My favorite line....sounds like the way I talk about my favorite play after a Patriots game.  The Globe cheering section is clearly baffled, at how to criticize Mitt Romney here.  He came a cross as reasonable, presidential, and in full control.  Obama came across as petulant and defensive.  It is a favorite meme on the left to suggest that Romney is weak on foreign policy.  But what, exactly, was Obama's foreign polivy experience in 2008?  Being raised in a Muslim country, and being mentored by anti American figures his whole life.  

"Being raised in a Muslim country, and being mentored by anti American figures his whole life."  Bigotry  ascending.  That Muslim country is a democracy my friend and your latter statement a McCarthyesque meme.  This marks you as a throwback to an ugly time in this country's history.  You advocate eliminating part of the population of this country cracking under the pressure of Mitt Romney's poor performance. 

In keeping with his flip-flopping ways, Romney the chicken hawk's failure to articulate any substantive ways in which he differs from the President on foreign policy highlighted his and the GOP's weakness, vacillation, and incompetence. President Obama's confident mastery of this area and his many successes contrasted sharply with Romney's meek recitation of ineffective talking points, and once again made it clear how unfit for the presidency Romney remains just two weeks before the election.  

Mali will be under water soon anyway. Did the Globe remove my post because I used the term "fist pump"? For cripe's sake-you make a fist and raise your arm in the air. Get your mind out of the gutter Globe.

A Globe writer thought the "bayonets" line was great? Whoda thunk it? It was obviously read meat for the true believers but it came across as snarky and petty. So now the person who mispronounced "corpse-man" three times is an expert on Naval Aviation? If I'm not mistaken, US Marines still carry bayonets for ceremonial occasions.

I thought Obama's comment about "bayonets", "horses" and "aircraft carriers" was condescending and beneath the presidency. It sounded like something "crazy uncle" Joe Biden might have said between grinning that sarcastic grin of his.

And hey, where's the Globe column about Romney's great zing at Obama concerning his supposed off-camera comment to Putin that he'll have "more flexibility" to deal with Russia after he wins a second term. Romney was perfect when he said we don't need flexibility, we need backbone!

Last night Myth Romney became the "peace" candidate in his attempt to win the undecided vote.  This new personality tried to appeal to women and moderate voters.  It left me wondering does Myth suffer from multiple personality disorder?

"My favorite moment was after Romney brought up his often-repeated line about the US Navy having fewer ships now than it did in 1916, Obama said: “We also have fewer horses and bayonets . . . We have these things called aircraft carriers. Planes land on them.”"  Wow, this coming from a learn-as-you-go former community organizer.  I'm sure the libs got lots of laughs out of that one just like you, Farah.  But the rest of us thought it was childish, pedantic, scolding, and petulant.  It wasn't the comment of presidential stature. It was a comment from someone upset that he's not trouncing his opponent so he takes a cheap shot.  I'm sure it played well in the Eastern Establishment ranks, but for the rest of America where Obama has lost tremendous ground?  Not so much.  Oh yeah, in case you forgot, that part of America all the libs will be denigrating as stupid and scared the day after the election when Obama is swept out as a one-term failure.

Young Lady -- do you not get it.  If not you shold probaly look for some other line of work.  He was just being real.

Great piece Farah. If someone were to really listen you heard the President state that crippling sanctions were working with regard to Iran. The only "comeback" Romney had was that the sanctions should have been in place sooner. Then came the important part. The President stated that we had to get various other countries to also establish the same sanctions. Countries such as China. Matter settled. By the way these sanctions are the same ones that international experts stated we should have employed against Iraq instead of invasion and occupation. Trouble is sanctions take time. And we all want immediate results. Diplomacy doesn't work that way!

"attacking me is not a plan."

I'm an independent, and yes I'm still deciding. But I have to say it's refreshing to see a candidate acknowledge his competitor's strengths and successes! We independents are DYING for that type of "politician" in office. Where you may see a man who you don't think has his own foreign policy, I see a man who accepts what is working and looks to adjust what isn't. Whether I agree with him or not is another story. On the flip side, and again whether I agree with the President's handing of foreign policy or not, I couldn't help rolling my eyes watching last night's debate every time he kept saying "that's not your plan" to Romney after Romney layed out his plan! The President kept concluding very effective and convincing statements by coming back to that phrase that he's used ad nauseum since the first debate - and it's KILLING his Presidential image with independents! He should be focused on presenting his own strengths and promoting them - THAT's why Romney won the first debate. It was all about Romney. And his economic plan - whether the President and Democrats want to accept that it is the same plan they expected - was laid out crystal clear over and over again. For the President to keep saying "that's not your plan" appeared childish. Look, it is now laid out for everyone to see. It IS his plan. If you don't like it, it must be good. But back to the main point, I think the President could have locked up this election by winning independents over if he would stop pointing the finger for the sake of trying to look strong (which is backfiring) and start acknowledging that Romney - just like any individual - has some good points!

YEAH, what happened to Barack Obama's famous "Likeability Factor"?. No smiles from Obama. He was completely UNLIKEABLE. If the "Independents" or Women" vote only on "Likeability", then it's Mitt all the way.

bayonets and horses. Shows Obama's keen understanding of our tactics as CiC

While I can say that I would not want to be on the podium with the pressure of providing answers I can say that President Obama's sound bite might sound good and play well to the media attention span it was not in my opinion a good response. The reality is that our armed services are stretched thinner and thinner. The resource pressure is both manpower and physical resources. We must have the capability to show our flag in many jurisdictions. Diplomacy is always our first preference, joining with our allies, but our military provides the extra incentive.

"Obama said: “We also have fewer horses and bayonets . . . We have these things called aircraft carriers. Planes land on them.” and with $1 billion sequestration in the military budget barely 60 days away, we will soon have far fewer of them. OBama may cavalierly said sequestration wont happen, but he cant say how it wont, as he has no initiative underway to prevent it occurring as scheduled.  Hey, it's all good, that's all Congress's mess, isnt that what he said...not really HIS problem, but THEIRS!  Where does the buck stop...not with this President. Hopefully sequestration wont happen, because enough Congressmen will care too much about their country...it darn well wont be avoided due to Presidential leadership...that has been AWOL for the past few years, as it is n this issue.  Romney is 100% right and Obama's cute turn of words doesn't change that thruth.

Not disputing your point, fooltastic, that Romney might have changed his positions over the last few weeks or months.  However, many independents don't care to follow 16 months of campaigning, nor watch MSNBC or Fox News for our "unbiased" information.  We've learned not to trust what we hear from "party people" or their designated representatives in the media.  So while you are hearing flip-flopping, which I'm not debating, I and other independents are only listening to the comments that come directly from the candidate's mouths when we care to listen - which is during the debates.  So if look at it through that lens, you might see why so many independents may feel the President is being ridiculous and - frankly - annoying.  Certainly NOT Presidential.  And I do believe that is one reason he was smoked in the first debate.  Only one candidate came out of that looking Presidential.  Out of the second, neither did.  This last one - the President would've easily taken that crown - in my opinion - if he didn't finish every one of his effective arguments by going back to telling us what Romney's position is.  Look, his record to many of us is strong - he should focus on that.  He certainly needs to get away from Big Bird, binders, and bayonets.  That's losing independents.  Ask us!

Now I do have to throw one thing back to you.  What is the President's economic plan for the next four years?  I've listened to all the debates and haven't heard it yet.  Not a word.  If he's said anything, it hasn't stuck (and, if I may say, I don't think I'm a stupid guy).  So for someone who wants to constantly say that Romney hasn't laid out the details of his plans, I have to say that I feel I know Romney's economic plan extremely well (regardless of whether or not I agree with it) and know nothing about the President's plan.  On foreign policy, it's almost vice versa, but at least I have a general sense of Romney's plan.  But shouldn't the President be focusing on the strength of HIS economic plan?  We can't focus on it if we don't hear it.  And again, I'm not listening to those on the "news networks" to hear it.