This tells me two things....
1-The award is a joke
2-Bush was SO bad a president that Obama can win the award for simply not invading any countries in the first 6 months of his admin
This tells me two things....
1-The award is a joke
2-Bush was SO bad a president that Obama can win the award for simply not invading any countries in the first 6 months of his admin





any decent news source should have reported the reasons why the nobel prize committee chose to award the prize to obama. so, yes, if you watch fox news, you probably walked away with the opinion that the nobel peace prize is a joke.
but yes, bush was THAT bad.




Bush had better things to do than worry about getting Nobel prize. He was a great president. God bless him. He understood the dangers US faced and he chose to do something about it.





Here's one persons take on it:
http://amicusdei.wordpress.com/2009/...l-peace-prize/
Here are the 10 reasons I believe President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize:None of those accomplishments are complete, but the game has changed, and the President led the way. I for one think it’s a good day in America today!
- He has promised to close Guantanamo, although that is taking longer than he thought;
- he is wrapping up our involvement in Iraq;
- he is re-thinking the conventional wisdom on Afghanistan;
- he has engaged the Iranians, North Koreans, Cubans, Chinese, and others;
- he has restarted the Mideast peace process;
- he has reframed our relationship with Russia and their satellite states;
- he has gone to Cairo to address Muslims in their own country, both engaging and cautioning them on the US role in the world;
- he led our nation in a rescue of the world financial markets;
- he has the approval of 77% of Europeans; and,
- he has restored faith that America can be a moral voice, a reasonable voice in a very unreasonable and immoral world.





We had a leader once in Canada, Prime Minister Lester Pearson, who won the peace prize...I guess for similar reasons. Those were heady days.
http://www.unac.org/en/projects/pear...el50/index.asp
UNA-Canada Celebrates the 50th Anniversary of
Lester B. Pearson's Nobel Peace Prize (1957-2007)
It has been fifty years since a remarkable Canadian - Lester Bowles Pearson - was honoured with the 1957 Nobel Peace Prize for his vision, wisdom, perseverance and skillful success in establishing an international police force to resolve the 1956 Suez Crisis. In effect, creating the UN's first designated peacekeeping mission, and the blue print for the UN's now well-recognized role in peacekeeping and, subsequently, peace-building as well.
Throughout his career and lifetime, Pearson was a strong advocate of the UN's role in peacekeeping, and in strong Canadian involvement in UN peacekeeping operations. He firmly believed that Canada had a responsibility, indeed a vital national interest, in active participation in any international activity that would lessen the chances of another world war, and in robust intervention to end ongoing conflict. As such, he was a strong and effective advocate for peaceful resolutions to several major international crises that faced the UN during his tenure as a leading Canadian diplomat - from the Korean War to the Suez Crisis to the Cyprus Crisis. Through his involvement in early UN conflict solving, both Pearson and Canada emerged with distinction.
In addition to his unwavering belief in the role of the UN in fostering international cooperation and peace, Pearson was a strong advocate for the UN's role in the very issues that can directly influence the delicate balance between peace and unrest - economic issues, social issues, development issues, human rights, and environmental degradation. All of these he perceived as direct threats to his vision of a peaceful and cooperative world.
"Threats to global survival, though they are sometimes exaggerated in apocalyptic language which makes our flesh creep, are real. The prophets of doom and gloom may be proven wrong but it is a chilling fact that man can now destroy his world by nuclear explosion or ecological erosion."
"The stark and inescapable fact is that today we cannot defend our society by war since total war is total destruction, and if war is used as an instrument of policy, eventually we will have total war. Therefore, the best defense of peace is not power, but the removal of the causes of war, and international agreements which will put peace on a stronger foundation than the terror of destruction."
- Lester B. Pearson




Guantanamo Bay is a non-issue; people are just making mountain out of mole or something like that.
Obama is taking credit for Iraq withdrawal but the withdrawal plan was already sketched when Bush was in the office. The troop level was increased (the famous serge) to clean up the militant strong holds and that enabled the phased withdrawal that we are seeing now; it already started when Bush was in the office.
Obama's policy on Afghanistan will spell disaster for US. He wants to hand the control of Afghanistan to Taliban and then withdraw from the Afghanistan. That will be a big mistake because future attack can be launched from Afghanistan again. Keep in mind Al Queda was given safe heaven in Afghanistan by Talibans.
Bush was already dealing with Iranians and other questionable characters on the world stage.
The relation between USA and Islamic countries are the same today as they were when Bush was in office.
Obama has achieved nothing so far. But he is definitely a messiah to many people who are expecting some miracles.














I think you are confusing facts with personal opinion. For instance, Guantanamo bay is an issue to me, and all the people who are "making a mountain out of a mole" as you say. So saying it is a non-issue is your opinion, not a fact. Likewise with the rest of your facts.
And I just like saying "have you lost your marbles?". I don't really feel like arguing with you.




I seldom feel like arguing with anyone but sometime what people post is too annoying not to respond. Guantanamo Bay has a prison facility, which is used to hold the armed combatants against United States. What is so big deal?
The point I was trying to make was you were giving credits to Obama for things he has not done. Glaring example was phased withdrawal from Iraq. Bush not Obama laid out the withdrawal plan.





..."Why not try to pray or meditate when you feel irritated? Irritation is a vice." -Cyril. So is hypocrisy.
...and bush failed to complete it under his watch thus Obama inherited the right 'to wrap up our involvement' as was properly stated.
"Peter, did you take Stewie to a strip-club? He smells like sweat and fear." - Lois and Stewie (Family Guy) ... "Through early morning fog I see, Visions of the things to be, The pains that are withheld for me, I realize and I can see..."





Sorry I missed church. I was too busy practicing witchcraft and becoming a lesbian.
"If you're good at something, never do it for free." The Dark Knight
"you conjunctively engender an intoxicating combination of wicked, wholesome & insanely intelligent" - a friend describing me
Blessed Be





(snip)"With the choice of President Obama for the Nobel Peace Prize inspiring such widespread befuddlement, it seems worthwhile to ask, just who are these people who made this choice, and what might their agenda be?
Accompanying news stories on the award were photos of a smiling Thorbjorn Jagland, chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee, admiringly hold a photo of the U.S. president.
This is the man who spoke gushingly about the hope Obama has inspired. Who is Thorbjorn Jagland?
Some stories have reported that he is the former prime minister of Norway, and that he was the leader of the Norwegian Labor Party for 10 years. But he recently completed an even more interesting 10-year tenure.
From 1999 through 2008, Jagland was vice president of Socialist International. What’s that? It’s exactly what the name suggests – an international organization of socialist groups who advocate for far left policies. It also boasts of “consultative status” with the United Nations.
Its statement of principles calls for “the internationalisation of the economy” and all sort of other socialist boilerplate. It also rejects the notion of “armed peace” between superpowers, and wants Europe to play a lead role in basically disarming everyone.
Socialist International has member organizations from most countries, including one from the United States, Democratic Socialists of America, which touts its vision of what it calls an “alternative to capitalism.” Its newsletter, The Activist, is filled with articles that sing the praises of folks like Karl Marx and the late socialist radical Michael Harrington.
Jagland also serves as chairman of the board of the Oslo Center, which pursues Jimmy Carter-like interventions into conflicts and tries to mediate peace talks (in fact, the Oslo Center and the Carter Center work together), and came under criticism when he was selected as Oslo Center chairman because he was still president of the Norwegian parliament at the time, and was accepting money for both gigs.
It is no surprise, given his memberships and proclivities, that Jagland would welcome a weakened United States on the international stage. Of course, for one to be a socialist in the European setting is hardly a shocker. Many left-wing political parties in Europe are open about their socialism. They embrace groups like the Oslo Center and the United Nations because these are forums in which the United States is only one voice among many.
For the European socialist who detests the idea of the United States as the world’s pre-eminent power, giving over international decision-making authority to groups like these furthers the goal of a world in which socialist despots have just as much say in the affairs of the world as free, democratic nations.
This does not necessarily prove that President Obama is a socialist. Indeed, the aforementioned Democratic Socialists of America lament on their web site that he is not one of them, and express no end of their frustration in this regard. (snip)





melonie, thank you for posting that article, i had no idea one of the loudest modern socialists was a norwegian. that makes me like norway even more. those norwegians really have their priorities in place and i always like to read stuff about them because it gives me faith in humanity.








Absolutely nothing. But we all know that presidential promises are nothing but bullchit to get elected. I believe that Obama would like to do everything on this list. A LOT OF PEOPLE would. They didnt get nominated. I have to agree with Jayatee here. Let him get it done before giving him the award, otherwise give it to everyone else that wants the same thing......oh wait they are not the annointed one, the one most high
, the savior of mankind
......seriously.
![]()





It's not bullshit if you try, and are seen to be trying.
The prize was awarded to your President...
"for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"
Nobody expects the man to achieve permanent world peace....or is this the only thing that will do for you to celebrate the honouring of your President with a Nobel Prize?



I just believe it is too early. If he achieves it i would be on board for him to win the next one, even though i am mostly against everything he stands for.
As far as the list i will just take 9 and 10 cause they are so easy and really politics bores me.
9. He is more popular overseas than here.....maybe we should start letting the world choose our president....yeah thats it since its all about them.
10.-----
HB dont get me wrong i havent like any of our presidents in the last couple of decades. But this one is coming after me harder than the rest and i am prior military and the USA comes first ALWAYS in my book.
Yeah i got issues---pray for me![]()





Truthfully I have to say, I don't see him needing to exert much effort. The international diplomacy you're speaking of was happening even before he took office. Europe is in love with this man. He didn't need to work very hard to strengthen anything.
And Im sorry, for me (yes Im aware Im biased and everyone isn't going to feel as strongly as I do about this one issue) where things are completely unimpressive is what he's doing in the middle east.
Sorry I missed church. I was too busy practicing witchcraft and becoming a lesbian.
"If you're good at something, never do it for free." The Dark Knight
"you conjunctively engender an intoxicating combination of wicked, wholesome & insanely intelligent" - a friend describing me
Blessed Be


I too was curious as to why he received the prize. After doing some research I found various quotes from the committee that amount to the same reasons Hockey Bobby gave. They also said that they sometimes felt the need to give awards to people who were in the process of what they felt to be a great great achievement because what they were undertaking was so monumental and a difficult road to walk that they felt the prize would give them the strength and where with all to continue the fight. Remember that Obama was only in office for 12 days when all the nominees were selected. That gave me a new perspective about the whole thing. It made me feel like they had nominated the idea of betting on hope and the future and not Obama the man.





That's just hilarious to me.... but I'm not surprised.
I've laughed before at the same.... the Nobel Peace Prize amounts to a hill-of-beans.
It makes more sense after what Melonie added. Seems a few people are awarding people who fit their agenda.










All the people who don't like America love him because he apologizes for America at every turn and is seen as weak by our enemies because of his appeasement .Look at all the nuclear saber-rattling going on since his inauguration. Used to be those places were afraid of us.
"never trust a big butt and a smile"-- Bell Biv DeVoe
If you're in your twenties and aren't a liberal, you have no heart. If you're in you're forties and aren't a conservative, you have no brain - Winston Churchill
Bookmarks