Obama Wins The Nobel Peace Prize (1 Viewer)

I'm happy, but I hear what people are saying. Of course, some people don't want him to be recognized for anything and want him to fail miserably, just so that they can use that in future elections and to prove their theory that only white people can lead.

It may be too early, but I am still happy.

Maybe it will inspire him to end the wars and close the illegal detention facilities.

Bill
 
I've heared about it in my café tonight and was surprised.
I too think it's too early now.
I definitely do (did) see him as a candidate for that prize. But getting it now? What for?

I think it's more of a symbol than his real achievments.
Kinda 'Nobel Prize in Advance'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's never too soon to reverse the misguided notions of the past.

I see it as a victory of ideas, and can only hope it speeds a move towards a higher human law.

It is early, and shocking...and I think that's the point.
 
They give peace prizes to people who authorize air-strikes into civilian areas ?

I voted for him, I want to see him succeed, and I will probably vote for him again in 2012. But it seems odd that this award should go to a leader who hasn't forged a peace treaty anywhere.
 
More homework for poor Obama. He'll need a couple of centuries to keep his promises and all the things he's been lumbered with. Good luck...
 
It was way too early. He has'nt accomplished anything yet. He got it because of his good intentions and ideas. I don't think that ever happened before, giving a Nobel prize to a person with good intentions. If that's all it takes, then there must be a lot of candidates for the Nobel prize out there.
Maybe they should create a new Nobel prize, only to be given to the person who has the best intentions of all. :D

Of course, Obama won over McCain. That alone makes him worthy a Nobel prize ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Post of the year!

Agreed, actually.


Anyhow... yes, I'll agree to the statement that he promotes peace (or tries to, in a presidential sort of way). But, I am one of those who think this is a bit too early. I believe even Obama said that upon his acceptance, or something along those lines. Perhaps if he had won at the end of his term, after he had done all the things (or tried his damndest) he says/said he was going to (pull all the troops out, etc...), then I would be a little happier. I support the guy, but I haven't gotten a check yet.
 
It is not too soon. He went around the middle east and kissed a bunch of ass and made it clear the U.S. is not going to kill all of them.

It is going to be awkward to send more troops to Afghanistan but he'll do it. I bet Rush Limbaugh is excited.
 
Well, that's not the worst reason I can think of - "not being George Bush". :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well it's obviously that but I'd expect the Nobel Peace Prize to be a lot less political. He'd only been in power two weeks or something when the nominations closed. It makes a mockery of something that you'd like to think was above such tawdry politics. As they say in Texas (or is it Tennesse?) "Shame on you" or something ;)
 
Although I agree that it may have been early, also remember that Obama was not born on 1/20/09. Before that he was a presidential candidate and a Senator who opposed the war.

Also, the speech in Cairo and the his first speech to the Muslim world went farther in advancing peace than 8 years of war ever could. Not to get political and all, but you cannot kill to stop terrorism. Terrorism is the war method of people who have no power and feel aggrieved. Taking away more power and killing more members of their family only makes them want to strap on a bomb and blow themselves up and take others with them. Justice, respect, and EDUCATION will get rid of more terrorism than a million bombs.

Just like in the US. Most of the Christian ZEALOTS feel powerless in society and are very uneducated.

So, yes, I think that he did more to advance peace than any president in recent memory, although most of it was with words, not actions.

Hopefully he'll follow up with actions.

Bill
 
It's about something different every year. I'm not involved, who am I to dictate the qualifications they consider? Perhaps it's an expression of relief, that the US is going down the tubes less quickly than reelecting W would seem to have indicated.

Great points, Bill.
 
I think it should be more about actions than pre-election rhetoric though, don't you?

yes, and no.

If you look at the pre-election rhetoric, you had one candidate, McCain, that made jokes about bombing Iran by singing songs about it. You had Obama's administration coming on the heels of the Bush/Cheney torture regime, where the former VP still defends war crimes that were conducted at his direction.

So, it is probably premature, but on 1/21/09 we were already starting to make a turn away from torture & endless war and to SOME hope of peace. I hope that he gets us there. Who knows, but it could have been MUCH worse.

Bill
 
If you look at the pre-election rhetoric, you had one candidate, McCain, that made jokes about bombing Iran by singing songs about it. You had Obama's administration coming on the heels of the Bush/Cheney torture regime, where the former VP still defends war crimes that were conducted at his direction.
That explains why you think Obama should have won the election but it doesn't really justify his winning the prize for me. In the past it always been about recognising achievements that have lead to peace. In this respect Obama has done nothing yet, which is why I think it's political, i.e. a dig at the Bush administration. That's not a criticism of Obama, rather the people who gave him the award. Obviously I hope he goes on to earn the award but he hasn't done so yet, which is why I think it's premature. I wouldn't be surprised if he was a bit embarrassed to have received the award now.
Anyway, politics is boring so I'll draw a line under it ;)
 
Excerpt from the Speech by Obama:

"I am both surprised and deeply humbled by the decision of the Nobel Committee. Let me be clear: I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations.

To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace."

So, even he thinks that it is premature.

I'm still happy that he got it.

Bill
 
I thought it was a load of shit. My reaction was "Huh???" The only way it makes sense to me is if 1) you give it for what a person says rather than for what they do, or 2) you are trying to steer them in the right direction.

Wait five years and see if he deserves it.
 
Geez, I'm pretty hostile at 6 AM. What I would have said, had I waited a while, was that it indeed does seem premature. The upside, even if you don't think he deserves it, is that it sets the bar high, and he may feel compelled to live up to it.

See how reasonable I am at dinner, with a glass of wine?
 
The upside, even if you don't think he deserves it, is that it sets the bar high, and he may feel compelled to live up to it.

I think that's what we all hope for - including the Nobel Committee.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, what he said.

You can see the LRADs at work in Pittsburgh on Youtube. Doesn't feel like America anymore.
 
Every time I see this thread in the list of new posts, for a split second I think it says, Oprah Wins The Nobel Peace Prize.
 
No, that's next years winner.

In all seriousness, it's ridiculous. Where is the peace he's created? As has been prevalent with any super power, his rhetoric comes with an attached laser-point. He may well have good intentions, but it's not as if he can say 'Well, let's do this' and actually do it. When he actually sorts out the Middle East conflict, or brings stability to Afghanistan or Iraq, well, then I'd at least say there's some basis.

I think just maybe the Nobel comittee got caught up in Obama's slogan
'Yes we can' when making their decision.
 
Geez, I'm pretty hostile at 6 AM. What I would have said, had I waited a while, was that it indeed does seem premature. The upside, even if you don't think he deserves it, is that it sets the bar high, and he may feel compelled to live up to it.

See how reasonable I am at dinner, with a glass of wine?

See, the wonders of the grape.
Bukowski understood that.
 
Every time I see this thread in the list of new posts, for a split second I think it says, Oprah Wins The Nobel Peace Prize.

Maybe they meant Oprah and got the names garbled. It would make as much sense.

To my friends who are big Obama supporters, please don't think I'm down on the guy. I voted for him, I like him. He's smart, he's articulate, he's personable. He's funny. He's tall. He's hip. He's a good family man. But I'm still in a wait and see mode. He talks a good game but I want to see what actually happens under his watch. I hope I have to eat my words later and admit I must have been paranoid to have any doubts about his intentions.
 
To my friends who are big Obama supporters, please don't think I'm down on the guy. I voted for him, I like him. He's smart, he's articulate, he's personable. He's funny. He's tall. He's hip. He's a good family man. But I'm still in a wait and see mode. He talks a good game but I want to see what actually happens under his watch. I hope I have to eat my words later and admit I must have been paranoid to have any doubts about his intentions.

If he only reverses the stem cell ban, allows gays in the military and stops torture I'll love the guy. I want MUCH more from him, but he has already done a few things that I support (and a couple that I do not), which is more than the last guy, who NEVER signed a law that I liked.

That has nothing to do with the Nobel, but from where I stand he is on our side.

<leftist political rant>

Plus the torture thing is HUGE. Even though Bush said that we do not torture, everyone knew that was a lie and at every turn his VP came out and said that we do what we want. It was an embarrassment for us in the world. Kinda like preaching about other countries having nukes when we are the only ones to use them and at the same time we were considering using them as bunker busters in Afghanistan/Pakistan.

AND, they use the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that Iran signed as a reason why they can't have them, when Israel, Pakistan and India can. What they fail to mention is that the treaty was signed by Iran when they were ruled by the Shah, who was an illegitimate ruler and dictator that was in our back pocket. He was not a rightful leader of Iran and any treaties that he entered to were not necessarily in the best interest of his people, but in the best interest of our people.

Not that I think that they should have nukes. I don't think that they should have them and I don't thin that we should either.

</leftist political rant>

Krauthammer is a blowhard right winger. I heard someone say, the other day, that if Obama single-handedly cured cancer, they would complain that he did not cure Cerebral Palsy. In the minds of these people anything good can be spun bad and anything bad should be pushed hard. If Obama lowered taxes on he wealthy these guys would find a reason to criticize it even though that it their platform.

I'm not against all people that don;t agree with me, but these guys have only one agenda (well three): Critize, embarass and destroy the president at any cost.

There's a "real american patriot" for you.

Bill
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top