During the Austin debate last week, Barack Obama made this comment:

"You know, I've heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon -- supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon," he said. "Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq. And as a consequence, they didn't have enough ammunition, they didn't have enough humvees. They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief."

Well, you had to know that a statement like that--insinuating that life is not all wine and roses for our troops being sent for their third, fourth and fifth rotation into the Gulf--was just going to make the wingnuts crazy. (I won't link them, but you'll find links here)

ABC's Jake Tapper took a look at Obama's anecdote, and guess what? Pretty much confirmed it as true. Silly Jake, wingnuts don't care about the truth. But I give you full points for this little dig at the end:

I find that Obama's anecdote checks out.

Some are quibbling about whether or not the "commander in chief" can be held responsible for how well our soldiers are being equipped, since Congress provides the funding for the military, but the Pentagon (and ultimately President Bush) are in charge of the funding mechanism.

I might suggest those on the blogosphere upset about this story would be better suited directing their ire at those responsible for this problem, which is certainly not new. That is, if they actually care about the men and women bravely serving our country at home and abroad.

Oh snap, Malkin and Ace of Spades. That was you getting pwned. Hubris Sonic at Group News Blog piles on, because you deserve it.

UPDATE: PERRspectives reminds me that the wingnuts weren't nearly as anxious to examine George W. Bush’s blatant “not ready for duty, sir” lies in 2000.