When you have nothing relevant or intelligent to say, it's as good a comeback as any?
Congratulation, President Obama!!!
- Thread starter SirJosephPorter
- Start date
When you have nothing relevant or intelligent to say, it's as good a comeback as any?
Incidentally, some of you may find this interesting. This was the reaction to MLK getting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1965.
The National Review Sept. 7th, 1965
story written in the conservative National Review a few months after Martin Luther King Jr. won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964:
"For years now, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King and his associates have been deliberately undermining the foundations of internal order in this country. With their rabble-rousing demagoguery, they have been cracking the “cake of custom” that holds us together. With their doctrine of “civil disobedience,” they have been teaching hundreds of thousands of N#groes — particularly the adolescents and the children — that it is perfectly alright to break the law and defy constituted authority if you are a N#gro-with-a-grievance; in protest against injustice. And they have done more than talk. They have on occasion after occasion, in almost every part of the country, called out their mobs on the streets, promoted “school strikes,” sit-ins, lie-ins, in explicit violation of the law and in explicit defiance of the public authority. They have taught anarchy and chaos by word and deed — and, no doubt, with the best of intentions — and they have found apt pupils everywhere, with intentions not of the best. Sow the wind, and reap the whirlwind."
Will Herberg, "’Civil Rights’ and Violence: Who Are the Guilty Ones?", The National Review Sept. 7th, 1965
So it seems nothing changes, at least in Republican circles.
The National Review Sept. 7th, 1965
story written in the conservative National Review a few months after Martin Luther King Jr. won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964:
"For years now, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King and his associates have been deliberately undermining the foundations of internal order in this country. With their rabble-rousing demagoguery, they have been cracking the “cake of custom” that holds us together. With their doctrine of “civil disobedience,” they have been teaching hundreds of thousands of N#groes — particularly the adolescents and the children — that it is perfectly alright to break the law and defy constituted authority if you are a N#gro-with-a-grievance; in protest against injustice. And they have done more than talk. They have on occasion after occasion, in almost every part of the country, called out their mobs on the streets, promoted “school strikes,” sit-ins, lie-ins, in explicit violation of the law and in explicit defiance of the public authority. They have taught anarchy and chaos by word and deed — and, no doubt, with the best of intentions — and they have found apt pupils everywhere, with intentions not of the best. Sow the wind, and reap the whirlwind."
Will Herberg, "’Civil Rights’ and Violence: Who Are the Guilty Ones?", The National Review Sept. 7th, 1965
So it seems nothing changes, at least in Republican circles.
I don't know... what does it make me if I agree with a Liberal on one issue? That Obama did not earn this award. Bi-Partisan? Able to see beyond left and right.
More center?
Not. ;-)
I don’t know about that, but he certainly was a conservative, National Review is a conservative publication. Whether he was a Republican or a Democrat, today he definitely would be a Republican.
That may be your take, but on CBC radio I listened to an interview with someone who said that the overall reaction by both Republicans and Democrats was puzzlement.
Few people, other than you, can figure out what the Norwegians were thinking.
Peace prize - No he did not deserve it - Not yet anyways - Later perhaps - Fogot about this guy - Liberated India peacefully - Nominated 5 times - .[18][19] The Committee has confirmed that Gandhi was nominated in 1937, 1938, 1939, 1947 Mahatma Gandhi never received the Nobel Peace Prize, though he was nominated for it five times[47] between 1937 and 1948. Decades later, though, the Nobel Committee publicly declared its regret for the omission. The Nobel Committee may have tacitly acknowledged its error, however, when in 1948 (the year of Gandhi's death), it made no award, stating "there was no suitable living candidate" though they awarded it posthumously to fellow Scandinavian Dag Hammarskjöld in 1961, who died after being nominated. Similarly, when the Dalai Lama was awarded the Peace Prize in 1989, the chairman of the committee said that this was "in part a tribute to the memory of Mahatma Gandhi". The official Nobel e-museum has an article discussing the issue.Another controversy from the Nobel listings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Prasherhttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091009093649AAWCfcGHitler was nominated by the Swedish Member of Parliament Erik Brandt in January 1939. What many people don't know, and obviously even his contemporaries didn't understand, was that the whole nomination was nothing but a joke.Brandt was a Social Democrat, a staunch anti-Nazi and one of the founders of a Swedish organization called Universal Anti-Fascist Coalition in 1938. What made him perform this practical joke was his astonishment over the naïve and gullible praise of the British Prime Minister Chamberlain ("Peace in Our Time") who in his opinion put the whole of Europe in danger by yielding ground to Hitler in Munich in September 1938 by accepting the incorporation of Bohemia in the Third Reich.12 Swedish members of parliament praised Chamberlain to the skies and nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize in 1938 (he didn't get it), which made the astonished Brandt respond by nominating Hitler a few months later.Brandt seems to have been both shocked and surprised when he realized that most people, including the media, didn't get his irony. Many people even wrote him telegrams and letters to express their thanks and appreciation for his nominating Hitler. Even the German leadership seemed happy and content about the nomination (when he actually intended to make them feel offended by the irony), so Brandt quickly turned tail and withdrew it just a few days later.
Though award in anticipation of greatness is like betting on a whirlwind, congratulations all the same, Mister Obama.
Nope....He was a Jew.... so Sir knowitall must be an Antisemite....since according to his thought process....if you're against Obama's Liberal policies you're a racist:roll:
You might be right, but giving obama one at this point makes the value of the award meaningless.
Puzzlement would be a natural reaction, Tenpenny, especially since many people don’t know how the award process works (sometimes they don’t give the award for past accomplishments, but they like what someone is doing, like the direction they are going and give the award as an encouragement).
I can understand someone being puzzled. However, most Democrats (and I suspect independents as well) will be happy for Obama and happy for USA for the award. And conservatives should be happy for Obama and for USA as well, but they are not (as I said before, I will be happy indeed if Harper gets the award, though even then Harper will never get my vote).
That really demonstrates how poisoned, how fetid is the political atmosphere is in USA, that a substantial minority of the US population is not happy that an American got the Nobel Peace award, but actually seems to be angry and frustrated that one of them (who happens to be their political adversary) got the award.
No I am not, I was just listening to CNN, they said that there have been ten years so far when no peace award was given.
All Nobel Peace Prize Laureates
Link for years not awarded - 1st and 2nd world war - along with 48 - did not go thru the complete list
It's easy to be angry and frustrated when you see someone get a top notch award for not having done anythign yet, but hoping they will. It devalues the award, and makes a mockery of the recipient. Surely you can see that? I'm sure that Obama is thinking, What the hell?
I can see the Stanley Cup being presented now, because some of the teams have done well and show promise, so we might as well reward them now as encouragement.
The stanly cup has no similarities to the nobel peace prize so once again,another moot analogy.