Stalking The Candidates

Did I say stalking? No, no...I meant following. You know, on Twitter.

Yes, I recently signed up to follow both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney on Twitter. Not surprisingly, the Obama account seems to be producing far more tweets than the Romney account.

Not that I'm under any delusion that either man is actually tweeting, mind you. I'm sure both of them employ others empowered to tweet under their good names. And I suspect Romney, being Romney, is just itching to fire a couple of his tweeters (twitterers? twits?) as the campaign moves along, just because we know he gets a kick out of that sort of thing.

Neither am I under any delusion that they will ever see any replies I make to their tweets. Both men are obviously busy, Obama with being president and Romney with trashing our allies overseas (more on that in a bit).

That won't stop me from replying, of course. I just can't shut up. The challenge, though, will be to fit those replies into the woefully inadequate 140-character limit. So what you likely will see will be stuff like this:

Not that I'm going to let Obama off easily; I'm sure I will feel the need to respond to him as well, especially when he barfs up oatmeal like he did here:

Yes, I know. Tilting at windmills, and all that.

If you want to track my pointless arguing at these two famous men who will never respond, I suggest you sign up to follow @feralboy12 on Twitter. I will also try to put up a feed here at this site, somewhere over in that column on the right-hand side of this page.

Meanwhile, Romney recently trekked to England, where they are opening the 2012 Olympic Games. He's making friends fast, especially with quotes like this about our erstwhile allies (from his book):

England [sic] is just a small island. Its roads and houses are small. With few exceptions, it doesn’t make things that people in the rest of the world want to buy. And if it hadn’t been separated from the continent by water, it almost certainly would have been lost to Hitler’s ambitions. Yet only two lifetimes ago, Britain ruled the largest and wealthiest empire in the history of humankind. Britain controlled a quarter of the earth’s land and a quarter of the earth’s population.

Ignorant prick.

So how did England rule that large, wealthy empire, spread out over a quarter of the earth's land?

They did so with the most powerful naval force the world had ever seen. Which also, I suspect, helped them keep control of that water that separated them from the continent and protected them from Hitler's ambitions.

Oh, and...Battle of Britain, jerk. The only way Germany was ever going to be able to invade the British Isles against a superior naval force was to gain control of the air with their vaunted Luftwaffe. They tried...they failed. After that, there was virtually no chance of an invasion of ground troops. The plans for that ("Operation Sea Lion") were shelved once England opened up that can of whoop-ass.

"We saved your ass in World War II, you silly
limey bastards! I saw a John Wayne movie on the telly!"

This left England able to host a build-up of troops, including a whole lot of our brave American fighting men, in a staging action that made D-Day possible.

The Brits won this battle at great cost in lives and material. Thanks, Mitt, for belittling their sacrifices.

The Luftwaffe was never the same after their failure in the Battle of Britain. And as rough as D-Day was, it would have been much worse, and quite possibly disastrous, had Germany still possessed a powerful air force to throw into the mix.

Criminy. Read a book, Mitt.