President Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize.

[palemale]

It's very sad what some --too many-- Obama supporters are doing to the Democratic Party and to the future of our nation with this kind of ungenerous untruthful and gratuitously mean-spirited characterization of people and accomplishment.

Ungenerous, untruthful and gratuitously mean-spirited characterization of Prez Obama and his supporters is OK, but not of anyone else. Gotcha Nick.

So, I'll concede the Dalai Lama worked hard giving speeches and studying. What else has he accomplished? You're quick to condemn Obama as nothing more than a speech maker. But what else has the Dalai Lama done? What concrete act has he performed to bring about peace (other than give a speech)?

His government did sign the agreement that turned Tibet over the Chinese, that is something concrete he is responsible for, but I wouldn't call it advancing peace. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeen_Point_Agreement_for_the_Peaceful_Liberation_of_Tibet

So, all you critics of Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize, I'm still waiting for someone to explain what Aung San Suu Kyi and Dalai Lama accomplished that made them more worthy than Prez Obama to receive the prize.

 

[palemale]

Nick, I took your advice and checked the Wiki page on the Dalai Lama. Found some interesting stuff.

The Dalai Lama had this to say about sexuality:
Buddhist sexual proscriptions ban homosexual activity and heterosexual sex through orifices other than the vagina, including masturbation or other sexual activity with the hand... From a Buddhist point of view, lesbian and gay sex is generally considered sexual misconduct".

In October 1998, The Dalai Lama's administration acknowledged that it received $1.7 million a year in the 1960s from the US Government through the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and also trained a resistance movement in Colorado (USA)

British journalist Christopher Hitchens criticised the Dalai Lama in 1998, questioned his alleged support for India's nuclear weapons testing, his statements about sexual misconduct, his suppression of Shugden worship, as well as his meeting Shoko Asahara, whose cult Aum Shinrikyo released sarin nerve gas in the Tokyo subway system.[77][78] Hitchens proclaims that he "makes absurd pronouncements about sex and diet and, when on his trips to Hollywood fund-raisers, anoints major donors like Steven Segal and Richard Gere as holy."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Dalai_Lama

 

[palemale]

Pumpkin, I think it is a good thing the Nobel committee awarded the Dalai Lama a Peace Prize because it is important symbolically to highlight the struggle of the Tibetan people for basic rights and their suffering under Chinese rule. And I also think it was good that they award a prize to Aung San Suu Kyi to highlight the struggle for democracy and human rights in Myanmar.

What I object to is Obama haters (or those who are disappointed because he didn't turn out to be perfect) who use the granting of the prize as yet one more reason to attack him for not enacting his campaign promises in his first 9 months. They attack him as undeserving because he hasn't accomplished anything.

Two days ago, Nik2 said, unlike Obama, Aung San Suu Kyi was deserving of the award. I asked him yesterday what made her deserving, and pointed out that she lead a campaign that resulted in her winning an election, then she got arrested. He said I was misinformed, but has yet to answer my question. Maybe I am misinformed and she has accomplishments of which I am unaware. I haven't extensively researched her life. So, I'm still waiting for Nik2 to educate me on those accomplishments that made her more deserving of Obama to receive the Nobel prize.

I'm just asking for a little consistency, but some are too blinded by hatred for or disappointment in Obama to be objective.

 

[Sammie13]

This is as big a joke as the entirety of the Obama administration thus far.

 

[seven2go]

Also, the TIMES ONLINE

Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration....blah blah.......blah

Read the whole thing here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6867711.ece

SO......the TIMES has taken up reading minds now.......

In a court of law: objection overruled.......

 

[palemale]

Liberal icon Howard Zinn feels differently, yes even leftists can see this is absurd:

War and Peace Prizes
The dismaying gift of the Nobel prize puts Barack Obama on the list of its winners who promised peace but prosecuted war.

I was dismayed when I heard Barack Obama was given the Nobel peace prize. A shock, really, to think that a president carrying on two wars would be given a peace prize. Until I recalled that Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Henry Kissinger had all received Nobel peace prizes. The Nobel committee is famous for its superficial estimates, won over by rhetoric and by empty gestures, and ignoring blatant violations of world peace.

Read the whole thing here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/oct/09/nobel-peace-prize-war-obama/print

Also, the TIMES ONLINE

Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.

Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.

Read the whole thing here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6867711.ece

Read both articles. So what? Would Zinn have Obama come into office and withdraw troops from both countries? That would be stupid. Would it promote peace to have a precipitous withdrawal followed by a blood bath? Zinn's short article states a position with nothing to back up his assertion.

The Times On Line article has the ridiculous assertion you made that Aung San Suu Kyi was more deserving of the prize then Pres. Obama. I'm still waiting for you to explain why my comment on her was misinformed and why her accomplishments were so exceptional she was more deserving of the prize than was Obama.

 

[chance1]

It's pretty obvious now that this is the shallow conclusion that most people reach. Upon closer inspection for the real reasons why it was given you would see that it is not a joke, but rather a very serious decision made by the Nobel Prize Committee.

i have no doubt it was a SERIOUS decision

but it's a poor one

that reflects ...................

poor judgement

it devalues the idea or make that ideal of the award

i think pres. barack obama could very well do great things

and i hope that he does

but this is the proverbial "cart before the horse"

no disrespect to the president ..........

but awarding him this is a disrespect to the ideal of the award

and for the record while right wing extremists are bashing the choice - as they do everything obama/dems, etc.

i have spoken to many who are liberal who are rolling their eyes

it furthers the suggestion that the pres. is a celebrity first

not where we need him to be

 

[chance1]

Cornel West was on Bill Maher this week and said while he is very proud and happy for Pres. Obama

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornel_West

that the award puts pressure on him - to act peacefully

and he brings up a lot of the points Nik2 is making about how he prosecutes the war - and being a wartime president

that if he does not get out of afghanistan then soon it will be HIS war - with his name stamped on it - and the actions of our military and govt - he will be responsible

it's a very interesting dynamic

i wonder if it will impact his thinking - the president's that is

will he feel a greater responsibility?

and could that have been a motivation for giving him the prize?

im not a conspiracy theorist by any means btw

 

[Apollo]

Dirty work eh? Did you see the pictures of the innocent children who were hurt and/or killed in the air raids? Check out the Greenwald article I posted from Salon a while back. The pictures are harrowing (in fact, I'm including them in this post) and -- as with all such photos -- makes it difficult for one to register abstract arguments from safe positions of global privilege such as "We're doing the world's dirty work."

Obama is not as bad as Bush, not by a long shot. But he is not completely innocent either and he's definitely not a pacifist or complete peace-maker.

[Image: Removed by Moderator]

[Image: Removed by Moderator]

I don't see how showing pictures of kids being bombed gets your point across? I mean the Nobel people said why he was chosen.

It is given, especially in war time that force, and bombs will be used. It is a war. He is currently trying to end one war and rap up another one which will probably take a few more years.

I understand you support Obama or just accept that he is there. And I understand why you think he shouldn't have gotten it. I personally think it is a little to early to give him a Nobel Peace Prize especially so early in his presidency when he hasn't done THAT MUCH. I think everyone needs to take their ADD medicine and learn some patience and calm.

But the pictures and story doesn't really help your argument.

 

[CoolBlue71]

Congratulations, President Obama!

 

[NickCole]

Ultimately, I do want Obama -- the man I supported during the primaries and the man I voted for in the election -- to live up to the promises he made, and become the man I supported during the primaries and the man I voted for in the election. ...

I'm curious, you keep peppering your criticism with pointing out that you supported Obama during the primaries and voted for him. What's point is it intended to make?

 

[Kulindahr]

I think the shock is the ignorance most people have about the Nobel Peace Prize, namely the common misconception that it must be awarded for achievement.

That word "done" in the definition sort of requires achievement, no?
But I suppose it depends on what the meaning of [STRIKE]"is"[/STRIKE] "achievement" is.

History teaches us that those who are committed to maintain peace, are also fully prepared to wage war, to encourage the aggressor to maintain the peace.

Abso-fraggin-lutely!

Obama has already said he was going to Stockholm for the award. Does that surprize anyone? Hey, if any of us Jubbers were awarded something big like this, we'd go, too.

I'd only go if they let me pick some cute roommates for my stay -- otherwise, I'd tell them to send the check.

He can't it is impossible. There is no solution to the Middle East.

Sure there is -- pave the whole place and us it for a spaceport.

I think it is great and he gave a very humble speech and himself said he is not entitled to it.

Then why is he accepting it??
Or is he going to Stockholm to refuse it?

Best thing he could do would be to go, take the thing, and say that he accepts it on behalf of a man who truly deserved it because his work continues today: Ghandi.




My first response when I heard this was "WTF?"
My second response was "WTF?"

My mom said that a truly great man would turn it down.

A local notable Democrat, Korean War vet, said, "He got it 'cause he's black."


After consideration my response is now "Hmmm".

 

[PickYrPoisn]

Who better than Obama to receive a prize he has not earned?

Obama didn't "do" anything to receive the Nobel Peace Prize?
You're right, dammit. And he's in good company.

in 2006, Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank won the Nobel Peace Prize:
"...for their efforts to create economic and social development from below."

The way the committee worded this announcement,
it sounds to me like these guys just tried really, really hard to do something.

So what did they actually *DO*?

Well, nothing, really... Muhammad Yunus - he's just some nerdy eastern economist
(bet his middle name is Hussein, too) that spent way too much time studying and
coming up with outrageous economic theories.

And Grameen Bank is, well...they just run a bank. I mean, like every other
bank they provide loans, savings programs, credit establishment and
other financial services to entrepreneurs living below the poverty
line in the United States.

---

so here for 2009 I hear that Barack Obama has won the Noble Peace Prize.
"...for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy
and cooperation between peoples."

And so AGAIN I ask the same question: What did he *DO*, what has he put forth?

Well, nothing really. I mean c'mon, he's just the President of the United States.
And again with the way the committee worded this announcement it
sounds to me like they're just happy he's trying really, really hard.

Listen, he's doing the EXACT same thing that any other US President
would try really, really hard to do, right?

Trying really, really hard to close down a prison that has tarnished the
US with some majorly embarassing human rights issues.

Trying really, really hard to negotiate a new Strategic Arms Reduction
Treaty with Russia.

Trying really, really hard to get all sides to agree to a plan to
responsibly end the War in Iraq

Trying really, really hard to work with and resolve what is obviously a difficult
situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Trying really, really hard to promote global energy conservation and
saving the environment, versus rapacous consumption of oil and other natural
resources.

--

I just don't get those Noble Peace Prize guys...

Why don't they ONLY give these highly prestegious awards who people who
actually *DO* something?

Why not posthumously award it to Truman? Couple of nukes ended a major world war and brought peace. Now THERE'S a peace prize for ya!

But seriously, here's a thought...

Maybe for the Noble Peace Prize guys, it's not only about trying really, really hard to do things.

Maybe it's about trying really, really, hard to do the RIGHT things...



rock on..

 

[NickCole]

But seriously, here's a thought...

Maybe for the Noble Peace Prize guys, it's not only about trying really, really hard to do things.

Maybe it's about trying really, really, hard to do the RIGHT things...

That's the point!

Obama is NOT trying really really hard to do the right things. He's doing the wrong things. And that's because it's what he's trying to do.

Excellent new piece by Matt Taibbi about war and peace and Obama and us. Click in and read the whole thing, it's very well written:

It’s hard to believe, but there have been sillier moments in the history of the Nobel Peace Prize than this recent fiasco involving Barack Obama — it’s just so hard to remember them when you’re rolling around on the ground and spitting up greenish foam in a state of shock, as most of us were this past weekend as the news of Obama’s amazing award rolled over the airwaves. ...

How do we do things? We keep the troops in those faraway places like Afghanistan and Iraq, sure, but while we do that we make sure to extol things like tolerance and dialogue and the spirit of diplomacy. We make sure that the same people who were not involved in the decision-making process during the previous bombing runs under Bush are in the loop again, now and hopefully forever. We smile a lot and say nice things about the Geneva convention and the impropriety of torture and secret detention, the importance of the rule of international law. We make everybody feel better about how things are going to go from now on.

This is what Barack Obama did to “earn” the Nobel Prize. He put the benevolent face back on things. He is a good-looking black law professor with an obvious bent for dialogue and discussion and inclusion. That he hasn’t actually reversed any of Bush’s more notorious policies — hasn’t closed Guantanamo Bay, hasn’t ended secret detentions, hasn’t amped down Iraq or Afghanistan — is another matter. What he has done is remove the stink of unilateralism from those policies.

They’re not crazy-ass, blatantly illegal, lunatic rampages anymore, but carefully-considered, collectively-run peacekeeping actions, prosecuted with meaningful input from our allies.

You see the difference? The Nobel committee sure did! ...

http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/10/13/on-the-nobel-prize-for-occasional-peace/

 

[JB3]

Amen elvin. For the first time in 8 years I'm proud to be an American again!

That's more of a sad commentary on your life than it is on the state of the nation during the last eight years.

Much has happened to be proud of, even while there has been other less savory things happening.

 

[Kulindahr]

Excellent new piece by Matt Taibbi about war and peace and Obama and us. Click in and read the whole thing, it's very well written:

It’s hard to believe, but there have been sillier moments in the history of the Nobel Peace Prize than this recent fiasco involving Barack Obama — it’s just so hard to remember them when you’re rolling around on the ground and spitting up greenish foam in a state of shock, as most of us were this past weekend as the news of Obama’s amazing award rolled over the airwaves. ...

How do we do things? We keep the troops in those faraway places like Afghanistan and Iraq, sure, but while we do that we make sure to extol things like tolerance and dialogue and the spirit of diplomacy. We make sure that the same people who were not involved in the decision-making process during the previous bombing runs under Bush are in the loop again, now and hopefully forever. We smile a lot and say nice things about the Geneva convention and the impropriety of torture and secret detention, the importance of the rule of international law. We make everybody feel better about how things are going to go from now on.

This is what Barack Obama did to “earn” the Nobel Prize. He put the benevolent face back on things. He is a good-looking black law professor with an obvious bent for dialogue and discussion and inclusion. That he hasn’t actually reversed any of Bush’s more notorious policies — hasn’t closed Guantanamo Bay, hasn’t ended secret detentions, hasn’t amped down Iraq or Afghanistan — is another matter. What he has done is remove the stink of unilateralism from those policies.

They’re not crazy-ass, blatantly illegal, lunatic rampages anymore, but carefully-considered, collectively-run peacekeeping actions, prosecuted with meaningful input from our allies.

You see the difference? The Nobel committee sure did! ...

http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009...asional-peace/

Quoted for striking at the heart of things!

Well-written indeed.

 

[NickCole]

I am so proud for my President and my country.

It's very damaging when people feel pride over having been awarded a prize that is unearned and undeserved.

It goes right along with truthiness and with believing something will be true because one wants it to be true. When people live in fantasy, reality is still happening all around and its attendent problems are not being addressed, which means deterioration.

 

[NickCole]

Yup. I remember travelling to other coutries and we were treated like shit. London, Paris, Madrid, Sevilla, Nice etc...under Bush.
To see that the world views us differently is amazing.

If you were treated like shit then that's your fault, not George Bush's. I've been traveling all this time, as have many of my friends, and although there definitely was a decline in the way a lot of Europeans thought of the United States, in my experience it never translated into how they thought of Americans or me.

For the first time in a while I felt proud was when I did the march and stopped at the White House. How great is this country?

Ironic. You sound like Joe Solmonese at HRC and the standing ovation they gave Obama at their fundraiser.

Barack Obama has given us no reason to feel pride stopping at the White House. DADT and DOMA are still firmly in place. Further, he hasn't done what's necessary to get a great economic stimulus or regulated financial industry or a gold standard health care or close down Gitmo or end our involvement in Iraq -- and he's clearly inspiring some Americans to be likewise proud of pretense rather than authentic achievement.

 

[Kulindahr]

It's very damaging when people feel pride over having been awarded a prize that is unearned and undeserved.

It goes right along with truthiness and with believing something will be true because one wants it to be true. When people live in fantasy, reality is still happening all around and its attendent problems are not being addressed, which means deterioration.

Kinda like getting totally stoned 'cause there was nothing in the 'fridge, and when you come back to reality, they came and got your fridge.....

 

[NickCole]

Kinda like getting totally stoned 'cause there was nothing in the 'fridge, and when you come back to reality, they came and got your fridge.....

Yeah kinda.

But I neglected to add the other side, which is that living in fantasy, one misses all the opportunities and doesn't do the work that results in real accomplishment and genuine pleasure and comfort from real things.

In the short run, pretending is obviously easier and seems just as good. But ultimately it's only make believe, and even the most sumptuous make believe fur coat won't keep you warm in winter.