Perhaps, but it is still a far cry from the schoolyard bully image that USA projected during Bush years.
Congratulation, President Obama!!!
- Thread starter SirJosephPorter
- Start date
Perhaps, but it is still a far cry from the schoolyard bully image that USA projected during Bush years.
Since its inception the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded 89 times, to 119 Nobel Laurates - 96 times to individuals and 23 times to organizations.
It has never been awarded to a country.
If the Nobel Comittee had not been blinded by political correctness and socialistic small-mindedness, they would have awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to the United States of America, for electing, for the first time, a black person President.
Why not? Isn't that what they have, in fact, done? Obama, as a person, as a political figure, or as anything at all, clearly is not deserving this Prize on his own merit.
He has been unable to achieve peace in his own party.
He has been unable to achieve peace between Democrats and Republicans.
He has been unable to achieve peace in the Middle East.
He has been unable to say "NO" to a large collection of tin pot dictarors, all in vain.
He has been unable to convince the IOC to award the Olympic Games to Chicago.
Perhaps, because he has not been able to rein in his rotten to the core, corrupt buddies and supporters there.
If they done that, the Prize would still have a small measure of credibility, after repeated debasements thru the years.
Such as giving it to Yasser Arafat. Jimmy Carter. Al Gore.
And not giving it to Ronald Reagan in 1990, when Michael Gorbachev was the winner.
These politically correct fatheads deemed correct to award the Prize jointly to Arafat and Peres/Rabin, Mandela and de Klerk, Sadat and Begin, but displaying their ignorance by denying the Prize to Ronald Reagan - jointly - with Gorbachev.
If Obama had any integrity, he would admit that he is not deserving of the Prize, and have the honesty and guts and turn it down.
It has never been awarded to a country.
If the Nobel Comittee had not been blinded by political correctness and socialistic small-mindedness, they would have awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to the United States of America, for electing, for the first time, a black person President.
Why not? Isn't that what they have, in fact, done? Obama, as a person, as a political figure, or as anything at all, clearly is not deserving this Prize on his own merit.
He has been unable to achieve peace in his own party.
He has been unable to achieve peace between Democrats and Republicans.
He has been unable to achieve peace in the Middle East.
He has been unable to say "NO" to a large collection of tin pot dictarors, all in vain.
He has been unable to convince the IOC to award the Olympic Games to Chicago.
Perhaps, because he has not been able to rein in his rotten to the core, corrupt buddies and supporters there.
If they done that, the Prize would still have a small measure of credibility, after repeated debasements thru the years.
Such as giving it to Yasser Arafat. Jimmy Carter. Al Gore.
And not giving it to Ronald Reagan in 1990, when Michael Gorbachev was the winner.
These politically correct fatheads deemed correct to award the Prize jointly to Arafat and Peres/Rabin, Mandela and de Klerk, Sadat and Begin, but displaying their ignorance by denying the Prize to Ronald Reagan - jointly - with Gorbachev.
If Obama had any integrity, he would admit that he is not deserving of the Prize, and have the honesty and guts and turn it down.
In the first 11 days of his presidency? Come on, I may be ignorant of a lot of things, as I pointed out, but I'm not going to swallow that.And it wasn't me that said he got it for not being Bush. That was someone else.
Like I asked, what did he do to deserve the Nobel before the Nobel people decided to give him the prize 11 days after he became president? Perhaps he got it for campaigning for the presidency and winning? Has he settled matters in Iraq? Afghanistan? China & the Dalai Lama? DRC (used to be Zaire)?
At least Sadat did stuff, Kissinger did stuff, etc.
That probably has done a lot to improve US image in world esteem. Now, if he'd only work on a foreign policy that doesn't smack of date rape. Policies that respect tradition will do more to silence the extremists than opening up another McDonalds
Writing your name in the snow while standing up is easy....Let me show you..;-):roll:
And not giving it to Ronald Reagan in 1990, when Michael Gorbachev was the winner.
Reagan did nothing to deserve the Noble Prize, YJ. I think Gorbachev gets the credit for dismantling the Soviet Empire; Reagan simply took credit for it because he happened to be the president.
As to your claim that Obama didn’t achieve this or he didn’t’ achieve that, he has been in office for less than one year, give him more time.
If Obama had any integrity, he would admit that he is not deserving of the Prize, and have the honesty and guts and turn it down.
I think Obama has already said that he is humbled by the honour, he doesn’t deserve it. But turn it down? He would be stupid to do that (no doubt that is what the Republicans would like him to do, if their man, Bush didn’t get it, then Obama must turn it down even if he got it).
Reagan did nothing to deserve the Noble Prize, YJ. I think Gorbachev gets the credit for dismantling the Soviet Empire; Reagan simply took credit for it because he happened to be the president.
As to your claim that Obama didn’t achieve this or he didn’t’ achieve that, he has been in office for less than one year, give him more time.
If Obama had any integrity, he would admit that he is not deserving of the Prize, and have the honesty and guts and turn it down.
I think Obama has already said that he is humbled by the honour, he doesn’t deserve it. But turn it down? He would be stupid to do that (no doubt that is what the Republicans would like him to do, if their man, Bush didn’t get it, then Obama must turn it down even if he got it).
Alfred Nobel, the inventor of dynamite and a major armaments manufacturer, specified that the Peace Prize be given "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."
Even Rachel Maddow of MSNBC is disillusioned by his performance:lol:
YouTube - MSNBC Rachel Maddow rips obama a new one!
YouTube - MSNBC Rachel Maddow rips obama a new one!
I read it, if that's what you mean. I knew Bush is a warmonger long before you mentioned it, though.
So in that sense, everyone is a saint because they aren't Satan. Cool.
Then the Nobel people should have taken more time to see if he actually DID deserve the prize.
Of course he'd be stupid to turn it down. He worships money and prestige as much as anyone else can. But that has nothing to do with integrity.
wow, The Big O has done what? Mentioned that he'll close Gitmo? Mentioned that he'll withdraw his army from Iraq? Mentioned ....... Yep. That's definitely reason to deify him, as Sir Joe seems to have done.
"Reagan did nothing to deserve the Noble Prize, YJ. I think Gorbachev gets the credit for dismantling the Soviet Empire; Reagan simply took credit for it because he happened to be the president."
We've been thru this before. There is none so blind as the one who WILL NOT see. Trying to explain colours to a blind man is like attempting to describe the beauty of Beethoven's music to a deaf person is exactly like trying to bring reality into SirJosephPorter's fantasy world with facts.
To be chronologically correct, the Soviet Union desolved when George Herbert Walker Bush - not Reagan - was President. So, Reagan was given credit and rightfully so, while he never claimed it.
And the history of the Soviet Union shows that without Reagan Gorbachev woulld have been nothing more, nothing less than any of his blooodthirsty Communist predecessors, like Stalin, Kruschev, Brezhnev, etc.
We've been thru this before. There is none so blind as the one who WILL NOT see. Trying to explain colours to a blind man is like attempting to describe the beauty of Beethoven's music to a deaf person is exactly like trying to bring reality into SirJosephPorter's fantasy world with facts.
To be chronologically correct, the Soviet Union desolved when George Herbert Walker Bush - not Reagan - was President. So, Reagan was given credit and rightfully so, while he never claimed it.
And the history of the Soviet Union shows that without Reagan Gorbachev woulld have been nothing more, nothing less than any of his blooodthirsty Communist predecessors, like Stalin, Kruschev, Brezhnev, etc.
Maybe you should do a bit of research and see what the prize is actually about,heres a link that may explain it for you.
I'm getting a real laugh at how some folks are jumping on Obama and have no idea what the prize is about.:lol:
It's not even partisan,just downright hatred.
Hoyt Hilsman: Does President Obama -- and America -- Deserve the Nobel Prize?
Perhaps it is hatred for some people. But, I haven't seen anyone actually post something that the Big O did before the Nobel people decided to give him the prize. So with me, it isn't hatred, it is incredulity as to why they'd award him the Nobel. Research that.
That is a matter of opinion YJ, and I don’t share it (and clearly neither did the Nobel Prize Committee). They thought that the credit goes to Gorbachev and I agree.
Juan posted what he's done,it's not up to me to get you to read them.:roll:
Gitmo will be closed and he will get the troops out Iraq eventually,he may be a messiah but it's going to take more then a snap of the fingers to undo all the damage Bush has done.
I did,click the link and educate yourself. It's got noting to do with 11 days in office but keep thinking that,it's good for a laugh.
Kakato, to me the whole argument as to whether Obama deserves the Nobel Prize is inane and senseless. There is only one body who can decide if he deserves the Nobel Prize, and that is the Nobel Prize Committee. The prize is theirs to give, and they have decided that Obama is fully deserving of it.
As to his political opponents, well that is strictly armchair quarterbacking, and means absolutely nothing.
And hatred? Of course it is hatred, what else can it be?