Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize - Page 5 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Azure · 10-09-2009, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

But 8 months after taking office? A joke.

Again, they decided 11 days after Obama took office.

Playfair · 10-09-2009, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Obama! Obama! Obama! Obama! Obama!

Obama "Yes we can!" (soaks up cheers)

Obama "Change is good"

(soaks up cheers)

Obama "If you can't stand the heat . . . get out of the kitchn"

Obama "I'd like to thank the Nobel Prize committee for this huge honor. Through perserverance, hard work and taking major risks . . ."

"Yo Obama, I'm really happy for you and I'm gonna let you finish but every other Nobel Peace Prize winner is a better nobel peace prize winner then you.

Yes . . Yes . . . I'd like to announce my candadicy for next years Nobel Peace Prize, I plan to erradicate . . . Irradiate . . and Annihilate Isreal thus bringing peace to the region. I mean if a do nothing like the hated imperialistic dog Obama can win it, I am a shoe in.

Do you know what the best part of all that was? I am a SHOE in.... SCORE!

Clever_Iggy · 10-09-2009, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Again, they decided 11 days after Obama took office.

I didn't read that. That makes the recognition even more awesome.

My tolerance for the honeymoon period is at it's limit.

NBC · 10-09-2009, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Didn't they just give a Canadian one for something 40 years ago (I can't remember what)

I think giving Obama one is just a publicity stunt since the Nobel Prize is so irrelevant now. A stunt that's backfiring already.

Or are you referring to Lester B. Pearson and the 1956 Suez Crisis?

Azure · 10-09-2009, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

I didn't read that. That makes the recognition even more awesome.

My tolerance for the honeymoon period is at it's limit.

Yeah, from what I understand the final tallies were taken 11.5 days after Obama got into office.

Iowa_Flames_Fan · 10-09-2009, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Yeah, from what I understand the final tallies were taken 11.5 days after Obama got into office.

There's only one explanation: they're Norwegian witches. They can see the future!

zuluking · 10-09-2009, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Personally, I think it's way too early to evaluate Obama's impact on the U.S., let alone world peace. In that sense, I think this is a bit goofy. However, it's also totally beyond his control. I think it's very funny that somehow an unsolicited award that was deliberated on in another country is evidence of Obama's own arrogance in the mind of some posters.

The committee is saying that they are looking to future, not past accomplishments, as is pretty standard for the Nobel Peace Prize (totally different criteria than other Nobel prizes):
I still don't agree with it, but it does explain how they made their choice. We might quibble with their methods, but ultimately none of us has any more control over the process than Obama himself.

For the information of those who don't know, the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by a five-member panel appointed by the Norwegian parliament. Nothing to do with the other Nobel Prizes, which are deliberated on and awarded in Sweden through a much different process.

If anyone actually cares, here are Obama's comments about it (emphasis mine):

blah blah blah

Can you believe the arrogance? I mean seriously: how dare he say that he doesn't yet deserve the award and that it is a call to action for the future rather than a reward for his past actions!!

IFF, almost all (that i cared to go back and read) comments are exclusively about the mickey mouse decision made by a mickey mouse organization NOT about obama's arrogance (that's a given.) What's with the red herring?

Flame Of Liberty · 10-09-2009, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

The committee is saying that they are looking to future, not past accomplishments, as is pretty standard for the Nobel Peace Prize (totally different criteria than other Nobel prizes):

"We trust that this award will strengthen his commitment, as the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, to continue promoting peace and the eradication of poverty," the Mandela Foundation, named for the former South African president who spent decades in prison, said in a statement."

I still don't agree with it, but it does explain how they made their choice. We might quibble with their methods, but ultimately none of us has any more control over the process than Obama himself.

How does it explain anything? Effectively what they did, is that 11 days into office they gave him a blank cheque, a statement of blind support based on his nonexistent track record of promoting peace and the eradication of poverty.

At that time when the votes were cast, how did they know Obama is going to promote peace - everybody and their dog promotes peace in their political speeches. Not to mention how did they know what means is he going to use to pursue this end (peace)???

Iowa_Flames_Fan · 10-09-2009, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

How does it explain anything? Effectively what they did, is that 11 days into office they gave him a blank cheque, a statement of blind support based on his nonexistent track record of promoting peace and the eradication of poverty.

At that time when the votes were cast, how did they know Obama is going to promote peace - everybody and their dog promotes peace in their political speeches. Not to mention how did they know what means is he going to use to pursue this end (peace)???

Hey, I don't disagree. I said it "explained" it--I didn't say it "justified" it. Two different things.

VladtheImpaler · 10-09-2009, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

How does it explain anything? Effectively what they did, is that 11 days into office they gave him a blank cheque, a statement of blind support based on his nonexistent track record of promoting peace and the eradication of poverty.

At that time when the votes were cast, how did they know Obama is going to promote peace - everybody and their dog promotes peace in their political speeches. Not to mention how did they know what means is he going to use to pursue this end (peace)???

He is the first black President - what more do you want?

driveway · 10-09-2009, 02:19 PM

Interesting analysis I saw on CNN, likening Obama's award of the prize to Gorbachev's in 1990: Much more for what he could do and the way he could change his country and subsequently the world than anything he has actually accomplished.

Iowa_Flames_Fan · 10-09-2009, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zuluking

IFF, almost all (that i cared to go back and read) comments are exclusively about the mickey mouse decision made by a mickey mouse organization NOT about obama's arrogance (that's a given.) What's with the red herring?

Fair point. I guess I'm saying this: believe that Obama is arrogant if you like. His actions in this particular context don't show it.

I think the award puts him in a weird spot in a PR sense. Can't turn it down without looking like a ###### and rejecting the "world peace" agenda that the award promotes. Can't accept it without looking entitled and presumptuous. I think he probably picked the approach that will work best in the long term, but there really wasn't a very good approach.

It's helping him a lot that the right-wing punditry is looking petty and jealous. They're missing a huge opportunity to score points. I'm beginning to wonder if they'll ever find their voices in American politics again.

Ford Prefect · 10-09-2009, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

He is the first black President - what more do you want?

A cross-dressing black/hispanic president. From Idaho.

Flame Of Liberty · 10-09-2009, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Hey, I don't disagree. I said it "explained" it--I didn't say it "justified" it. Two different things.

OK I'll go with "they tried to explain it"

Another thing that comes to mind, Obama refused to meet with the Dalai Lama because it would "upset" China, notorious for human rights abuse. Dalai Lama is a Nobel Peace Prize lauterate, is he not? Pretty interesting situation where one Nobel Peace Prize winner refuses to meet a Nobel Peace Prize lauterate because it might hurt the feelings of people who poop on peace...

zuluking · 10-09-2009, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Fair point. I guess I'm saying this: believe that Obama is arrogant if you like. His actions in this particular context don't show it.

I think the award puts him in a weird spot in a PR sense. Can't turn it down without looking like a ###### and rejecting the "world peace" agenda that the award promotes. Can't accept it without looking entitled and presumptuous. I think he probably picked the approach that will work best in the long term, but there really wasn't a very good approach.

It's helping him a lot that the right-wing punditry is looking petty and jealous. They're missing a huge opportunity to score points. I'm beginning to wonder if they'll ever find their voices in American politics again.

Thanks. I will believe that Obama is arrogant. And in this case, his words don't show arrogance and they really can't show it as he even recognizes that he's done jack-all to deserve this award. Again, the asshattery is on the Nobel organization this time, not Obama.

(He needs no additional help in the asshattery department.)

Azure · 10-09-2009, 02:45 PM

The prize was given to Obama, and not the United States.

Anyone with half a brain realizes that the President, even the best one can't create peace in any way possible by himself. It takes the collective will of the WHOLE government. Hell, with most foreign aid given to other countries in hope of establishing 'peace'....or helping people out, the aid is directed by Congress. The President just signs off.

Me thinks that whoever picked Obama for the prize was caught up in the stupidity of thinking one man can actually change the world.

Obama can't even implement the health care changes HE wants without running into resistance from his own party. How the hell is he going to create a more peaceful world when it means having to work with, or against some of the most screwed up people in the world?

VladtheImpaler · 10-09-2009, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by driveway

Interesting analysis I saw on CNN, likening Obama's award of the prize to Gorbachev's in 1990: Much more for what he could do and the way he could change his country and subsequently the world than anything he has actually accomplished.

Nice try, but by 1990, Gorbachev had already been in power for several years, and had already gone a long way toward defusing the cold war tension and toward arms limitations. Not that I consider Gorbachev a great man or anything, but he had actually accomplished something in the cause of world peace. Granted, though, he wasn't the first black president of the Soviet Union...

Azure · 10-09-2009, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Nice try, but by 1990, Gorbachev had already been in power for several years, and had already gone a long way toward defusing the cold war tension and toward arms limitations. Not that I consider Gorbachev a great man or anything, but he had actually accomplished something in the cause of world peace. Granted, though, he wasn't the first black president of the Soviet Union...

Not too mention being President of a very oppressive Soviet Union that was working towards fixing that oppresion.

VladtheImpaler · 10-09-2009, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NBC

Is that because all the Presidents since then have been rubbish, or do you actually think that Kennedy accomplished anything in the 2 years 10 months in power?

JFK tag-teamed Marilyn Monroe with his brother. Did any other president manage anything close to that? Paula Jones is no Marilyn Monroe...

BloodFetish · 10-09-2009, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zuluking

This award is completely unsupportable and really has nothing to do with Obama as it would were it any other overly-hyped leader bestowed the award merely for being overly-hyped. I shudder to think of those that work tirelessly day in and day out for real peace (not rhetoric peace) who got shafted by this obamanation from the Nobel crew.

+1 for using obamanation in a sentence!

Personally, I think Dubya gets an assist on this one. If it wasn't for Dubya's "Bring it on" mentality and general war-mongering Obama doesn't look half as good.