Quote:
Originally Posted by Little32
I think that saying that he flat out does not deserve it is arrogant and presumptuous. It implies that everyone that has been a part of this process from the nomination to the final vote is some kind of moron because they came to a different conclusion and both nominated him and chose him to receive the prize. It is arrogant because these people are not arbitrarily chosen, nor are they so ill-informed as to make a fundamentally unsound choice. It is presumptuous because none of us are completely privy to the deliberation process, so we don't know why he was chosen where another was not. Why is it so impossible to grant the Nobel Foundation the same sort of privilege that most of us insist upon for our own organizations.
I think that what I have said stands. I don't know how to explain it any differently.
|
Hi pot, meet kettle.
You don't think that you are the one being arrogant and presumptuous? Giving the Nobel Prize committee some kind of superior importance? Would it have mattered if Obama didn't receive the prize? No. Why? BECAUSE THERE WERE PEOPLE THAT DESERVED IT MORE. Where their nomination wasn't based on ideas or "platform talks" (because after all he had only been President for 2 weeks), but based on ACTION.
So if Obama never withdraws the troops in the 4 years he is president, or disarm all the nuclear weapons around the world, what will his Nobel Peace Prize mean? JACK SQUAT! If this award is sooo prestigious and given by such a "superior" committee (as you so imply) then they should have had the knowledge to not give into propaganda, and actually wait until he did something.
Several people have quoted why this committee claims they chose Obama, so you really can't say "we don't know why he was chosen."
ETA: And why can't you just realize that people have a different opinion than yours? What is the point of insulting us?
Threaded Mode
