Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize- Page 2

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 9:48am

And the RNC chimes in:

"The real question Americans are asking is, ‘What has President Obama actually accomplished?’ It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights. One thing is certain – President Obama won’t be receiving any awards from Americans for job creation, fiscal responsibility, or backing up rhetoric with concrete action."

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 9:58am

I hate having to side with the right, but ... I just read that the nominations for the prize closed in early February, meaning Obama would have been in office for two weeks.

[wonkit]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 9:58am

Nelson Mandela spends decades in jail representing the fight to end apartheid. Obama has been in office for nine months. The discrepancy is pretty obvious.

Some of us left-leaning liberals are also going "wtf?" so don't belittle the righties for asking the same question.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:06am

I still hate having to come down on the same side as the right, regardless of whether or not there are left-leaning liberals (isn't that redundant?) who also agree.

[tazber]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:08am

wonkit's right. There's so much more we can belittle the right for other than this.

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:08am

"I just read that the nominations for the prize closed in early February, meaning Obama would have been in office for two weeks."

While questioning whether or not his accomplishments merit the award makes sense, based on my understanding of the process, the nomination is reasonable. I think the nomination is more of a 'watch list' rather than accomplishments before the nomination date. It's very different from Tony/Oscar/etc or retrospective sports awards. Based on his agenda, I think the nomination made sense.

Updated On: 10/9/09 at 10:08 AM

[broadwayjim42]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:17am

But agenda doesn't equal accomplishments.

I consider myself very liberal, but I wasn't on the "hope, change, hope, change" bandwagon last year....I would have much preferred Hillary, so awarding Obama for what he hopes to do rather than what he's accomplished feels hollow.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:21am

I think the nomination is more of a 'watch list' rather than accomplishments before the nomination date.

As for instance which other recipients?

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:22am

"But agenda doesn't equal accomplishments."

I think that's a fair argument for the award, rather than for the nomination.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:25am

I too think it is premature. But I think it is impossible to understate how much his election changed the international dynamics.

This was more an indictment of the Bush years than a recognition of anything Obama has done.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:28am

A friend of mine just rewtweeted this, and it did make me laugh -

Just to f--- with conservatives, Obama should give the Nobel Prize money to ACORN.

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:32am

"As for instance which other recipients?"

Willy Brandt in 1971 and Gorbachev in 1990.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:33am

"Obama's election and foreign policy moves caused a dramatic improvement in the image of the U.S. around the world. A 25-nation poll of 27,000 people released in July by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found double-digit boosts to the percentage of people viewing the U.S. favorably in countries around the world. That indicator had plunged across the world under President George W. Bush."

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:41am

This nebulous description was the only criteria I could find for the award:

"to the person 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."

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:43am

To me this particular win is just going to add fuel to the fire to those who detest President Obama. Who nominated him to begin with? If anything, the selection process and committee need to be looked at.

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:49am

Nominations can be made by past winners, national legislators, and certain university professors. There were over 200 nominations this year, the most ever. The award is chosen by a five person committee designated by the Norwegian legislature.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:51am

"Obama's election and foreign policy moves caused a dramatic improvement in the image of the U.S. around the world. A 25-nation poll of 27,000 people released in July by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found double-digit boosts to the percentage of people viewing the U.S. favorably in countries around the world. That indicator had plunged across the world under President George W. Bush."

Meaning, the Nobel Peace Prize has become The People's Choice Award.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 10:57am

Only if you consider five Norweigians "the People."

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 11:09am

I don't remember much about Willy Brandt, but I remember that Gorbachev got the award for instituting "Glasnost," which seemed a really big deal at the time.

I didn't pay much attention to Glasnost, but I LOVED Gorbachev's wife, Raisa!

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 11:13am

It wasn't until halfway down the first page that I realized this was serious and tazber wasn't linking to Linda Blair projectile vomiting or the Never Gonna Give You Up video.

Huh. This was unexpected.

[Marianne2]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 11:15am

And it's starting... People from the church I used to go to as a kid and teenager are complaining about this, and saying that the devil has control. Nice.

I do agree that it is a bit premature, but these people are ridiculous.

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 11:16am

Both Brandt and Gorbachev were given the award for making significant changes in the ways in which their countries dealt with the world, and both were given the award before their policy changes had borne any concrete results. 'Glasnost' was a big deal, but based on how the rest of the world views us, the diplomatic shift from Bush to Obama is just as significant. Gorbachev was given the award for Glasnost, but when the award was given, it wasn't because it had produced any substantial results.

[Kristie-K2]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 11:17am

Well, I for one think this is Great...Our President needs all the Blessings he can get.

[broadwayjim42]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 11:20am

Someone who called into a local radio show this morning said that Obama was showing all the signs of being the Antichrist....he was joking and said so, but there are people out there who are probably thinking the same thing...and unfortunately aren't joking.

It's becoming any port in a storm with Obama's critics....any little thing they can latch onto and mutate.

[madbrian]

Posted: 10/9/09 at 11:30am

The DNC has come out with a remarkably sharp response to the RNC's comments on the award (which I posted earlier in the thread):

"The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists -- the Taliban and Hamas this morning -- in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize. Republicans cheered when America failed to land the Olympics and now they are criticizing the President of the United States for receiving the Nobel Peace prize -- an award he did not seek but that is nonetheless an honor in which every American can take great pride -- unless of course you are the Republican Party. The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It's no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim."