The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I support the president and believe that he is taking the country and the world in the right direction, but this seems premature. 

And to think he did it without ringing anyone's bells.   :D

For which action did he receive this award?  Anything in particular?

Since we always discuss the definition of irony, is it ironic that a country involved in two wars has its leader as the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize?

I would say no.

It would be ironic if Obama fought Jimmy Carter over who was more peaceful.

Obama is the shit. He's in a win-win scenario, meaning that no matter what he does, everyone will love him all over the world. Give him the Peabody award and the Heisman Trophy, too.

I concur with Jtex

And while they are at it, lets give him the Grammy, Emmy, Tony Awards, put him in The Pro Football Hall of Fame and oh, lets not forget the Oscar which he rightfully deserves.

You can read their reasoning here:  http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/home/announce-2009/

"...for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons."

Also

"Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened."

Emphasis mine...
They're basically awarding all of us for no longer being bullies and attempting to take steps in the right direction.

The Nobel Peace Prize does not have to be for one singular act from my understanding. It can mean that you're moving in the right direction.

Where outside of grade school do you get rewarded for effort?  It takes results and the jury is still out on Obama, imo anyway.  I would have a lot of respect for him if he said "Thanks but I have not earned it yet."

I just can't believe he has enough time in his schedule to do a promo commercial spot for the new George Lopez late night show. I mean, come on...surely there is something important he could be doing instead of that?

Some call this a "job".

Here is my take to use a football analogy.....  Obama getting this award now, it the equivalent of inducting Matt Ryan into the football hall of fame in Canton. 

I don't mean any disrespect to either. 

Ryan is a very good football player, but to claim he has earned a spot to Canton is ludacris.  Ryan earned the rookie of the year award last year and may very well likely be on his way to a hall of fame career, but he ain't there yet.

Obama has moved the nation and the world in the right direction.  Maybe as well as any world leader has ever done in the first 10 months in office.  I would not begrudge him the rookie of the year award or have problem with someone claiming he has been the most effective president in his first 10 months in office.  But to say Obama is already a Hall of Fame world leader in the area of peaceful foriegn relations....in my opinion it is too early.   

I'm not saying that I would've given the award to Obama, but I think that the Peace prize is something very different that the tangible goals of a football hall of fame, which is measured purely by results.

I think that peace is a process, and I think that effort is part of that.

Again, I do think it's premature, but I don't think it's a travesty or anything like that.

Even at your job, you get awards for going above and beyond, not just for doing your job adequately.

I disagree.  The Hall of Fame is a recognition of lifetime achievement; in contrast, the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded yearly.  It is perfectly reasonable for the Nobel Peace Prize to be given to someone who has done a lot of work in one year.

Now, you can argue the merits of him being nominated 2 weeks into office...

"Above and beyond" is relative, is it not?

If the last person to hold your job was a colossal, epic failure and screwed up everything they touched, coming in and merely being Not Incompetent makes you look pretty damned good.

Spot on

I would like to argue this one thing in favor of Obama.  He did do exactly what it says in the nomination.

It's pretty undeniable that he changed the landscape of US diplomacy.  As it is a yearly award, I would say that it's true that Obama has done a lot in the year, both as a candidate and president, to promote peace.

I don't know who he was up against, though.

This is completely lost on me because I don't believe in football.

You do realize this is a football discussion site?  Come to think of it you never post in the football related sections. 

So most people ought get the reference.

Or did you join thinking this was a site about aquatic mammals? 

I joined because I helped Dave register the domain name way, way back in the day. And Fau and others that I know were hanging out here. I NEVER go in any other section. Football sucks as do most spectator sports.

This is the same organization that gave the Peace Prize to Yasir Arafat. I don't know why anyone puts much stock in what a bunch of Norwegians think.

Voting for the Nobel ended 12 days after the election. Obama basically got the award for not being Bush.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT5Kl38fSVY

That is a blatant and total lie.   

The nomination process ended two week after he came into to office. The voting for the prize only occured shortly before the award was announced. 

My apoligies. I meant the Nomination.  Still.......the fact that he was even nominated only 2 weeks into office doesn't tell you anything?  ::) 

If I weren't looking for an excuse to bash the President, it "might" tell me that the Nobel folks saw a good base of action in Obama's first two weeks and felt that the direction it was leading was significant.

So now the Nobel Peace prize is awarded for assumptions?  Give me a break already........its Pathetic.  Now they have affirmitive actions created just for the President of the United States?  ::)

What was the Base of action?  ???  How did that Base do after the following 50 weeks?  ???


Sorry .......just not being George Bush is not going to cut it.

While I agree it is a bit premature.  Your agruement is based on totally false accusations. 

It only takes one person to nominate him.  Yes, his nomination was based on his campaign promises to repair the damage done by the madman that previously held the office, the work he did to heal relations during the transition period, and  the fact that the world was more a more peace  a mere two weeks after he was in office.  (And in fact it was)

The actually awarding of the Peace prize was based on a little less than one year in office. 

I think you underestimate the significance of not being George W. Bush (or Dick Cheney).

HA!


Good stuff.

Win the Peace Prize and then have to decide if you'll drop another 40,000 troops into Afghanistan vs the kinder, gentler America concept.  America's days as a Super Power were numbered the day the Soviet Union fell. 

Oh no, other nations are trying to influence our policy by telling us how great we are!

This outrage must be stopped at all costs.

Nothing false about it. Its based on a Complete lack of any facts .............any facts supporting Obama has acomplished any of the things he said he would so far.   Granted , Its only been a year, and he has alot of his plate. I'm willing to give him more time to acomplish his goals . But giving him this award before he has just really cheapens it. He himself should not accept it and step down.

You may have a point there! ;D

YOU are based on a complete lack of facts.   

Yes, it is a fact that the US has better and more peaceful relations under Obama than under Bush. 

This award has nothing to do with his campaign promises.  The fact that the oil and gas tax loophole have not yet been closed has nothing to do with this award. 

You want to claim that this award was determined two weeks after the US election when in fact it was determined over a year later than that. 

While I agree this award was premature.  You are not interested in actually discussing that based on facts, but based on making up your own, or maybe what you heard on Rush Limbaugh. 

That is mathematically impossible.  It hasn't even been a year since the election.

Really? Last time I checked People were still dying in both Iraq and Afganistan. In fact Afganistan is even getting worse:   http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33256784/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia


Don't know what set of facts your going by......maybe something you heard on Oprah?  ::)

Premature is an UNDERSTATMENT. Its a disgrace and it brought the worth and the signifigance of the Nobel down more then a few notches when its given just to make a political statement.

How is it a disgrace?  WTF?  You're reacting completely irrationally.  It's like you're angry that our president is being recognized for something good. 

And peace IS a political statement.  That's what the award is for -- to make a statement towards the politics of peace.  By it's very nature, it's a political award.

Seems like many of the people who are claiming that awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama diminishes its significance are the same people that have already been saying that it's meaningless for years, ever since it was awarded to Yasser Arafat (and again when it was awarded to Al Gore).

I have to say, only in America does our President get the Nobel Peace Prize and everybody whines about it. I think it's laughable that those that usually would pay no attention to the prize are now all up in arms. A disgrace? Really? He didn't nominate himself.

Shut up, America. Once again you're embarrassing those of us that aren't assholes.

Really?  I thought Peace was something when people were not afraid to walk down the streets without getting blown up , hardly the scene in Afangaistan right now.

Hey heres a thought.......lets give the Superbowl Trophy to New Orleans. Fuck the game.  That city deserves it right?   

It may be a political award, one that Obaba should get in his 4th yr for trying,  but this is a Joke. Afirmitive action at its highest level.  ::)

Desmond Tutu was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984 for his work against apartheid in South Africa.  Apartheid wasn't abolished until ten years later.

Jimmy Carter was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for his work to establish peace in the Middle East, which is still one of the most war-torn areas in the world.

Al Gore was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 for his work towards combating global warming.  The globe is still warming (although I imagine that you probably consider this award to be just as illegitimate as you consider Obama's to be, anyway).

The Nobel Peace Prize is not simply awarded based on net results.  There are many examples of when it has been awarded based on effort.  For almost two years, Obama ran a campaign in which he sold the people of America on the idea that diplomacy is a important and underutilized part of our foreign policy, and that we should strive to involve the rest of the world in conflict resolution (and, significantly, he actually won an election with this philosophy).  In his first 9 months in office, he has effected a dramatic shift in U.S. policy re: internationalism.

I find it rather ridiculous that you believe that this is an affirmative action award; this belief is completely incompatible with the claim that he got the award for simply not being GWB.  Do you seriously believe that if a (non-adulterous) John Edwards had won the election and implemented the same policies, he wouldn't be getting the award?  Is he any less not-George-Bush than Obama?

Spider-Dan, weren't you aware that the only way that a black person can win anything or get any sort of promotion, job, etc is through affirmative action? Blacks are not capable of doing anything on their own. They must rely on things being "handed" to them.

OK.....Give me one thing Obabma has done in a year towards making peace.

NOT TRUE.  But when shit like this happens, it does turn the clock back 10 yrs easy on everything that was accomplished by hard working deserving black people.
Don't worry........I'm sure Oprah will hold his hand through the next 3 yrs.  ::)

(1) Nobel Peace Prize is a joke. I don't see where it affects me in anyway if a organization wants to give an award to someone who doesn't deserve it. This doesn't change a single person's mind on who the president is or what platform he stands on.

(2) Obama didn't ask for the award; he was nominated independently.

(3) The rest of the world still hates us. Obama is not going to change that. Anyone see the video of the people attending the Olympic committee cheering when Chicago was eliminated in the first round of selection? That was Obama's baby. It really carries no weight. This is a fluff piece; not news.

Can't argue with any of the above. This is the commitee that three times refused to give the award to Ghandi. The most they could do was to not present the peace prize the year he was assasinated in recognition of the fact that he should have won it.

But Mr PLO gets one.......Its about Political and social prestige. Nothing else. This has backfired on the Comittee BIGTIME.

So, if I understand you correctly, people who already thought that the Nobel Peace Prize was a joke (because of Arafat and Gore)... will continue to think that it's a joke.

This is what you call "backfiring?"

Not exactly.......maybe they thought that was a fluke. Now nominating Obama 12 days after the election and giving it to him before he has acomplished anything will certify that its an empty award.  It proves they have an agenda. 

Of course they have an agenda.  Their agenda is the promotion of peace.  The entire point of the award has always been and will always serve that agenda.  Obama campaigned towards that and his election signified a change in policy from "Cowboy diplomacy".  The committee gave the award for that.

Is it the same agenda that they had two years ago when they gave the award to Al Gore and people screamed that it was a fraud?

You can only play the "Nobel Peace Prize is now corrupt and meaningless" card so many times.  If you continue to express outrage after every recipient you don't like, you are basically proving the continued legitimacy of the award.

Everyone that bitched and moaned about Al Gore getting this award should simply be saying, "I don't care, that award is meaningless."

I get that and am all for it..........but until its actually acomplished all they gave him an award for is, saying the right things. 

Al Gore has a History of eight yrs as the Vice President of the United States. He brought the issue of Global warming to everyone . You can't have a Hot day without someone commenting on fucking Global warming. Like Gore or not, he acomplished something.

2 weeks after an election Obama is nominated and wins first time out. FOR WHAT? Most here said it was premature and all most can come up with is what he Might do in the future. And what about Arafat?

Thats like taking a serial Murder and giving him an award because he promised not to kill and rape anymore. But they passed on Gandi? No cards here. That award is corupt and meaningless. Had they waited a year or two it would have at least been less obvious.

The Nobel board did not nominate him. Someone else did who is of a high enough respect level for the board to take it seriously. I would like to know who it is, but we will have to wait 50 years until the names of the people who did the nominations are released. If there had not been such a insane amount of vitriol directed at Obama for this, the person may have been willing to come forward, but not now.

Hmmmmmm.  have you wondered why?  People want to see him act. He needs to do more then just make speeches and take plane trips with Oprah. People are losing homes, jobs, retirements, health care.........and he's trying to get some bullshit political game hosted at his old stoping grounds. Last time I checked he represented all 50 states and not just Illnois.

It just hit me! Maybe the award was for bringing the policeman he insulted for doing his Job and that Racist best friend of his together for a beer............ ::)

Defense, the more I read from you, I become even more convinced that you have absolutely no substance to your arguments.  It's one thing to disagree with the stance (or any of many stances), but you continue to skirt the issue to things like Oprah, the Olympics, and now Gates.  When people who are being more reasonable than you challenge your position and its baseless claims, you've got nothing, so you revert back to the same old in-circles bullshit and try to sully the name of the person through their associates.

It's the same shady diversionary tactics that you used in the Roman Polanski thread.

You fool no one.

...which explains why he won the Nobel Peace Prize 7 years after he left elected office?

Wait, so now, getting people to comment on a topic is "accomplishing something"?  In that case, Obama has "accomplished" even more than Gore.

First of all, being nominated 2 weeks in (after almost 2 years of campaigning) doesn't really mean a whole lot, since the decision wasn't made until 9 months later.

But again, by the standard you just applied to Gore, Obama has gotten people talking about international diplomacy and nuclear disarmament and multi-lateralism as a whole.  Congratulations, Obama now deserves this award?

Wasn't Al Gore's award based on the idea that all of his work would lead to substantive climate change legislation passing?  Or was it just because he made a really entertaining movie?

Make up your mind.   It's pretty ridiculous to claim that Gore definitely earned his award but Obama has done nothing to earn his.

Not trying to fool anyone. You just don't like it because Obama is being given every break, every award , every anything to make him look competent, but its hysterically obvious.

Please don't even bring up the Polanski thread. That was nothing but an attack . In fact dave since you asked , I'll say it. I don't think your a very intelligent person. Otherwise you wouldn't have to constantly attack me personally instead of my posistion. I've tried like hell to respect you but maybe this is what you were looking for. A fight so you could ban me.
Can't beat me so get rid of me. Do whatcha got to do.

Yes, he was "given" this award.  Just like he was "given" the election, right?  And he was "given" a victory in the primaries, and he was "given" his Senate seat.

At every single level, no matter what he does, he has still accomplished nothing.  The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act?  Nothing.  Keeping GM and Chrysler from simply closing their doors and throwing their employees out on the street?  He had nothing to do with it.  And if/when health care reform passes, you will continue to say that he has done nothing without skipping a beat.

Since his election, the U.S. has jumped from the 7th most admired nation in the world to the first (http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE59447120091005).  This, too, is entirely coincidence and has nothing to do with anything that Obama has personally done or said.  Especially not his decision to clearly declare that the United States will no longer use "enhanced interrogation" (i.e. torture).  Which was also nothing.

He has made his proposals and is waiting for Congress to shit or get off the pot. As president he is limited in exactely how much he can do. The most he can do is speak to the public and Congress to try and sway them to pass legislature that he favors, or veto the things he does not like. SInce COngress has not really sent him much legislature to sign, we have no idea how he is going to wield his veto powers.
Just what exactly should he have done by now? The GOP is spouting a lot of negativity about the Dems and the president and their ideas, but yet have offered no real solutions of their own. It is obvious that the GOP is going to try and stonewall as much legislature as possible and wait out till the 2010 mid terms in the hope s they can regain seats.
But back on point. All this negativity directed at the president is wrong on so many levels because he did nothing to get nominated for this award nor did he try and sway the voters. I am willing to bet he would have rather lost this contest and seen the Olympics make it to Chicago instead.

Exactly why the Award was Premature. Good chance none of his propsals will even happen.

Actually, I didn't ask.

But anyway, I'm not attacking you personally.   I thought I was very clearly attacking your lack of arguments.  They are baseless smear campaigns on people's associations, rather than anything with actual merit.


You have continually brought this up over the last few months, but I don't know why.  If you are ever banned from this site, it will be the same reason everyone is banned -- for not following forum rules.  ...not for some personal vendetta of mine.

I know this thread was locked earlier. I really wish the same leniency and deletion of attacking posts was used on other threads.

But then it has nothing to do with him. The pundits on the right and their lackeys have been repeatedly saying he is not doing anything, when it is Congress that has to get legislation through. It is obvious the GOP is in bunker mentality untill the next mid term election and will not allow on type of bipartianship at all, and the Dem leadership is weak and cannot bring their party together.
So what more can a president do? He has talked, cajoled, taken his case to the public, etc. There is only so much one man can do to try and move the legislative branch to do their job. Our Congress is a bloated, putrid house of retched excess and inneptitude.
The only reason any of Bush's suggestions got through is the GOP used their majority advantage to ram legislation through as quickly as possible before they lost their advantage, and tha is not how you get productive laws through that will lead to a healthy country.

Once again you are spewing bullshit.   Get your facts straight. 

I think when it comes to "agendas" it's pretty clear who has them and what they are...

Yep, it sure is clear enough.