Obama FAILS to deliver peace to the world, REWARDED by Norwegian Nobel Committee - by Koki
scarykitties on 9/10/2009 at 17:11
I wasn't sure what I was going to talk to my ultra-conservative dad about over a Dairy Queen Blizzard.
Now I know. This will keep him bitching for at least half an hour.
Gingerbread Man on 9/10/2009 at 17:13
Quote Posted by SD
Anyone who helps keep Sarah Palin from high office merits at least one Nobel Peace Prize, if not more.
I'm changing my opinion to this.
thefonz on 9/10/2009 at 17:55
Hmm, so he was awarded on the basis of his potential to bring peace to the world.
No pressure then.
Still, how long has it been since there was a US President with a Nobel Prize?
Jeb Bartlet. Thats how long.
fett on 9/10/2009 at 18:19
What SD said. Jesus...:rolleyes:
Aerothorn on 9/10/2009 at 18:28
"He said he did not feel he deserved to be in the company of some of the "transformative figures" who had previously received the award.
Speaking outside the White House, he said he would accept the prize as a "call to action". "
translation: I don't deserve this award but I'm accepting it anyway.
No blame to Obama for not having accomplished anything worthwhile in the name of peace yet - pretty much nobody achieves much in their first eight months. But I agree with the many who have said that it would have been really powerful if he had declined the award, saying that others deserved it more and he would accept it when he had accomplished the things he had set out to do.
heywood on 9/10/2009 at 18:29
Quote Posted by Gingerbread Man
how long before nobody brings up Roosevelt
or Dawes (coolidge's VP)
or Hull (Roosevelt's Secretary of State)
or Marshall (Army Chief of Staff, Sec of State, originator of Marshall Plan under Roosevelt)
or Henry Kissinger (international war criminal)
all with R in front of them
yeah
it's like that
Theodore Roosevelt was a Republican (till he formed a 3rd party) but Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a Democrat. Hull was a Democrat and in the latter Roosevelt's administration. Marshall was also a Democrat and served under FDR and Truman.
Not sure what your point was anyway.
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
But I agree with the many who have said that it would have been really powerful if he had declined the award, saying that others deserved it more and he would accept it when he had accomplished the things he had set out to do.
That would have been ballsy, but it would have cheapened the prize even further. He'd basically be telling the prize committee that they're a joke.
demagogue on 9/10/2009 at 18:38
What I wonder is how Obama can handle an acceptance speech. Either he goes the "humbled" route, and then it just sounds like he's frankly embarassed for being awarded for nothing special, which he probably is; or he goes the "confident, inspirational" route, and then it just comes across as arrogant, like he really believes he deserved it for something special he's done. And I don't see that he could turn it down; that'd be like admitting you don't deserve the status of a credible peacemaker. The whole thing is probably more trouble than opportunity for him.
Edit: Also, did anyone catch the little irony that shortly after Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace prize, America bombed the moon.
Kaleid on 9/10/2009 at 18:56
I think they should be handed out retro-actively, making it way too early to hand to Obama. Let him earn it.
Two people who never should've received it: Kissinger and Arafat. I'm sure there are more but its not worth my time.
Gingerbread Man on 9/10/2009 at 18:59
Quote Posted by heywood
Theodore Roosevelt was a Republican (till he formed a 3rd party) but Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a Democrat. Hull was a Democrat and in the latter Roosevelt's administration. Marshall was also a Democrat and served under FDR and Truman.
fuck, got my Roosevelts knotted again. :(
Well, the Kissinger win is the one I think handily deflects the whining, anyway
