Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
Really? You mean just in terms of people questioning whether he should have won?
I'm just kind of alarmed by what this would seem to mean in terms of other people's efforts to do good in the world. If Obama, with relatively short list of real accomplishments to benefit other people*, is the most qualified, aren't we kind of doomed?
*I don't mean for an individual or for a US politician, because obviously getting elected President is an accomplishment. I mean a legacy of getting stuff done.
ETA: or did you mean that he would behave in the future according to the standards that the Nobel Peace Prize have rewarded in the past, which would still be at least 50% "Yikes" for me.
Just throwing in my two cents on the choice: I think it's just a nail in the coffin of the Noble awards in certain areas seeming anything but baldly political endorsements. It's not the final nail, or anything, but really, who cares? They can give their prizes and that's swell. The rest of us can just regard their value in the context of previous award winners.
|
It really isn't that serious.
You (and several others) are being absolutely ridiculous. No one is doomed. This award isn't going to cause any harm. Simply put, he is being recognized. He will receive the prize. It will be donated. Life will go on. You weren't on the committee to make the decision. It wasn't your call to make. There is nothing you (or any other naysayers) can do about it.
Threaded Mode
