Obama has won a Nobel

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by Little32

(and sometimes you folks are just too much for me).

And this looks like it's gonna be one of those days...I will just sit back and watch this one play out.

Join me and pop some popcorn. The usual players will pop in momentarily.

You may want to read this This kind of adds to what KSig said earlier.

Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.

More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.

[tld221]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

I wonder how much of it is the European Community "commending" the US, for lack of a better word, for electing the opposite of George W. Bush.

Originally Posted by KSigkid

I think that has a lot to do with it, and I think the President is benefitting from a reversal of the anti-Bush international backlash.
This is completely a "message award;" that doesn't necessarily make it different than past Nobel Prizes, but I think people should at least keep that point in mind.

But I think it's open to interpretation of whether that should actually be the case.

I'll admit that I have a rather limited understanding of the Nobel criteria for each of the categories. My limited understanding, though, is that in other categories (science and literature for example), the prize is given for someone who has either completed or substantially completed something. In the science categories, the individuals involved have either discovered something or substantially furthered the understanding of a concept.

In my opinion, the Peace Prize should be judged by similar criteria. I think that it's incredibly difficult to bring about the type of change worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, but that's ok with me...it's an extraordinary award that should be given for extraordinary results.

this was the sentiment on Fox News this morning when I heard the news.

I love this though:

The Norwegian Nobel Committee decided not to inform Obama before the announcement because it didn’t want to wake him up, committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland said.


“Waking up a president in the middle of the night, this isn’t really something you do,” Jagland said.

[tld221]

Furthermore, im suprised no one has pulled a race card yet. Not just GC, but in the media.

I'm just waiting for Roland, Dyson and Donna Brazile to weigh in on CNN.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Little32

ETA: It never ceases to amaze me how folk who don't run anything but their mouths try to second guess those who are in a position to make these awards. Why do you all get to say he doesn't deserve the award, when according to the judgement of the folks that vote for these prizes year-in and year-out, he does. Give me a break.

Oh get over it.

Once again, don't say anything about Obama or think critically about anything pertaining to him because the crybabies will waaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by tld221

Furthermore, im suprised no one has pulled a race card yet. Not just GC, but in the media.

Race isn't a "card," but I mentioned being the first Black President in my 2nd post.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Race isn't a "card," but I mentioned being the first Black President in my 2nd post.

So does that mean that Mandela got one for being the 1st Black President in South Africa?

[KSigkid]

Little32 and DS...I think you're making WAY too much out of this. EW is the only poster who has been critical of the President's international policy in this thread. All the rest of us are saying is that they think it was a bit early and premature to give him the prize. That's it.

Did we lose the ability to second-guess at the close of the Bush administration?

ETA: It never ceases to amaze me how sensitive people can be to criticism when it's aimed at their favorite politician. I guess that's one similarity between some Bush supporters and some Obama supporters...

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

So does that mean that Mandela got one for being the 1st Black President in South Africa?

That probably had something to do with it. A Black President of South Afrika is a great example of change and hope for future change.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Little32 and DS...I think you're making WAY too much out of this. EW is the only poster who has been critical of the President's international policy in this thread. All the rest of us are saying is that they think it was a bit early and premature to give him the prize. That's it.

Did we lose the ability to second-guess at the close of the Bush administration?

Nope...not making it anything. I agree (to a point) with 'all the rest of you".

However, I would like to state for those that wondered 'why'. I simply wanted to provide info and an opinion as to 'why'.



I am just merely stating that at this point with some of what i read, I am watching to see how both pro and cons play out...that is it.

I'm not really taking part of the debate because I already have an idea of how it will go, so have at it. I got red kool ade and popcorn sitting by the couch.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

That probably had something to do with it. A Black President of South Afrika is a great example of change and hope for future change.

I knew you would say that...thanks.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

I'm not really taking part of the debate because I already have an idea of how it will go, so have at it. I got red kool ade and popcorn sitting by the couch.

But see, when you make statements like this, you're essentially saying "The anti-award debate will be ridiculous, so I'll just sit back and watch."

Need I remind you that you were one of the most willing participants in the pro/con Bush debates...

[DrPhil]

It's always silly when people state that they aren't taking part in a discussion. Your lack of participation speaks for itself. If you insist on being on the sidelines, just be on the sidelines and don't turn every discussion into a popcorn and kool aide spectacle. You exaggerate the debate and get the pro-Obama people riled up when you do that.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

But see, when you make statements like this, you're essentially saying "The anti-award debate will be ridiculous, so I'll just sit back and watch."

Need I remind you that you were one of the most willing participants in the pro/con Bush debates...

Yup...guilty.

So...carry on people!

Originally Posted by DrPhil

It's always silly when people state that they aren't taking part in a discussion. Your lack of participation speaks for itself. If you insist on being on the sidelines, just be on the sidelines and don't turn every discussion into a popcorn and kool aide spectacle. You exaggerate the debate and get the pro-Obama people riled up when you do that.

Nobody has to do it...sometimes some of you folks do it for yourselves...so...that's it for me.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Yup...guilty.

So...carry on people!

Welp, thanks to DS we can have a discussion. To what do we owe this honor?

Back to the topic before Little32 and DS got sidetracked:

Obama doesn't deserve a Nobel Prize.

[Elephant Walk]

Originally Posted by Little32

And regardless of what folks say (and sometimes you folks are just too much for me) Obama has taken huge strides in trying to reframe U. S. leadership on the global scale. He has offered the olive branch (in the form of renewed diplomatic attempts) to people and nations that no recent president has wanted to touch with a twenty-foot pole. It hasn't always worked, but it does demonstrate a desire to change the nature of U. S. foreign to a model that is more equitable and inclusive on a global scale. Many here would point to that desire as a weakness; many abroad, who are weary of the U. S. as global bully, see it as a strength.

But many Presidents have done this before and not been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. FDR's Good Neighbor policy represented a dramatic shift in what generally had been a very bloody involvement in Latin America into an uninvolved non-parental role. This was early before the war. FDR's policy was far more impactful than anything Barack Obama has ever done to date.

ETA: It never ceases to amaze me how folk who don't run anything but their mouths try to second guess those who are in a position to make these awards. Why do you all get to say he doesn't deserve the award, when according to the judgement of the folks that vote for these prizes year-in and year-out, he does. Give me a break.

Mahatma Gandhi has never won it. Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini have been nominated at one time or another. One of the worst Presidents in American history Jimmy Carter, has won it. Henry Kissinger won it. I can assume that the Peace Prize is really just a slam against Barack Obama, some sort of insult.

[DrPhil]

Nobel Prize's are political.

Speculation:
Winning one binds the Administration to whatever its promises/plans are (whatever they are) and theoretically prevents the Administration from bombing/going to war with particular countries.

Administrations are always bound to political promises with the international community at some level, and this one just came in the form of a Nobel Prize.

So, yeah, Obama wasn't given one because HE deserved it.