama said. "Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military's changed. We have these things called aircraft carriers, where planes land on them. We have these ships that go underwater, nuclear submarines. The nature of our military's changed. And so the question is not a game of Battleship where we're counting ships. It's what are our capabilities."
Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson, took offense to the president's comments.
"It's alarming just how out of touch President Obama continues to be when it comes to the dangerous world that we live in, and it's unconscionable that he is more focused on wasting taxpayers' hard-earned money on failed green energy companies like Solyndra than ensuring the strength of America's Navy," Scalise said.
Rep. Cedric Richmond, D-New Orleans, said he's heard the criticism by some Republicans, but he views the bayonets and horses remark as a "good line" that made his point that Romney's call for increased military spending isn't well thought out at a time of large deficits.
"I know that there are some Republicans trying to take it out of context, but I think he was saying that the way we build things changed and so does the way you invest in equipment," Richmond said. "We have all these state-of-the-art ships, many of them built in Louisiana, so we don't need as many ships overall. It's a compliment to the quality of shipbuilding in Louisiana."
The biggest ticket military ship item for Metro New Orleans has been the construction of amphibious assault support ships, known as LPD 17s, which cost $1.6 billion each. They were built primarily at Avondale Shipyards.
But as production is phased out, Huntington Ingalls, which has had the contract to build the vessels, is stopping ship construction at Avondale and switching it to Mississippi.
Bollinger Shipyards in Lockport recently won a $250 million contact to build six Fast Response Cutters for the Coast Guard. But in a lawsuit, still pending in New Orleans federal court, the U.S. Justice Department accuses Bollinger of falsifying data that led the Coast Guard to contract with the firm to lengthen eight deepwater cutters - all of which turned out to be "unseaworthy and unusable."
Erin Donar, spokeswoman for Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., reacted to the debate by talking about the senator's support for shipbuilding in her home state.
"In every budget climate, Sen. Landrieu works tirelessly to keep Louisiana's shipbuilders employed, including a recently secured $212 million contract to build ship to shore connectors for the Navy in southeast Louisiana," Donar said.
Said
Sen. David Vitter, R-La. "Obama really can't predict what type of military
demands the future will hold, but unless he's already stopped our oceans from
rising to the point that they're actually shrinking, the
At the debate, Romney said he would put a priority on strengthening the military.
"Our Navy is smaller now than any time since 1917," Romney said. "The Navy said they needed 313 ships to carry out their mission. We're now down to 285. We're headed down to the -- to the low 200s if we go through with sequestration. That's unacceptable to me. I want to make sure that we have the ships that are required by the Navy."Obama said he wants the needed number of ships for the Navy, but that it's also important to make sure there's enough funding for troops and returning veterans.
"And so when I sit down with the secretary of the Navy and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, we determine how are we going to be best able to meet all of our defense needs in a way that also keeps faith with our troops, that also makes sure that our veterans have the kind of support that they need when they come home," Obama said. "And that is not reflected in the kind of budget that you (Romney) are putting forward, because it just don't work."
.