« NOBLE EFFORTS MUST YIELD TWO STATES | Home | Leaked Ahmadinejad Diary Proves Iran Prez Is Jewish »
Nobel Open Thread
So, the internet is exploding this morning with the news that President Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The President says he's "humbled," some pundits say he should turn it down, everyone's got an opinion. What's yours?
Thread away.
Advertisement
It at first seemed to be Onion news. What a joke.
October 9, 2009 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe we should consider this a reflection not of our own sentiments, but more of an example how relieved the WHOLE WORLD is that we have transitioned from a warmonger presidency to a diplomacy president?
How arrogant of anyone to see this from a U.S. perspective, it is just proof of how desperate the Bush/Cheney junta made the rest of the world.
Just by promising to back down from Bush's world-domineering, pre-emptive politics, and then getting elected in spite of it, Obama defrlated the world fear balloon considerably.
Essentially, he brought PEACE to millions worldwide, and that fact alone, that he would run on the very platform of change that he chose, qualified him for this prize.
And he won, to boot.
Imagine that.
October 9, 2009 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't you get it people? This Nobel prize is FOR US!
They're giving the Nobel prize to the electorate of the US for overcoming racism.
It's not Obama's prize. This prize is for the people of the United States for showing the world how a cosmopolitan and multi-ethnic democracy can work.
HOORAY FOR US! I'm going to start working on my acceptance speech.
October 9, 2009 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
I second that thought.
This prize is for the people of the USA, for turning decisively away from the dark path we've been on for the past 40 years and more.
Nevertheless, Obama is the one who will have to live up to this prize. I say we help keep him on track and moving forward.
October 9, 2009 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
What youre saying is completely true. children health
January 10, 2011 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I do agree with all the ideas you have presented in your post. They’re very convincing and will definitely work. Still, the posts are very short for starters. Could you please extend them a bit from next time? Thanks for the post.by healthy families and child health plus
February 17, 2011 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point and a healthy way of looking at it. I concur.
October 9, 2009 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fully agree. People looking elsewhere for Obama's achievements need to look in the mirror. No more state-sanctioned torture, no more Crusading, no return to Cold War.
October 9, 2009 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
However, I wonder if the pending Afganistan troop decision was a consideration by the Nobel Commitee.
It would be an interesting turn of events for a Nobel Peace Prize winner to then escalate a war shortly after recieving the Honor.
If Obama doesn't send more troops to Afganistan, then expect the Right to cry foul that Obama is Kissing up to Europe or some other standard GOP BullSh*t.
You hear it here first folks...
October 9, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's a shame Netanyahu and Mahmoud weren't declared joint winners instead. The results would have been....interesting.
October 9, 2009 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
October 9, 2009 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The world is confused, too..."
Speak for yourself, Karl, and you might have some credibility, we would probably all agree you are confused, but speaking for the whole world, that's a big lump of authority you seem to claim.
But them doofus Scandinavians, what would they know, huh?
October 9, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Having lived in these parts on and off for years, and having read commentary on the main news sites of 8 EU countries and having watched British, French, German, Italian and Spanish newscasts this morning, I am fairly confident in my estimate.
Your anecdote?
October 9, 2009 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Affirm the earth Karl. Can't you DANCE?
Get y'all's head da hell out of that dayum DAS KAPITAL and do some dayum victory dancin'
October 9, 2009 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
"having watched British, French, German, Italian and Spanish newscasts this morning,"
So, their MSM is any better than ours? Their neocons bought up those portfolio loss-leaders long ago, just like here in the US.
Why no Swedish or Norwegian broadcasts?
October 9, 2009 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, the "MSM" is better. Think BBC. RAI is the worst of the bunch, but not terrible.
The reason I did not watch Nordics is that I read instead.
October 9, 2009 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let me clarify the reception is not "boo, hiss, Obama is a loser" but pretty decidedly "hm, OK, maybe a bit too soon?"
As a rule, folks in the .eu like him, think he is a vast improvement over Bush, but are expecting actual results.
October 9, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Having lived in these parts on and off for years, and having read commentary on the main news sites of 8 EU countries and having watched British, French, German, Italian and Spanish newscasts this morning, I am fairly confident in my estimate.
jokes
August 4, 2010 9:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I am currently in "the WHOLE WORLD", and have been for some time."
What a pompous statement.
Was the Nobel Committee's award due to its "America-centrism" as well?
October 9, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
In spite of it?
Bush barely get re-elected in 2004, and Obama beat McCain by over 7 percentage points in the popular vote, and had over double the electoral votes.
October 9, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
That "in spite of it" reference was intended as sarcasm. I get a little snarky now and then.
October 9, 2009 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
They love us! This is a love letter to America from the rest of the world. Everyone now has taken advantage of the President's positive and open embrace of internationalism - respect for all nations - and rejection of small-minded, narrow nationalism to signal their enthusiastic and relieved approval of what they knew was there in us all along, but often not in evidence in our actions. çizgi film izle - caillou çizgi film izle
January 24, 2011 8:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, The Onion would make Steele the butt of that joke.
October 9, 2009 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wasn't there a workout tape called "Buns of Steele?"
October 9, 2009 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
The brevity of your opinion can only reflect the depth of your understanding in the selection. Bold stroke professor!
October 9, 2009 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see him try to escalate in Afghanistan now!
October 9, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Whether he deserves the Nobel or not is purely an academic debate at this point, he already won it.
While there may be reasonable doubts that he has actually earned such a prestigious peace award, there is no doubt he represents a much smarter, stronger and better America than what we have seen for a long, long time günlük burç - caillou izle
January 24, 2011 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's crazy to think he should turn it down, but he can't hype it. He'd be much better off winning this 10 years from now.
October 9, 2009 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not so much of a prize for Obama. More of a stick into the eyes of the republicans.
Who says international prizes aren't political.
C
October 9, 2009 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's also offensive to everyone who cares about and works for peace and non-military solutions. If and when Obama does anything meritorious in this direction, the idiots in Stockholm might have a point. At this point in time, this award is really offensive.
October 9, 2009 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your offensive for bein' a hatin' ass biotch.
WAKE UP DUDE. This Bud's for you - or Nobel prize that is. Enjoy. Don't hate.
October 9, 2009 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I won't reply in kind. You're happy, enjoy. I agree with much that Glenn Greenwald said here:
"Through no fault of his own, Obama presides over a massive war-making state that spends on its military close to what the rest of the world spends combined. The U.S. accounts for almost 70% of worldwide arms sales. We're currently occupying and waging wars in two separate Muslim countries and making clear we reserve the "right" to attack a third. Someone who made meaningful changes to those realities would truly be a man of peace. It's unreasonable to expect that Obama would magically transform all of this in nine months, and he certainly hasn't. Instead, he presides over it and is continuing much of it. One can reasonably debate how much blame he merits for all of that, but there are simply no meaningful "peace" accomplishment 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."
October 9, 2009 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greenwald thinks Greenwald should have won it.
October 9, 2009 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a puerile comment. Greenwald has been a consistent advocate for peace. Obama has escalated the war in Afghanistan already; we'll see the results of the lengthy review but all signs are pointing to a prolomged war. I think Greenwald would be a better recipient of the award. I do not know what your comment is based on other than snark but if you have a case against Greenwald, by all means make it explicit instead of making puerile comments. Or not if that suits you best.
October 9, 2009 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cmaukonen is right.
AP: Common misconceptions about the Nobel Peace Prize
From an article on the Nobel website:
October 9, 2009 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for posting this. So all those tweaking about it should just calm the heck down.
October 9, 2009 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
You still would have to demonstrate that Obama had engaged in such efforts as of the nomination date.
Lots of luck with that.
October 9, 2009 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
No one is so blind as he who will not see.
Or maybe you're just a tribalist authoritarian filled with hatred.
October 9, 2009 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
And maybe you are a blind idolater with a cult-like fetish for Obama.
To each his own.
I voted for and support Obama, but he hasn't earned the prize through either effort or accomplishment to date, much less had he by week two of his presidency.
It is not effort to simply be "not Bush."
October 9, 2009 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
RIGHT WING RACIST TROLL ALERT.
Name of Blog: Nobama
Posts under: Dilirius
Characteristics: A very unhappy freeper that escaped his zoo keeper. Has trouble with spelling and prize awards. And black people in power.
October 9, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're the one who came in here and started throwing around slurs, so to suggest that anyone who objects to your tone is an "idolator" is silly and shows your true nature.
October 9, 2009 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I did not use the word "idolator."
It was "idolater," which is the first, and therefore preferred, spelling of the term listed in the dictionary.
And it was in response to being called a "tribalist authoritarian."
So, you are let's say 'incorrect,' to be polite, in suggesting that I started throwing slurs around, even assuming "idolater" is a slur, much less a slur in the sense of "right wing racist" or "tribal authoritarian."
The fact that you are willing to be dishonest about this matter speaks volumes about YOUR true nature.
October 9, 2009 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you can't already see what you're looking for you're either not looking, not admitting to what you see, or a bit too shallow to understand what you are looking at.
No offense intended. Dig deeper.
October 9, 2009 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lot's of people see what they are looking for - that doesn't mean what they see is actually there.
E.g., Bush saw WMDs in Iraq that weren't there and so did his conservative supporters.
They also saw an Iraqi threat that was non-existent.
Yes, plenty of people see only what they are looking for.
October 9, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
No,Bush didn't see WMDs he fabricated information to be able to go into Iraq. He didn't see an imminent threat, he wanted to go in.
October 9, 2009 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, you wouldn't. Fortunately, you and nitwits of like mind are not running the Nobel committee.
October 9, 2009 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
That would defeat the point of stirring-up controversy.
October 9, 2009 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
It will be wonderful to see all the radiohead wingnuts and Fox News maniacs foam-enting at the mouth over this. Their frantic protestations will fill the airwaves with the story, and it will get much more time in the media spotlight because of them.
Without the Rush-Hannity-Malkin crowd, this story would fade from the pages in a few days. But their indignant protests will keep it alive for weeks.
This will really weed out the political pawns from the political chessmasters.
Watch the pawns (especially those pawns who imagine themselves queens and kings) howl out loud from every wingnut pulpit, unwittingly helping disseminate the profound meaning of this moment in history, while the smart ones remain wisely silent.
Because the only wise thing for a smart republican to do right now would be to STFU, their protests just make them sound like sore losers, whining in the wind.
October 9, 2009 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. I was shocked at the initial news, since it did seem 'too soon'. But upon reflection, I see this just shows how frightened the rest of the world was during Bush's tenure.
October 9, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hooray for us...The naysayers are just neck deep in sour grapes! Then we have Steele and the wingnuts--who cares!
Just what have the repubs done for America--except get us into this fiscal morass, in two wars, and bailout the corporations., obstruct HC reform and lie out their teeth!
Another nail in the republican coffin!
Bet the clintons are roiling in this > Ha Ha Ha!
October 9, 2009 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Turning it down would be idiotic, but I can imagine Obama thinking, "really?? Do I need this right now with all the issues I have to deal with?"
October 9, 2009 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What the hell are you smokin' Bpurcel?
This is prize is for the American people for not being hatin' mothas!
Use da dayum head what God gave you and think.
This prize is not a 'problem.'
How long has it been since Obama was elected? HMM?
It's almost November. THINK.
October 9, 2009 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's a perfect example of what Woody Allen once said:
"Ninety percent of life is just showing up."
October 9, 2009 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm a big supporter of the President, but along the prestige continuum, the Nobel just moved away from the Congressional-Medal-of-Honor type award and a lot closer to the Mira-Sorvino-Winning-an-Oscar end of things.
October 9, 2009 10:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The prestige continuum".
Spare me. He shares this award with Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. With Henry Kissinger, for crying out loud.
The award retains all the prestige and nobility of a bukkake video. I'm actually pretty impressed with the choice-I think it sends an interesting set of signals to a person who literally spread a global gospel of "Yes We Can," and who we're all eagerly expecting to see carry his end of that bargain.
To whom much is given, much is expected.
October 9, 2009 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
The best response would be to fire Larry Summers out of a cannon.
Smack into Henry Kissinger.
October 9, 2009 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I like your idea! if only.........
October 9, 2009 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
HA!!!
October 9, 2009 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great idea!
October 9, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just feel like it's giving World Series rings to the Yankees during spring training. It's a little premature, and I'm a strong supporter of the President's foreign policy agenda.
October 9, 2009 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Has the Nobel prize jumped the shark?
October 9, 2009 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
The award was undeserved, which is not the same as saying it went to an undeserving person. The "big outside world" is pretty confused about the prize too.
Obama has not, thus far, done much work that I would qualify worthy of the award but he is going in the right direction. It has been pointed out that the prize is often given for ongoing work: this is true, but usually the work has been going on for years already.
If someone has difficulty understanding my position, I think the best way to perhaps bring that about is to consider what happens if Obama manages to broker Middle-East peace, or achieve complete nuclear disarmament, or maybe cause some type of drastic reduction in west-east relations?
Is he then going to be awarded the Deluxe Signed Edition Nobel Peace Prize with Sprinkles on Top?
October 9, 2009 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, but he will receive a gift certificate to have his first award personally engraved at Things Remembered.
October 9, 2009 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
AP: Common misconceptions about the Nobel Peace Prize
From an article on the Nobel website:
October 9, 2009 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I addressed that.
October 9, 2009 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is he then going to be awarded the Deluxe Signed Edition Nobel Peace Prize with Sprinkles on Top?
Does this matter?
October 9, 2009 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
It does. How should Obama be recognised should he broker Middle-East peace?
October 9, 2009 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
He's still eligible for another one.
I thought Josh explained it well here.
October 9, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course he will be eligible. But is it your thought, then, that Middle-East peace is equivalent to whatever it is that this is supposed to be for?
October 9, 2009 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
KM, you are one of my favorites, so I'm really not trying to be in an argument with you.
Do I consider MidEast peace on a par with attempting to turn the US economy, reputation, foreign policies, domestic policies, war crimes, etc, the ship of state, that Bush laid upon us from the horribles into a decent, humanitarian global citizen? I don't know. I don't know whether I would value a cure for cancer over MidEast peace. I don't try to put these things into hierarchies of good, bad, and evil. I just try to value and appreciate what good we can get out of horrible.
And maybe I shouldn't love this, but that committee made one hell of a political statement that has blasted the heads off a party that I have no respect for. :-)
I do take it as a win for our side.
October 9, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anything that reduces Republicans further cannot be all bad.
I mentioned below that I do not think many here are truly happy about the award as it should be, but rather just as a "win" in this ongoing political game. I would also say that self-validation is a huge component of it, but it is perhaps unfair to analyse that deep.
October 9, 2009 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um,.... they might remember him in the history books?
Prizes are nice but reality is better.
October 9, 2009 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Y'know, they had to give the prize to somebody.
Here's how I imagine the voting went…
October 9, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
No they don't. There have been years when a prize wasn't awarded.
And the prize doesn't have to be for "World Peace", just peace.
October 9, 2009 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Which was exactly what I meant by this sentence above;
"Just by promising to back down from Bush's world-domineering, pre-emptive politics, and then getting elected in spite of it, Obama deflated the world fear balloon considerably."
I think it is safe to say that deflating fear increases peace, and since that is really the spirit of the Nobel prize, and from that point of view, Obama certainly deserves it, because he really did deflate world fears, making room for that mysterious, quiet comfort we call "PEACE."
Peace is not just the absence of war, it is the freedom from FEAR that war is imminent.
October 9, 2009 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Peace is not just the absence of war, it is the freedom from FEAR that war is imminent."
I thought that was worth reposting, hoping it sinks in to some of our naysayers who just don't understand what it is like to live in fear of some mighty world power coming to dominate your loved ones..
October 9, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said.
October 9, 2009 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is patently silly. It is worth remembering that among Obama's decisions during his early presidency was to INCREASE American troop levels in Afghanistan and to follow the Bush administration's lead in defending policies of indefinite detention, regardless of the decision to TRY to close Gitmo. I am an Obama supporter - I donated, I volunteered, and I went to town hall meetings over the summer to shout down the crazies. But in the end, I have to say that this prize is premature at best.
October 9, 2009 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, he won't get the deluxe version. It will just be an affirmation of the Nobel he won today. Recognizing a person's overall belief system and ability to promote peace is as important as waiting until they accomplish it. Obama has the ability to promote world peace, partly because he is the antithesis of GWB but mostly because of his own demeanor, values and viewpoint. In a world where wars have been waged over and over again it is not crazy to recognize someone who has a gift that can be used for good. Yes, he is but one man....but no one gave him a shot at being president in the beginning. He has the ability to inspire others to be better and that can change a town, a county, a state, a country, a world. Not him, but us after being inspired to do more. What the hell is wrong with that?????
October 9, 2009 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did I imply there was something wrong with it?
October 9, 2009 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans are hypertribalist authoritarians who consistently put loyalty to a thoroughly discredited and selfish mindset before loyalty to country.
Or, put it another way... they're assholes. Republicans are assholes. Of course they're going to respond they way they've responded.
Remember Helen Keller as depicted in "The Miracle Worker" *before* she had her breakthrough? That's the Republican mentality. It's not even really a political position or an ideology -- again, it's simply tribalist loyalty. If you tweak my follower instinct, I'll follow, and I'll be fiercely against anything you tell me is "Fair Game".
We should be focused on changing the media's habits. The Republican Party has made its decision: they're the Party of The Civil War Was a Draw and The North Cheated So We Kinda Deserve To Be In Charge. To hell with them.
October 9, 2009 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
You sir, speak THE TRUTH.
They're bitter, they're nasty, they're resentful. Resentment coming from the Ayn Rand types is even more pathetic.
October 9, 2009 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
The worst aspect of the Republicans is their century-long rape and pillage of everything Abraham Lincoln ever stood for, all the while carrying around his poor abused corpse as a dry and dusty fetish object.
It's time to liberate Lincoln from the clutches of that damned cargo cult.
October 9, 2009 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The worst aspect of the Republicans is their century-long rape and pillage of everything Abraham Lincoln ever stood for..."
I wish that fit on a bumpersticker, it should be shouted aloud from every rooftop.
October 9, 2009 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I fail to see understand the reaction that this is somehow an embarrassment to Obama, that he is undeserving of it. And I seriously doubt if the Nobel committee gives much of a damn about the Republicans.
I'm guessing that he was awarded the prize because he has ended regime of torture and institutionalized illegality, and he has raised the stature of the US in the eyes of the rest of world to the point that there is once again hope of peace and prosperity instead of a miasma of dread and fear. Good for him. And good for us.
October 9, 2009 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, let's see . . . what if we gave Rookie of the Year to Darrius Heyward-Bey of the Oakland Raiders (2 catches and no TDs) four weeks into the season while several other rookie receivers have caught over a dozen passes with multiple TDs, not to mention other position rookies?
Yes, you should be embarrassed when someone gives you a prize you didn't earn for reasons of spite or race.
October 9, 2009 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're kidding about race, right?
October 9, 2009 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
What else has he done besides become the first black American president?
So, no.
October 9, 2009 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
AHHHHH! DAYUM! WAKE DA HELL ON UP BOAH!
We elected this black person. Y'know, we, the nation with the Bull Connors and the KKK and whatnot.
And the slavery and the Jim Crow and the...Jesus cracker, wake UP!
October 9, 2009 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
And a great thing it was.
But, I guess that means when we elect the first woman, she will automatically qualify for the prize.
Or the first asian . . .
Well, you get the drift.
October 9, 2009 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Given the fact that there were laws on the books that made nigros second class citizens - YES.
Given the fact of POLL TAXES. Yes.
Given the fact of FIREHOSES AND POLICE DOGS TURNED ON NIGROS AND JEWS AND MINISTERS WHO DARED MARCH FOR FREEDOM.
Yes.
Stew in them juices. It smells so good. Tasty.
MMMMM. Good.
October 9, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
You are saying that they awarded it because he's the first black president.
I'm going to have fun all day watching all the wingnuts go into paryoxms of exagerration.
October 9, 2009 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
RIGHT WING RACIST TROLL ALERT.
Name of Blog: Nobama
Posts under: Dilirius
Characteristics: A very unhappy freeper that escaped his zoo keeper. Has trouble with spelling and prize awards. And black people in power.
October 9, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
LEFT WING RACIST IDOLATER ALERT!
Posts under: seashell
Characteristics: A very blind cultist that sees only what he or she wants to see that escaped his or her psychiatric ward. Has trouble with reading comprehension and reality. And people who aren't black.
--------------
I guess anyone can play this game.
October 9, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
You don't do it very well. No HTML, no links and NO credibility. But as a Republican, you should be used to the credibility issue.
I also smell a birther. If you are, you will get flagged for abuse. That's asking too much of us to put up with.
October 9, 2009 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I see no links or HTML in this comment of yours (apart from the links and HTML imposed for all comments).
So, I take it that means this comment of yours has no credibility, right?
October 9, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
"I guess anyone can play this game."
You lost this game long ago, or you wouldn't be here trying to diminish the pride and feeling of some sort of progress, enigmatic though it may be, we are, for the most part, feeling at this historic moment of worthy recognition.
Go to some wingnut site and converse with people who agree with you. Condescend elsewhere, if you expect respect.
October 9, 2009 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
You both are just like the people at RedState.com and the real right wing trolls who regulatory post on left wing websites: ad hominem attacks on anyone who dares to disagree with you or criticize or question he who you worship, with defamatory claims about who they are and what they stand for - i.e., name-calling.
Hate is every bit a product of left wing fanatics like you as it is of right wing fanatics.
C'est la vie.
October 9, 2009 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
You come here AS an ad hominen attack against Obama, then lament when we do the same to you?
I guess it's IOIYAR, to attack, but when we do it in defense, you call us RedStaters.
Dilirous, YOU started the ad hominens, not us. You came here claiming Obama was somehow unworthy.
We just picked up your gauntlet.
Sounds more like a crybaby than a debate.
October 9, 2009 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
PS I certainly don't hate you, but I think you are either confused or a hypocrite, nothing personal.
October 9, 2009 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think this is CT. He invited those damn Hominems into the conversation again.
Bye, CT.
October 9, 2009 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
You said it yourself - anyone who disagrees with the majority here, or more specifically with you (and seashell), should go somewhere else:
"Go to some wingnut site and converse with people who agree with you. Condescend elsewhere, if you expect respect."
You don't tolerate dissent and you don't want to read any opinions you don't share - how is that not "cultish?"
I don't think that's what the Democratic Party, or Obama, is all about, thankfully, but unfortunately there are rabid Obama supporters who insist that anyone not sharing all their opinions about Obama is a "birther," "troll," or "racist."
Just like there were rabid Bush supporters who insisted that anyone not sharing all their opinions about Bush were "traitors," "anti-American," or "communists."
October 9, 2009 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
"You come here AS an ad hominen attack against Obama"
False.
". . . you call us RedStaters."
False.
"Dilirous, YOU started the ad hominens, not us."
False.
"You came here claiming Obama was somehow unworthy."
This is not an ad hominem attack, even if that were an accurate characterization of what I said. So, false, again.
October 9, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, we know you're a troll. But let's argue the sports analogy (even if seeing politics, or business for that matter, as if it is sports is a childish and limiting metaphor). Obama, having perfected a pitching style that had been neglected for many decades, even denigrated as "sissy," used it to win the presidency of the most powerful nation in history, in a period of grave world-wide crises.
Let's face it, preaching peace, reconciliation, and open dialog has not been a formula for winning the presidency. TR campaigned on his "big stick." JFK campaigned on a phony "missile gap." HRC portrayed herself as bravely dodging bullets in a war zone. McGovern has long been held to ridicule for running on ideals of peace. Carter lost office for a perceived lack of sufficient belligerence against Iran.
If there were a Nobel War Prize, then Obama wouldn't deserve it. Maybe war is to be preferred to peace. But that's not at issue. The premise of the present award is that peace is preferable. That's obviously something the previous administration - in control of a war machine equal in funding to all other armies in the world combined - did not believe. Achieving election to America's highest office while advocating peace is surely fully worthy of the world's most prestigious peace award.
October 9, 2009 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
You've made the best argument yet, without sounding the least bit cultish.
October 9, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed: Obama talked the American public down from the war party ledge Bush had us perched on.
October 9, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
BTW, it was an analogy, not a metaphor, and thus perfectly appropriate. Analogies are not intended as stand-ins, but to demonstrate generally similar principles. "Pump" is a poor metaphor for "heart," but it is a great analogy.
October 9, 2009 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bye, CT. Back to Bellvue for awhile. Take your meds.
October 9, 2009 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
It pretty much destroys the credibility of the prize for future recipients, casts serious doubts about previous winners, gives the Right abundant ammunition to continue to criticize international institutions as being irrational and out of touch with reality, and will be an albatross around the president's neck.
But aside from that . . .
October 9, 2009 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
If awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Kissinger didn't destroy its credibility, nothing will.
October 9, 2009 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kissinger ended a war.
What war has Obama ended?
Still in Iraq, still in Afghanistan, still fighting in both places.
October 9, 2009 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
He ended a war? Really? I'm sure the President of the Republic of (South) Vietnam will totally agree with you on that. Let's get him on the phone at his office in Saigon and see how he feels.
October 9, 2009 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Right Wing Racist Troll Alert
October 9, 2009 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I assume you're not talking about me.
October 9, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, of course not. I was trying to warn you (and others) and didn't realize it could look the other way, too. I'm sorry. :-)
October 9, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kissinger "ended a war" after gleefully supporting it - brutally- for years. He "ended a war" after first invading two other countries, including bombing the hell out of Cambodia, killing thousands, causing a refugee crisis and ultimately helping the Khmer Rouge. Yeah, that deserves a peace prize.
Tom Lehrer's response to being asked why he abandoned political satire: ""Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize."
October 9, 2009 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm pretty sure Nixon did all those things.
But your mileage with real history may vary, since you seem to be out of touch with reality.
October 9, 2009 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Right, Kissinger was just a minor player in those policies, serving only in small roles simultaneously as both National Security Advisor AND Secy of State. And it's not like Vietnam was a big deal at the time or anything.
And yes, I am out of touch with reality. That's why I bother responding to you.
October 9, 2009 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kissinger told Nixon to keep the war going so Nixon could paint McGovern as a defeatist wimp.
October 9, 2009 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kissinger did not end the Vietnam war. The American people ended it no matter how much the Rebubbacan't try to rewrite history.
October 9, 2009 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just like Reagan didn't end the cold war, Chernobyl did that, but the Republicans still try to manage history after the fact by suggesting Reagan's bristling militarism somehow scared the commies into folding.
It was the Russian people and their million-person march on Moscow that brought down the Soviet Union. NOT Ronnie Raygun.
October 9, 2009 11:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the other 10 percent is not being George Bush.
Speaking of which, remember the WingNut campaign several years ago to get a Nobel Peace Prize for Bush? Trying to stir up the issue like the Hornet's Nest approach to anything would work as well internationally as it does with our lazy press?
This is just icing on the cake.
October 9, 2009 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
This morning someone on the Morning Joe show suggested that Mr Obama turned down the Nobel Peace prize. That might happen in the Bizzaro world but it isn't going to happen here.
October 9, 2009 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
TPM: will you PLEASE use your expanded reporting capacity to get a comment from McCain?
I need some snark.
October 9, 2009 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Now I know why I married a Swede...
October 9, 2009 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would think that should have been obvious before you married her.
(OTOH, my first wife was a statistician. I'm much happier now.)
October 9, 2009 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
That Swede IS my first wife...
October 10, 2009 12:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
The real issue is how the President will respond to this award. He would do well to acknowledge it for what it is: an endorsement of his approaches and goals. This would convey the appropriate humility, and keep the spotlight on the process of international diplomacy, not simply the personalities. The world will definitely need Obama's diplomatic philosophy if it is to successfully confront poverty, conflicts, terrorism, climate change, nuclear disarmament, and many other pressing global issues.
October 9, 2009 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. I don't get this reaction at all. I read the Nobel Committee's statement and it makes perfect sense to me. Peace has to start somewhere and President Obama has been remarkably capable in making a U-turn back into the right direction.
October 9, 2009 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
"He's not George Bush" is not a reason for giving the Nobel Prize and you must have missed the part where the nominations were due about 2 weeks into his term, which means he hadn't made any turn yet, even if we accept the proposition that he in fact has made a U-turn, a questionable proposition at this point.
October 9, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
The nomination deadline doesn't mean they weren't allowed to consider anything that's happened since then. It means that's when the deadline for nominations ended.
October 9, 2009 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
So, what was the basis for nominating him?
Hoping he would do something in the future?
Then, let's nominate everybody. Who knows what any one person will do in the next few months.
Sheesh, what a lame rationalization for Obama getting the prize.
October 9, 2009 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dilirius, you have made more than enough vacuous comments, why don't you grab a Bud and turn on your ESPN.
October 9, 2009 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think your reply alone delivered enough vacuousness for the entire thread.
Try to post something that actually offers up some facts and opinion, rather than just snark.
October 9, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fuck off, asshole.
October 9, 2009 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seconded....
October 9, 2009 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
A blog with no snark is no blog at all...
October 10, 2009 12:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Please read the Nobel statement. It sets out very clearly why President Obama was selected to receive this award. They put the dots pretty close together; you should be able to make sense of it.
October 9, 2009 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
I read it and the dots are a roadmap to nowhere, sorta like Palin's bridge.
October 9, 2009 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
CT is on the loose. Bye, CT. We're all tired of you. Again.
Go poop your pants elsewhere. Preferably Bellvue.
October 9, 2009 1:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
"He's not George Bush" is a great reason for anyone to get a prize. But just to be fair, on another blog, I nominated George Bush the the "International Not Being Dick Cheney" award.
October 9, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
The following is the text of the announcement on Friday by the Norwegian Nobel Committee giving the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama:
"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
"Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.
"For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."
October 9, 2009 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I really think the Noble committee is making a pointed comment against the Bush policies of the prior eight years. What they don't understand is that Bush sought peace also: we would have a world of peace, once we vanquish all of our foes.
Where is W's peace prize for attempting to instill world peace, from the barrel of a gun?
(snark intended).
October 9, 2009 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Also, it's kind of funny that the Republican party spends odd-numbered days attacking President Obama for being too chummy with the rest of the world and even-numbered days attacking President Obama for lowering our prestige around the world. DOES NOT COMPUTE... DOES NOT COMPUTE...
October 9, 2009 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't understand the question: what has he done?
1) Got elected president of the United States
2) Ended a regime of torture
3) Re-engaged the international community in actual international issues such as terrorism
4) Oh, he accomplished the first while promising to do 2 & 3
I'm sure I'll come up with more later . . .
October 9, 2009 10:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
I must have missed that he did 2 and 3 in the first two weeks of his presidency . . . oops, no, I didn't because he didn't.
October 9, 2009 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
He promised to end torture and to re-engage with the international community. And he got elected.
October 9, 2009 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
So did Hillary Clinton and every other Democratic candidate.
October 9, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
No other Democratic candidate got elected.
That seems rather obvious.
October 9, 2009 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
No other Democratic candidate got elected?
Hmmmmmm . . . then how did the makeup of Congress change from majority Republican to majority Democrat?
Back to the drawing board for you, dtaciuch.
October 9, 2009 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't mind trolls but I do mind stupidity.
October 9, 2009 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jeezus, man. Elected President.
I'm done arguing with the resident troll, btw.
October 9, 2009 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Coordinated and pushed through transnational response to global financial meltdown (caused by policies of his predecessor), expanded G-8 to the G-20 and somehow persuaded the lot of them to do a hell of a lot more than anyone ever expected a group that big and disparate to ever do, oh, and, just coincidentally, pulled the U.S. out of a catastrophic slide of international standing, regard and prestige caused by bellicose unilateralism of Bush/Cheney in a matter of months.
No, he doesn't "deserve" it, but the idea that he's done "nothing" is a rightwing calumny.
October 9, 2009 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
He did that in his first two weeks?
What are you smoking?
October 9, 2009 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
No. No, he didn't do it in his first two weeks. What else ya got?
October 9, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Skidmarks in his underwear?
October 9, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama failed to get Germany, the country best able to do so, to pass a stimulus package. So to say that he coordinated the reaction to the financial crisis is simply false.
October 9, 2009 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
He ought to respectfully decline the award.
October 9, 2009 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
... or deliver Kissinger to the Hague. Then he'd *really* deserve it!
October 9, 2009 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, sometimes ideas are worth something!
October 9, 2009 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed.
October 9, 2009 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
What surprises is all the "splat" from sour grapes. This is not the Oscars, ladies and gentlemen! This man was potential Nobel material from a long time ago, before we heard of him. Deserved and earned. Mike Pearson was a peace Prize Laureate. Remember HIM? Anyone, anyone?
Maybe Quinn does, if he is old like me.
October 9, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm also on the respectfully decline boat ...
October 9, 2009 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I see from some of the comments that a cult-like fetish for Obama is not dead.
October 9, 2009 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Poor thing -- you seem to be suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome. You're so filled with seething hatred that it has unhinged you and made you incapable of thinking rationally.
Go lie down with your binky and your blanky. It'll be okay. Have a juice box.
October 9, 2009 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hardly seems likely since I voted for him.
But you prove my point - idolatry for Obama still exists and the hatred is really by his idolatrous supporters who can't stand to see him criticized or questioned, no matter how legitimately and so have to resort to childish personal attacks with equally childish language.
But I seriously doubt you will give up your childish come-backs, just like the nutty wingers refuse to give up theirs.
October 9, 2009 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hardly seems likely since I voted for him.
Which is why you named your blog here Nobama.
Give it up, go back under the rock. Stay there. Bad dog.
October 9, 2009 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have no blog named "Nobama" and have no idea why you think I do.
That was my pseudonym during the Democratic primaries.
You don't get to tell me who I voted for.
Now, go back to your little self-contained world that revolves around glorious Obama so you won't be scared by reality anymore.
October 9, 2009 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fuck off, troll.
October 9, 2009 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
You ass. All you have to do is click on your name and it takes you to your blog, which is named Nobama. It says so right on it. Now go away, while I'm still laughing.
October 9, 2009 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
"This user has not started their blog yet!"
Can't read, eh?
And "Nobama" is a username, not the name of a blog, if there was actually a blog, which there is not.
LOL
October 9, 2009 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
You don't get to tell me who I voted for.
If it was up to me, you wouldn't get to vote.
Go away, CT. You are boring us. And nobody likes you.
October 9, 2009 1:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
My thinking is they gave it to Barry because they couldn't give it to the American people for finally coming to their senses last November. And he should accept it, on their behalf.
October 9, 2009 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who'd have predicted that Arizona State would have more exacting standards than the Nobel Peace Prize committee?
October 9, 2009 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt many have read the official reason for awarding Obama the prize. Let's start there before we give our approval/disproval. Or go ahead and react like the cable news outlets.
October 9, 2009 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Official reasons" won't create accomplishment toward world peace in Obama's first two weeks where there was none.
Except maybe in the world of idolatry . . .
October 9, 2009 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
World Peace and War on Terror are equally vacuous terminology.
I'm certain someone will soon post a serial list of sufficient accomplishments to satisfy the criteria of advancement of peace through diplomacy and denuking of the planet.
October 9, 2009 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
WTF is with you right wingers and your f'in lists. Do they distribute lists for you to recite everymorning when you wake up? Does it look something like this
1) I am an a**hole
2) I will dilute all conversation w/ my hate
3) I will always demand lists as proof
4) I am an a**hole
October 9, 2009 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Jesus, get a grip clandesdun.
The list is for dilirius. I support Obama's award sans list. I merely suggested it as an exercise for the conceptually challenged that can't wrap their head around this award.
I post no list out of laziness and a degree of amusement at seeing the anti-Obamamites' confusion in the fog of post-GW realpolitik.
Your list is quite nice though I am not sure how you came to conclude #2,3 from my comments.
#1,4 I cannot deny.
October 9, 2009 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry dude. By the time I got all the way down to your comment I was obviously showing the affects of the constant bombardment of stupid up above. I said it before and will doubtless say it again, if we could figure out how to convert stupid to energy we’d solve all the energy problems. Then again, we might just become too stupid to realize we’re cold and the cars not moving.
October 9, 2009 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, that has been posted over and over (in this thread too.)
October 9, 2009 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it's for diplomacy, and seems entirely appropriate.
October 9, 2009 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
well, i was surprised. does he deserve it? i'm not sure. remember, the committee said he was being rewarded for his EFFORTS, not his accomplishments. Steele and the other naysayers have missed that point.
The Taliban are also neighing like horses, which does not surprise me. they are the arab worlds answer to the gop
October 9, 2009 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
People who think it is undeserved don't understand how terrifying the rogue, bombastic, know nothing, torturing United States looked to the rest of the world.
Obama has turned that around. Actually the election of Obama did.
It is perhaps more an award for the people of the United States for electing him and stopping the plunge into nightmare.
October 9, 2009 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is simply a world-class Bush/Cheney bitch-slap. All Obama had to do was back off on the Bush Doctrine and Dr. Cheneyloves torture program, and the difference was so enormous that it was enough to make the rest of the world applaud.
Dear Right-wingers and Bush Apologists,
F*** YOU!
Love,
The Nobel Prize Committee
October 9, 2009 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I especially enjoyed the FU part. Excellent.
October 9, 2009 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm proud. As Americans should be.
I'm also not shocked to see the many patriots and corporate shills of the media (etc) falling over themselves attempting to be more aghast than evryone else over this.
October 9, 2009 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Mr. President,
sincere congratulations.
However, history is waiting and the verdict will be harsh unless you do what is necessary to restore the republic. The cost of doing what is right will be high. The cost of doing nothing (in order to keep appeasement and MAD as the agreement between you and the Military Industrial Congressional Complex intact)will be a permanent stain upon your reputation and the establishment of a permanent class of Josef K's who, as you well know, have committed no crimes.
"This is a Day of Affirmation, a celebration of liberty. We stand here in the name of freedom.
At the heart of that Western freedom and democracy is the belief that the individual man, the child of God, is the touchstone of value, and all society, groups, the state, exist for his benefit. Therefore the enlargement of liberty for individual human beings must be the supreme goal and the abiding practice of any Western society.
The first element of this individual liberty is the freedom of speech: the right to express and communicate ideas, to set oneself apart from the dumb beasts of field and forest; to recall governments to their duties and obligations; above all, the right to affirm one's membership and allegiance to the body politic - to society - to the men with whom we share our land, our heritage, and our children's future.
Hand in hand with freedom of speech goes the power to be heard, to share in the decisions of government which shape men's lives. Everything that makes man's life worthwhile - family, work, education, a place to rear one's children and a place to rest one's head - all this depends on decisions of government; all can be swept away by a government which does not heed the demands of its people. Therefore, the essential humanity of men can be protected and preserved only where government must answer - not just to the wealthy, not just to those of a particular religion, or a particular race, but to all its people.
And even government by the consent of the governed, as in our own Constitution, must be limited in its power to act against its people; so that there may be no interference with the right to worship, or with the security of the home; no arbitrary imposition of pains or penalties by officials high or low; no restrictions on the freedom of men to seek education or work or opportunity of any kind, so that each man may become all he is capable of becoming... "
--- RFK, in S. Africa
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23110
October 9, 2009 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm wondering whether they're simply setting him up as the first multiple winner. After all, it takes time to close Guantanamo, withdraw from Iraq, and broker an Israeli/Palestinian peace agreement.
If he accomplishes these during this term, shouldn't he win again?
Obama has been a strong voice for disarmament: recall he unilaterally killed the European missile shield that the Russians were greatly concerned about, which reduces tensions between us and Russia. So that's something.
Also, the rhetorical change and shift in world attitudes towards the U.S. because of Obama's election is something that's surely harder for most Americans to appreciate than for foreigners. But it strikes me as if the award is as much a (deserved) repudiation of George W. Bush as anything else.
Another point: this makes it harder to attack Obama from the left on detention, torture, and civil liberties, and, frankly, I think that's unfortunate. Yes, we now don't use "enhanced interrogation", and Obama sharply denounced the tactics, but actually the policy shift happened during the Bush administration. And the substance of much of Obama's "war on terror" is nearly as different as the packaging suggests. Obama seeks indefinite detention of suspects, and he's quashed release of additional photographic evidence showing torture was not just a few bad apples at Abu Ghraib.
I gladly donated to Obama's campaign, and he's far, far better than his predecessor on most issues. As an American, I'm proud that he won, and it is a tangible sign that Obama's efforts to improve America's standing in the international community have paid off.
But I still can't help but think it's a little early to give him this prize.
October 9, 2009 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
How will Obama be able to live up to the legacy of Henry Kissinger?
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0611-03.htm
October 9, 2009 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
On second thought, I have a different tack on the award. The Nobel Committee is as much a platform as it is an arbiter of intellectual and moral standards. I think this award is not being given for anything Obama has done, per se, but as an endorsement of Obama as a symbol. First Black President of the most powerful nation on the planet...said country with a tortured and sordid racial history, both past and present.
This Nobel is kudos to the "Yes we can" spirit which fired up the imaginations of people all over the world. It is also a rebuke to the reactionary forces in America which have arrayed themselves against progress. A friend wagged that this Nobel Prize will lead to an eventual President Palin. A chilling, but not unrealistic thought.
The Nobel Committe has laid their hands on Obama. Saying, "this is our son, in whom we are well pleased." And it's also a huge "Fuck you" to the Jim Demints of the world. Nobel has spoken. In this age of Murdoch, the establishment has fired one across the bow.
October 9, 2009 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting:
An award that generates as much interest as the Nobel Peace Prize is bound to be surrounded by myths. Geir Lundestad, secretary of the secretive committee that awards the prize, outlines for The Associated Press some of the most common misunderstandings:
Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.
More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091009/ap_on_re_eu/eu_nobel_peace_myths
October 9, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Except an examination of the list of past winners doesn't really bear that out. Most of the people or organizations awarded the prize actually did something, and even most of the "aspirational" or "in-progress" winners had been working on it for years, not two weeks.
October 9, 2009 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
This shows how desperately the world needs hope. We still need hope. It is the first time perhaps that the Nobel prize was given for someone who exudes hope, but after the very dark years we are leaving behind (and for which we haven't atoned) we are powerfully being reminded why Obama was chosen to be president and why not only we cared, but the entire world. Remember, there was not a country in the world where McCain outpoled Obama. We are not in this alone. We are in this world together. That message rings as true today as it did when Obama ran for president, and I sincerely think that he has lived that ideal.
I for one am thrilled that he received this prize. He deserves it.
October 9, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do use one the most inappropriate movie lines possible under the circumstances, "deserves got nothin' to do with it." "Deserve" has always been more a matter of coincidence than intent with this award. It is overtly political and is given for overtly political reasons.
With that in mind, you can't understand this award without looking at who they gave it to in 2007. Contrary to what a lot of people on the left are saying, this is, in a very real sense, an affirmation of American exceptionalism, except as conceived by the world (or at least some Norwegians) rather than in the perverted form advanced by the Neocons.
I'll probably write a reader blog about that today or tomorrow when I've gotten my thoughts into better order.
But for right now, I'm having trouble doing that because I can't get over the totally inappropriate glee it gives me when I picture the expression on the faces of a long line of people when the got the news:
Dick Cheney . . .
Rush Limbaugh . . .
Benjamin Netanyahu . . .
Krauthammer . . .
McConnell . . .
Paul Broun . . .
Joe Wilson . . .
Pawlenty . . .
Jim DeMint . . .
Mullah Omar . . .
Michelle Malkin . . .
Back to Cheney glowering and fuming around with his cane in his secure bunker . . .
It's just so wrong, yet I can't stop . . .
October 9, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
lol!
October 9, 2009 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good comment. The moment they heard the news, the look on their faces ...... LOL.
October 9, 2009 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
To be fair, the reactions from Ana Marie Cox and Josh Marshall were disappointing. Myopic might be the word.
Morning Joe was a complete disaster.
October 9, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh dang,
John Sidney McCain . . .
How could I have forgotten McCain?
October 9, 2009 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
McCain was gracious. He appealed to patriotism.
The Maverick bar is a lot lower these days, but credit where it's due.
October 9, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I know, dammit. Total schadenfreude buzzkill.
October 9, 2009 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't forget Bill Kristol on your list of faces.;-)
October 9, 2009 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
From his egocentric POV, is this just Kristol's lousy karma playing out?
As punishment for his very un-American glee at Chicago's Olympics-bid failure, he must suffer Obama's recognition by the Nobel committee?
What goes around comes around.
When you are so personally and deeply invested in someone's failures, you will inevitably ride that emotional rollercoaster back to the bottom, every time they succeed.
October 9, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
First of all the ending of the Bush stars wars in Poland and Czech Republic scheme is one accomplishment that weighs a lot heavier in Europe than in the US. So much heavier that the quips about just "not being George Bush" are a little inane; lest we forget, it's really IMPORTANT to not be George Bush. Following that up with an agreement on arms reduction with Russia was another important sign that has oddly been ignored here.
Dilirius I'm sorry, Kissinger did not end the War he lost it.
Al Gore won for making a movie.
I have no idea what Teddy Roosevelt won for.
October 9, 2009 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, not done in his first two weeks.
Try again.
October 9, 2009 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting:
An award that generates as much interest as the Nobel Peace Prize is bound to be surrounded by myths. Geir Lundestad, secretary of the secretive committee that awards the prize, outlines for The Associated Press some of the most common misunderstandings:
Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.
More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.
Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091009/ap_on_re_eu/eu_nobel_peace_myths
October 9, 2009 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup. After reading Dillrius posts, I agree with Seashell (back at 10:52. Dillrius is definitely a troll. Ignore him (or her or it).
October 9, 2009 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, that settles it: anyone who disagrees with those who worship and adore Obama and who can find no fault with him is a troll who must be viciously attacked for voicing an opinion.
Funny, I get just the opposite definition on conservative sites: liberal troll who should be viciously attacked for voicing an opinion that is in disagreement with the majority on the site.
As I said, haters exist in all forms.
October 9, 2009 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fuck off and die, asshole.
October 9, 2009 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Theodore Roosevelt won for brokering the end to the Russo-Japanese war in 1905.
October 9, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
So?
October 9, 2009 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Nobel committee can give the award to anyone they dame well please. It's their award. They have noone to answer to but their own conscience.
If someone wants to pick someone different and give them an award, he or she can go right ahead. In fact, the world would be better off if we had a dozen or so committees handing out awards to those who are helping make the world a more peaceful place. It would be much better energy spent than that which has been and will continue to be spent attempting to "prove" that Obama didn't deserve this.
October 9, 2009 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Typically for awards you prove that someone did deserve it, but you are probably right.
Everyone here is just insanely happy because:
1. They won and the right wing lost.
2. It validates their self-image.
3. Everything America does is significant.
October 9, 2009 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
True. I know there are some people doing some seriously hard and dangerous work out there who could use the recognition. Personally if I was on the committee I wouldn't have given it to him at this point. But the committee had their reasons which they have spelled out (and probably some they haven't - like giving the finger to Bush administration).
In the end, it's like any award: it's just an award. And just like everything else, we can't it with us when it's our time to go.
October 9, 2009 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm frankly a bit stunned at the tone of some of the comments in this thread. Goes to show how dedicated opponents or sympathetic critics have had their worlds shaken by the Nobel announcement. Obama was supposed to be an evil socialist or a corporate sell-out, and on and on.
Folks, this isn't hard to figure out. The effect of Obama's election, his outreach to the world, his break with the Bush policies in Europe, North Korea, and the Middle East, his renewed commitment to nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation, sent seismic vibrations across the world that the right has derided and the left has discounted.
The prize is a recognition of the effect Obama has had since being elected, but more importantly, it's an endorsement of his approach, which should legitimize his initiatives that have been stalled by folks like Netanyahu. Going into a peace talk will have a different feel now, and that was the point.
October 9, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Already Orwellian
Look, they gave the same award to Kissinger back in the day. When the folks who define conventional values behave nihilistically like that, it makes it impossible to have any grounds to condemn or praise awarding this thing to anyone.
October 9, 2009 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was taking a cab ride in Istanbul a little while ago with my family. About halfway through our journey, the cabdriver (who later tried to bilk us of a few lira, but never mind) pointed at me and asked, "You, Italia?" I was confused for a second, then understood and answered "No, we're Americans". "Ah," he smiled , "America. Obama".
How different this encounter would have been only ten months ago. I suspect a similar, if better enunciated shift in attitudes towards the world's military, cultural and economic superpower has been underway across many geographies and social strata. Yeah, the award may be a couple of years too early, but if Obama can now use the world's reborn admiration for America to build effective global coalitions to address real problems, then the Nobel Committee will have been justified in in their otherwise not easily explicable choice.
October 9, 2009 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's too early and I don't like the idea of giving awards as encouragement, but I wonder if we here in the U.S. fail to understand how incredibly relieved the rest of the world is that he is in office.
October 9, 2009 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has given people hope and turned an incredibly dark and grim moment --the bush and bin laden years -- into a more optimistic, cooperative one.
But with this prize comes tremendous responsiblity for Obama. Still, feels pretty good to get such support and approval.
October 9, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said!
October 9, 2009 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Congratulations US President Barack Obama!
I am absolutely certain that you will be the first to say this award belongs to all the PEACE seeking people in the world. You will be the first to point out the sacrifice being made every day by from the humble American solider trying to fulfill a mission of stability in the Middle East.
You will the first to admit the frustration felt by thousands of laid off autoworkers desperately trying to understand a changing deeply routed economy. You will be the first not to forget or lessen the shameful Ahmadinejad government thugs that use truncheon’s blows to subdue the Iranian women peace demonstrators in Tehran.
And so much more.
You are the first, Mr. President to awaken the leadership of the world with a vision of hope. When all is said and done humanity’s history when darkest sometimes is fortunate enough to have one person with the courage to say it out loud. Now the World hears you.
Thank you, President Obama.
October 9, 2009 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
For those of us who share Obama's international policy goals and diplomatic efforts the prize should be celebrated. Yes, we should remain humble considering the challenges before us. But, we should also be encouraged that our efforts thus far are recognized and supported.
How quickly the media gets everyone spinning. Is this a bad thing for Obama? Is it too soon? If you drink too much of their coffee it acts as a depressant. Have a cup, wake up, and enjoy the day!!!
October 9, 2009 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
To assert an opinion about whether or not Mr. Obama "deserves" to win the Nobel Peace Prize implies that one has a set of criteria for the selection. I don't, and I haven't thought about the Peace Prize much over the years, so I wouldn't say, one way or another.
But all of the actions that the selection committee noted in justifying the award are, without a doubt, true. And those actions, without a doubt, have been profoundly important positive influences on the world's social and political climates.
To denigrate the award because he "hasn't done enough, yet," is to close one's eyes to the depth, breadth and potential of those influences, and to forget the dark days that preceded his arrival.
October 9, 2009 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the popular media meme is missing the point. Is Obama being awarded for his accomplishments as President? Or is he being awarded for changing the international climate? Obama did not start gathering the world's attention on January 20, 2009. As the first serious African American presidential candidate, the first presidential nominee of a major American political party, and during his campaign, he was a voice of reason, a supporter of peace.
Let's not buy into the ridiculous idea that his eligibility for this award started on Jan. 20.
October 9, 2009 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, as if coming from nothing to break the color barrier and inspire the world with your election with your message of hope and reconcilation means nothing.
October 9, 2009 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent excellent point.
October 9, 2009 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, The deadline for nominating anyone for this prize was in February I believe. I'm with you.
This, Like the Olympics reaction, give the right another opportunity to look small, and instead of pride in their own country we get more partisanship.
October 9, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
So far the U.S. has not transitioned from a war president to a diplomacy president, has it? So far Obama has continued the inherited wars, he's protected those who have committed torture, he's continued the attack on civil liberties that have their origins in 1215 at Runnymede. Need I go on with the evidence that shows Obama to be a war maker and not a peace maker? Yes, he style is a refreshing change after Bush/Cheney, but his policies are not much different so far. He continues in the Kissinger tradition of obtaining a Nobel Peace Prize without pursuing peace policies.
October 9, 2009 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Imagine how George W. Bush would have stumbled through such a quite spontaneous press conference ...
October 9, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
That idiot would have focused on his "political capital".
October 9, 2009 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
[Warning: Snark Alert!]
I just don't get it at all. How could the Nobel Committee give the Peace Prize to Obama and yet have failed to give it to Hitler in 1939? Especially because Obama and Hitler are absolutely identical in every way imaginable.
October 9, 2009 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
So you think if Obama just immediately yanked all of our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan that there would be peace breaking out all over the place. My guess there would a lot more carnage than there is now, just that US troops wouldn't be involved. Sometimes it is, unfortunately, about minimizing the destruction rather than having an actual option of choosing between war / no war.
He inherited these two messes and now he is trying to resolve them in sanest way possible.
October 9, 2009 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dang, that was meant for out of the loop.
October 9, 2009 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm no republican and I'm a huge Obama fan, but that said, he should respectfully decline the award ... He just hasn't done anything worthy of the prize.
Certainly there are other politicians who have won the war when they did not deserve it ... Henry Kissinger comes to mind ... but this will be used as more empty suit rhetoric by the right and will negatively impact Obama's agenda. Declining would give him better moral standing for being an honest broker.
October 9, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Get your facts straight. The prize isn't based on accomplishment -- that's just a myth. The committee wants to encourage peopel they think are promoting international cooperation and peace.
That's their right, and joining the rightwing/MSM meme (really identical at this point) about how he should decline it misses the point: He's on the right track.
October 9, 2009 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's statement this morning is excellent: he quite humbly says that he doesn't "deserve" the award based on past accomplishments, but he also notes that the award is often given to try to push people towards peace, and says he will accept the award.
He then lists several issues - nuclear arms, global warming, Israel/Palestine where he is trying to make a positive impact. Yet the tone is, as usual for Obama, more about "us" and "we" than "I" - he notes that achieving the goals he has will require cooperation from leaders and citizens from around the world, not just by dictate from America. And I suppose that sense of shared responsibility, and cooperation, is in large part why he won the award.
I'd still rather see him make a far stronger break with the Bush/Cheney war on terror tactics, and the DOJ should be seriously investigating, and likely prosecuting, officials who put our torture regime in place, but it's hard to listen to Obama speak and not be inspired.
October 9, 2009 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, according to their statement, it was his emphasis on "shared responsibility" that in part motivated their awarding the prize. And I like how both the committee and Obama include global warming as part of the "peace." It isn't all about guns and bombs.
October 9, 2009 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
John Fugelsang on the Stephanie Miller show this morning: "On the same day the U.S. bombed the moon, President Obama got the Nobel Prize for mooning the bomb."
Congratulations President Obama and all peace loving people!
October 9, 2009 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Are we supposed to know who those people are?
October 9, 2009 12:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice consolation prize after losing the Olympics. The world likes us afterall.
October 9, 2009 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
The key question is: What does Dick Cheney think?
October 9, 2009 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney is thinking about either trying to invade Kenya or Hawaii. Or should he try for both. He's not quite sure yet.
October 9, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama ran on the slogan of "HOPE" and he seems to have delivered this to the rest of the world.
People outside the U.S., (as well as many of us inside the U.S.), were terrified by the policies of the Bush administration. This award not only addresses racism (as mentioned above), nuclear disarmament, but the prospect of peace as well as the denoucement of the Bush Doctrine and the Bush presidency, in general.
Sort of like "Ding, Dong, the Witch is Dead" in the Wizard of Oz.
October 9, 2009 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Must be a slow peace year.
October 9, 2009 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Taliban and the RNC both condemn it. LOL. Birds of a feather.
October 9, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
DNC beat me to it:
UPDATE: Either sensing an opening to cast the Republican Party as actively rooting against America, or just fed up with the stream of negative responses, the Democratic National Committee put out an unusually blunt statement Friday morning. The gist: that the GOP sides with the terrorists.
"The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists -- the Taliban and Hamas this morning -- in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize," wrote DNC Communications Director Brad Woodhouse. "Republicans cheered when America failed to land the Olympics and now they are criticizing the President of the United States for receiving the Nobel Peace prize -- an award he did not seek but that is nonetheless an honor in which every American can take great pride -- unless of course you are the Republican Party. The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It's no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim."
October 9, 2009 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fundamentalist conservatives may actually represent "birds of a feather", muslim, christian, jewish, hindu or WHATEVER.
THE ARE EXTREME CONSERVATIVES OF EVERY FAITH AND CREED WHOSE ONLY REAL AGENDA IS MAINTAINING A STALE STATUS QUO, NO MATTER HOW CORRUPTED IT HAS BECOME BY ITS OWN POWER.
Sorry for yelling, my caps button got stuck.
October 9, 2009 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny how all those saying he is undeserving fail to put forward their candidate. I think he's deserving, but I'll put one out there: Greg Mortenson He's focused on peace and education in the Middle East. The work he has done is amazing. I hope he will receive the prize in the future.
October 9, 2009 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. Greg Mortenson is deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize. Maybe next year.
October 9, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's open another can of worms, shall we? Care to bet that Bill Clinton's name will be brought up by Fox and other wingnuts, as in Bill Clinton did not win the peace prize for his efforts to bring peace to Northern Ireland. It would be a low blow, plus allowing them to rub salt in old Clinton wounds. Almost a trifecta for Beck, Hannity . . . you get it.
October 9, 2009 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
USA! USA!
October 9, 2009 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Goddamn the Dodgers!
October 9, 2009 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting sequence of events:
1. Nobel Committee awards Peace Prize to Pres. Obama.
2. Americans break out into dog and cat fights.
October 9, 2009 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Have you ever heard of "The Civil War?"
October 9, 2009 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
As if we didn't have proof that the Nobel Peace Prize was being used as a political tool when Al Gore received it, the evidence is in. A political tool has been given to a political tool. What a joke.
October 9, 2009 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
TROLLS ON PARADE!
October 9, 2009 12:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love a parade!
And, oh by the way, they make no bones about the fact they want to use the prize to have "liberalizing" effect. Maybe because that's how one moves closer to peace. Go figure.
October 9, 2009 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's a birther, too. Has to be particularly galling for that team of 'players'.
I love it. :-)
October 9, 2009 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you base your claim that she is a "birther" on what?
Your obvious obsession with birthers, which appears to rival the "birthers" inane obsession with Obama's nationality, and the fact she's posted something you disagree with?
October 9, 2009 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why can't we just be proud of our country and president today? Would it be awful to move this country in the direction of peace? Really? Comments like this are unbelievable to me.
October 9, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Being proud of our country has nothing to do with the Nobel Peace prize being given out to a president who was in office for 11 days before nominations for the prize was closed. Maybe if he had gotten it after getting us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, at least it would be for something he actually did.
October 9, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't believe the Nobel Committee has ever made any secret that the Peace Prize is a political tool, much less denied it, and it can't be a joke to use it as a political tool since they admit it is used for tjat and that is what it essentially is intended to be used for.
None of that has anything to do with whether they've used the tool correctly or effectively or credibly in any particular case, but it certainly doesn't make it a joke simply because it was awarded for political reasons - it is ALWAYS awarded for political reasons and it has ALWAYS been a political tool and it was ALWAYS meant as a political tool and it will ALWAYS be a political tool.
October 9, 2009 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
So tell me again why we should be so proud and happy about our president being awarded a "political tool"?
October 9, 2009 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Nobel Peace prize was set up to encourage the pursuit of peace. That means, encouraging people to act right not simply rewarding them for results already achieved.
Although by defeating the Rethuglican War party Obama has already made an incredible contribution to peace even before he was inaugurated.
Or do you not share my belief that we would currently be debating when we invaded Iran if the Republicans had won?
October 10, 2009 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The Nobel Peace prize was set up to encourage the pursuit of peace. That means, encouraging people to act right not simply rewarding them for results already achieved."
Yeah...that worked out really well in 1994.
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/
October 10, 2009 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Or do you not share my belief that we would currently be debating when we invaded Iran if the Republicans had won?"
I see your point. Now we can debate when Israel will attack Iran instead.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3787724,00.html
October 10, 2009 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seems like most of the Trolls here today are unhappy losers themselves.
Why not step away from the computer, try supporting the prize recipient in his efforts and push him further to own it in his actions? No? Too much to ask?
October 9, 2009 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Too much to ask? Yes and No. First they have to understand what you're saying. That's the Yes part. The No part comes in because that's what they automatically say to everything.
October 9, 2009 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I thought we were supposed to automatically say "birther" in response to everything we disagree with!
October 9, 2009 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's fine the President Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. It might have made more sense (to me) and been more substantive if they had waited a while, but they didn't.
What bothers me is that pundits are using this as a hammer to beat the president over the head.
President Obama didn't campaign for this award (did he?), nor did he strong-arm the Nobel committee for it. Yet, my impression so far today is that a lot of people appear to laying the "blame" for this at his feet.
How about we just allow President Obama to humbly accept this award, put it up on his mantel and move on?
David
ps... I woke this morning to John Roberts on CNN interviewing .. wait for it... republican strategist Ed Rollins about this. I'm pretty sure that interview could have written itself.
October 9, 2009 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're kidding, right? Idiots (like the "dilirious" one posting on this thread) are just going to add this to the pile of things they hate about Obama, the first of which, of course, is the color of his skin.
October 9, 2009 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only think I "hate" about Obama is that collection of his most rabid supporters who spew hatred against any contrary opinion.
Other than that, Obama's done better than I expected, worse than promised, and consistent enough with why I voted for him to like him for a second term should he continue to perform no worse over the next three years and hopefully grow to perform better.
The fact that I'm skeptical of the justifications for a Nobel Prize at this point in his career neither makes me a racist nor a Republican.
Don't let facts deter your rants, though.
I understand fully that expresseion of real rage and faux outrage, along with colorful profanities, is the greatest addiction of the rabidly partisan, whether Right or Left.
October 9, 2009 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shut up, moron.
October 9, 2009 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
The job of those whose job it is to pick the Nobel Peace Prize winner has been done. We can have our opinions of it, but nobody other than those on the committee really know why they select the person or persons who are honored. Nonetheless, people cannot resist offering their own opinions I suppose, as though that is what counts, but that is not what counts.
It may be my opinion that it seems a tad premature for Obama to have won this award at this time but I have not problem at all with it. Many people posting here have identified lots of good reasons for the committee to have awarded this to the President and I certainly don't grudge him the award. It is an honor for him but also an honor for every single one of us who voted for him. I certainly don't like a lot of what he has done. I see him as far too much a corporate representative as opposed to a tribune of the people. Nonetheless, it doesn't diminish my pride in him as an American for having been selected for this incredible honor. It makes me proud as an American that a committee of foreigners recognize our President and feel he is worthy of this most esteemed of prizes. I don't know of any prize on earth more prestigious than the Nobel Peace Prize.
So, on this surprising day let's give the President his due. Let's conratulate him, feel proud of him and also let's congratulate ourselves and enjoy a feeling of pride in our country. I really do see the award as something the President is receiving both for his accomplishments and as a symbol for us all.
Congratulations Mr. President! Now, use this to do what is right on healthcare and other critical issues on the nation's agenda.
October 9, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans going batshit over this is just one more example of their "Country First" signs at the Republican convention last year being just a slogan. Sad! Really sad!
October 9, 2009 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hitler passed a law forbidding Germans from accepting the Nobel Peace Prize because too many damn anti-Nazis were winning it. So Josh Bolton encouraging Obama to refuse it just makes all kinds of sense.
If you think about, giving a Nobel Peace Prize to someone in an extremely powerful and influential position, who is rational, idealistic, and well-intentioned but faced with rabid opposition (and who is maybe a little light in the political courage department) will likely have a much greater impact on our future well-being than honoring worthy but past accomplishments.
And note to GOP: "neutered" = "broke, friendless and "despised"
October 9, 2009 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
And note to GOP: "neutered" = "broke, friendless and "despised"
Correctomundo on all counts but "broke", since they are still a very wealthy party. It may not be in party coffers, but give them another Palin-type they can trust, and their green flow will resume.
But, that being said, all that money can't buy friends, respect or fertility, so the rest of your observation stands..
October 9, 2009 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Congratulations, Mr. President! Continue on that road to world peace...from a nuclear free world, to ending the wars to continuing to show your compassion for those who are not like you. You are truly an inspiration to the world. I am proud that you represent this country.
October 9, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a call to action, I think, on the part of all peace-loving Americans. And yes, a rebuke of bushco. Let us hope it also spurs a rebuke of those who endorsed and implemented torture.
I applaud the Nobel Committee’s hope in an America which turns away from bullying and toward peace and cooperation.
October 9, 2009 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like to nominate the Democratic Party's 2016 Presidential candidate for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize.
I don't know who the nominee will be, but I'm sure that person means well.
October 9, 2009 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
turn it down?
Joe Scarbrough EAT IT!!!!
Obama Should accept it!!! THis prize is not only for Obama its for the USA. Obama represents US. They gave him the prize because they like the path WE AS A NATION are going.
This isnt about Obama. Think about it why else would they have given it to a sitting president.
Obama should embrace the prize and take it as a call to action and use it to bully blue dog democrats to pass good legislation and stop sucking republicans off.
October 9, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Waiting for Rush and Glenn's heads to come to a point and explode. Too funny.
Great for Obama but my first reaction was I can't wait to hear the craziness from the rightwing nuttery. The entertainment value...priceless.
October 9, 2009 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the Nobel folks simply asked the question, "In the past year, who has (in the words of the award criteria) 'done the most or best work for fraternity among nations'?" And if you ask, Who has made the biggest difference on that score in the past year--surely it's Obama. More to do? God, yes. But the award is hardly undeserved.
October 9, 2009 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
President Obama has already accepted the Nobel Prize and he said it is a "call to action". Good on him!!!!!
October 9, 2009 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Michael Steele = Kanye West on this one.
October 9, 2009 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Strikes me as a brilliant move on their part to serve their foundation's agenda.
They see potential in him as a sympatico son to their agenda both because of what his election symbolized and his own rhetoric and actions to date (things like G20 response to world financial crisis and chairing the Security Council on the atomic weapons question are right up their alley...)
The award lays a head trip on him at precisely at a crucial point in his service as president of the U.S. when he could develop in one direction or another.
While it also lays a head trip on any bad actors/negative nabobs he is trying to deal with right now, and could also serve as a little temporary boost for any of the problems he's dealing with right now, but that will be only a little temporary boost and won't last long. And I don't believe the committee is so dumb that they don't realize that, too. No, it really seems to me it is to play the head trip on Obama of "remember what you're doing this for, remember what you said, remember what you represent to so many in the world, live up to it."
P.S. The people arguing that he hadn't done much by Feb. of this year are just being silly and naive about the Nobel committee following strict rules. They can do any frigging thing they want. They may have seen potential by then, but it's the stuff that followed up on that potential that obviously turned them move to this.
Also, I should mention that people in the western blogosphere and the media have a big blind spot about Africa, they forget all about that continent. It's actually where peace is most needed in this world, and whether you like the reasons for that or not, Obama's election has a lot of important symbolism there. The award just gives him more gravitas to have an effect there.
October 9, 2009 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
First reaction was 'Whaaaaat? That's just silly'. Notice this reaction was without thinking and the similarity it has with the conservatives out there who are ripping the selection. Upon reflection (oh, why can't some people learn to reflect?) it seems like the right choice as a symbol of the repudiation of the past near decade of darkness.
The more cynical will call it the award for not being George W. Bush, but hey, that's all good by me.
In Case You Missed It
October 9, 2009 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's funny to watch this neocon renaissance of interest in results and achievements. Their own approach to foreign policy is to spend more money than what health care would cost to smugly and righteously hurt the bad guys' feelings.
October 9, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Only in America can someone be criticized for winning a Peace Prize.
The right wing is crazy.
I say anyone who wants to criticize please aim your arrows at the Nobel committee. Not at Obama. He didn't lobby for the award.
If anything, look at this as an opportunity for the US and Obama to seek out peace rather than war.
October 9, 2009 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll post this again here
I think to understand the import of this choice one need only look to the career of John Bolton, the man Bush tried to appoint as US ambassador to the UN; he is symbolic all the neo-con adventurism and dirty dealing done by that administration:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Bolton
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/07/27/bolton-failure/
there was a LOT of dirt done in international affairs over the past 8 years. This award honors and reinforces the hope that Obama can successfully bring that era to a close. It will take time and support from we the people who put him in office and the rest of the world.
October 9, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very briefly and again,
1) All the many leading Democratic Countries do not have the enactment of the Death Penalty and have held steadfastly to those mandatory cornerstones of Democratic Principles of Law.
2) By proper respect, regard and most importantly interpretation of Democratic Law the enactment of the Death penalty is impossible, period and including the end to torture in all its forms, applications, ecetra, period.
3) A brief additional suggestion is that the White House immediately keep its many verbal, written and campaign promises and not do the opposite thereof as the record clearly and unmistakeably has recorded!!!!!!!!!!
Even though I feel I have been personally betrayed by these so-called 'Whistleblower' Organizations of;
1) Government Accountability Project (GAP)
2) National Whistleblower Center (NWC)
3) Project on Government Oversight and Accountability (POGO)
4) and many or most all of our US Executive, Legislative and Judicial Officials
I continue to request that President Barack Obama keep his verbal and written campaign rehtoric, pledges and promises to the National Whistleblower Center and immediately bring to a full floor vote the 'Federal Employee Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Restoration Act' and hopefully the Sabersky Plan that from my impression has been well received and not the Second Signing Statement of President Barack Obama that from published reviews has increased the retaliations upon Whistleblowers and the harmful effects thereof upon all.
October 9, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
PROUD! So proud I can't stand it. He doesn't do exactly what the left wants, not exactly what the right wants but he does find the one step at a time solutions that will prevail in bringing our world, not just our country, to a better place. Hang on everyone . . . the Obama journey is going to give all of us permission to evoke in each other the best of which humanity is capable. VERY, VERY, VERY, PROUD!
October 9, 2009 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Idea for bumper sticker:
"My President is a Nobel Peace Prize winner!"
October 9, 2009 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's absolutely ludicrous that such a tool of the Empire and servant of the military-industrial complex should win this award ... but hey, the Nobel Peace Prize lost all credibility when it was given to noted war criminal Henry Kissinger.
October 9, 2009 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
A song for all you whineyazzed rightys. Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XFGiYzJj7I
October 9, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
thanks for useful information!
Best regards, Mary, CEO of youtube to mp3
December 16, 2010 4:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Eric Kleefeld (TPM) - October 9, 2009, 12:44PM:
"Reasonable people can believe this award was not deserved and that Obama has not at this time demonstrated the true accomplishments required."
Apparently not, according to some folks commenting here, who think anyone believing that is a right wing racist troll.
C'est la vie.
October 9, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
The symbolism of this award for the United States is tantamount to a welcome back to the world. Those who had an opportunity to travel between 2000 and 2008 experienced the damage to U.S. reputation around the globe. President Obama has changed all that and the Nobel Prize Committee has made a wise choice.
Frankly, I cannot get my head around how winning the prestigious Nobel Peace Price can be interpreted by sane intelligent people as a liability anywhere, least of all at home. It speaks of a cynical, unfair, egoistic, self-serving and mad society to turn such a positive into a negative.
Can't we for one day feel united and happy over such a recognition? Over the fact the world seems to have regained faith and admiration for the U.S. and looks forward to its leadership? Is being loved by the rest of the world all that bad? Can''t we value and appreciate what we have in President Barack Obama. Some of the comments made by Steele, R.L., and some other right wing commentators are as bad as it gets. Shame on them!
October 9, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
And why this impatience towards Pres. Obama after only 9 months in office? Why, in turn did we passively accept the coup d'etat of 2000 and all the calamity it wrought during the 8 years which followed.
October 9, 2009 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure what you mean by "passive."
Did you expect Democrats to engage in armed revolt?
If Democrats had been passive, then the electoral victories in 2008 would not have been possible.
As for impatience with Obama, the more you promise the more your failure to achieve anything stands out and Obama promised a lot.
For example, Obama should have been able, with a Democratic majority, to wipe away DADT within a few weeks of taking office, something that is not only right, but would have enhanced our efforts at winning Afghanistan, since many, many Arabic experts were pushed out of the service by the Bush administration, hamstringing our ability to effectively deal with the issues in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But, he didn't, which not only is a failure to act on promises made during the campaign, promises for which no significant barriers to keeping exist, but ultimately harmful to our national security by depriving our military and foreign services the talents of many dedicated American citizens.
While it is true that Obama, and the Democratic Congress, has had to endure unprecedented obstructionism, that is not sufficient excuse on many fronts, but only on a few.
October 9, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Obama promised a lot."
List them, the actual promises. Or give us links to them. And I mean actual PROMISES, not the idealistic speeches suggesting change of some sort, not the politically managed comments meant to reassure the hoipeful and maybe sway the skeptics.
List the PROMISES you say he made.
I would suggest most of those statements you considered promises were actually hopeful statements, which were interpreted by some as promises because they desperately wanted to hear it as a promise, not a hopeful statement.
Those of us who heard it correctly carried hope away from those speeches, not delusions.
And now we (those of us who did not misinterpret every hopeful statement as a promise) are all the more hopeful because we see the progress hiding beneath the media's thinning veil of lies, and the rest of the civilized world's evident appreciation of those tangible changes.
I think too many of the supposed Obama supporters who are now such regular naysayers were either projecting their own delusions onto Obama's words, or they are disingenuous, and have never sincerely supported him.
October 9, 2009 11:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure what I think of this, and I imagine Pres Obama must be uncomfortable with it. It just seems like they could have waited a little longer into his Presidency. To me the Prize has always seemed like the pinnacle, the peak of someone's career in good works. I just hope this isn't so for Obama. He's just starting, really. A full moon can only last for so long. It just feels a little premature.
October 9, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ultimately, like pursuit of the Olympics, it is a distraction from more important matters.
The Right, now, can't pass up the opportunity to rabidly (and disloyally and hypocritically) mock Obama and the Left can't pass up the opportunity to shove it back in their face.
Both sides are more eager to score partisan points, either for or against Obama or those that approve or do not approve of his performance, than to deal with the real issues we face.
Only a handful of supporters here have made any rational and reasonable arguments for awarding the prize to Obama (e.g., wyt) - the rest simply argue from a pro hominem perspective, with gushing sycophantic praise devoid of any substance.
October 9, 2009 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a remarkable man and a remarkable life?
I have supported him strongly every day in 2008 and that Nov night was one of the most spectacular moments in my life as a global and political being.
While, I have my compliants in the 10 months of his tenure- no public figure had inspired me remotely as much as he has and in my mind I have no doubt he deserves it.
The man hasn't tured 50 yet..Wow.
October 9, 2009 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope that we (eventually) see this fabulous award as being given to a man of peace, rather than bickering over "what has Obama actually achieved as yet?" From the outset of his presidential candidacy, Obama has embodied the spirit of bipartisanship, much to the Righties' delight because they get to reject him, and much to the Lefties' disgust because they continue to see this stance as an unwillingness to fight. I view Obama as a man with an extraordinary level of spiritual self-control; everyone keeps knocking him in the chin, and he keeps stretching out his arms to invite them to know him better and therefore get over themselves. Over and over again. To the point where the rest of us would have said, "forget this shit!" and picked up a club to strike the uncooperative assholes over the head. For this, as far as I am concerned, he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize more than any other public figure I can think of. He will not bend to public opinion to become a normal, reactive, lowest-common-denominator, pugnacious "opponent." As a nation, we manage to bring everything else down to our level: but not this man. The world has noticed. While domestically, his moral greatness is pearls before swine and everyone here is in "whine" mode, internationally, they actually have the bravery to notice this effort and reward it. I could not be more pleased and proud.
October 9, 2009 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am waiting
I am waiting
I am waiting...
for the American eagle
to straighten up
and fly right.
Ferlinghetti
Well, I is We and We is the World, as the famous song put it, more or less. (I can see the whole spread of pop culture from Michael Jackson to Bob Dylan before my mind's eye this minute belting it out - there really is no business like show business!)
The whole world was waiting, impatient, frustrated, often despairing that America, beacon of hope for the whole world, the world's country with its tumultuous mix of every creed and color imaginable, seemed unable to assume its destined role as world leader, but, finally, someone comes along to give them the chance, the reason, to show their real feelings about the most powerful and popular country on earth.
They love us! This is a love letter to America from the rest of the world. Everyone now has taken advantage of the President's positive and open embrace of internationalism - respect for all nations - and rejection of small-minded, narrow nationalism to signal their enthusiastic and relieved approval of what they knew was there in us all along, but often not in evidence in our actions.
Discussion of the small-minded legalisms of the nomination period and process are beside the point - they could not help themselves! This flowed out from the heart of the world in a great gushing unstoppable stream of emotion that simply swept the committee along with it.
The award is for the President just being there, being who he is. It is to encourage us to stay on this course of peaceful involvement in the world, for the future continuation of this positive style of American leadership. It is a heartfelt thank you from the world for the whole administration and for the whole nation, each and every one of us Americans.
Most of all it is an expression of hope. It is an expression of how much the world needs to have faith in America, how much the world wants to believe in America. Now we have to live up to the responsibility they have given us.
October 9, 2009 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
yep....this is post number 293
October 9, 2009 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't know if this is the last word, but on top of everything else he has done that is worthy of our pride and respect, his personal humility was undeniable when he accepted the award, not as a reward for a job well done, as a "call to action" to fulfill the legacy he has already begun to write.
This guy is a breath of fresh air. Regardless of how much you might disapprove of his politics, he's got the whole arrogant Bush junta, from Cheney on down to W, outclassed in every way.
Whether he deserves the Nobel or not is purely an academic debate at this point, he already won it.
While there may be reasonable doubts that he has actually earned such a prestigious peace award, there is no doubt he represents a much smarter, stronger and better America than what we have seen for a long, long time.
October 10, 2009 12:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was very pleased to find this site.I wanted to thank you for this great read!! Hulu Downloader | iPad Converter
August 17, 2010 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
This article is very interesting. Thank you very much for sharing . m2ts files converter from m2ts converter
August 17, 2010 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm a big supporter of the President, but along the prestige continuum, the Nobel just moved away from the Congressional-Medal-of-Honor type award and a lot closer to the Mira-Sorvino-Winning-an-Oscar end of things.
Sofia, an employee of Iscsi San Software
December 21, 2010 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Woah! I’m really enjoying the template/theme of this website. It’s simple, yet effective. A lot of times it’s hard to get that “perfect balance” between user friendliness and appearance. I must say that you’ve done a excellent job with this. In addition, the blog loads extremely quick for me on Chrome. Outstanding Blog!
Copenhagen hotels
March 25, 2011 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
You will have to consider aspect inside an important challenge for one from all of the most beneficial blog sites for all of the net. I actually can suggest that web site!
Luxembourg hotels
March 25, 2011 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
You helped me a lot indeed and reading this your article I have found many new and useful information about this subject. the diet solution
March 26, 2011 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I choose my friends for their good looks, my acquaintances for their good characters, and my enemies for their intellects. A man cannot be too careful in the choice of his enemies. auto insurance quotes online Oscar Wilde
March 30, 2011 3:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
A principle is the expression of perfection, and as imperfect beings like us cannot practice perfection, we devise every moment limits of its compromise in practice. buy insurance Mohandas Gandhi submit articles
March 30, 2011 4:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
A nation which has forgotten the quality of courage which in the past has been brought to public life is not as likely to insist upon or regard that quality in its chosen leaders today - and in fact we have forgotten. online games to play for free John F. Kennedy imobiliare
March 30, 2011 4:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am absolutely amazed by the amount of information on this page. I wrote this site and hope that in the coming days. Great job keep up the good work
accredited degree
online degree
March 30, 2011 8:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think a very beautiful and interesting, but the problem is what will cost the owner to service the interior designer who will give input ......
prior learning degree
life experience degree
March 30, 2011 8:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am absolutely amazed by the amount of information on this page. college degree
March 30, 2011 8:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is very encouraging to go through the post for it contains information about these interesting feature. It is a useful tutorial. Manchester Airport Car Parking
April 1, 2011 5:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Send Flowers to your Mother any time any where through our services send mothers day flowers India Very Informative And Interesting Blog to read very nice mothers day flowers delivery USA Happy Mother's Day
April 6, 2011 3:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just passed this onto a colleague who was doing a little research on that. And he actually bought me lunch because I found it for him smile So let me rephrase that: bournemouth greenhouses
April 14, 2011 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a fantastic website and I can not recommend you guys enough. Full of useful resource and great layout very easy on the eyes. Please do keep up this great work. Samsung CLP 300 toner cartridges
April 18, 2011 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Another great post. Bravo. Great work.
Discover how to Watch TV on Laptop and how to get live TV via internet
April 20, 2011 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Really appreciate this wonderful post that you have provided for us.Great site and a great topic as well i really get amazed to read this. farmville secrets
May 3, 2011 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would say that President Obama deserves the Novel Peace Prize. I believe that he has done several good things for US and his advocacy for peace and one nation is becoming a success. credit tips
May 4, 2011 5:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Really appreciate this wonderful post that you have provided for us.Great site and a great topic as well i really get amazed to read this. Samsung CLP 300 toner cartridges
May 4, 2011 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink