Quote:
Originally Posted by deepimpact2
No, it doesn't indicate a lack of a valid answer. You should know that from many of the discussions that have taken place on here. More than likely it is the presumptuous tone of your question.
And since, as you pointed out, he ISN'T the first controversial award winner, that should remove some of the shock and surprise.
|
If it doesn't indicate a lack of a valid answer, do tell why you (or anyone) who has a valid answer would play coy and not give it.
It's hardly presumptuous (presumptous of what, exactly?) to say I don't feel he fits the criteria (which I quoted, just in case) and to ask that if you do, please tell what he has done that would qualify him to win. If, for whatever reason, you chose not to disclose why you think he qualifies - what are we to think?
When did shock and surprise enter the conversation? I will say that Obama himself said he was surprised - did you expect him to win? Really? (Rhetorical question, btw.)
Threaded Mode
