So. Unless you've been living in a cave, I'm sure you've heard that President Barack Obama has won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize (surprise!)
The blogosphere was immediately abuzz with ... confusion. What has Obama done to deserve to win? Isn't it a bit premature? Are Norwegians just Obamafans? And does this mean that the Olympics is ditching Rio to come to Chicago? You'd expect this kind of reaction from his political opponents, but it seems that *everyone* was scratching their heads.
I know, I know - no politics on Neatorama. But I'm genuinely puzzled. What do you guys think is going on?
[poll=13]And yes, I made that Super Obamario Bros. photoshop
I have the impression that not many actually read the explanation of the committee, as to why they decided like this. I'm more or less neutral to the decision, but regret that once more discussions are led without proper knowledge of the background.
That said, I'm slightly against him having won even though he has visionary ideas. Willy Brandt had more clear-cut plans, not just rhetoric, and more just needed the support to get the plans moving. I think I'm going to stay out of the discussion from here on out regarding this, but that's just my take on it.
"Here's a prize to help you win reelection because the Neocons, Right Winger personalities and those who call themselves Republicans are still going stark raving mad and they scare us."
I'd think having our president win The Nobel Peace Prize would be a good thing but all I see is another thing for people to fight about. I also thought it would be a good thing for Chicago, which as far as I know is in America, to be awarded the Olympic Games but people were celebrating losing out on that.
Also let me briefly express my disapproval of political posts on Neatorama... I disapprove of political posts on Neatorama.
On the other hand, who should have been chosen? It's hard to come up with someone...
And- maybe he deserves it simply because his presence is so much less aggravating. In other words, he's a peaceful simply because he's not such an aggressor.
I was dumbfounded by the decision, but the more I read about it from European sources and people who follow such prizes, the more sense it makes.
I don't know whether having won the Nobel will make Obama's work any easier though - given the cynicism and disbelief that his award has generated, even from friendly camps.
@dutchboy: obviously the poll isn't scientific. It's supposed to let you vote only once, though I'm sure there are ways to skew it and let you vote many times (but who'd take the time to do that and what for?) I think it's been pretty representative of what I've seen in real life.
And here's a great little post from antiwar.com about it.
http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2009/10/09/nobel-peace-legacy-was-meant-to-be-radical/
But Alfred Nobel’s will, where he laid out the requirements for winning the Peace Prize, were anything but moderate. Nobel said the prize should go to:
…the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work of an idealistic tendency; and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity among nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.
Obama has done absolutely none of this. But he has ramped up violence in Pakistan, fomenting a civil war there. And he's thinking about a SURGE! in Afghanistan.
I mean this is like Nixon getting the prize. Seriously. Oh wait. Nixon actually promised to end the war started by his predecessors. Obama never did. O, and Kissinger won the prize while Vietnam was being carpet bombed.
You can't take the Nobel Peace Prize seriously.
How has Obama increased violence in Pakistan? Seriously, just about all my relatives live there and it would really suck if my president caused my aunts/uncles/cousins/grandmother's deaths. I just spent a month there and yes, there is an anti-America attitude there, but not very anti-Obama.
Anyway, (7% of you are now annoyed at my word usage) I don't think that Obama should have won the prize. Maybe later, when he's done something useful. The committee could have waited till next year to nominate him, couldn't they?
And the stated reason for this award is not Obama's accomplishments to date, but an acknowledgment of a sweeping and radical change in policy for the worlds most powerfully armed nation.
The poll is misleading. This isn't a reward for Obama -- it's a hue responsibility for him to live up to. Does he "deserve" to be saddled with the burden of making his time in office worthy of being compared to Nelson Mandela or Martin Luther King? No, I don't think anyone deserves that. But at this point in our history, it's what he must take on. Sucks for him. But I hope he makes it.
Its very undemocratic when you cant disagree with the president or think that maybe there were more deserving people for a Nobel Prize.
It is a political signal to like Dutchboy says- give the president "of one of the most militarized counties in the world that has troops in 135 countries and is actively fighting two large wars" a Nobel PEACE prize... To me that stays completely nuts.
Sun Tzu (544-496 BC) said it- Wars are fought where the wisdom and words of diplomacy have failed.
Obama and his cabinet fail until they succeed in getting their troops out of those 135 countries back to their loved ones and until they stop fighting in at least those 2 wars... In my mind, only THEN he deserves that Prize...
But hey that's only my myopia...
The sad part is, many of those that have gotten the NPP in the past claims that this incident doesn't make them feel as special as they used to for winning said award. And I can't blame them. Those that think that Obama didn't deserve this aren't just the usual anti-Obama people. Those that voted for him, and generally agree with what he says believes it was pretty hokey.
Even Obama had his doubts..
http://www.taylormarsh.com/2009/10/09/obama-on-nobel-award-i-didnt-deserve-it/
What is funny is, it's probably the first time those that think Obama can do no wrong, is in disagreement with those that think that this call was not deserved, even when Obama agrees with them.
I think some heads probably exploded over that one.
I applaud Obama for being generally humble about the whole incident by hinting around that he probably didn't deserve it.
Lets hope that he lives up to the hype.
I've always said that a lot of Europe are jealous because they couldn't vote for Obama. Those in charge of the NPP has also been known to be negative against America's conservatives. I mean Reagan should have won it for his role in bringing down the wall. But who did they give it to instead?
Come on..
Being pretentiously condescending to people doesn't make you suddenly right. I know exactly why the committee voted for him. I knew BEFORE I came to the conclusion that it's full of it.
I guess according to you, Obama is "myopic" as well. As he too made comments about not deserving it.
This is no way is an attack against Obama.
I don't know why those that staunchly support him are being so knee-jerkish about anyone that believes he didn't deserve it yet. Which does include Obama himself.
I hope you aren't insinuating that the owner of said page is manipulating the numbers.
Is it that hard to believe that that many people are using their noodle?
Again, even Obama is questioning it.
If Obama had any class, he would have said "No thanks, maybe next year".
What's next? I hear they're going to give Obama a Lifetime Achievement award at the Oscars, for all the home movies he's starred in.
Interesting that we favor him not deserving the prize.
Also I posted above "“Can these poll numbers be trusted?” and it was meant as a joke.
-Bob
"Interesting that we favor him not deserving the prize."
What is that interesting? I would be freaked out had the vote been any other way.
Original:
http://content.ytmnd.com/content/f/0/c/f0cb50ff85656349f3b4978af59be20d.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_H44IkuSV9qQ/RkJynUFCIVI/AAAAAAAABEg/2TpAhJsX2NQ/s200/another+castle.jpg