Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

Topspin said:
Nominated, did they not consider anything since then?
Click to expand...
What was he nominated for doing?

Seriously, in order to be nominated for such things you need a record of actually doing them first, you don't get an automatic nomination because you are a black dude recently inaugurated.

The other people who didn't get this award were far more qualified and had put their lives on the line for others rights.
 
Damocles said:
What was he nominated for doing?

Seriously, in order to be nominated for such things you need a record of actually doing them first.
Click to expand...

so your versed enough to argue with the educated people who gave it to him.
Jarod said it best above, the largest peace time turn around.
 
Topspin said:
so your versed enough to argue with the educated people who gave it to him.
Jarod said it best above, the largest peace time turn around.
Click to expand...
Yes, based on history one can base an opinion on facts rather than hacktacular pendantic sychophantism based on party affiliation.
 
Damocles said:
What was he nominated for doing?

Seriously, in order to be nominated for such things you need a record of actually doing them first, you don't get an automatic nomination because you are a black dude recently inaugurated.

The other people who didn't get this award were far more qualified and had put their lives on the line for others rights.
Click to expand...

HE led one of the largest peacefull turn around of international and diplomatic policies from agressive war mongering, to agressive efforts toward peace in modern history.
 
Jarod said:
HE led one of the largest peacefull turn around of international and diplomatic policies from agressive war mongering, to agressive efforts toward peace in modern history.
Click to expand...

Yes he has, and the NAZI lovers of the old regime are pissed and out in force here today.:clink:
 
Jarod said:
HE led one of the largest peacefull turn around of international and diplomatic policies from agressive war mongering, to agressive efforts toward peace in modern history.
Click to expand...
Again, HE did not. At the time of nomination for this award he had been President 9 days and had done nothing but campaign for office.

And again, far more deserving people were overlooked. It is only your party affiliation and natural tendency to be a sycophantic apologist that clouds your mind here. Step back and imagine if Bush had been nominated 9 days after he was inaugurated.
 
Damocles said:
Yeah, but at least Gore had been out working hard on that particular subject for years. Writing books about it as early as the 1980s.

While it was a diminishment of the award to give it to Al, there could at least be some argument for some validity.
Click to expand...

OK, I have to agree. Al at least gives a good showing.

I'm not really saying Obama did anything wrong here either. I'm just laughing at how silly the process looks at this moment.

But let's look at the reality. This is and has always been just a PR thing. I'm not suprised he would win an award, but it's just funny that it's for no apparent reason.
 
Damocles said:
Again, HE did not. At the time of nomination for this award he had been President 9 days and had done nothing but campaign for office.

And again, far more deserving people were overlooked. It is only your party affiliation and natural tendency to be a sycophantic apologist that clouds your mind here. Step back and imagine if Bush had been nominated 9 days after he was inaugurated.
Click to expand...

so how the fuck would you know if they don't consider stuff after the nomination????
 
tinfoil said:
OK, I have to agree. Al at least gives a good showing.

I'm not really saying Obama did anything wrong here either. I'm just laughing at how silly the process looks at this moment.

But let's look at the reality. This is and has always been just a PR thing. I'm not suprised he would win an award, but it's just funny that it's for no apparent reason.
Click to expand...
I figured he would get one, but after a year or two of growing into the office. This just made it obvious that the only requirement is political, I'm embarrassed for the people who were on the committee that voted for it....
 
Topspin said:
so how the fuck would you know if they don't consider stuff after the nomination????
Click to expand...
This has to be the stupidest thing I have heard in a long time. Nominations are not based on psychic predictions, they are based on what people have done. You don't get nominated for a Nobel prize for science because people guess you will solve the "Theory of Everything" this year because you graduated 9 days before as one of the "most promising students" in some physics program, you get it because you solved it last year.

First you have to do something impressive enough to be nominated. Being elected in the US is not something for which anybody should be nominated for a Nobel Prize.

In order to be nominated you first should do something worthy of the award, being elected President of a country isn't enough.
 
obama-toast.jpg

http://www.cracked.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/obama-toast.jpg
 
tinfoil said:
OK, I have to agree. Al at least gives a good showing.

I'm not really saying Obama did anything wrong here either. I'm just laughing at how silly the process looks at this moment.

But let's look at the reality. This is and has always been just a PR thing. I'm not suprised he would win an award, but it's just funny that it's for no apparent reason.
Click to expand...

Good post. It's not like Obama was out campaigning for the award. He didn't award it to himself so it's not his fault. But the man is going to be President for four years, if not eight, they couldn't have waited to give it to him at least a year after being in office to see what he's actually done?

Jarod you say he deserves based on his campaign rhetoric. Again this is no disrespect to Obama as he didn't ask for the award but awarding the Nobel Peace Prize for great speeches when many people have risked their lives or done actual things to earn the award?
 
Damocles said:
This has to be the stupidest thing I have heard in a long time. Nominations are not based on psychic predictions, they are based on what people have done. You don't get nominated for a Nobel prize for science because people guess you will solve the "Theory of Everything" this year because you graduated 9 days before as one of the "most promising students" in some physics program, you get it because you solved it last year.

First you have to do something impressive enough to be nominated. Being elected in the US is not something for which anybody should be nominated for a Nobel Prize.

In order to be nominated you first should do something worthy of the award, being elected President of a country isn't enough.
Click to expand...


Bannishing the Nazi's in the 30's in Germany would have been a fine accomplishment. Obama has done so here.
 
Jarod said:
The point is that those same Americans who sat on their asses while America was murdering hundrids of thousands of innocent people in a fradulent war turned around and elected Obama! Its one of the biggest and most important peacefull turn arounds in a single government ever.
Click to expand...

I don't share that vison my brother.

We're still in Iraq, war is spinning even more out of controil in Afghanistan, we're killing people in Africa, haven't closed Guantanamo, still have a terrorist training camp on our soil, we're threatening Iran, and bombing the fucking moon.

What turnaround are you talking about?

A turnaround in rhetoric, not action my brother, is meaningless.

The Nobel Prize should be based on results, not hope, not rhetoric, and not good speeches.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top