Obama awarded 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
I'm speechless. I don't blame Obama. I think even liberals, especially peace activists, have to be confused and somewhat angry at this decision. He has a lot of great (depending on who you ask) ideas, but nothing has been accomplished so far...at all (Gitmo won't close for a long time, we will be in Iraq and Afghanistan for a long time [in fact, expect more troops in Afghanistan soon], and he caved to the Russians on the missile shield to, maybe, gain their cooperation with Iran who, btw, is going about their business of developing nukes). And that's really no shame. He's only 10 months into his first term. But how must those protesters in Washington whining...I'm sorry...lobbying to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan feel? This lowers the stature of the Prize (as if it could get any lower than when they awarded it to Gore over the survivor of Jewish concentration camps who had saved people and records of the dead for their families). I also think it will do nothing but Obama's chances at re-election as it's going to allow his opponents to reinforce the image of him as an appeaser and friend to the anti-American influences in Europe and around the world.
I'm not sure what Obama will do, but I feel for him. It's like Congress called me up and told me they were awarding me the Medal of Honor because I gave a homeless veteran change. You can't snub your nose at a prestigious honor (the Peace Prize is prestigious in international circles anyway), but even you know you didn't earn it. He's definitely in a Catch-22. Speech at 9:30am CDT. I fully expect him to equivocate, but we'll see.
I guess the committee had no viable candidates to choose this year.
(10-09-2009 08:05 AM)blazr Wrote: [ -> ]Obama awarded 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
I'm speechless. I don't blame Obama. I think even liberals, especially peace activists, have to be confused and somewhat angry at this decision. He has a lot of great (depending on who you ask) ideas, but nothing has been accomplished so far...at all (Gitmo won't close for a long time, we will be in Iraq and Afghanistan for a long time [in fact, expect more troops in Afghanistan soon], and he caved to the Russians on the missile shield to, maybe, gain their cooperation with Iran who, btw, is going about their business of developing nukes). And that's really no shame. He's only 10 months into his first term. But how must those protesters in Washington whining...I'm sorry...lobbying to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan feel? This lowers the stature of the Prize (as if it could get any lower than when they awarded it to Gore over the survivor of Jewish concentration camps who had saved people and records of the dead for their families). I also think it will do nothing but Obama's chances at re-election as it's going to allow his opponents to reinforce the image of him as an appeaser and friend to the anti-American influences in Europe and around the world.
I'm not sure what Obama will do, but I feel for him. It's like Congress called me up and told me they were awarding me the Medal of Honor because I gave a homeless veteran change. You can't snub your nose at a prestigious honor (the Peace Prize is prestigious in international circles anyway), but even you know you didn't earn it. He's definitely in a Catch-22. Speech at 9:30am CDT. I fully expect him to equivocate, but we'll see.
in the liberal/socialist/Marxist/collectivist world, well said = well done
I think more than anything else this gauges the depth of hatred Europe had for Bush. He knows he hasn't done anything of substance to merit the award. I agree that this may end up as an albatross around his neck in 2012 especially if he missteps in Afghanistan.
"Yet the choice was stunning given that the nomination deadline of Feb. 1, less than two weeks after the Obama presidency began."
-Sourced from Fox News Online
I think this shows how completely irrelevant the Nobel Prize now is. Hell, this is the same group that gave it to Arrafat.
I don't blame him either. However, I think he should give the $1.4M he won from receiving the prize to the locals in Detroit. After all, they think they're getting free money from his "stash" anyway...
Is it too late to call dibs on Bill Clinton in the heart attack pool?
In other news, I'm a Heisman Trophy candidate.
(10-09-2009 08:15 AM)biglizard Wrote: [ -> ]I think more than anything else this gauges the depth of hatred Europe had for Bush. He knows he hasn't done anything of substance to merit the award. I agree that this may end up as an albatross around his neck in 2012 especially if he missteps in Afghanistan.
So he won basically for not being Bush. Maybe I can win next year, since I'm not Bush either.
I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
(10-09-2009 03:17 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
Then he should have been a real man about it and refused to accept it. But, I don't think his ego would allow him to do that.
(10-09-2009 03:30 PM)blazeman21 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:17 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
Then he should have been a real man about it and refused to accept it. 
But, I don't think his ego would allow him to do that.
(10-09-2009 03:17 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
He needs to live up to his words from some other speeches he's made before I buy his fake humility in this one.
(10-09-2009 03:30 PM)blazeman21 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:17 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
Then he should have been a real man about it and refused to accept it. But, I don't think his ego would allow him to do that.
I don't believe ego is what accepting the Prize is about. No one shows disrespect for such a prestigious body by "poking them in the eye" or "spitting in their face" by refusing an internationally recognized award as though the Nobel Committee members didn't know what they were doing. The President was up front about his doubts about deserving the award and that is all one can do. John Wayne did not refuse the "Oscar" because it was given for a performance he doubted was among his best. He just joked about never realizing that his left eye had kept him from winning before.
the Norwegian Nobel Institute made a political statement. That is all.
I don't care if he accepts it or the $. the Institute just proved how irrelevant this award has become.
(10-09-2009 06:12 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:30 PM)blazeman21 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:17 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
Then he should have been a real man about it and refused to accept it. But, I don't think his ego would allow him to do that.
I don't believe ego is what accepting the Prize is about. No one shows disrespect for such a prestigious body by "poking them in the eye" or "spitting in their face" by refusing an internationally recognized award as though the Nobel Committee members didn't know what they were doing. The President was up front about his doubts about deserving the award and that is all one can do. John Wayne did not refuse the "Oscar" because it was given for a performance he doubted was among his best. He just joked about never realizing that his left eye had kept him from winning before.
But then there was George C. Scott. Oh wait...
(10-09-2009 11:45 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 08:15 AM)biglizard Wrote: [ -> ]I think more than anything else this gauges the depth of hatred Europe had for Bush. He knows he hasn't done anything of substance to merit the award. I agree that this may end up as an albatross around his neck in 2012 especially if he missteps in Afghanistan.
So he won basically for not being Bush. Maybe I can win next year, since I'm not Bush either.
Neither am I. But my last name starts with a B so I'm probably hosed.
I still think Ashton Kutcher going to walk across the stage in Oslo and shock us all. It would be fitting.
(10-09-2009 03:30 PM)blazeman21 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:17 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
Then he should have been a real man about it and refused to accept it. But, I don't think his ego would allow him to do that.
If he had refused to accept it then that would have looked very poorly internationally. He said he didn't think he deserved it and he's giving the money directly to charity. I don't know what else you want from him, save bombing the Nobel organization's headquarters.
(10-11-2009 09:10 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:30 PM)blazeman21 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:17 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
Then he should have been a real man about it and refused to accept it. But, I don't think his ego would allow him to do that.
If he had refused to accept it then that would have looked very poorly internationally. He said he didn't think he deserved it and he's giving the money directly to charity. I don't know what else you want from him, save bombing the Nobel organization's headquarters.
It just would have looked poorly to the Norwegians, and lets be honest, who really cares what they say?
Quote:How to Win the Nobel Peace Prize In 12 Days
Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize this morning. Over the last decade the only requirement to win the prize was that the nominee had to be critical of George W. Bush (see Al Gore, Mohamed El Baradei and Jimmy Carter).
President Obama has broken new ground here. Nominations for potential winners of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize ended on February 1. The president took office only 12 days earlier on January 20.
Let’s take a look at the president’s first 12 days in the White House according to his public schedule to see what he did to deserve a Nobel Peace Prize:
January 20: Sworn in as president. Went to a parade. Partied.
January 21: Asked bureaucrats to re-write guidelines for information requests. Held an “open house” party at the White House.
January 22: Signed Executive Orders: Executive Branch workers to take ethics pledge; re-affirmed Army Field Manual techniques for interrogations; expressed desire to close Gitmo (how’s that working out?)
January 23: Ordered the release of federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries. Lunch with Joe Biden; met with Tim Geithner.
January 24: Budget meeting with economic team.
January 25: Skipped church.
January 26: Gave speech about jobs and energy. Met with Hillary Clinton. Attended Geithner's swearing in ceremony.
January 27: Met with Republicans. Spoke at a clock tower in Ohio.
January 28: Economic meetings in the morning, met with Defense secretary in the afternoon.
January 29: Signed Ledbetter Bill overturning Supreme Court decision on lawsuits over wages. Party in the State Room. Met with Biden.
January 30: Met economic advisers. Gave speech on Middle Class Working Families Task Force. Met with senior enlisted military officials.
January 31: Took the day off.
February 1: Skipped church. Threw a Super Bowl party.
So there you have it. The short path to the Nobel Peace Prize: Party, go to meetings, skip church, release federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries, party some more.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/10/0...prize-win/
"release federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries" is the only thing that's preventing my award at the moment...
(10-11-2009 09:10 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:30 PM)blazeman21 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:17 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
Then he should have been a real man about it and refused to accept it. But, I don't think his ego would allow him to do that.
If he had refused to accept it then that would have looked very poorly internationally. He said he didn't think he deserved it and he's giving the money directly to charity. I don't know what else you want from him, save bombing the Nobel organization's headquarters.
I'm inclined to agree.
I think the president has handled it about as well as he could have. It was the selection committee that looks ridiculous.
(10-12-2009 03:21 PM)BlazingGoat Wrote: [ -> ]"release federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries" is the only thing that's preventing my award at the moment...
You skipped church?
(10-12-2009 03:31 PM)Smaug Wrote: [ -> ] (10-11-2009 09:10 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:30 PM)blazeman21 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-09-2009 03:17 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote: [ -> ]I don't get all the piling on Obama over this. He basically said in his speech he didn't think he deserved it since he hasn't accomplished the goals he set out yet and has only been in office for a few months. He did say that he is giving the prize money to charity.
Then he should have been a real man about it and refused to accept it. But, I don't think his ego would allow him to do that.
If he had refused to accept it then that would have looked very poorly internationally. He said he didn't think he deserved it and he's giving the money directly to charity. I don't know what else you want from him, save bombing the Nobel organization's headquarters.
I'm inclined to agree.
I think the president has handled it about as well as he could have. It was the selection committee that looks ridiculous.
...and whoever the d!p$h!t is that nominated him.
(10-12-2009 03:51 PM)BlazerFan11 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-12-2009 03:21 PM)BlazingGoat Wrote: [ -> ]"release federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries" is the only thing that's preventing my award at the moment...
You skipped church?
Yeah. I'm pretty bad about that.
