More On Obama's Not Bush Prize

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:18:55 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The President speaking now. Glenn Greenwald wrote:

[T]here are simply no meaningful "peace" accomplishment[s] in his record -- at least not yet -- and there's plenty of the opposite. That's what makes this Prize so painfully and self-evidently ludicrous.

President Obama says he does not deserve it. Good for him. He will accept the award though. Looks sheepish about the whole thing. I take it he hopes this goes away quickly. President Obama's awkward reference to the Afghanistan "theater" demonstrates how ridiculous this all is.

Final thought - future headline "Nobel Peace Prize Winner Escalates War in Afghanistan"

Final Final Thought - the problem here is NOT President Obama, it is the Nobel Committee. Obama did nothing wrong and it is absurd to criticize him for the foolishness of the Nobel Committee.

Speaking for me only

< Friday Morning Open Thread | Conservatives And Kos Agree: Rangel Should Step Down >

The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

Menu

Home | About | RSS
E-Mail | Comment Policy |
Search
Login

Make a new account

Existing Users

Username:
Password:
Creator and Principal Author
- Jeralyn E. Merritt
TL Alumni

Contribute To TalkLeft

Sections
Site Credits
- TalkLeft Graphics by C.L., Our Man in Hollywood (2006 - 2008)
- TalkLeft Header Graphic by Monk
- Powered by Scoop
Legal
- All Content Copyright ©2002-2024. Reprints only by permission from TalkLeft.com
- Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.
- TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.
"The pump don't work 'cause the vandals took the handles"
© 1965 Bob Dylan

More On Obama's Not Bush Prize | 165 comments (165 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Gleen Greenwald (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:20:44 AM EST

siding with terrorists.
what next

oh boy (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:23:49 AM EST

"I will accept this award as a call to action."

Today's gonna be really fun.

Some reasonable voices (5.00 / 1) (#83)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:28:15 PM EST

Inspirational words have brought him a long way - including to the night in Grant Park less than a year ago when he asked that we "join in the work of remaking this nation the only way it's been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand."

Are out there on this.

Parent

One inarguably true thing Obama has said: (4.50 / 6) (#86)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:52:42 PM EST

"I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many transformative figures that have been honored by this prize"

Well, no you don't sparky, and you could say the same of the Office of the President.

The Nobel Committee has become a cynical facsimile of new-agey, pre-kindergarten teachers who give everybody a star for something.

Al Gore and Paul Krugman should hold a MASSIVE press conference and give the effin thing back. Surely to gawd, somebody is willing to give it back in protest.

In the meantime, where is my GD Nobel Prize?

Parent

Did his teleprompter really (4.40 / 5) (#94)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:08:22 PM EST

mislead him into such misuse of a pronoun?

Or maybe he is recognizing that being inanimate is what won him the prize. Not so for the truly transformative figures WHO are on the list, though.

Parent

Obama's alleged colossal brain power (5.00 / 1) (#104)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:29:14 PM EST

doesn't include rudimentary comprehension of English pronoun usage. I mean, this is the kind of thing one learns in grade school.

Obviously, when the quote appears in print it should read as follows:

"I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many transformative figures that [sic] have been honored by this prize".

I'm totally sick, so take this with a grain of <snark>.

Parent

Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate: (5.00 / 1) (#127)
by Spamlet on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:18:06 PM EST

The notion that that should not be used to refer to persons is without foundation; such use is entirely standard.

Standard, if infelicitous.

I'm no terrorist!

Parent

More evidence that dictionaries (5.00 / 1) (#128)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:21:56 PM EST

are the go-to sources on spelling.

Grammar books disagree with this dictionary (and, from a fast google search, so do some other dictionaries).

Parent

: Dictionaries (5.00 / 2) (#133)
by Spamlet on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:26:17 PM EST

are ultimately descriptive, not prescriptive.

Parent

Btw, perhaps (none / 0) (#130)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:23:13 PM EST

M-W is clarifying that "that" can be used for a group of persons referred to by a singular noun. I.e., Obama would have been correct if his teleprompter told him to say "a list of figures."

Parent

Sadly, much of our language (5.00 / 2) (#138)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:56:54 PM EST

has been adjusted to accommodate the declining public education system. Enough people don't get it, so we change it :)

It will be one of my pet peeves forever to hear educated people who pride themselves in their gift of communication to refer to humans as "that".

Parent

This is how language evolves (5.00 / 2) (#146)
by Spamlet on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:12:05 PM EST

Or devolves.

Personally, I lament the disappearance of "inflammable." It used to mean "capable of being easily ignited and of burning quickly." But apparently so many people were confusing the Latin intensifier "in-" with "in-" used in the sense of "non-" that a change to the inelegant "flammable" became an urgent matter of public safety.

Parent

: Evolve, devolve, wev... (5.00 / 1) (#151)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 04:07:06 PM EST

Grammar Girl sez:
Stick with this rule and you'll be safe: use who when you are talking about a person and that when you are talking about an object...
The who-goes-with-people rule is the conventional wisdom, but, on the other hand, I did find a credible reference that says otherwise...
My guess is that most people who use who and that interchangeably do it because they don't know the difference...in this case, I have to take the side of the people who prefer the strict rule. To me, using that when you are talking about a person makes them seem less than human.*
*I agree, with the foregoing. It would be infelicitous (inappropriate) to say: Obama is a person that won the Nobel Peace Prize this year for spurious reasons.

Parent
: My recollection (none / 0) (#149)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:40:44 PM EST

of inflammable was that "inflame" and "flammable" indicated redundancy in putting both "in" and "able" on either end of the word.
I was fairly young when that changed, so I don't know the absolute reasoning.

Parent

Indispensible --- sable --- sible ... (5.00 / 2) (#156)
by Ellie on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 05:07:41 PM EST

I suck at spelling and grammar, but some of my crimes are from using Vox / Dictation, words from my 1st and 2nd languages in a pinch, and not enough Spell Chuck.

I have these on hot-keys:

Cambridge Online Dictionary
Princeton Wordnet
Dictionary of Etymology
The origin of Common Phrases
HW Fowler's online The King's English is a two-fer, with a dropdown menu for a searchable Wm Strunk Elements of Style, which is also available online in its entirety.

Guilty pleasure: goofy slang from any era, especially when it pops up inappropriately or in unlikely places, eg, the Bush admins' overuse of bonkers to dismiss critics. That fifties Biff talk smacking down McFly, coming from the WH briefing room, gave me such a rush, I'd drop everything whenever I'd hear that day's SpokesBiff at the mic. I craved to hear one say that not only was Helen Thomas bonkers, she put out, plus, her threads were from Cubesville.

It's in the perpetual record for future generations to enjoy! How mental is that???

Parent

: Are you channeling Sybil? (5.00 / 1) (#159)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 08:03:37 PM EST

Funny stuff BTW.

Parent

I nominate Sher for a Nobel Peace Prize (4.33 / 6) (#106)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:36:30 PM EST

based on her mute usage of the "2" comment rating; which s/he supplements, on occasion, by a "1". (This comment may prove to be a case in point.)

Parent

I rest my case! (5.00 / 5) (#121)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:01:50 PM EST

Parent

: For another laff of the day (4.00 / 4) (#131)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:24:50 PM EST

see sher's "1" rating to my comment below.
The woman lacks a sense of irony, too.

Parent

sher downrates because of WHO (4.42 / 7) (#111)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:45:54 PM EST

comments, not what the comment says.

Heck, when I get a 2 from sher -- which is so often that it's boring -- I gotta figure my comment must be twice as good as those for which I got a 1!

Parent

His tone seemed right (5.00 / 2) (#4)
by andgarden on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:28:10 AM EST

I think he was rightfully a bit embarrassed.

If (5.00 / 2) (#14)
by lentinel on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:33:26 AM EST

he really felt embarrassed, as well he should, perhaps he will do a little soul-searching and ask himself why he feels embarrassed.

Parent

Really? (5.00 / 1) (#62)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:32:05 AM EST

He claimed this has been done before, so he clearly was trying to deflect the ridiculous nature of him getting the award.

Keep in mind, the nomination was submitted 10 days after he took office. They needed to base their selection on the information provided to substantiate the nomination. What could possibly have been said?

BTD is correct in the selection not being his fault. I don't know who or what prompted the nomination.

Parent

Depends upon whether (5.00 / 1) (#76)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:03:35 PM EST

someone else nominated Obama.

Parent

I'm thinking the concept was (none / 0) (#95)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:09:37 PM EST

discussed and authored during that cardboard cut-out party the Obama writers and team are noted for. I wonder what other esteemed awards/prizes they have entered his name into contention.

Parent

Yeh, that photo (5.00 / 2) (#100)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:16:24 PM EST

is one of my faves when I speak with women's groups ever since. Those who missed it then still gasp now. And especially when I point out that we still are paying the exorbitant salary of the twenty-something who scripts the teleprompter.

Y'know, nominating Obama for this does seem like some fratboy prank.

Parent

: If he keeps winning awards that (none / 0) (#144)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:03:48 PM EST

can't be explained through his accomplishments, we'll know that it's his team just trying to see how far they can take the joke.

Parent

well, it does seem to me... (5.00 / 2) (#80)
by Dadler on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:15:40 PM EST

...that this evidences an utter amazement on the part of europe that america could elect, at this particular time in its paranoid state, an african-american president, much less a man with the name barack hussein obama. they wept in europe too, watching those towers fall, for reasons as myriad and debatable as the origin of existence. the quality of the tears is not so important as the origin. shorter: i don't think we appreciated how astonished europe was by his election.

Parent

: On some things (5.00 / 4) (#132)
by Spamlet on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:25:14 PM EST

Europe doesn't know jack. A case in point would be the dewy-eyed delusion that the United States and the rest of the world will automatically be made better places because the U.S. elected an African American president named Barack Hussein Obama. But I guess we export Kool-Aid as well as Coke.

Parent

Really, indeed... (5.00 / 2) (#109)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:43:07 PM EST

the nomination was submitted 10 days after he took office.

So, Obama got the NPP nomination for being elected.

Parent

I think a lot of us are underestimating (none / 0) (#136)
by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:55:43 PM EST

just how much the rest of the world hated Bush, I mean my god- its basically viewed as a net improvement (which it should be to a degree- especially in Iraq) to such a degree that Bush left office that its funny.

Parent

Actually, I don't think it's possible (none / 0) (#147)
by Spamlet on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:16:41 PM EST

for any of us to misunderstand how much the rest of the world detested Bush. But you do make the case for this Nobel being the Not Bush Prize.

Parent

Well I think that's what most people view it as (none / 0) (#148)
by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:19:54 PM EST

and frankly on a sheer objective list- being "Not Bush" might be as big a net improvement as anything else that's happened lately.

Parent

: I have to disagree (none / 0) (#157)
by Spamlet on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 05:24:03 PM EST

if the basis of evaluation is Obama's record to date.

being "Not Bush" might be as big a net improvement as anything else that's happened lately

I agree with the second part, and greater substance, of what Glenn Greenwald said, complete with disturbing illustrations (but with all due credit to Obama for the praiseworthy actions Greenwald also notes).

Parent

Complete text and vid of Obama's Nobel speech (5.00 / 2) (#124)
by Ellie on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:06:41 PM EST

Here ya go.

I thought it was just right, all things considered.

Parent

No he is not "sufficiently embarrassed" (4.40 / 5) (#91)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:00:50 PM EST

If he were sufficiently embarrassed he would give it back and suggest that he be reconsidered for the prize after he has actually accomplished something, anything, of merit.

This $hit is a travesty of epic proportions.

Parent

Well, his remarks about the (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by brodie on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:28:29 AM EST

Afghan theater weren't encouraging. Some hawkish notes there about forces representing a threat to US nat'l security interests.

I still expect him to call in a few weeks for a 20-25k troop increase, the middle course. Be happy to be proved wrong though.

Who (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by lentinel on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:30:36 AM EST

in the world decided to use the word "theatre" to describe a hellhole of bombs and death?

Early pre-Orwellian Orwell.

Parent

In WWII (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by Emma on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:39:23 AM EST

weren't the terms "European Theater" and "Pacific Theater" in common use?

Parent

: Yes...and still are. n/t (none / 0) (#44)
by oldpro on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:10:02 AM EST

Parent

Wiki offers: (5.00 / 1) (#46)
by oldpro on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:13:40 AM EST

The term seems to have been coined by Carl von Clausewitz in his book "On War".

Parent

"The whole world's a stage" (none / 0) (#64)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:34:11 AM EST

n/t

Parent

: Close...but no cigar. n/t (none / 0) (#69)
by oldpro on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:39:37 AM EST

Parent

you (none / 0) (#8)
by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:29:23 AM EST

wont be

Parent

Sort of why (none / 0) (#11)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:30:20 AM EST

this award is absurd.

Parent

Don't those who support his policy (none / 0) (#48)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:17:27 AM EST

re Afghanistan believe it ultimately will help bring peace?

Parent

You will love this (5.00 / 9) (#57)
by Stellaaa on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:26:11 AM EST

My husband just told me a German analyst said, that maybe he got it cause "he made peace with Hillary".

Parent

: That's the only possible answer (5.00 / 1) (#67)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:36:34 AM EST

actually.
MSN has a poll...62.5% are saying he did NOT deserve this. The remaining are split between not sure and "huh"?

Parent
: I also liked Grey's suggestion (5.00 / 1) (#72)
by vml68 on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:44:40 AM EST

Grey'sthat it was the BEER SUMMIT that did it!!!

Parent
: Excellent. But then, where is her prize? (5.00 / 1) (#92)
by ruffian on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:04:07 PM EST

Parent
: That's actually pretty funny. (none / 0) (#60)
by inclusiveheart on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:29:35 AM EST

n/t

Parent

to believe that... (none / 0) (#56)
by Dadler on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:25:11 AM EST

...you'd have to believe that eliminating (murdering) millions of potential adversaries would constitute peaceful. and, make no mistatke, for peace to reign you'd either have to murder millions, completely and impossibly transform the US military into a primarily humanitarian/educational organization, and/or make your sh*t magically smell like rosewater.

you would need an entire army FULL of Greg Mortensens, in other words, and does anyone really think that is possible? it could be, but is it in our current state of national delusion?

Parent

Yes, and not likely (none / 0) (#19)
by KeysDan on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:39:30 AM EST

to be the last, a "middle course", with many increments, as I see it.

Parent

That would be most (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by brodie on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:49:58 AM EST

unfortunate, Keys, though as you know that's how a certain other war got wildly out of hand and how one president, off to a good start in domestic areas, became a one-termer.

Which is why I think this NPP award will serve as a constant reminder, both from the left and right (cynically), that he needs to live up to its lofty expectations. And continuing the long slog in Afghanistan with increasing commitments is clearly inconsistent with such expectations.

I suspect Obama is familiar enough with LBJ and VN to know about how these sorts of continual mid-level ramp ups tend to end. And in the long run, I just don't see Obama as the stupidly stubborn and politically tone deaf type like Lyndon.

Parent

No, you're right (5.00 / 1) (#35)
by gyrfalcon on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:57:58 AM EST

he's not LBJ and Vietnam. But LBJ's particular stubbornness and blindness are certainly not the only route into endless war quagmires.

Parent

Would you perhaps see him (none / 0) (#31)
by nycstray on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:53:16 AM EST

as woefully inexperienced on the international level when it comes to war and peace?

Parent

: Yes, inexperienced relative (none / 0) (#39)
by brodie on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:04:54 AM EST

to Hillary, whom I preferred in the primaries.
But you can make up for inexperience with smarts and courage. Obama clearly has the former, but unlike a post-BoP JFK, he's yet to show he will stand up to the Pentagon fruit salad boys and perhaps a majority of hawks and semi-hawks in his nat'l security apparatus.
Jury's still out on Obama bucking the FP establishment in the war-making area.

Parent

Sure hope you are right, (none / 0) (#34)
by KeysDan on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:55:02 AM EST

but I doubt it. The more McChrysal beats him up, the more likely he will do what he says, albeit in 'measured' steps, of course.

Parent

Are you kidding (none / 0) (#129)
by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:22:08 PM EST

As a matter of fact Obama is more tone deaf than LBJ ever was. Obama is closer to Nixon than LBJ.

Parent

Golly (5.00 / 6) (#6)
by lentinel on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:29:01 AM EST

Obama coming down squarely on both sides of an issue.

"I don't deserve it. I'll take it."

Who'da thunk it?

Wonder (none / 0) (#23)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:45:33 AM EST

how he'll come down on both sides of the money....

Parent

Maybe he will donate the money to (5.00 / 3) (#51)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:19:46 AM EST

Jimmy Carter's foundation.

Parent

: Now that is comedy (none / 0) (#79)
by Slado on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:12:37 PM EST

Parent

well he can't really refuse it (none / 0) (#137)
by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:56:45 PM EST

it would look horrible.

Parent

What a joke (5.00 / 1) (#7)
by Dadler on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:29:11 AM EST

Maybe he'll send Ving Rhames to give his speech and pull a deserving candidate up on stage to surprise with the award. Who will play Jack Lemon? I'd rather see that than the speech he'll give.

and a call to action? (5.00 / 8) (#10)
by Dadler on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:29:53 AM EST

you got ELECTED as a call to action and that hasn't done anything to get you moving, why should this?

Parent

Well, to show his sense of (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by brodie on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:41:46 AM EST

humor and that he doesn't take all this too seriously, since it's rather embarrassingly premature, he could see if Sacheen Littlefeather is still available to go to Stockholm to accept.

Her, or Mia Farrow or Angelina Jolie.

I'm also thinking one of the fine peace-minded members of ABBA, since they're already over there and presumably already on board with Barack. Bjorn or Agnetha perhaps ...

Parent

: Perhaps (5.00 / 9) (#33)
by Zorba on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:54:35 AM EST

Kanye West can travel to Oslo, leap up when Obama gives his speech, grab the mike and announce who really should have won the Peace Prize.

Parent

I don't think Afghanistan (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by indy in sc on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:41:31 AM EST

disqualifies him from this award. I just think not much he's done qualifies him for it.

I get the "hope" thing and I'm happy that the "world" sees America in a much better light. However, he needs to use that goodwill to make real strides towards peace.

I would love for him to be getting this award in a couple of years after Guantanamo Bay has been successfully closed and/or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are ended and/or real progress is made with Iran and with Israeli/Palestinian issues.

Don't squander the goodwill Mr. President. It happened before to terrible effect.

Never (5.00 / 4) (#37)
by sas on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:01:18 AM EST

before has so much been given to one who has done so little.

Story of the guy's life..........

Some comments (5.00 / 7) (#40)
by TheRealFrank on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:05:27 AM EST

I think it's weird that Obama got the Nobel peace prize, and it would have been better if someone else got it, or he turned it down.

However, I also believe that Obama is generally a good guy, and that he is trying to make a positive difference. There is plenty to criticize him for, but there can be no doubt that his diplomatic efforts have been positive.

The snide comments about him "keeping the money" and how getting rewarded for nothing is "the story of his life" are just ridiculous.

Obama wasn't my first choice in the primaries (Clinton was), but come on people. Get over it.

Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#49)
by lilburro on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:18:04 AM EST

and ironically Clinton works for Obama in the department that has done the most work in helping him get this award. Hating on him for this is hating on Hillary as well. But whatever...

Parent

Well, seeing as SoS Clinton (5.00 / 4) (#59)
by nycstray on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:26:59 AM EST

was sworn in the day after O, she also would have had less than 2 weeks on the job when nominated . . . at least she had more of a history though . . . I think it would have been a premature nomination for her also.

BTW, since when did disagreeing with something like this become "hating on him"?

Parent

well I disagree (5.00 / 1) (#75)
by lilburro on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:55:47 AM EST

with the Committee's decision, but saying he's never deserved anything in his life and the other types of comments TheRealFrank is referring to are just way over the top IMO. I'm no Obamabot but c'mon.

Parent

: Yes, he has earned (none / 0) (#96)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:11:06 PM EST

some of the great gifts he has been given in life.

Parent

The problem here is the Nobel Committee (5.00 / 1) (#53)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:23:25 AM EST

Not Obama.

Parent

Has anybody ever declined the NPP? (5.00 / 1) (#112)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:49:27 PM EST

Based on a recognition of one's own undeservedness. Or, for any other reason.

Parent

Yes (5.00 / 2) (#122)
by Upstart Crow on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:03:38 PM EST

Vietnamese monk. Believe he was to be co-awarded with Kissinger.

Parent

: Going to go out on a limb (none / 0) (#139)
by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:58:46 PM EST

and say the co-award part is what would piss the monk off- seriously that's so much worse than Arafat-Rabin its not even funny (at least they both had blood on their hands).

Parent
: Le Duc Tho (none / 0) (#162)
by souvarine on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:21:40 PM EST

Le Duc Tho, Communist revolutionary in Vietnam, declined the prize. I don't believe he was a monk. As a leader of the Viet Minh he had plenty of blood on his hands.

Parent

They (none / 0) (#90)
by lentinel on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:58:14 PM EST

are both intellectually challenged.

Parent

Bless your heart Frank, it's not about Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#107)
by Boo Radly on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:38:28 PM EST

it's about His actions, deeds, remarks. Why can't you move on and let Him claim His actions?

Parent

: #104 is real Candid for TheRealFrank (none / 0) (#108)
by Boo Radly on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:42:10 PM EST

Don't know why it did not cue up under his comment.

Parent

How is Obama Not Bush? (5.00 / 3) (#52)
by Boo Radly on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:21:35 AM EST

: They have judged a book by its cover. (5.00 / 4) (#114)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:51:21 PM EST

Parent

The classy way to accept would have been to say .. (5.00 / 2) (#54)
by Ellie on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:23:52 AM EST

... something like:

"I don't know if I deserve to be among the many outstanding past winners of this honor, but I'm humbled, and I thank you. I will do my best to earn it.

OR, I'll go for the Physics prize too, by dedicating myself to turning back time so that Ellie's head doesn't have to explode this morning."

He could also decline it the way Sartre did his Literary Nobel. I'm not sure how his speech went, but it no doubt followed a deep existential haul off a Gitane and started,

"What is the point? We're all solitary flames flickering in the universe. This bourgeois farce of flinging garish prizes for mindless scribbles we call liteature sickens me -- no, nauseates me -- particularly when serious attention is given to d!ckheads like that mega-wanker Proust and his deplorable "master"work, WTF was in that Madeleine, Anyway? In closing, Nobel Committee, blow me, and a colossal f*ck you to all of Scandinavia except Kierkegaard.

I would love to go on but I need to go puke. As much as I detest this award, I somehow feel compelled to go earn it with a tract that more thoroughly denounces you, your Mamas, and the cultish vanities of literature. Please look for it in bookstores at the appropriate time. Thank you -- doh! -- not for the award but for your attention in this matter."

: Or, he could decline in the spirit of Groucho Marx (5.00 / 3) (#82)
by KeysDan on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:22:25 PM EST

I'll never join a club that would have me as a member.

Parent

Someone (5.00 / 3) (#65)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:34:51 AM EST

Someone somewhere on the net called this part of his "accelerated Jimmy Carter-ness". LOL, chuckled.

The Nobel Committee should be awarded the Nobel Prize for kissing arse....or at least they should get the cake.

You have to wonder what (5.00 / 2) (#68)
by oldpro on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:36:49 AM EST

Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton are thinking this morning. I hope they stay away from microphones. Hillary won't be able to...if ever there were a time to display her diplomatic skills, this would be it.

Oh, maybe Bill Clinton will host another (5.00 / 2) (#70)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:40:20 AM EST

blogger mtg.

Parent

: Ummm --- (none / 0) (#89)
by lentinel on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:56:41 PM EST

Does "mtg" stand for "mortgage"?

Parent

Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#88)
by lentinel on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:55:21 PM EST

and Bill will be running - competitively - for the nearest barf bag, sink, or toilette into which they would offer their innermost thoughts.

Parent

Bill might (none / 0) (#140)
by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:59:18 PM EST

but its not like Hillary has much to be upset about.

Parent

: Well....except that if she'd been (none / 0) (#153)
by oldpro on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 04:28:35 PM EST

the Dem nominee, she'd be the President reaping the rewards for not being Bush, including this one.

Parent

To be fair (5.00 / 8) (#74)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:50:40 AM EST

he brokered peace between Gates and Crowley.

Quite the dust-up, that.

So true... (none / 0) (#87)
by lentinel on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:53:03 PM EST

and yet - the romance has seemed to fizzle.

Gates announced, rapturously, that he and Crowley - in fact their entire families - would soon attend a Celtics game together.

I awaited this event the way some are anticipating forth coming episodes of "Lost".

And yet, there has been report of this event having taken place.

So much promise.

So little movement towards a real and lasting peace.

How so --- Obama.

Parent

Just words. (5.00 / 1) (#97)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:11:45 PM EST

Parent

And words are all I have to steal (5.00 / 1) (#115)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:52:46 PM EST

your heart away (Bee Gees).

Parent

: Saw one yesterday that made me laugh (none / 0) (#168)
by Inspector Gadget on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 09:24:54 AM EST

NobeLOL

Parent

He should have accepted it on behalf of (5.00 / 2) (#77)
by esmense on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:04:20 PM EST

the American people, rather than himself, as an acknowledgement of the values and history of leadership that has inspired the hopes and expectation this award represents. And he should have been ready with a good answer to the question that ended his press conference, "What are you going to do with the money?" (That answer,of course, should not be "keep it.")

Doing so would have been the only alternative to refusing to accept the award that would have actually demonstrated humility -- rather than just making a verbal claim for it.

He'll get there re the money. Remember (5.00 / 1) (#103)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:25:36 PM EST

it took some time before the campaign contributions bundled by "what's his name" were donated to charity.

Parent

Rezko. Can't believe I forgot his name. (5.00 / 2) (#110)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:43:10 PM EST

Guess he really didn't adversely effect Obama's winning the primaries/caucuses/GE.

Parent

That is because Stellaaa (5.00 / 2) (#117)
by MO Blue on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:56:19 PM EST

doesn't post here very often.

Parent

: Fortunately, she's baaaack. (5.00 / 1) (#126)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:11:17 PM EST

Parent

Obama, use the NPP $ on kidney transplants! (none / 0) (#155)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 04:36:44 PM EST

You know, for people without health insurance. (As seen in Capitalism: a love Story.)

Parent

Um (4.25 / 4) (#78)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:10:15 PM EST

you expected this from the guy who gifted Gordon Brown with 25 DVDs?

Propriety is not their thing.

Parent

: I didn't expect it, I just think it would have (5.00 / 1) (#81)
by esmense on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:21:41 PM EST

been the smart response -- from a PR and political stand point. But these people often aren't as brilliant politically as they think, and are encouraged to think, they are. Their egos blunt their political instincts. A truely humble response isn't in their make up.

Parent
: TiS, Obama also gave Queen Elizabeth an Ipod... (5.00 / 2) (#116)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:55:11 PM EST

so don't go selling the guy short.

Parent

PT-109 (5.00 / 1) (#84)
by MKS on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:43:01 PM EST

Joe Kennedy tried to get Jack a Silver Star for what happened to the PT-109. The Navy demurred and awarded JFK the Navy Life Saving Medal instead.

JFK remarked privately how it really was absurd that he got a medal for getting his boat so out of position that it was run over by a Japanese Destroyer. He knew way too much was made of his time on the PT-109--but he didn't publicly act embarrassed about it, and used it.

Sometimes you get what you deserve, sometimes you get less than you deserve, sometimes you get more than you deserve....

I actually think JFK deserved the Life Saving Medal because he did do that. Swimming a long way with a injured crewman in tow. But he ran as war hero writ large--an exaggeration.

Why not turn it down? (5.00 / 1) (#85)
by DancingOpossum on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 12:45:35 PM EST

Several people have said that it would have been difficult or embarrassing to turn it down. Why? People turn down awards -- including the Nobel.

Jean-Paul Sartre, as Ellie notes, turned it down because he turned down all awards. And the Vietnamese politician who was co-nominated with Kissinger turned it down because the country was not yet at peace (of course that little fact didn't stop Henry, so I guess Obama is in good company.)

I doubt it would cause an international uproar, and in fact, I think it would show a mature, reflective side of Obama. He could dispatch Hillary to deal with it should the Norwegians get restless--or, he could bomb them.

Buwahahahahaha! (5.00 / 1) (#93)
by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:04:09 PM EST

I rolled over in bed this morning when this was announced on CNN and called it the same thing.

O's speech was good; will give $1.2 mil to charity (5.00 / 3) (#105)
by Ellie on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:32:44 PM EST

Now that I've had a chance to hear his speech in its entirety, I officially unexplode my head. His acceptance was thoughtful and measured, and not ballooning with empty, lofty phrases. I hope his promise to earn it isn't BS.

Credit where credit is due.

How sad for the next winner (5.00 / 3) (#113)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:51:17 PM EST

of the Nobel Peace Prize a year from now -- as it is a joke now, when there were nominees who deserved it. There will be deserving nominees next year, too . . . but the truly deserving don't need prizes, as they do it for less tangible rewards.

However, the truly deserving sure could use that million and a half bucks that comes with the prize, because they would put it to good use -- for others.

Still not as sad as Mother Teresa (5.00 / 1) (#142)
by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:00:51 PM EST

sorry but running an ineffective free clinic that on a whole increases suffering isn't Peace Prize worthy.

Parent

: ohhhh, I don't know... (none / 0) (#154)
by Upstart Crow on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 04:31:57 PM EST

What about Rigoberta Menchu, who plagiarized her memoirs.

Parent

This comment on another blog (5.00 / 5) (#120)
by vml68 on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:00:18 PM EST

ade me chuckle...

"In other news, The Vatican has started the beatification process for President Obama"

Some sanity doth return (5.00 / 2) (#123)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:05:11 PM EST

in my abode, where one of the young Obama fan boys shook his head in disbelief this morning at the news. And said that this is racism on the part of the committee, as there could be no other reason to put Obama ahead of the other nominees. Interesting.

Like announcing a fire sale (5.00 / 1) (#134)
by Spamlet on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:36:13 PM EST

before the fire.

Nobel Committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland:

Some people say, and I understand it, isn't it premature? Too early? Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now.

After Obama has turned Afghanistan and Pakistan into scorched earth.

The statement that (5.00 / 3) (#135)
by vml68 on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:48:41 PM EST

it could be too late to respond three years from now.

has me really confused. How can it ever be too late to recognize someone for what they have achieved?

If all it takes is a statement (not action) saying that you would like to achieve "world peace", then shouldn't every contestant in a beauty pagaent also be contenders for a Nobel Peace Prize?

Parent

: Me too (none / 0) (#141)
by nycstray on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:59:48 PM EST

maybe because this is supposedly for his "aspirations" and all that will have gone 'poof' in 3yrs and he'll just be another US President?"
Or are they expecting some sort of result from this?

Parent

Nobel Chair says too late to nominate BO in 3 yrs! (5.00 / 1) (#158)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 08:00:46 PM EST

Why? Because he'll be out of office after one term? Even then, if the man worked his a$$ off for world peace he could still be awarded the prize.

Lest we forget: Carter got the NPP 22 years after leaving office.

Methinks, the Nobel Committee suspects Obama will be gone in 3 years and that he will accomplish nothing for the greater good either in or out of office. So let's give the NPP to the spokesmodel for the health lobby, banksters, and war-profiteers before he finishes running the country into the ground.

Parent

BTD, I think your (5.00 / 1) (#150)
by prittfumes on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 04:05:40 PM EST

Final Final thought sums it up perfectly.

Yeah -- typical (4.00 / 7) (#25)
by DancingOpossum on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:46:45 AM EST

"I don't deserve it...but I'll take it!!"

Story of Obama's life.

He'll keep the money too. The Obamas are not known for their philanthrophy.

But it's good to see that the spirit of arms merchant Alfred Nobel -- purveyor and profiteer of death and destruction -- is being honored so perfectly with today's award.

http://www.chris-floyd.com/

: A swing and a miss (5.00 / 1) (#143)
by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:02:29 PM EST

maybe waiting to jump on someone until after all facts are know will keep you from looking like an ODS sufferer next time.

Parent

You (3.00 / 2) (#43)
by sas on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:09:54 AM EST

think it is ridiculous to say he is getting rewarded for nothing? that this is the story of his life?

Exactly what WORK has he accomplished in his life on which you base that statement?

Mr. Feelgood.....

I missed the start of the speech (none / 0) (#2)
by andgarden on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:21:17 AM EST

what did he say?

Basically, that he didn't deserve it (5.00 / 4) (#24)
by MKS on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:46:04 AM EST

Obama was in a no-win position. By accepting it, he gets all the predictable criticism.

But to have rejected it would have been problematic too. It would have alienated Western Europe which does like Obama. And, being humble and self-effacing, although it may personally be satisfying, is not the way Presidents aggregate power.

The Nobel Committee has done Obama no favors and was clearly trying to influence policy. It would have been better for Obama had the Nobel Prize gone elsewhere....But he really had to accept it.

Parent

The Nobel Committee (5.00 / 2) (#29)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:51:09 AM EST

did the Nobel Committee no favors.

The award is officially a farce. A joke.

Wonder what SNL is going to say...

Parent

Teresa, my thoughts exactly (5.00 / 3) (#36)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:01:15 AM EST

in an earlier comment re the Nobel committee chair's comment about delaying the call to Obama to just leeeaave Obama alooooone to get his sleep:

Not just the Onion but also SNL (none / 0) (#174)

comes to mind, with this from the link -- from the selection committee, which must not watch SNL:

The Norwegian Nobel Committee decided not to inform Obama before the announcement because it didn't want to wake him up, committee chair Thorbjoern Jagland said. "Waking up a president in the middle of the night, this isn't really something you do."

Also interesting to note [in that link] that re the committee's stated rationale of Obama's work on nuclear reduction, it has been just words -- nothing actually has been done. It just gets weirder in this nu world.

Parent

What? (5.00 / 5) (#55)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:25:03 AM EST

No 3:00am phone calls? Did they call Hillary instead?

And someone offered that Hillary should go accept the award for him. Now THAT would be funny.

(BTW: I was actually referring to LAST week's SNL, where they emphasized the notion that Obama has really done very little of significance since taking office.)

Parent

: Why "wake him up" at all? (5.00 / 1) (#118)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:58:19 PM EST

Is he any more "transformative" awake than he is asleep?

Parent

I find the same image popping into my (none / 0) (#71)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:43:07 AM EST

head when I think about what prompted someone to enter his name into nomination.

I see his people (Favre, Axelrod, etc.) all sitting around in a room drinking beer, surrounded by cardboard cutouts of Obama. They write on each of the cutouts the name of an extraordinary award or honor...laughing hysterically while they plan how they are going to grab the most coveted prizes for this guy.

Parent

Well said. (5.00 / 2) (#32)
by gyrfalcon on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:54:31 AM EST

Obama is not so crazy (give him a few years) as to think he either deserves this or that it's anything other than a problem for him.

He really can't refuse to accept it. Let the rest of the world rebuke the Nobel Peace Prize, but he should not discredit them any further than they've discredited the stature of the prize themselves.

But I wonder if he couldn't find some emergency diplomatic issue he has to attend to on the day of the ceremony and send somebody else in his place, his VP or SoS, to accept the award.

Parent

He said (5.00 / 4) (#26)
by Steve M on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:48:29 AM EST

that his daughters gave him the news this morning.

Malia said, "Daddy, you won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it's Bo's birthday."

Sasha said, "And we have a three day weekend coming up!"

And then he commented that it's great to have kids to help you keep things in perspective.

Parent

Did he lie? I read his press sec'y (none / 0) (#99)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:16:02 PM EST

woke him up and told Obama he won. Which is it?

Parent

: I admit (none / 0) (#101)
by Steve M on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:16:36 PM EST

that I may not be providing a perfect transcript.

Parent

Where's Bo's NPP? (none / 0) (#119)
by FoxholeAtheist on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:00:09 PM EST

He had a freakin' birthday. That's gotta be worth a lot these days.

Parent

His words were OK.. (none / 0) (#9)
by TheRealFrank on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:29:33 AM EST

But I think a humble refusal would have been a better move, diplomatically and politically.

Oh well. It's weird. I love the exploding heads on the Right, but it feels wrong.

It does him nor progressive policy (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:32:02 AM EST

and favors.

And it pretty much exposes completely the award as a farce.

Obama wants this to go away obviously.

But he'll have to go make a speech. I bet it is a very low key speech.

Parent

So does he ramp up Afghanistan (5.00 / 3) (#16)
by nycstray on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:34:55 AM EST

before or after "The Speech"?

Parent

: Yes, the only hope I see in this (5.00 / 3) (#27)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:48:41 AM EST

is that it may delay Obama in sending more of my students to Afghanistan, long enough so that they can complete this semester. I have found it worrisome to see how many have had to get excused absences because of increased callups for training.
And I hope that the inevitable increase in more troops sent there doesn't give my Afghan war vets in class more nightmares.
But I bet what is happening in Obama's wars won't help my former student, a Marines officer whom I saw yesterday, who was sent back to campus as a recruiter.

Parent

The Peace Prize (5.00 / 2) (#38)
by Zorba on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:04:45 AM EST

is always, always a political statement (for that matter, the Swedish Prizes in the sciences, economics, and literature are very often political, as well). I'm not quite sure what the Norwegian Committee's reasoning was here, since at best, this is wildly premature. I'm speculating that it is in part to spur Obama to put his words into action, in part to reward the United States for electing someone of color, in part because he's not Bush, and in part as a further rebuke to Bush, Cheney, the neo-cons, and the right-wing. And in part because it's fun seeing the Republican heads exploding. None of which excuses the inappropriateness of this year's award, of course. It can't have been very welcome by Obama and his advisers, but I think it would be a diplomatic mistake on his part to turn it down.

Parent

Low key with every camera (5.00 / 1) (#50)
by oldpro on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:19:08 AM EST

in the world on him.

Parent

When was the nomination deadline? (none / 0) (#15)
by me only on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:34:41 AM EST

I would love to know what he had accomplished by the nomination deadline. Surely the deadline was several months ago.

Deadline (5.00 / 1) (#17)
by Emma on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:38:36 AM EST

February 1, 2009 is what I heard.

Parent

You are correct (5.00 / 3) (#22)
by Slado on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:43:27 AM EST

and to use BTD's words "Makes it more absurd."

He was president for less then 2 weeks when he was nominated so it was stricly a nomination based on the fact that he was elected rather then McCain.

The Nobel Peace prize has been belittled because of this and it's a shame.

Oh well.

Parent

: One wonders (5.00 / 1) (#125)
by Upstart Crow on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 02:08:20 PM EST

One wonders what supporting documentation was used with the nomination on Feb. 1.

Parent

Doesn't matter. Decision was made (none / 0) (#98)
by Cream City on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:13:11 PM EST

now. The Norwegians must not read the news lately.

Parent

i wonder (none / 0) (#30)
by Illiope on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 10:51:17 AM EST

i wonder if they bagram air base "guests" were permitted to watch the acceptance speech? i mean, you can still watch it if you are forced into a stress position for hours.

DNC statement is excellent (none / 0) (#41)
by magster on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:07:27 AM EST

posted on OpenLeft.

I want what their drinking! (none / 0) (#42)
by mmc9431 on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:08:51 AM EST

I just wish Obama was half the man that so many people believe he is.

wrong person (none / 0) (#45)
by joel dan walls on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:13:03 AM EST

Clearly the prize should have gone to the Rightful Heiress instead of the Usurper.

wrong perdon redux (none / 0) (#47)
by joel dan walls on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:17:17 AM EST

The other puzzle, which I am sure BTD can explain, is why the prize committee referred to Barack Obama as president, when we all know that the actual President of the United States is Olympia Snowe. Perhaps President Snowe ought to share the prize with the Rightful Heiress.

Glenn Greenwald and BTD agree w/ (none / 0) (#58)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:26:13 AM EST

Michael Steele. A first.

No we don't (none / 0) (#61)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:30:06 AM EST

Parent

Well, not after the final, final thought. (none / 0) (#63)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:33:38 AM EST

Parent

Since the beginning (5.00 / 1) (#66)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:36:13 AM EST

My posts have been about the Nobel Committee, not Obama.

Parent

: Now I agree. I started with the (none / 0) (#73)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 11:45:56 AM EST

latest post. Sorry.

Parent

I prefer the NPP winner just make (none / 0) (#102)
by oculus on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 01:23:59 PM EST

comments in response to NPR as to how this was such a total surprise and how the winner never expected this. And thank the team and mention all the others who deserved to win.

Press conference in the Rose Garden?

You'd think people would (none / 0) (#145)
by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:04:43 PM EST

realize what the comittee's trying to do now after the Al Gore Nobel- they're trying to use the prize to call attention to something and force change rather than as a reward for something ending- I mean its not like the list doesn't have far more questionable entries- Arafat (though more in retrospect- at the time it looked good) and Mother Theresa spring to mind.

I would love to (none / 0) (#152)
by Wile ECoyote on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 04:16:40 PM EST

listen in on the private conversation between the Clintons to hear their take on it.

: I'd be willing to bet they have much (5.00 / 2) (#160)
by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 08:27:03 PM EST

more interesting things to talk to each other about.

Parent

Well how about that! (none / 0) (#169)
by shoulin4 on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 10:03:13 PM EST

My comment is gone :)

Well to sum up, I think it's not Obama's fault for receiving the award, it's not like he actively competed for it, nor is it evident that he even knew he was nominated for it.

I also think that there are some really petty people in the world whose disdain for this man runs so deep that they can't help but imagine him to be the devil-incarnate. He won a prize he didn't want, acknowledged that he didn't deserve it, and there are people still berating him down to the very last punctuation mark. This man could donate the prize money to charity, and people still only see him as good as being the guy who molested a card-board cut-out on one side of the aisle or the anti-christ on the other.

It's unfortunate that such disdain for one human being can manifest itself dangerously to the point of conspiracy. It's also unfortunate that the Nobel committee seeks to influence politics with their award. Was that what Alfred Nobel originally had in mind?

it was deleted for (none / 0) (#170)
by Jeralyn on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 02:05:07 AM EST

containing profanity and for personal attacks and name-calling. Please read the comment rules.

Parent

: Profanity? (none / 0) (#171)
by shoulin4 on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 03:31:35 AM EST

I didn't use any profanity. But if you say so. Against whom specifically was I making personal attacks? Hehe, as if I'm the only one making personal attacks here. You'd think the man bombed Japan with all of the personal attacking going on.
It's nice to be back posting here. Such a breath of fresh air being that I'm China where many things are either censored, blocked, or destroyed and re-written. It's strange though that I'm able to even see this site being that China likes to pretend that foregin politics don't exist.
N E who, thank you for the warm welcome :) Btw, does anyone know to which charity Obama will be donating the money to? Has it been announced yet?

Parent

More On Obama's Not Bush Prize | 165 comments (165 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment