Obama's done a lot to set the table for good things down the road, but I'd have to agree that this seems incredibly premature. Anyone have any idea who the other candidates were?
According to what I've read, nominations had to have been post marked by February 1st. Obama was inaugurated on the 20th. What did he do in less than two weeks to win a Nobel Prize?
First black president I guess? Maybe?
Is there some rule that says they couldn't vote for someone who hadn't been nominated?
According to what I've read, nominations had to have been post marked by February 1st. Obama was inaugurated on the 20th. What did he do in less than two weeks to win a Nobel Prize?
According to what I've read, nominations had to have been post marked by February 1st. Obama was inaugurated on the 20th. What did he do in less than two weeks to win a Nobel Prize?
First black president I guess? Maybe?
Is there some rule that says they couldn't vote for someone who hadn't been nominated?
getting nominated is not a difficult thing. it's not like the oscars.
Yeah, I'll me too on the "too soon, norway, too soon"
I can see why he'd be nominated (race speech, disarmament talking, end gitmo/torture stuff), but he's short on accomplishments that aren't tied up in congress, and he's got a few shitty positions on the accountability scale of things.
But really, wait until he's finished doing shit before you rank and award him for things. Give an award to the LHC folks who are trying to end war by destroying the human race!
According to what I've read, nominations had to have been post marked by February 1st. Obama was inaugurated on the 20th. What did he do in less than two weeks to win a Nobel Prize?
[...] the Peace Prize should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.
So I'll go with the goodwill trips to other nations and the UN and the speeches given at those events. The talks with Iran leading to Iran shipping some (most?) of their nuclear stockpile off to Russia to have it refined to be fuel. The talks with Iran leading to Iran saying they will allow us to send in inspectors to view their nuclear facility. And the Lugar-Obama Nonproliferation legislation too.
But you're probably right, it's because he's our first black president. For clarity's sake I'm not really sure he's really done enough in my mind to get the award, but it seems he meets the criteria and I'm not very familiar with the past recipients so I can't say how he compares to people that have received it in the past.
iTunesIsEvil on
0
Options
deowolfis allowed to do that.Traffic.Registered Userregular
According to what I've read, nominations had to have been post marked by February 1st. Obama was inaugurated on the 20th. What did he do in less than two weeks to win a Nobel Prize?
[...] the Peace Prize should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.
So I'll go with the goodwill trips to other nations and the UN and the speeches given at those events. The talks with Iran leading to Iran shipping some (most?) of their nuclear stockpile off to Russia to have it refined to be fuel. The talks with Iran leading to Iran saying they will allow us to send in inspectors to view their nuclear facility. And the Lugar-Obama Nonproliferation legislation too.
But you're probably right, it's because he's our first black president. For clarity's sake I'm not really sure he's really done enough in my mind to get the award, but it seems he meets the criteria and I'm not very familiar with the past recipients so I can't say how he compares to people that have received it in the past.
They gave it to Mother Teresa. Obama has done so much more than she ever did.
They also gave it to Yasser Arafat, but people were much more optimistic about him back then.
Couscous on
0
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
If I promise to end world hunger and make cars fly and run on hopes and dreams, can I get a nobel prize?
Maybe. Probably helps if you spend all your political capital to give healthcare to poor people after abolishing Bush fuckups and ushering in a new age of peace, all while dealing with the worst economy modern America has ever seen.
• 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.
This was definitely as much of a slap in the face to the former Bush administration as it is an award for Obama
I have to agree with that. If anything, it really enforces how the international community viewed the U.S. when Bush was in office.
This is 100% political, and pretty transparently so. The "rest of the world" believes they are doing us a favor. There's a lot of goodwill toward America here.
Of course the reality is that this is going to cause massive problems domestically.
I'm in support of it, but only because it's such a transparent means of affirming the "world's" support. I don't think that this will be helpful or meaningful in the long run unless a large, conservative portion of the population here in America suddenly forgets how to turn on their TV.
If I promise to end world hunger and make cars fly and run on hopes and dreams, can I get a nobel prize?
Maybe. Probably helps if you spend all your political capital to give healthcare to poor people after abolishing Bush fuckups and ushering in a new age of peace, all while dealing with the worst economy modern America has ever seen.
Timothy Leary uncovers Sprial Energy, wins Nobel Prize for hardcoreness. More at 11.
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited October 2009
Yeah, I just realized that Obama is going to look super bad if it turns out he needs to send more troops. I wouldn't be surprised if the committee decided to award him with it to sort of persuade his upcoming decisions.
Damn peace mongers, all underhandedly deciding the course of the future.
why should you give a prize to someone that assuages other governments by breaking protection treaties w/allies? You shouldn't.
The only thing I can come up with here is that by "protection treaties w/ allies" she means "falling over ourselves to not piss off Israel." I'm left thinking "if we make Iran a less dangerous entity then Israel should throw a goddamned pizza party for us."
I would not have given it to Obama. That being said, there are decent arguments to do so:
- He (promised to) close Guantanamo. While he may not succeed in his set timeline, it seems underway.
- He set up a retreat plan for Iraq.
- He held talks with Iran, after which they agreed to have inspectors in their new facility, opening a path to diffuse a decade of saber rattling.
- He has boosted the foreign view of the USA by an amazing degree (There was an article on this a few days ago), removing part of the Bush legacy.
- His election has shown that the USA has changed. Even 30 years ago it would have been impossible. And at the start of the election cycle, people were quite skeptical still. (Not all Obama's doing, but he certainly helped)
All of these seem fairly valid reasons to award the price.
Downsides:
- He is probably going to escalate the war in Afghanistan.
- He doesn't appear to anything at all about Israel, which has become openly defiant of past agreements regarding settlements and the treatment of east-Jerusalem.
Also, I agree that the Peace price probably needs to go.
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited October 2009
Y'know. I hope those critical of this and capable of having their voices heard on TV or radio keep in mind this is the Nobel Prize committee's doing, and not Obama's. I don't doubt they're going to rail Obama for it though.
"The upside is the Nobel Prize committee that has had suspect selections in the past has just befuddled a lot of people across the world," said host Joe Scarborough.
"I predict right now that he will find a way to basically turn it down," Time's Mark Halperin added . "I think he is going to say, I share this with the world or whatever. I don't think he'll embrace this. Because there is no upside."
"The damage is done," Brzezinski responded.
Damage? I didn't realize the Nobel Peace Prize was so damaging.
"The upside is the Nobel Prize committee that has had suspect selections in the past has just befuddled a lot of people across the world," said host Joe Scarborough.
"I predict right now that he will find a way to basically turn it down," Time's Mark Halperin added . "I think he is going to say, I share this with the world or whatever. I don't think he'll embrace this. Because there is no upside."
"The damage is done," Brzezinski responded.
Damage? I didn't realize the Nobel Peace Prize was so damaging.
The RNC put out a statement today on the news:
The real question Americans are asking is, "What has President Obama actually accomplished?" It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights. One thing is certain -- President Obama won't be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action.
The RNC put out a statement today on the news:
The real question Americans are asking is, "What has President Obama actually accomplished?" It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights. One thing is certain -- President Obama won't be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action.
If anyone knows anything about peace and human rights, it's the Republican party.
The RNC put out a statement today on the news:
The real question Americans are asking is, "What has President Obama actually accomplished?" It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights. One thing is certain -- President Obama won't be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action.
Yes, because if there's anyone whose opinion we want to hear when it comes to promoting human rights and world peace, it's the GOP.
It seems like everyone is ignoring what he did in Chicago. Isn't turning down wealth to help the impoverished one of the things people get this prize for? Saying he hasn't done anything is disingenuous at best.
Posts
I can live with that
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
I have to agree with that. If anything, it really enforces how the international community viewed the U.S. when Bush was in office.
Is there some rule that says they couldn't vote for someone who hadn't been nominated?
This truly is boggling my mind..
getting nominated is not a difficult thing. it's not like the oscars.
I can see why he'd be nominated (race speech, disarmament talking, end gitmo/torture stuff), but he's short on accomplishments that aren't tied up in congress, and he's got a few shitty positions on the accountability scale of things.
But really, wait until he's finished doing shit before you rank and award him for things. Give an award to the LHC folks who are trying to end war by destroying the human race!
But you're probably right, it's because he's our first black president. For clarity's sake I'm not really sure he's really done enough in my mind to get the award, but it seems he meets the criteria and I'm not very familiar with the past recipients so I can't say how he compares to people that have received it in the past.
Wow, Norway, you guys really hate Fox news, huh?
They also gave it to Yasser Arafat, but people were much more optimistic about him back then.
GM: Rusty Chains (DH Ongoing)
Maybe. Probably helps if you spend all your political capital to give healthcare to poor people after abolishing Bush fuckups and ushering in a new age of peace, all while dealing with the worst economy modern America has ever seen.
Good comment discussion going on about this on Ta-Nahesi's blog.
This is 100% political, and pretty transparently so. The "rest of the world" believes they are doing us a favor. There's a lot of goodwill toward America here.
Of course the reality is that this is going to cause massive problems domestically.
I'm in support of it, but only because it's such a transparent means of affirming the "world's" support. I don't think that this will be helpful or meaningful in the long run unless a large, conservative portion of the population here in America suddenly forgets how to turn on their TV.
Timothy Leary uncovers Sprial Energy, wins Nobel Prize for hardcoreness. More at 11.
What transparency? Sealing of torture memos? Gitmo still running? More wiretaps?
Peace? How is afghanistan
Damn peace mongers, all underhandedly deciding the course of the future.
Front page, first line at RedState
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
The only thing I can come up with here is that by "protection treaties w/ allies" she means "falling over ourselves to not piss off Israel." I'm left thinking "if we make Iran a less dangerous entity then Israel should throw a goddamned pizza party for us."
:rotate:
- He (promised to) close Guantanamo. While he may not succeed in his set timeline, it seems underway.
- He set up a retreat plan for Iraq.
- He held talks with Iran, after which they agreed to have inspectors in their new facility, opening a path to diffuse a decade of saber rattling.
- He has boosted the foreign view of the USA by an amazing degree (There was an article on this a few days ago), removing part of the Bush legacy.
- His election has shown that the USA has changed. Even 30 years ago it would have been impossible. And at the start of the election cycle, people were quite skeptical still. (Not all Obama's doing, but he certainly helped)
All of these seem fairly valid reasons to award the price.
Downsides:
- He is probably going to escalate the war in Afghanistan.
- He doesn't appear to anything at all about Israel, which has become openly defiant of past agreements regarding settlements and the treatment of east-Jerusalem.
Also, I agree that the Peace price probably needs to go.
What the hell are you talking about?
He's opened records that were sealed under Bush
He's released lots of torture records and photos, but not all
He tried to close Gitmo but the republicans went all NOT IN AMURRICA BUDDY NO HUH DONT THINK SO
More wiretaps? I'm pretty sure you just made that one up
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Man, they skipped lolcelebrity and socialism and went straight to racism. I was expecting a better showing, to be honest.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
Damage? I didn't realize the Nobel Peace Prize was so damaging.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
You just wait. This is going to be nasty.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
So wrong, yet so right. and Right.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Not just Republicans, but a lot of Democrats too due to NIMBY stuff. Which is idiotic. Terrorists don't have jail escaping superpowers.
If anyone knows anything about peace and human rights, it's the Republican party.
Yes, because if there's anyone whose opinion we want to hear when it comes to promoting human rights and world peace, it's the GOP.
EDIT: Hi5 Henroid