Seriously?

IHateUGAlyDawgs · Post by **IHateUGAlyDawgs** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:35 am

Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize? For what?

Now, I realize the award has really been meaningless for years (Carter, Gore, Arafat, etc.)...but holy crap.

G8rMom7 · Post by **G8rMom7** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:38 am

I know...I hadn't even had my coffee yet when I heard that. I can't believe it, but if Gore could get it for that fraud of a movie he did, I guess anyone could get it. I'm sure he'll also win an Oscar, Emmy and Grammy before his term is over. He's just like the rest of the celebrities...it's all about the awards...not really about doing anything constructive. Meh.

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:01 am

This is like Jethro Tull winning the grammy for best heavy metal album.

Reasonable minds can disagree over whether Jimmy Carter or Yassir Arafat or Al Gore deserved it - but at least they had done something to merit consideration.

I can't figure out what Obama has actually done to win this thing. Slider, you wanna weigh in with the party line?

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:33 am

Also, someone at another forum pointed out that the nomination deadline was February 1, 2009.

Obama took office on January 20.

This is America's prize for not electing George Bush to a third term.

MinGator · Post by **MinGator** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:00 am

W....T....F...?? ?? ??

For what, apologizing to the world for being the USA?

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:14 am

Asked why the prize had been awarded to Mr Obama less than a year after he took office, Nobel Committee head Thorbjoern Jagland said: "It was because we would like to support what he is trying to achieve".

"It is a clear signal that we want to advocate the same as he has done," he said.

He specifically mentioned Mr Obama's work to strengthen international institutions and work towards a world free of nuclear arms.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8298580.stm#id8290000/8298600/8298600

If that's why he got it, why didn't Nixon and Reagan - each of whom actually did something (SALT I, ABM treaties for Nixon; INF treaty for Reagan) to limit and reduce the risk of nuclear war.

annarborgator · Post by **annarborgator** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:32 am

Even their explanation is entirely inconsistent: the first quote says to support what he's trying to achieve and the second says to support what he's done.

I hate the world. The fuckers really make me see globalist conspiracies everywhere and I'm really trying not to be so conspiracy minded. I guess the real answer is that the committee got caught up in the cult of personality just like Americans did.

radbag · Post by **radbag** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:33 am

he should decline the accolade and state that his primary responsibility is to keep his citizens safe.

G8rMom7 · Post by **G8rMom7** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:56 am

I would totally give him props if he declined and said "come back to me in a year or so when my policies are put in place". Of course he won't...one of my friends on FB wrote "The Nobel Committee has just reduced the prestige of the prize to that of an MTV Music Award." My comment back was "where is Kayne when we need him? Didn't Beyonce's song Halo do more for peace than anything he has done?" LOL

DocZaius · Post by **DocZaius** » Fri Oct 09, 2009 10:08 am

I wonder if he'll have to donate the $1.4 million that comes with the award to the US Gub'mint. As President, he can only accept certain gifts from foreigners worth less than a couple of hundred bucks. Everything over that belongs to the US, not the man. There might be an exception for something like this, though.