Discussions
Does Obama Deserve The Nobel Peace Price
Posted by Timesobserver • 10/09/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: nobel peace prize, obama
After reading my editorial, what do you guys think? Does Obama deserve the Nobel Peace Price so early in his presidency?
www.thetimesobserver.com/obama_nobel.php
User Comments
-
No but neither does anyone else who gets it.-
Does this implicate that the awards panel never picks a good person, or that the award is just garbage, regardless of who receive it? -
What it implicates is the tendency of the awards panel to use it as a political tool rather then an award based on merit.
-
'What it implicates is the tendency of the awards panel to use it as a political tool rather then an award based on merit.'
Exactly. -
Here are ten concrete reasons why Obama deserved the Nobel Peace Prize, based on things he has done already.
trulyskewed.blogspot.com/2009/10/ten-reasons-obama-deserves-nobel-peace.htm...
I don't know if we're supposed to provide links to our work, but the original discussion creator did, so I think it's appropriate
-
-
Maybe he is deserving of the Taco-bell piece prize.-
Now I want some nachos. -
Miss Suzie, I believe that is how Obama started in politics
-
-
Nachos, yes.
Obama, no.-
How about Obama on nachos?
-
-
Even so - his main mission is for peace around the world and strengthening the unity of the world. I think... yes, deserving.
Maybe the only deserving party out of all the nominations. (and who might they have been.)-
If you read my editorial, Wagerwitch, I think there are many other nominees who deserve the award more than Obama. They have really overcome and in some cases, risked their own lives for peace.
-
Don't we all want peace?
I prefer someone who can stick to the promises that they make. I would think the more appropriate award for Obama would be an oscar.
-
-
Absolutely not. -
Aside from the money and prestige involved, these awards are really meaningless. They have no real substance or value. Can you remember who won last year's Peace prize? Or the one the year before? In the end we'll all make up our own minds who we cherish and respect.-
I think Al Gore won the one before. I think in principle it does have value or ironey (not sure) since it was Alfred Nobel who invented Dynamite. -
I love what you said!!!
-
-
Read my blog 2 see my opinion!-
Hi Marcusmarcus. I visited your blog and I left you a comment. Maybe you can return the favor?
Anyway, I don't think people who say that Obama doesn't deserve the award are all racists or hate Obama. Sure, some are but not all of them. -
Anyway, I don't think people who say that Obama doesn't deserve the award are all racists or hate Obama. Sure, some are but not all of them.
BULLSHIT -
Dsriharsha, do you care to expand on your enlightening comment?
-
would you care to expand on why someone who has that viewpoint is a racist?
There is a severe kind of neoracism prevalent these days.. and I am saying that as a south asian whose ethnicity has often been at the receiving end of classical racism..
would it make a difference to you if I criticized a person who essentially lived the same life as Obama, though not a black and a more commonplace caucasian name? To make a statement that anyone against Obama(in some viewpoints) is a racist is a ridiculous statement. Does him being a Black President of a Superpower provide some sort of Halo that I cant criticize him? -
Dsriharsha, I don't get what you're saying here. I mean, I understand, but I don't get your first reply to me.
Basically, not everyone who criticizes Obama is a racist. Not everyone who says that Obama doesn't deserve this award is a racist or hates the man.
Sure, some people are racist and hate Obama and even if the man runs into a burning house and saves three kids, these people will still find something wrong with him for doing it. -
oh damn.. I completely misread what you said, I missed the dont part in "dont think"..
I read it as you were saying that those who were against him being awarded the prize were racists.. My apologies
I feel stupid now. -
The racist argument, though I am sure there is some truth to it, is pretty weak. Just because people disagree with one another doesn't make them racists. But, it is a great way to go along with the system that is already in place though, by trying to divide people against each-other so that no real change can occur. I would suggest not believing everything you see and hear on TV or the radio.
-
No problems, Dsriharsha, we all make mistakes.
-
-
Yes! -
-
NO
very very sad that even the Nobel Peace prize has resorted to gimmickry..
How long has Obama been in office? Not even a year...
what has been his track record so far? he was not even a well known entity or had any presence before the Democratic primaries.. so essentially, we are the Nobel commitee judged his performance over less than a year? and what exactly has been his impact in the few months? AFAIK, much of the foreign policy decisions has been attributed to Hillary Clinton, right?-
"very very sad that even the Nobel Peace prize has resorted to gimmickry.."
Hardly new though. The last person to receive that award who actually deserved it was Nelson Mandela in the early 90's, and that may have been luck as even then they were using it as a political tool in South Africa. -
not entirely true.. I am not familiar with many of the names there, but Yunus and Grammen Bank were deserving.
And the rest(mostly) had a body of work and concrete action and not just plain rhetoric on which they were judged upon. It wasn't quite as gimmicky as this. -
Yunus and Grameen bank were more deserving? How does microfinance relate to "who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses"
-
Yunus is also a game-changer. People who are happy, healthy, and receive a decent living wage don't steal from and murder their neighbours. It's all interconnected: health, happiness, decent standard of living, and peace, both inner and outer. People can't think about larger issues when their bellies are rumbling and they have no roof over their heads.
For that matter, I'm a little disappointed that it didn't go to Maestro Jose Abreu, who won both the Polar and TED prizes earlier this year, so he must certainly have been on their radar. -
@Husdal: With regards to actually building peace, everything. Microfinance and economic development has done 100's of times more good for world peace then all the "peace congresses" and "reduction of standing armies" in the world, especially considering as reducing standing military forces usually favors aggressors.
I see what you mean by the original mission statement, but the man who wrote it (Alfred Nobel) was single-handedly responsible for driving up the death tolls in the American Civil War and World War I to "make war too terrible to fight," and, with that view of "peace," paved the way for Adolf Hitler in World War II, so methinks it best not to listen to it.
-
-
Here's the procedure from the official Nobel peace prize site..
September – Invitation letters are sent out. The Nobel Committee sends out invitation letters to individuals qualified to nominate – members of national assemblies, governments, and international courts of law; etc, etc
so, as of september last year, his achievement was that he was selected as nominee for the Democratic party.. and hadn't even completed a full term as senator?
February – Deadline for submission. The Committee bases its assessment on nominations that must be postmarked no later than 1 February each year. Nominations postmarked and received after this date are included in the following year's discussions.
He was in the Presidents office for a grand total of 11 days before the deadline for nomination?
February-March – Short list. The Committee assesses the candidates' work and prepares a short list.
he was shortlisted on his performance as the President over his 11 days of office? and his 1 year of poll campaigning? poll promises is what the Nobel prize is taking into consideration thesae days?
March-August – Adviser review. The short list is reviewed by permanent advisers and advisers specially recruited for their knowledge of specific candidates. The advisers do not directly evaluate nominations nor give explicit recommendations.
October – Nobel Laureates are chosen. At the beginning of October, the Nobel Committee chooses the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates through a majority vote. The decision is final and without appeal. The names of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates are then announced.
The Nobel comitee has awarded this prize on what critereon to him taking into account his short time?
Maybe Obama is a deserving candidate based on his viewpoints and stance.. but in the future. NOT right now.
As for the other possible candidates, the Nobel institute doesn't disclose for 50 years, so we may never know.. but if there were no one worthier, the Nobel commitee need not have given the prize this year.. it has happened several times in the past that the prize wasn't awarded in a year.-
He's a game changer and has shown it quite often in a number of instances. In fact, if you go on the Nobel web site and read the criteria, it's quite clear that he has met or exceeded the criteria for nomination, and had, as far back as September of last year.
Often the Nobel peace prize is given as encouragement to someone in a difficult position who is working for peace; sometimes the committee feels the $1.4 million prize money is needed for the effort, and sometimes they see someone struggling who has the power to effect change, and the committee feels that person needs either a bit of prestige or recognition, or a friendly gesture.
In any case, the President wasn't thinking about the award, didn't seek it, and had no choice but to act as he did: accept it graciously, say he didn't deserve it, and promise to try to live up to it. -
@geekchick: Any new US President would've been a "game-changer" because the world wanted him to be one. If the word weren't eloquent, they'd quote them anyways.
-
-
I'm not sure why BlogCatalog continues to maintain a separate politics board, but it has one. Here's the thread on this topic over there: www.blogcatalog.com/politics/discuss/entry/barack-obama-wins-nobel-peace-pr...
Oh, and that thread started 6 hours ago, not five.
And we have a thread from 10 hours ago on the main boards: www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/barack-obama-wins-nobel-peace-prize
And we have an entry from 34 minutes ago: www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/does-president-obama-deserve-nobel-peace-...-
OUCH ... Little Red Dog. You bitey too hard!
-
What makes even less sense is there is no link to the politics board from the main page. You have to do a weird trick with the "Start New Discussion" feature to get there.
-
Oh well, Clioandme, what are you going to do?
Anyway, what's your two cents on the topic?
-
-
There's a politics board? I agree, it needs to be shown on the main page so people don't lump their politics topics with everything else.
-
I think he is most deserved. Because The button of world war is in the hand of obama. Gift him with nobel prize, and he would think twice before pressing the button.-
Greenindia, many U.S. presidents before Obama never received the Nobel Peace Prize and they never hit the nuclear button.
Are you implying that President Obama is a shallow man who cares more about his image than the safety of his fellow Americans and the rest of the world?
-
-
At least Obama is doing a lot of things which we are not even close to doing. Instead of finding faults look at the postive side at all the good deeds he is doing-
Well, they usually give up the award after someone has accomplished something. So far, Obama hasn't done anything and he was nominated only after being in the White House for less than two weeks into his presidency.
-
Sounds manipulative.
-
Well, Jeremyjanson, in my editorial I said that Obama got the award the same way a high school cheerleader gets to become Prom Queen --- by popularity alone.
-
T o Timesobserver and Selvia
Obama himself says he is surprised of the decision. Further added, he doesnot think he is the right person. -
@GI: I was mostly talking to Sylvia.
-
Greenindia, if you had read my editorial, you would have noticed that I'm not blaming Obama himself for the award. That's just asinine.
-
-
The Nobel Peace Prize has had adolf hitler and josef stalin as nominees...yasser arafat was actually awarded the Nobel Peace Prize...
Al Gore was a ridiculous choice...
www.planetearthpeaceparty.com/2008/06/irena-sendlerowashould-have-been-the-...
Barack Obama was not a poor choice but in my opinion a premature choice...He has spoken eloquent words that have given many Earthlings hope for a peaceful world...Unfortunately the Planet needs actions that will result in a peaceful world...
Hopefully the eloquent words of Barack Obama and/or his speechwriters will lead to some meaningful actions that will help create a world of peace...-
Well, I have all the praise towords my every friends who expressed their concerns, observations, clarification towords the subject. It will also be appropriate to make a thought on what is the relavant cause for being the Nobel Prize (Peace)given to Obama. I think sitting within the simple law of nature that there is a cause for every effect. Or should we think there is nobody in the world who work better than Obama for PEACE?
-
-
I'm delighted he won it. Besides being willing to open up a dialogue with Arab nations, which was unheard of in Bush's administration that demonized all of them as "terrorists," there are other justifications for Obama winning the prize. From Fivethirtyeight:
"The justification for the prize, while certainly unexpected and a bit tenuous, is indeed rooted in fact. Obama has long been a booster for non-proliferation, and his speech and lobbying at the UN General Assembly and Security Council proved to be quite successful.
On climate change, the Obama administration has taken the toughest line against carbon emissions of any White House so far in terms of concrete regulations by Federal agencies. The September announcement by the EPA that the agency would begin to regulate CO2 as a pollutant, verified by the Supreme Court in 2007, was a major step towards US action on the climate change issue. Though cap-and-trade or other large scale programmes are clearly the purvue of Congress, the executive branch's efforts in the realm are likely to be a major portion of the US effort.
Regarding diplomacy, the committee was likely in part referring to the re-elevation of Susan Rice's post, the US Ambassador to the UN, to a cabinet level post, as well as his public addresses and promised strategic changes toward diplomatic action over rapid military decisions - such as Iran. The G5 plus one meeting with Iran, where Undersecretary of State Burns officially met with the Iranian negotiator, and found a way forward on nuclear energy processing was the first concrete outcome of this strategy."
www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/obamas-prize-for-peace.html-
Well, Lisa, just because President Obama has taken hard stances on issues and opened dialogue doesn't mean that he will be successful in them.
Only after he has succeeded should he be nominated and then awarded; not before.
Like him or not and I'm not saying he deserves to be nominated, but at least former President Bush took action against terrorists, which resulted in foiled terror plans from around the globe. That was a huge achievement in keeping the peace.
So far, the president hasn't done anything, yet. I want to believe that any American president has the power to do great good but only after their efforts show results that they are worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize.
But if you have read my editorial,
www.thetimesobserver.com/obama_nobel.php, you will see that there were other nominees who were more deserving of the award than any of these two men.
-
-
"Like him or not and I'm not saying he deserves to be nominated, but at least former President Bush took action against terrorists, which resulted in foiled terror plans from around the globe. That was a huge achievement in keeping the peace."
Well, that's a matter of opinion. Many rightly believe that Bush's actions, including the Iraq war that was based on lies (Saddam being responsible for 9/11 and his alleged WMDs), actually increased terrorism and violence around the world. And you wrote "So far, the president hasn't done anything yet," which is just not true. He has accomplished quite a few things since he took office. True, quite a few of his promises are still unfulfilled, but I'm hoping winning this prize will be a nice incentive for him to start taking stronger action.-
What incentive does he need? He holds the presidency, his party has control of both houses of congress, and he has goodwill around the world with many countries. If he isn't doing something, it's probably because he doesn't really want to.
-
Well, Lisa, the thing with former President Bush is that he never said that Saddam was involved in 9/11.
As far as WMDs, well, we had intelligent information from many countries, ours and the U.N., which stated that Saddam did have WMDs.
And let's not forget that former President Clinton ordered Operation Desert Fox to target and destroy Saddam's WMD plants. After the operation, the U.N. wanted to go into Iraq and see if the operation was successful but Saddam refused to allow them in. So instead of enforcing their own resolutions against Saddam, the U.N. walked away.
Now, do I agree with how Bush handled Iraq? Not entirely, but not for one minute do I believe that he, or the Democratic and Republican members of Congress, who viewed all the intel info, lied about Saddam's weapons programs. I personally think that the U.N. should have been given at least a year to search the country properly before any military action was taken or considered.
But we have discovered that Saddam allowed al-Qaeda and other terrorists to train in Iraq and allowed the country to become a terrorist black market. In addition, Israel and Saddam's air force general stated that he shipped some of his WMDs to Syria before the U.N. weapons inspectors came into the country.
So far, President Obama really hasn't accomplished much. He may have opened up dialogue with Arab nations and talked about a nuclear-free world, which other presidents in the past have called for, but so far his worthy efforts haven't yielded any results that should grant him this prize.
All I'm saying is that let's give him the prize once he has accomplished something worthy. -
"Like him or not and I'm not saying he deserves to be nominated, but at least former President Bush took action against terrorists, which resulted in foiled terror plans from around the globe. That was a huge achievement in keeping the peace. "
How is starting a war, an achievement of peace? -
Bettieblogger, I'm not talking about Iraq. (Although we did break up the terrorist black market that was there.)
I'm talking about going into Afghanistan and other countries (including the U.S.) and foiling terror attacks and capturing or killing terrorists.
-
-
No he did not deserve it and he only won because he is black.
Proof?
www.offendedblogger.com/2009/10/oh-nobel-he-diint-offensive.html
Stick that in your peace pipe and smoke it, Obama. -
TimesObserver writes: "....the thing with former President Bush is that he never said that Saddam was involved in 9/11."
Says you.
"The 9/11 commission reported in June that there was no “collaborative relationship” between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, and thus that Bush’s Enemy No. 1 had no role in the 9/11 attacks. Far from finding any partnership between the two, the report noted that bin Laden “at one time sponsored anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan.” This report effectively nuked a key justification for the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
President Bush responded to the revelation by asserting, “The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al-Qaeda is because there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda.” But the evidence showed that though al-Qaeda had repeatedly approached Saddam’s regime about working together, the Iraqi government had effectively rebuffed their proposals.
The Bush administration cannot brush aside the 9/11 commission’s report. A commission whose chairman was appointed by Bush and whose ground rules were dictated in large part by the White House has found that the Bush administration’s claim regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was baseless. And after more than 900 American soldiers have died in Iraq, this cannot qualify as a harmless error.
It is vital to recognize how persistently and intently Bush exploited Americans’ fears on the Saddam–al-Qaeda link to justify his preemptive assault against Iraq.
In a memo President Bush sent on March 18, 2003, notifying Congress that he was launching the war against Iraq, he declared that he was acting to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
Bush invoked this justification even though his administration had never offered a shred of evidence tying Saddam to 9/11. But the Saddam–al-Qaeda link was the key to the administration’s exploitation of the ignorance of the American people. Bush and team continually threw out new accusations and then backed off, knowing that few people were paying close enough attention to recognize that previous charges had collapsed like a row of houses of cards."
www.fff.org/freedom/fd0409c.asp-
"The Bush administration cannot brush aside the 9/11 commission’s report. A commission whose chairman was appointed by Bush and whose ground rules were dictated in large part by the White House has found that the Bush administration’s claim regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was baseless. And after more than 900 American soldiers have died in Iraq, this cannot qualify as a harmless error.
It is vital to recognize how persistently and intently Bush exploited Americans’ fears on the Saddam–al-Qaeda link to justify his preemptive assault against Iraq."
I completely agree with this statement! -
@BB: Yes, and what the heck does that statement have to do with Obama? If that's the reason for giving him a prize, Ron Paul probably deserves it more then Obama did at the time he was nominated!
-
Lisa, Bush never said that Saddam was involved with the 9/11 attacks. I have never heard him say that.
Yes, Iraq and al-Qaeda did have a relationship together. No one claims it was a strong one but there was one there and they did work on a few small projects together.
www.thetimesobserver.com/saddam_qaeda.php
My editorial has a link to the report.
But not once did Bush ever come on national television and say, "Saddam is behind the 9/11 attacks."
As far as going into Iraq, it was the right thing to do. We had no idea what Saddam had, he had a history of lying about his weapons programs and not following U.N. resolutions against him and the U.N., sadly, had a long history of not enforcing their own resolutions against Saddam and others.
After 9/11, action needed to be taken to find out what Saddam really had.
-
-
-
Yes, he does. At first I thought that it was ridiculous because he has yet to actually do anything, even though he is on the right track, but then I realized that the awarding of the prize is just the worlds way of telling america that they are on the right track and that they are going to get rewarded if they keep going in this direction. You have to look at it in the context of the world, and the reason most people don't appreciate it is because they forget that the nobel prizes are awarded by Norway and not America. -
He hasn't done anything yet except drive the country into massive debt which we will never be able to repay.
The only reason why he got it is probably because they didn't like Bush. It's sort of a slap in the face to him. -
While its a odd thing to see obama get the peace prize it is deserved none the less. As its probably related to the Sumatra boat hijackings.
I have no problem of him getting it, and am glad he did. -
i stated my opinion here blog.brooklynposh.com/2009/10/11/barack-obama-wins-the-nobel-peace-prize.as...-
Hey, Brooklynposh, I read your blog and I left you a comment and even took the poll.
-
-
Let's get real: many of the members of his cabinet and advisors are the same as under the Clinton (Brezinski et al), others were part of the same Wall Street clique who have benefited from and/or orchestrated the looting of the US. Most are members of the Council of Foreign Relations, Bilderberg etc. As is detailed at the beginning of this documentary: www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw
Ergo, anyone who thinks Obama has any personal leeway in his policies is quite deluded. -
that was quickie! -
Another important reason why Obama deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.
From today's Huffington Post:
Conservatives and Off-Base Lefties: Can You Top This?
"Well over half the people who walk the face of this earth come from among the three Abrahamic traditions or faiths: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It is no secret that there has been no love lost and little understanding between Islam, the fastest-growing of the three, and the other two....Now, along came a newly installed civic leader, a President of the United States, generally recognized as the 'leader of the free world.' Since what is known as "the free world" is predominantly Christian, the new president can also claim to be the most significant leader on the world stage of that Abrahamic faith, Christianity. Among his earliest actions, the new United States President stunned the world by reaching out to Islam -- not from Washington, not by way of TV or the Internet -- no, he traveled to Egypt, put his body and his presidency on the line, and spoke to Islam as he would speak to us.
Obama: 'I know there are many -- Muslim and non-Muslim -- who question whether we can forge a new beginning,' he said, emphasizing that, 'It is easier to start wars than to end them.' And then, speaking from the epicenter of the Muslim world, to all the world, and to the essence of our humanity, he spoke this truth: 'It is easier to blame others than to look inward, to see what is different about someone, than to find the things we share.' And who, for the love of God in three faiths, topped that this year?'"
Read more at: www.huffingtonpost.com/norman-lear/conservatives-and-off-bas_b_316948.html -
The Outrage Pandemic:
"Awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama seemed to carry with it a collective sigh of relief from Europe, if not the world. If the Nobel medal could speak, this year it would say, "Thank you, for stopping that crazy march to military madness that worried us all so much!"
America is still in Iraq and considering sending more troops to Afghanistan. Yet, these military actions are not being driven through by propaganda campaigns and bellicose brinkmanship. We no longer turn on our televisions to be greeted by constant White House speeches warning that terrorists will destroy our shopping malls with nuclear bombs tomorrow if we fail to invade Iraq and Iran and Afghanistan today. The world still has problems, but the biggest kid on the global stage is no longer picking fights everyday with everyone else."
Read more at: www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-feldman/the-outrage-pandemic_b_316405.html -
An award doesn't mean a thing. It's just another superficial creation for men to massage their egos.
The question is, despite all these awards are we any closer to peace in the world?
Human beings need to stop with all this folly and get on with concrete action towards real peace...which may never happen in a world without wisdom. -
I believe it was partly because of his efforts immediately after taking office to mend relationships with other countries. This made a powerful statement about his intentions, and marked a big u-turn in US foreign affairs.
I believe that it was also intended to encourage him to do the right thing and end the war mission in favor of peace and diplomacy.
It is ironic that it came the very day we bombed the moon. -
Obama has done nothing to deserve it. He's increased our military presence in Afghanistan, trying to turn our country into a socialist state, and trying to desecrate our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
-
Well elaborated points, blackwater (sarcasm)
Even Obama disagrees that he deserves the award. That must be hard on him.
Military in Afghanistan - boo. I also disagree with the war on terror. All Obama did was shift the theather of war back to Afghanistan :-/
A bit more socialism - woo. Too much individualism is counter-productive to progressing as a whole if you think about it. -
@ccRicers: "Even Obama disagrees that he deserves the award."
This thread is really more a criticism of the Nobel Prize Board then Obama, and maybe a little a criticism of his supporters.
"Too much individualism is counter-productive to progressing as a whole if you think about it."
Considering how much progress the Ancient Greeks made before they went collectivist, and how well America has done through individualism the vast majority of the time (with only a brief collectivist phase around the Great Depression and WWII), including collective progress, that is only true if you take a "my way or the highway" approach of saying that progress HAS TO BE AS I SEE IT RIGHT NOW!
Further, even in the USSR, most of Soviet Russia's great achievements, from launching the first man in to space (assorted Kidnapped Nazi Scientists), to building the second strongest navy in the world (Admiral Gorshkov), to building the worlds finest assault rifle (Mikhail Klashnikov) and some of it's finest film (directors like Sergei Eisenstein who made many innovations in film) were largely the result of individuals bucking society and developing themselves, often (especially in the case of Gorshkov) by ruthlessly manipulating the devices designed to restrict them.
So no, individualism and progress are very compatible. In fact, most truly magnificent progress occurs through individuals fulfilling themselves. More then anything else, collectivism is the arrogance of human beings believing that they can contrive a society better then the fruits of their natural intuition. Now I'm not saying there's no place for welfare, it is a sad reality that such grace is necessary, but the society as a whole should be left untouched to develop as it does from individuals. Welfare should take a very "get in, get out" approach societally, hopefully allowing individuals to develop themselves so they can be off of it and individual again soon.
-
-
Funny, I wrote about this today on my blog. I think his winning the prize so quickly is just a symptom of the ADD, impatient, world we live in. I have more on that (and hopefully a few chuckles) at:
ourannoyingworld.com/
By the way, I'm an Obama fan. My skepticism about him winning the award so soon is purely non-political. -
President Obama did not deserve this award and he admitted that. However, he did not ask for it, he did not nominate himself for it. It was awarded to him. So if there is any "anger" or anything negative for that matter, for this award being given to President Obama, I believe that it should be directed at the Nobel Prize Committee.
All in all, this is something that helps place America back in a positive light and that matters. So with that said, no he does not deserve the metal however it does end up making America look better in the long run. So while I disagree with who it was given to, at least it is something that could possibly help America as a whole in the end.-
I completely agree with you, Rene.
The Nobel Prize Committee needs to stop being political and start being objective. -
Damn skippy! Way to sum it up Rene Monroe. He's not on the panel, so stop hating.
-
-
I think in his case is more of a nudge to urge him to change the way the US does world politics. -
I'm not racist, I dislike all politicians equally!
-
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh deserved it MUCH MUCH MORE, because of NOT ATTACKING PAKISTAN after the 26th Nov 2008 terrorist seige and Carnage in Mumbai that outraged and shocked all Indians and many others around the world. This attack killed people from many countries, including Americans
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Mumbai_attacks
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
