Obama wins the nobel prize? It hasn't even been 9 months and he hasn't achieved jack shit other than taking up massive amounts of airtime.
I feel like obama won because he makes white people feel accepted by blacks.
Printable View
Obama wins the nobel prize? It hasn't even been 9 months and he hasn't achieved jack shit other than taking up massive amounts of airtime.
I feel like obama won because he makes white people feel accepted by blacks.
Now?
At this very second.Quote:
Originally Posted by lithy
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_...5hbHlzaXNvYmFt
Quote:
Analysis: Obama's Nobel honors promise, not action
WASHINGTON – The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama landed with a shock on darkened, still-asleep Washington. He won! For what?
For one of America's youngest presidents, in office less than nine months — and only for 12 days before the Nobel nomination deadline last February — it was an enormous honor.
The prize seems to be more for Obama's promise than for his performance. The Nobel committee cited as his key accomplishment "a new climate in international politics." The president has become "the world's leading spokesman" for its agenda, the committee said.
He has no standout moment of victory. Not surprising. Like most presidents in their first year, Obama's scorecard so far is largely an "incomplete," if he's being graded.
He banned torture and other extreme interrogation techniques for terrorists. But he also promised to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a source of much distaste for the U.S. around the world, a task with difficulties that have Obama headed to miss his own January 2010 deadline.
He said he would end the Iraq war. But he has been slow to bring the troops home and the real end of the U.S. military presence there won't come until at least 2012, and that's only if both the U.S. and Iraq stick to their current agreement about American troop withdrawals. Meantime, he's running a second war in the Muslim world, in Afghanistan — and is seriously considering ramping that one up.
He has pushed for new efforts to make peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. But he's received little cooperation from the two sides.
He said he wants a nuclear-free world. But it's one thing to telegraph the desire, in a speech in Prague in April, and quite another to unite other nations and U.S. lawmakers behind the web of treaties and agreements needed to make that reality.
He has said that battling climate change is a priority. But the U.S. seems likely to head into crucial international negotiations set for Copenhagen in December with Obama-backed legislation still stalled in Congress.
And what about Obama's global prestige? It seemed to take a big hit exactly a week ago when he jetted across the Atlantic to lobby for Chicago to get the 2016 Olympics — and was rejected with a last-place finish.
Perhaps for the Nobel committee, merely altering the tone out of Washington toward the rest of the world is enough. Obama got much attention for his speech from Cairo reaching out a U.S. hand to the world's Muslims. His remarks at the U.N. General Assembly last month set down new markers for the way the U.S. works with the world.
But still ... ?
Obama aides seemed as surprised at the news as everyone else, not even aware he had been nominated along with a record 204 others. He was awoken a little before 6 a.m. by press secretary Robert Gibbs, about an hour after the vote was announced, and aides scrambled to prepare a statement.
It's not necessarily a slam-dunk win for Obama in the tricky U.S. political arena.
He won last year's election in part because voters had grown so weary with the U.S.'s battered image abroad and were attracted to his promise to make a new start. But Republicans have been criticizing Obama as being too much celebrity and too little action, and may seize on this praise — from Europeans, no less — to try to bring him down a peg.
For Nobel voters, though, the award could partly a slap at Obama's predecessor as about lauding Obama. Former President George W. Bush was reviled by much of the world for his cowboy diplomacy, Iraq war and snubbing of European priorities like global warming. Remember that the Nobel prize has a long history of being awarded more for the committee's aspirations than for others' accomplishments — for Mideast peace or a better South Africa, for instance.
In those cases, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.
Obama likely understands that his challenges are too steep to resolve — much less honor — after just a few months. "It's not going to be easy," the president often says of the tasks he sets for the United States and the world.
The Nobel committee, it seems, had the audacity to hope that he'll eventually produce a record worthy of its prize.
___
EDITOR'S NOTE: Jennifer Loven is the AP's chief White House correspondent.
I thought it was just half the Americans who weren't smart enough to realize this guy is nothing but false promises given via fancy speeches. I guess other nation leaders are just as dumb.
I wonder when the "fallout" is gonna hit Obama.
You figure in a couple of years when we're another trillion or two in debt, the economy in every aspect is worse (including record high unemployment) and the Iraq war is still going on more people might start to think "hey, I think I've been dupped".
Joke, yes...
Well it is a joke now, but it has also been a joke for a very long time.Quote:
Originally Posted by wasabi
Oh what the fuck?
I guess he is making peace for us, but shit that's just fucking stupid.
Let's give bush one for leaving office.
That's racist.Quote:
WASHINGTON – The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama landed with a shock on darkened, still-asleep Washington. He won! For what?
The Nobel Prize means absolutely nothing now. Certainly the award has always been influenced by the political landscape of the world whether it is people just posturing for history in the hopes that they will be remembered differently (Jimmy Carter), or because they latch onto a cause that wasn't ever theirs, but they just made it seem like it was (Al Gore).
As much as I personally loathed those two choices, I also recognized it's unfortunately fitting given the fact that Alfred Nobel was a manufacturer of dynamite who wanted to be remembered by history more favorably when he was dead.
On the flipside there are plenty who did things worthy of being awarded the Nobel Prize. But the prize being given to Obama basically has cheapened the award completely. This is a man who has done absolutely nothing worthy in his political career whatsoever. He voted present on issues that were relatively important in an effort to avoid being labeled on certain issues. That's pretty much what a coward does, they don't truly stand by what they believe in or claim they believe in.
Well said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Abasuto
Obama's fairytale promises of hope, change, transparency, and accountability are pipe dreams that never stood a chance of being realistic. What's really funny is how he has surrounded himself with the sort of people that he claimed would never find a job in his White House.
And boy does he give them a lot. Like every fucking day. :oh_no:Quote:
Originally Posted by Abasuto
Seriously, you can't do your job when you're jetting all over the country and/or the world making flowery speeches. Goddamn asshole.
I just read a quote that this win for Obama will move Africa forward.
What?
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by DangerousK
After all the speeches about "cleaning up Wall Street", he's got a former Goldman Sachs lobbyist as our Treasury Chief of Staff.
I wonder if #2 on this list had anything to do with that.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...&cid=N00009638
Is there any place that actually quantifies the reason for his win?
I admit that I know little to nothing about the Nobel Prize, but I thought it was supposed to be an award for accomplishing something important?
I acknowledge that becoming the first African American president is a noteworthy historical benchmark but really, I think any competent Democratic candidate could have run on his platform and won against the post-Bush Republican candidate.
I'm just scratching my head about this. I don't get it.
Here at work, the Obama supporters are saying 'Don't judge him!' and 'He deserves it!'
And when I ask them to state their case, they can't do it. They give no reasons for it. And if they can't defend it or argue a compelling case for it....
As much as Obama winning is a bit of a shock, its not like its chosen by Americans to give out. Blame the Norwegians for this bit of short-sightedness.
They are awarded by 5 people who are selected by the Norweigian Parliament.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taiso
Lagduf will love this part:
The Peace Prize is presented annually in Oslo, in the presence of the king, on December 10 (the anniversary of Nobel's death), and is the only Nobel Prize not presented in Stockholm.
You're right. And Lithy's right, the Nobel Peace prize has been a joke for a long time. Carter and Gore of course, but then Arafat and Kissenger.Quote:
Originally Posted by RevQuixo
Okay, so I just spent a little more time reading about The Nobel Peace Prize.
I never really cared to look into it because I never cared about it. For all of its value, it's not like the world's leaders are climbing over one another in an attempt to win it.
There is still a noticable lack of peace in the world despite how 'coveted' this 'prestigious award' is.
Seems like it's just a big circle jerk into the faces of whoever the committee is trying to irritate that year.
Being African-American is irrelevant, it's scenery that has no bearing on how he does his job, nor should it be a criteria for heaping praise on him. He's also half white, so calling him African-American is a joke. And if you really want argue what a truly historic benchmark is for African-Americans, it would be Thurgood Marshall being appointed to the Supreme Court. That was far more important than Obama's election to the Presidency.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taiso
Obama supporters tend to be unable to present any compelling argument for defending him. When criticized they tend to point to the Republican party as being inherently evil while their savior Obama would never do the horrible things that the Republicans did...after all coming from the world of Chicago politics doesn't really mean you are more likely than not just as corrupt as everyone in Washington.
I've got to think it's a consolation prize for the Olympics.
I'll quote what my friend told me a bit ago:
"I equate the Nobel Peace Prize with a mention in Who's Who Among American High School Students."
Silly Norwegians gave it to him just for the fact that he isn't gwb.Quote:
Originally Posted by wasabi
As of now, obviously yes.
As an Obama supporter I have to say... WTF, that's retarded, he hasn't been in office a full year. It's ridiculous to think that he has earned the Nobel Peace Prize after 12 days. What did he do, drop a golden turd when he was trekking across Europe or something?
This is pretty stupid, but whatever.
Let's say you turned Somalia into a thriving first world country somehow and got awarded the prize. What would you do with the money?
NIGGA PLEASE! :annoyed:
You guys shoulda realized a long time ago that there is nothing sacred left in this world.
if he can pull off the health care reform in the US then he deserves 2:spock:
Apparently, according to the current standards and criteria, he clearly HAS done enough to earn one.Quote:
Originally Posted by striderpunk
“He has created a new international climate,” the committee said.
“Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future,” the committee said in its citation. “His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.”
Thorbjorn Jagland, the chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee and a former prime minister of Norway, said the president had already contributed enough to world diplomacy and international understanding to earn the award.
“We are not awarding the prize for what may happen in the future, but for what he has done in the previous year,” Mr. Jagland said. “We would hope this will enhance what he is trying to do.”
“Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics,” the committee wrote. “Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play.”
“The question we have to ask is who has done the most in the previous year to enhance peace in the world,” Mr. Jagland said. “And who has done more than Barack Obama?”
“We have to get the world on the right track again,” he said. Without referring specifically to the Bush era, he continued: “Look at the level of confrontation we had just a few years ago. Now we get a man who is not only willing but probably able to open dialogue and strengthen international institutions.”
And the full citation:
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/p...009/press.html
While I think that it could have gone to some people involved in environmental justice. I fucking love it, anything to piss of right wingers.
http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec-e...0.7817499.html - a worthy example of Obama's diplomacy
I wonder if he can make water turn into wine?
Change is coming to america. 35,000 Troops into afghanistan and Iraq to Iran.Quote:
Originally Posted by wasabi
It is a joke, I think Al Gore won that shit for his lies about global warming a bunch of scientists debunked. I think its genuinely part of some bullshit scheme to tax things we do in the future. The first step is to get people to believe the bullshit, then take advantage. Most americans are idiots. We should be thankful the european scientists were so fucking loud about the BS that it was. His award should be stripped. That video of gore's is so disgustingly propaganda, its insulting to the intelligence of just about anyone.
"It is a joke, I think Al Gore won that shit for his lies about global warming a bunch of scientists debunked. I think its genuinely part of some bullshit scheme to tax things we do in the future. The first step is to get people to believe the bullshit, then take advantage. Most americans are idiots. We should be thankful the european scientists were so fucking loud about the BS that it was. His award should be stripped. That video of gore's is so disgustingly propaganda, its insulting to the intelligence of just about anyone."
Oh yeah, what lies exactly? Now I disagree with Gore winning it although he did have a big impact with his movie. What scientists debunked it? What peer-reviewed academic article(s) was that in?
I'll say this much, this wasn't a prize of any note but a political endorsement.
I think there's no question that the prestige of the Nobel prize is meaningless in it's old box, but this wasn't about accomplishments, it was about validity.
Their goal, I think, was to endorse his diplomatic foreign policy agenda...specifically nuclear disarmament, engagement with Iran, etc...in a transparent attempt to give him political capital. It'll backfire, because Americans hate when foreigners have opinions, but that's life right?
As far as accomplishments go, had the Democrats and Republicans in Congress and in the Senate not impeded literally every single major policy goal of the administration we might actually have something to associate this award with. We have two parties, both cowardly, inefficient, and corrupt, who stand in the way of a very capable President making decisions that have been put off for far too long.
Y'know what? We avoided the collapse of the world financial system thanks to some extremely unpopular decisions he made, but we can't give an award there can we? I love when Merkel and Sarkozy complained about the bailouts in public when Deutche Bank, HSBC, Citi, and BofA would have gone completely bankrupt without them...taking down the economies of the West with them.
Say what you will, but having a smart man in the WH is enough for me to roll my eyes at this frivolous award and still be thankful he was elected.
You may begin flaming me.
Are you serious?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Wolfgang Krauser
Your insights on Global Warming are insulting to the intelligence of just about anyone.
You sound like those Glenn Becktards on the metro over here.
Fact: Global Warming is caused by the Sun.
He fucked with data, which is scientific fraud.Quote:
Originally Posted by frobenius314
You can find a whole host of info on the BS that global warming is. His movie is a piece of propaganda. Rewatch it when he starts talking about the nothing that happened in his life with his family. His goal was to paint himself as some savior to the world, if you strip the music off it, and cut down its details, you'll realize how stupid it was.
http://www.globalwarminglies.com/
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62598
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...KZDieukjRUChXJ
I don't want this whole thread to be about global warming, but its a proven fact by some of the top scientists of europe and the world that it is complete bullshit.
Not to mention the fact that the schools took his propaganda film and shoved it down our kids throats as science.
My friends kids are old enough to take the bait, and one of them came home pissed off at mom/dad/their whole generation for destroying the planet and his future. They really stoked him up, which I'm confident was the objective.
What my post is meant to say is that us humans have no effect on the climate with cars or other shit. We aren't the issue. Stuff like volcano's are. Its just very easy to think we cause it because nobody does the research on their effect, and many people just view the world as some 2D object being polluted by black ink.
"He fucked with data, which is scientific fraud."
What does it mean he fucked with data? Did he delete observations in the data set? I don't think Gore himself preformed any data analysis himself.
Haha, you posted a links from a guy from Competitive Enterprise Institute ( which is funded by oil companies btw) that does not debunk Gore with any scientific facts or catches him with any tangible lies.
http://www.realclimate.org has debunked sites like globalwarminglies.com. Like I said, I asked for an academic peer-reviewed article? You can't back up your arguments.
First thing a liberal does when he encounters something he doesn't agree with, but can't argue against... insult the person's intelligence. Next step: name calling.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoriquaSNK
With all due respect, an intelligent person does not cite WorldNetDaily and the New York Post as legitimate sources for an argument. That would be like me citing the Huffington Post and MoveOn.org.Quote:
Originally Posted by ki_atsushi
The existence of European scientists that disagree with global warming is not a defense either, I could find European scientists that think invisible pink unicorns created Earth if I went to the right wingnut websites looking for sources.
Back on topic, we can all agree that the award is bullshit. I just happen to think that the spirit in which they awarded it to him was admirable.
Without question, both the Democrats and Republicans are horribly corrupt and inept institutions, they are both filled to the brim with shallow, useless opportunists.
I happen to think that Obama, in contrast, is the real deal. The Nobel committee sees that he's the real deal, and made a good faith attempt to give him an international pat on the back.
Terrific piece in the NYT about their rationale for the choice.
Quote:
OSLO — The Norwegian Nobel Committee spent seven months winnowing the résumés of dissident monks, human rights advocates, field surgeons and other nominees — 205 names in all, most of them obscure — before deciding to give the Nobel Peace Prize to the most famous man on the planet, Barack Obama.
“The question we have to ask,” Thorbjorn Jagland, the committee’s new chairman, said after the prize was announced on Friday, “is, ‘Who has done the most in the previous year to enhance peace in the world?’ And who has done more than Barack Obama?”
While in recent decades the selection process has produced many winners better known for their suffering or their environmental zeal than for peacemaking, Mr. Jagland, a former Norwegian prime minister, said he intended to incorporate a more practical approach.
“It’s important for the committee to recognize people who are struggling and idealistic,” Mr. Jagland said in an interview, “but we cannot do that every year. We must from time to time go into the realm of realpolitik. It is always a mix of idealism and realpolitik that can change the world.”
Mr. Jagland, 58, leaned back in his chair in the committee room, surrounded by photographs of Peace Prize winners dating to 1901. Three previous American presidents look out from the wall: Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter. But the 2009 award to Mr. Obama, in his freshman year as president and still directing two wars, could be the biggest of them all.
While some leaders and commentators around the world lauded the selection, others said Mr. Obama had not yet earned it. Should his presidency descend into a military quagmire, as Lyndon B. Johnson’s did during the Vietnam War, the 2009 award could prove an embarrassment.
Several prominent Nobel observers in Oslo said the Nobel committee had put the integrity of the award at stake. But Mr. Jagland seemed to savor the risk. He said no one could deny that “the international climate” had suddenly improved, and that Mr. Obama was the main reason.
Of the president’s future, he said: “There is great potential. But it depends on how the other political leaders respond. If they respond negatively, one might have to say he failed. But at least we want to embrace the message that he stands for.”
He likened this year’s award to the one in 1971, which recognized Willy Brandt, then the chancellor of West Germany, and his “Ostpolitik” policy of reconciliation with Communist Eastern Europe.
“Brandt hadn’t achieved much when he got the prize, but a process had started that ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall,” Mr. Jagland said. “The same thing is true of the prize to Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990, for launching perestroika. One can say that Barack Obama is trying to change the world, just as those two personalities changed Europe.”
Mr. Jagland, who was elected Sept. 29 to be secretary general of the Council of Europe, represents the Labor Party, but the five-member Nobel committee is more than the collection of Scandinavian socialists that its critics in the United States sometimes imagine. Its members are chosen by the Norwegian Parliament to roughly reflect the party makeup of that body. The current committee includes two members from the Labor Party, one from the Socialist Left Party, one from the Conservatives and one from the far-right Progress Party. Mr. Jagland said all five members backed this year’s choice.
Geir Lundestad, who as executive director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute has handled the committee’s administrative affairs since 1990, said the committee met six or seven times this year, starting several weeks after the nomination deadline of Feb. 1. It did not pick a winner until Monday. He said Oslo faced a major challenge to get ready for what will likely be among the largest civic events in Norwegian history: the award ceremony Dec. 10 at which Mr. Obama will be expected to deliver a speech.
Responding to the analysts who expressed concern for the authority of the prize, given Obama’s lack of accomplishment so far, Dr. Lundestad said, “We are very optimistic that this will turn out to be a success and a highlight in our history.”
Mr. Jagland was asked if the committee feared being labeled naïve for accepting a young politician’s promises at face value. He shrugged and said, “Well, so?”
I posted three links, and you're commenting on one that I can't back up? Don't pull that selective bias. You prove it exists then. You can't because it doesn't exist. Its bullshit. Al gore has no phd, hes not a geologist. Even my professor who has his PHD did a huge thing in class explaining in detail that Al Gore is committing some serious fraud.Quote:
Originally Posted by frobenius314
You're a tool if you believe global warming is caused by humans.
"KUSI-TV Weatherman leads 30,000 Scientists in lawsuit charging Al Gore with fraud in Global Warming Scam. Also supporting the Scientists are 9000 PHD researchers."
Global warming has really become a religion for people though. It is something people just believe without studying to decide right on the spot they want to get behind it.
Need info on data? peer-reviews? Go ahead and look around.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...lation&spell=1
I much rather trust european scientists in the 30,000's then some politician that never even got a phd. How can you contrast those two things and even think for a second Al Gore could be right on something he hasn't even studied on a critical level? Its like if I went out and decided to diagnose non-existent forms of cancer for a plausible future, sure it might arouse shock and become really interesting, but its still conjecture. The climate has always been constantly going through different changes. When one happens, we can't say 'oh human beings caused this'.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoriquaSNK
I think I was just about as shocked when I saw that Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. Did anyone else catch the SNL skit from last week. I thought it was pretty funny and sort of ties in with this.
http://http://www.hulu.com/watch/999...-obama-address
"I posted three links, and you're commenting on one that I can't back up? Don't pull that selective bias. You prove it exists then. You can't because it doesn't exist. Its bullshit. Al gore has no phd, hes not a geologist. Even my professor who has his PHD did a huge thing in class explaining in detail that Al Gore is committing some serious fraud."
LOL, do you not know how scientific reasoning is done? You can't prove a theory, you can only falsify it. Theories that are tested over and over, and are collectively agreed to be true become "laws". The point being is that all evidence leads to the conclusion of CO2 and other greenhouse gases leading to a long-run increasing trend of the average global temperature. I could list numerous articles from scientific journals.
Its true that Al Gore has no PHD. Which is why I wondering how he "fucked" with data. Then you provided me a google search to al gore and data manipulation, which didn't list any evidence of him actually preforming the data analysis himself; rather he is explaining the results of scientists. So is your professor a PHD in Climate Science? Does he have peer-reviewed articles in this area?
"You're a tool if you believe global warming is caused by humans.
"KUSI-TV Weatherman leads 30,000 Scientists in lawsuit charging Al Gore with fraud in Global Warming Scam. Also supporting the Scientists are 9000 PHD researchers."
Global warming has really become a religion for people though. It is something people just believe without studying to decide right on the spot they want to get behind it."
So I'm a tool because there has been evidence from peer reviewed scientific articles that climate change is caused by GHGs that come form emissions?
So please list the actual lawsuit and whether these scientists actually have PHDs in Climate Science.
I'm not going to comment on this global warming nonsense, because that's a fool's errand, so let me say this:
My record as a pinko commie liberal is immaculate, and I don't think Obama is particularly good president. He's being held back by the worst congress ever (or close to it, I'd have to say), but the fact remains that he doesn't seem to be able to get anything done, and he's carried forth too many failed and toxic policies of the previous (disastrous) administration.
The idea of him getting a peace prize is absolutely absurd. They may as well give one to me for my armchair observations. Society as we know is it being eroded at an incredible rate, and the only thing anyone can think of to to about it is hand a prize to someone who fiddles as Rome burns. Ludicrous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeartlessNinny
Agreed. This congress is a disaster so far. I hope that he really does use this prize as a "call to action" and gets nuclear disarmament treaties and environmental treaties.
That would be nice, but given the guy's MO so far, I'd bet my left nut it isn't gonna happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by frobenius314
Look LWK, I know you're a smart guy, but if you do research outside of sensationalist websites, both right and left wing, you'll find excellent resources that comfortably outline man made climate change.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
American Meteorological Society
American Geophysical Union
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
All of the sites above have EXTENSIVE documentation including peer reviewed articles. There are plenty of European scientists as well as some Asian and African ones thrown in for good measure as well.
So, Obama, Nobel.