The recipient for the Nobel peace price...is Barack Obama

phaeded0ut

droooooneeeeeeeee!
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
1,301
Reaction score
125
Location
Virginia
The other issue to discuss since we're about comparisons is that during George W. Bush's presidency for the majority of both tenures, he had a rubber stamp of approval in the House (both Senate and Congress). What grouching appeared from the Democratic Party and Independents tended to be undercut by simply not taking a single position and sticking with that position. Instead there were multiple, smaller positions being presented and this was easier to overcome when things came to a vote or to sway individuals to a different position when it came time for a vote.

President Obama does have a majority (and probably soon to change) within both Houses relative to Party affiliation, but unfortunately, again, it is not a single unified position within the Democratic Party within both Houses.
The Houses are where the real decisions are made that affect people's lives. While there is a modicum of power within the positions of the President and the Vice President it is limited by not being over-arching to what is done within the Senate and Congress.

Another oft forgotten portion that is forgotten is that the Houses move slowly irrespective of what is occurring in the outside (of the DC area) world. Just look at how long Senate has sat upon the issue of continuing Unemployment Benefits for all 50 States, relative to the Congressional Bill that only worked to increase Unemployment Benefits for 37 States. Can't remember which of the two was for a longer duration, and I apologize for not presenting that information. Congress took approximately 3 days of deliberation and Senate has yet to discuss this very serious issue and has had the relevant information for over 2 weeks!

This is not a whine, but an observation mainly for those folks who don't live within the DC Area. Another such observation is that what is available for news is also quite different once you leave the DC Area, too. I also ask that you check up for yourselves on all information presented herein and do not take anything I or others have typed at face value. Please, formulate your own opinions and use multiple, reputable sources.

Back on the topic. What will be interesting is to see how much the Nobel Peace Prize will impact the Obama Administration's current and future decisions. I'd also posit that his opposition will equally be tempered by this award.

Lastly, I'd agree with George Stephanopoulos, Riz Khan and the economic news staff of the BBC (there were two on tonight who had the same thing to say) that the Nobel Award that the Obama Administration really wanted to win (again, I'd say that it was far too soon) or be nominated for was that of Economics.
 

xXxPriestessxXx

One Among the Fence
Contributor
Joined
Jan 21, 2008
Messages
1,678
Reaction score
327
Location
Redneck hell, AL
The other issue to discuss since we're about comparisons is that during George W. Bush's presidency for the majority of both tenures, he had a rubber stamp of approval in the House (both Senate and Congress). What grouching appeared from the Democratic Party and Independents tended to be undercut by simply not taking a single position and sticking with that position. Instead there were multiple, smaller positions being presented and this was easier to overcome when things came to a vote or to sway individuals to a different position when it came time for a vote.

President Obama does have a majority (and probably soon to change) within both Houses relative to Party affiliation, but unfortunately, again, it is not a single unified position within the Democratic Party within both Houses.
The Houses are where the real decisions are made that affect people's lives. While there is a modicum of power within the positions of the President and the Vice President it is limited by not being over-arching to what is done within the Senate and Congress.

Another oft forgotten portion that is forgotten is that the Houses move slowly irrespective of what is occurring in the outside (of the DC area) world. Just look at how long Senate has sat upon the issue of continuing Unemployment Benefits for all 50 States, relative to the Congressional Bill that only worked to increase Unemployment Benefits for 37 States. Can't remember which of the two was for a longer duration, and I apologize for not presenting that information. Congress took approximately 3 days of deliberation and Senate has yet to discuss this very serious issue and has had the relevant information for over 2 weeks!

+1 :agreed: Also I think it is important to note his desire for bipartisanship. Yes it was a very naive desire but I think he really thought that he could make it work. I would also venture to guess that the pressure not to just push something through the legislature like his predecessors did weighs pretty heavy on him. Basically it is a lose/lose situation for him. You try to work with both parties and give them an opportunity to sort their stuff out with little interference; then you aren't getting things done fast enough. If you cram your idea down the pipe and pass it without legitimate discussion; well then you are forcing your morality upon the American people.

Maybe it was too soon. Maybe it was undeserved in some people's eyes but he won it and I would really like to see people letting him enjoy his moment instead of acting like a rabid pack of wolves ready to devour anything that might show progress for the guy. :rant:
 

The Atomic Ass

Redefining Sound
Joined
Nov 16, 2007
Messages
2,988
Reaction score
267
Location
Assland
I can only begin to imagine where you're pulling that from. I studied his legislative voting record pretty extensively when he was running for office. It looked pretty solid to me at the time...

Please understand -- I'm no Obama fanatic. Sure, I voted for the guy and even volunteered for the campaign locally (mostly just to do my part to make sure we wouldn't now be under McCain/Palin, which terrified me to my core), but since he's taken office he's done plenty of things leaving me to :scratch:....

But, it goes without saying that his voting record is from before he took office. What exactly are you referencing here?
While his voting record is indeed solid, it does not (to my eyes at least), show any attempt to follow the Constitution, rather his voting record seems to consistently defy the Constitution. Not that this makes him stand out from his peers any, as practically every representative in the House and Senate vote no less than 80% against the Constitution, Conservatives included.
 

hairychris

Hairy Old Bloke
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
4,223
Reaction score
305
Location
London, UK
My 2 pence (being a Brit):

1) He's not done anything to deserve this yet, unless not obviously being a dick counts.

2) Damn... the right wingers are foaming at the mouth, well, more.

Hey ho. I'm wondering when the first assassination attempt will be. Hm.
 

777timesgod

Officially the unofficial Forum Censor
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
1,219
Reaction score
364
Location
Cyprus, Europe
My 2 pence (being a Brit):
1) He's not done anything to deserve this yet, unless not obviously being a dick counts.
2) Damn... the right wingers are foaming at the mouth, well, more.
Hey ho. I'm wondering when the first assassination attempt will be. Hm.

Hmm well actually obama is holding a pretty neutral stand against the rest of the world. Any time he has acted like a prick (against Russia and Greece), it was due to him wanting to please his allies. A lot of Americans call him weak for this soft-touch way so...
I dont think there will be an assasination attempt, i think the nazis (W.A.R) and the various kkk groups are pleased with the course of obama so far as a lot of people that are angry with him joined their ranks (I know this from researchs that i studied a trimester ago). Also with him holding this position they can accuse the goverment and a black guy at the same time.
Convinient eh?:idea:

Obama doesnt deserve this award but then again neither did Kofi Anan (a known plotist, liar, asshole and U.N pawn 1000 times worst than obama) or some of the other guys that got one. The Nobel prize for peace holds no respect in my eyes for years now. One of the reasons that obama got the award was canceling that Missile Shield thing that Bush was building - i think in Poland dont have the report nearby- against Russias missile positions. The truth is that with the economy plummeting to its doom the usa didnt have the money to complete the plan anymore. Extremely embarrasing but he turned it around and made it look like a peace jesture. Clever PR move i must admit, and i dont even support or like him.:agreed:
 
Last edited:

synrgy

Ya ya ya I am Lorde
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
6,628
Reaction score
1,332
Location
Frederick, MD
Folks, try this on for size: washingtonpost.com

Nutshell; there are two type of Nobel Peace Prize awards, one is aspirational (this is what President Obama has received) and the other one is for achievement.

Quoted for posterity, because I think a lot of people discussing this seem to have missed this all important point.
 

RenegadeDave

Huge nerd
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
1,470
Reaction score
381
Location
Marietta, GA
I listened to NPR on the way home on friday to get their input on this issue and (paraphrased) one of the commentators said

"My initial reaction was why not the Nobel prize for Physics and Economics too, because he's given speeches on them as well" (obviously dripping with sarcasm.)

It cheapens the award in my eyes, and marginalizes those who were nominated for accomplishing something more substantial for furthering the cause of peace other than winning an expensive popularity contest. You should award accomplishments, not aspirations.

It's like propping up failed companies with tax payer money when they have a failed business model.... oh wait... [note: not attacking Obama or D's w/ that comment, that took everyone's stupidity combined to pass]

As for Obama's desire for bipartisanship, his desire is for R's to back his positions, not to reach across the aisle and find common ground. The most "bipartisan" thing that's happened since he's been in office is changing the senate stimulus bill to buy out 3 R votes, and that was it as far as I recall. He pays great lip service to bipartisanship, but I've seen very little to support his supposed position. He's as partisan as anybody in the past 20 years.
 

Adam Of Angels

The GAS Man
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
8,946
Reaction score
811
Location
Mount Pleasant, PA
Does nobody realize how stupid and close minded it is to speak of partisanship or bipartisanship? What happened to having a set of ideals and aspirations that require no party affiliation?
 

Randy

✝✝✝
Super Moderator
Joined
Apr 23, 2006
Messages
24,375
Reaction score
14,017
Location
The Electric City, NY
That'd be nice, but there's hasn't been true "no party affiliation" ideals since somebody came up with the bright idea that you can't win elections unless you can make it about "us versus them". As far as I'm concerned, a politician's time spent in office is nothing more than an extended campaign season.
 

Eric

SS.org Regular
Joined
Mar 30, 2007
Messages
1,692
Reaction score
822
We better start digging out Nobel Peace Prizes for all the Miss America and Miss Universe contestants for the last 50 years... They all had great intentions too... :rolleyes:
 

JBroll

Hard-On For Freedom™
Contributor
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
4,099
Reaction score
531
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
Does nobody realize how stupid and close minded it is to speak of partisanship or bipartisanship? What happened to having a set of ideals and aspirations that require no party affiliation?

Butbutbut... bad ideas become good ideas when lots of people like them!

Jeff
 

777timesgod

Officially the unofficial Forum Censor
Joined
Sep 10, 2007
Messages
1,219
Reaction score
364
Location
Cyprus, Europe
We better start digging out Nobel Peace Prizes for all the Miss America and Miss Universe contestants for the last 50 years... They all had great intentions too... :rolleyes:

You sir are mean! :lol:

Next stop for obaman is the oscar, just wait until somene copy-pastes his face in a movie.:agreed:
 

TruthDose

SRS BIDNIZZ
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
249
Reaction score
74
Location
LONDON, UK
I see this both ways.

It makes me scratch my head, because:

"Nominations for the prize had to be postmarked by February 1 -- only 12 days after Obama took office. The committee sent out its solicitation for nominations last September -- two months before Obama was elected president." (from CNN article)

But then again, this is HARDLY the first time they've issued a 'forward thinking' peace prize. Al Gore, anyone? Mikhail Gorbachev, anyone? The Nobel foundation (or group, or whatever the fuck it is) has repeatedly issued the Peace prize (but not their other awards, for whatever reason) as a political statement rather than a reward for merits already achieved. In that sense, this year's award makes perfect sense.

So yeah, I'm of 2 minds about it. On one hand, I'm thinking "Really? REALLY?!" but then on the other hand I'm thinking "Word up. Maybe this will help him get more support for his diplomatic efforts."


Thinking the same.

"foreign diplomacy"? I wasn't aware that carrying on with two (at the least) wars was diplomatic...
but then I forgot that Henry Kissinger has one of these awards too...:lol:
 

JBroll

Hard-On For Freedom™
Contributor
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
4,099
Reaction score
531
Location
San Antonio, TX, USA
epic-fail-percentage-display-fail.jpg


Jeff
 


Latest posts

Top