Gay activists to Obama: What's next?

President Barack Obama 's embrace of same-sex marriage was a major moment for gay-rights advocates - historic, emotional, a cause for celebration and more praise for an administration with a strong record on these issues.

[Otis B Driftwood]

Knee pads: "Obama/Biden 2012"

[Ex-GOP Con]

America is a progressive nation. It has always rose above the bigotry and hatred. That is what makes this country so great. This too shall pass. History will reflect on these years and paint those who actively pushed to legislate their hate and bigotry and those who rose and stood above it.

[Ex-GOP Con]

They really should be patient. President Obama had more important things like the economy to tackle in his first term and focusing the country's attention back to hunting down bin laden. He has successfully managed to stop the recession and turn it around into a recover. And with his focus on bin laden, we were finally able to bring justice to those whose lives were lost on 9/11. Even during this time, President Obama had Don't Ask Don't Tell ended. If gay activist stepped back a little they would realize this President has done more for gay rights than any President above him. President Obama's second term will be a great one.

[The laughing liberal]

Obama: Our First Gay President!! LMAO!



It's the ECONOMY STUPID!





Your Big Money Donors made you Dance like a good Puppet! They had 2 demands:

1) Pimp Gay Marriage
2) Block the Oil Pipeline


You are a shill for the bucks Blobama!

[The laughing liberal]

The Economy SUCKS so what does Blobama roll out?



Gay Flowking Marriage!






OMG What a Moron!

[The laughing liberal]

2 More US Troops Killed in Obama's War so What does Blobama roll out?




Gay Flowking Marriage!!!!



Idiot!

[The laughing liberal]

400,000 applied for 1st Time Unemployment Benefits so what does Blobama roll out?




GAY FLOWKING MARRIAGE!!!!




What an Idiot!

[The laughing liberal]

$5 TRILLION in New Unpatriotic Debt saddled on us and our Children so What does the azzwhipe Obama roll out?



Gay Flowking Marriage!!!!




You can't make this stuff up!






Obama = Worst Totus of All-Time!

[Mona Lott]

The laughing liberal wrote:

2 More US Troops Killed in Obama's War so What does Blobama roll out?
Gay Flowking Marriage!!!!
Idiot!

Obama's war? Really? Who started it?

[my say my right]

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
Obama's war? Really? Who started it?

The Afgan war IS Obama's war. It is the one he himself called the "right war". So yes, it's Obama's war. Keep up, educating liberals is exhausting.

[Ex-GOP Con]

The GOP sure like whining about the debt.....but they still refuse to pay their Bush GOP debt down.

In fact, their solution: spend and have MORE tax cuts.

You can't make this stuff up!

Lulz.

[The laughing liberal]

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
Obama's war? Really? Who started it?

Libya War = Obama

Uganda War = Obama

Obama bombs Pakistan killing civilians = Obama's War

Obama Assassinates US Citizens = Criminal Act

Obama ESCALATES the Afghanistan War despite his claim he would End it!





- OUCH!-

[Ex-GOP Con]

my say my right wrote:

<quoted text>
The Afgan war IS Obama's war. It is the one he himself called the "right war". So yes, it's Obama's war. Keep up, educating liberals is exhausting.

He started neither. NEITHER are his war. Keep up, education phony conservatives is exhausting. Seriously.....are you that stupid? Or have you convinced yourself that the Afgan war is Obama's?

go and google: "when was the Afghan war started".

[Mona Lott]

my say my right wrote:

<quoted text>
The Afgan war IS Obama's war. It is the one he himself called the "right war". So yes, it's Obama's war. Keep up, educating liberals is exhausting.

Really? Obama started the war in Afganistan, eh?

[The laughing liberal]

my say my right wrote:

<quoted text>
The Afgan war IS Obama's war. It is the one he himself called the "right war". So yes, it's Obama's war. Keep up, educating liberals is exhausting.

WASHINGTON; President Barack Obama plans to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan over six months, an accelerated timetable — with an endgame built in — that would have the first Marines there as early as Christmas, a senior administration official told The Associated Press.

With the full complement of new troops expected to be in Afghanistan by next summer, the heightened pace of Obama's military deployment in the 8-year-old war appears to mimic the 2007 troop surge in Iraq, a 20,000-strong force addition under former President George W. Bush. Similar in strategy to that mission, Obama's Afghan surge aims to reverse gains by Taliban insurgents and to secure population centers in the volatile south and east parts of the country.


Obama = Bush!

[Mona Lott]

The laughing liberal wrote:

- OUCH!-

Did you poke yourself with your banjo pick?

[The laughing liberal]

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
Really? Obama started the war in Afganistan, eh?

LMAO!



When you take over the Commander in Chief or CEO position and DECIDE TO ESCALATE THE WAR 3 Times; You Own It dummy!



Obama should have gotten out but he wanted More US Troops to DIE for nothing. What a Filthy Pig!

[Mothra]

What's next?

That was quick.

From hero to zero in a week.

[The laughing liberal]

Ex-GOP Con wrote:

<quoted text>
He started neither. NEITHER are his war. Keep up, education phony conservatives is exhausting. Seriously.....are you that stupid? Or have you convinced yourself that the Afgan war is Obama's?
go and google: "when was the Afghan war started".

Afghanistan is the Right War and that's Why I'm Escalation US Troop Levels 3 times! YES!!!



IDIOT!





10 Years on, Are We Fighting the Right War in Afghanistan?


By Joshua Foust
Oct 7 2011,

The U.S. lacks coherent and measurable metrics for success in the war there, making it difficult to know if our strategy is even taking us in the right direction

Worse still, however, and relevant to my opening paragraph here, is the belief that a simple comparison of drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan will tell you anything at all about either theater of operations. Yemen and Pakistan are very different places, with different threats to their stability, different populations, different histories, different cultures, and different terrorist groups preying off the different society's socio-economic inequalities. They are not comparable, at least in the basic 1:1 ratio Thiessen constructs.

So what does that mean for Afghanistan? The way in which we conceptualize, frame, and then judge the wars we conduct matters tremendously. In "Measuring Success," I tried to do that with Afghanistan. I went into it hoping to do a fairly anodyne report of "here's what this metric says, here's what this metric says, and here's a weighted answer of how we're losing."

Measuring Success: Are We Winning? 10 Years in Afghanistan

What I found instead was that we just don't know what it is that we're accomplishing there. Simple numbers, like whether ISAF is right that violence is down or the UN is right that violence is up, don't actually capture the reality of the war.

War is complex, and it cannot be understood through simple bar charts and single metrics.

By looking at the war as a system, I realized something else: President Obama's strategy carries some real problems in terms of measuring its success. It has three basic components:

Degrade al-Qaeda so they can never launch at attack on the U.S. from Afghanistan;
Reverse the Taliban's momentum so they cannot overthrow the government; and
Build the Afghan government and Afghan security forces' capacity so they can run things on their own.

Sounds good, right? But the first two components are defined by absence, which means they have already been achieved but they also can never be achieved (since a single recurrence would demonstrate mission failure). The third component is so vague and undefinable we have no way of ever knowing if we've ever reached it, except maybe in hindsight someday long after we've already reached it, or failed to.

Knowing how incoherent the metrics for the war's success are, we probably shouldn't be surprised at the other findings I discovered: the Taliban is fighting a fundamentally political war, while ISAF, despite much talk to the contrary, is still fighting a conventional military war. Taken together, these two wars should mean we should account for both military and political effects in the war.

But we don't. In fact, we measure most of the relevant metrics that would tell us if we're winning in Afghanistan either incompletely or not at all. So when we ask if we're winning, we haven't the foggiest idea how to answer or to find out.

If we are ever to make smart choices in foreign policy, we have to start thinking in terms of strategy, not just of methods but of end states, outputs, and measurements. That just isn't happening right now, whether it's drone strikes in Yemen or the rapidly drawing down war in Afghanistan.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/arch...

[The laughing liberal]

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
Did you poke yourself with your banjo pick?

My factual post shoved a dirty sock right in your mouth now didn't it!



Bwahahahahahaha!



You couldn't even respond to it's content because you know it's all true about the Warmonger Obama. But you still kiss his azz. What a putz.