Capt Walter Miller1159892<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>This is about the traitor/Fox News Consultant (same thing) that called POTUS a pussy.<br /><br />"The metrics for determining pussyship are fluid and uncertain. We can assume that Peters’ usage of the word was obviously meant to convey that he considers Obama to be a coward and/or a weakling. This supposition is supported by some of Peters’ previous commentaries on the president, in which he has called Barack Obama “just not manly,” and a “bitchy high-school girl.” We can also glean from Peters’ commentary that he has an affinity for authority figures who exhibit stereotypically masculine behaviors, like Vladimir Putin, whom Peters has praised as a leader. However, Peters seems to exhibit some confusion on this point, as he’s referred to the Obama administration as “Stalinist,” which in practice was a very un-pussylike ideology. Peters has also accused Obama himself of associating with “tough Chicago guys” and having “a massive Third World chip on his shoulder,” which would suggest a certain degree of pugnaciousness. This contradiction afflicts a great many conservatives, who see in Obama simultaneously both a feckless wimp and an authoritarian despot.<br /><br /><br />So already we’re muddled on the question of whether Peters actually believes Obama merits being insulted in this way. Perhaps a better approach is to examine the case laid out by Peters as he was referring to Obama as a “pussy.” Here’s what he said on Fox News:<br /><br /><br />PETERS: And, you know, we want – we the people, the American people, whom he does not know in any intimate sort of manner, we want action. We want action against Islamic State and then – then, when the president is telling us he is going to destroy ISIS. This is a president who has done more harm to American police departments than he has done to Islamic State. This is a president who restrains our military. He uses it not to defeat ISIS, but for political purposes for political cover. This is a president who doesn’t want to hurt our enemies. This is a president who cares more about thugs in Guantanamo, or thugs in Ferguson, Missouri, than he does about law-abiding American citizens and their right to live in safety and peace.<br /><br /><br />I could break this all down piece by piece, but really there’s no need. Saying that the American people “want action against the Islamic State” implies that Obama has not been acting against the terrorist group, which is false. Per the Defense Department, the U.S. has conducted nearly 6,700 airstrikes in Iraq and Syria against ISIS. It’s true that airstrikes alone are not enough to “destroy” the Islamic State, but they’ve certainly helped to degrade it. That one fact alone pretty well dismantles every other argument he mustered when making the case for the “pussy” designation, unless the Defense Department has somehow covertly been bombing police stations all this time.<br /><br /><br />And it’s not entirely clear what Peters would consider a “manly” use of military resources. I would imagine that he, like a great many conservatives, sees the commitment of ground forces and a long, protracted, bloody occupation as the “manly” path forward, even if it is a proven recipe for disaster. But the man whose leadership qualities and vision he admires, Vladimir Putin, is similarly limiting his engagement with the terrorist group to airstrikes (when he’s not bombing anti-Assad rebels and Turkish aid convoys, of course).<br />So the case for calling Obama a “pussy” is weak and wracked with internal contradiction. And since Peters’ critique embodies so much of the conservative conventional wisdom about ISIS and the president, it seems only fair to turn the question around and ask: What do we call Ralph Peters?<br />“Sociopath” strikes the right note but feels a little too DSM-IV for my taste, a bit too clinical. “Bloodthirsty degenerate” is also in the correct area of the ballpark, but it’s a little rough and lacks joy. “Impotent crank who finds solace from the crushing frustrations of his wasted existence by going on cable news and boasting that his penis is bigger than the president’s” is a little too on-the-nose. As in the fight with ISIS, there is no perfect answer here, but I think “lunatic assclown” captures his essence well while also imbuing a pleasingly whimsical flair to the proceedings."<br /><br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.salon.com/2015/12/08/is_obama_a_pssy_a_very_important_fact_check_of_a_thing_that_was_said_on_cable_news/">http://www.salon.com/2015/12/08/is_obama_a_pssy_a_very_important_fact_check_of_a_thing_that_was_said_on_cable_news/</a> <div class="pta-link-card answers-template-image type-default">
<div class="pta-link-card-picture">
<img src="https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/link_data_pictures/images/000/031/422/qrc/hannity-peters.jpg?1449593103">
</div>
<div class="pta-link-card-content">
<p class="pta-link-card-title">
<a target="blank" href="http://www.salon.com/2015/12/08/is_obama_a_pssy_a_very_important_fact_check_of_a_thing_that_was_said_on_cable_news/">Is Obama a “p*ssy”? A very important fact-check of a thing that was said on cable news</a>
</p>
<p class="pta-link-card-description">A Fox News crank used a dirty word to sum up the right's critique of Obama's ISIS strategy — was he correct?</p>
</div>
<div class="clearfix"></div>
</div>
President Obama: Feckless Wimp or Authoritarian Despot?2015-12-08T11:45:03-05:00Capt Walter Miller1159892<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>This is about the traitor/Fox News Consultant (same thing) that called POTUS a pussy.<br /><br />"The metrics for determining pussyship are fluid and uncertain. We can assume that Peters’ usage of the word was obviously meant to convey that he considers Obama to be a coward and/or a weakling. This supposition is supported by some of Peters’ previous commentaries on the president, in which he has called Barack Obama “just not manly,” and a “bitchy high-school girl.” We can also glean from Peters’ commentary that he has an affinity for authority figures who exhibit stereotypically masculine behaviors, like Vladimir Putin, whom Peters has praised as a leader. However, Peters seems to exhibit some confusion on this point, as he’s referred to the Obama administration as “Stalinist,” which in practice was a very un-pussylike ideology. Peters has also accused Obama himself of associating with “tough Chicago guys” and having “a massive Third World chip on his shoulder,” which would suggest a certain degree of pugnaciousness. This contradiction afflicts a great many conservatives, who see in Obama simultaneously both a feckless wimp and an authoritarian despot.<br /><br /><br />So already we’re muddled on the question of whether Peters actually believes Obama merits being insulted in this way. Perhaps a better approach is to examine the case laid out by Peters as he was referring to Obama as a “pussy.” Here’s what he said on Fox News:<br /><br /><br />PETERS: And, you know, we want – we the people, the American people, whom he does not know in any intimate sort of manner, we want action. We want action against Islamic State and then – then, when the president is telling us he is going to destroy ISIS. This is a president who has done more harm to American police departments than he has done to Islamic State. This is a president who restrains our military. He uses it not to defeat ISIS, but for political purposes for political cover. This is a president who doesn’t want to hurt our enemies. This is a president who cares more about thugs in Guantanamo, or thugs in Ferguson, Missouri, than he does about law-abiding American citizens and their right to live in safety and peace.<br /><br /><br />I could break this all down piece by piece, but really there’s no need. Saying that the American people “want action against the Islamic State” implies that Obama has not been acting against the terrorist group, which is false. Per the Defense Department, the U.S. has conducted nearly 6,700 airstrikes in Iraq and Syria against ISIS. It’s true that airstrikes alone are not enough to “destroy” the Islamic State, but they’ve certainly helped to degrade it. That one fact alone pretty well dismantles every other argument he mustered when making the case for the “pussy” designation, unless the Defense Department has somehow covertly been bombing police stations all this time.<br /><br /><br />And it’s not entirely clear what Peters would consider a “manly” use of military resources. I would imagine that he, like a great many conservatives, sees the commitment of ground forces and a long, protracted, bloody occupation as the “manly” path forward, even if it is a proven recipe for disaster. But the man whose leadership qualities and vision he admires, Vladimir Putin, is similarly limiting his engagement with the terrorist group to airstrikes (when he’s not bombing anti-Assad rebels and Turkish aid convoys, of course).<br />So the case for calling Obama a “pussy” is weak and wracked with internal contradiction. And since Peters’ critique embodies so much of the conservative conventional wisdom about ISIS and the president, it seems only fair to turn the question around and ask: What do we call Ralph Peters?<br />“Sociopath” strikes the right note but feels a little too DSM-IV for my taste, a bit too clinical. “Bloodthirsty degenerate” is also in the correct area of the ballpark, but it’s a little rough and lacks joy. “Impotent crank who finds solace from the crushing frustrations of his wasted existence by going on cable news and boasting that his penis is bigger than the president’s” is a little too on-the-nose. As in the fight with ISIS, there is no perfect answer here, but I think “lunatic assclown” captures his essence well while also imbuing a pleasingly whimsical flair to the proceedings."<br /><br /><a target="_blank" href="http://www.salon.com/2015/12/08/is_obama_a_pssy_a_very_important_fact_check_of_a_thing_that_was_said_on_cable_news/">http://www.salon.com/2015/12/08/is_obama_a_pssy_a_very_important_fact_check_of_a_thing_that_was_said_on_cable_news/</a> <div class="pta-link-card answers-template-image type-default">
<div class="pta-link-card-picture">
<img src="https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/link_data_pictures/images/000/031/422/qrc/hannity-peters.jpg?1449593103">
</div>
<div class="pta-link-card-content">
<p class="pta-link-card-title">
<a target="blank" href="http://www.salon.com/2015/12/08/is_obama_a_pssy_a_very_important_fact_check_of_a_thing_that_was_said_on_cable_news/">Is Obama a “p*ssy”? A very important fact-check of a thing that was said on cable news</a>
</p>
<p class="pta-link-card-description">A Fox News crank used a dirty word to sum up the right's critique of Obama's ISIS strategy — was he correct?</p>
</div>
<div class="clearfix"></div>
</div>
President Obama: Feckless Wimp or Authoritarian Despot?2015-12-08T11:45:03-05:002015-12-08T11:45:03-05:00PO3 Private RallyPoint Member1159924<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>well, that is an opinion :). lol don't take that too serious. lol All you need to know, he is not one of your "kind', as long as he is not going to steal from you or trying to cut off your hand, you should just laugh at him and move on.Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2015 11:51 AM2015-12-08T11:51:56-05:002015-12-08T11:51:56-05:00Capt Walter Miller1159949<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>This reminded me of the Doonesbury cartoon from many years ago where Duke’s GF Honey had to go back to China and testify at the trial of the Gang of Four.<br /><br />PROSECUTOR: “Which is it, Ms. Liu, Scum of the Earth, or Lackeys of the capitalist running dogs!?”Response by Capt Walter Miller made Dec 8 at 2015 11:56 AM2015-12-08T11:56:35-05:002015-12-08T11:56:35-05:00SGT David T.1159966<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>The more important question is, do we really care about what he said?Response by SGT David T. made Dec 8 at 2015 11:59 AM2015-12-08T11:59:49-05:002015-12-08T11:59:49-05:001SG Private RallyPoint Member1160057<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Many times, people miss the opportunity to be persuasive about a topic because they are so emotional about the issue that they lose their audience. Although I would allow that the audience in this instance almost certainly had their mind made up on President Obama's policies.<br />Similar instances of vitriol was a daily occurance when George W Bush was President.<br />Translation: LTC(R) Peters is not trying to actually convince anybody. He is offering up red meat to people who already have their mind made up.<br /><br />As an aside, I think it is eminently possible to be feckless or weak in respect to one policy, and overreaching and dictatorial on other issues. As a currently serving Soldier, that is as far as I can go.Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2015 12:24 PM2015-12-08T12:24:16-05:002015-12-08T12:24:16-05:00Maj Mike Sciales1160141<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Wait Walt...wait... Bwshahaha! Excellent assessment.Response by Maj Mike Sciales made Dec 8 at 2015 12:47 PM2015-12-08T12:47:08-05:002015-12-08T12:47:08-05:00CPT Bruce Beattie1160208<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>LTC Peters is a retired Intel officer and the author of several books about military history. I suggest that you do a little research before you call him names. The current situation in the Middle East was predicted to be the inevitable result if Obama followed his ill-conceived plans to pull out of Iraq precipitously without regard for the consequences. And against the recommendations of senior military advisors. I suggest that you acquire a bit more knowledge of military history and the history of the Middle East before you reveal any more ignorance. You owe it to your troops. Obama was willing to give up that which was earned by the blood of your Marines and my soldiers. Obama drew a red line and didn't have the balls to do anything when that line was crossed. It may be crude and ungentlemanly but a man who makes such a challenge and then doesn't back it up was called a "Pussy" in my day! Peters doesn't admire Putin for the way he treats people but that when Putin says that he is going to do something, he does it!Response by CPT Bruce Beattie made Dec 8 at 2015 1:07 PM2015-12-08T13:07:13-05:002015-12-08T13:07:13-05:00PO2 Peter Klein1161610<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I wonder what Peters would do if the positions were reversed? It is pretty easy to complain, but very hard to be the one who actually has to make the decisions.Response by PO2 Peter Klein made Dec 8 at 2015 10:05 PM2015-12-08T22:05:19-05:002015-12-08T22:05:19-05:00PO1 John Miller1161657<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div><br />He was wrong with using a curse word on television, but I agree with his critique of Obama. I too believe that he is simply not doing enough to combat ISIS-sponsored terrorism.Response by PO1 John Miller made Dec 8 at 2015 10:20 PM2015-12-08T22:20:23-05:002015-12-08T22:20:23-05:00MSG Private RallyPoint Member1167181<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Traitor is pretty strong as well, Peters has no oath to the President and he has not hurt national security in anyway. While pussy may be strong for TV, it is hard to argue that the President has strong leadership, if any.Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 11 at 2015 12:15 AM2015-12-11T00:15:32-05:002015-12-11T00:15:32-05:002015-12-08T11:45:03-05:00