I find it odd that the nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize are due no later than February 1 each year, yet our president was nominated less than one month into his presidency. It is my opinion that he was nominated because he is not George W. Bush.
Looks like the norwegians were impressed by the charasmatic figure that is our president. It absolutely couldn't have been given on merit, since he was in office only 11 days when nominations were due.
Reminds me alot of the Living Colour song "Cult of Personality", because that is exactly what we are dealing with. I bet Ahmedinajade is impressed.
I agree Dan, Obama didn't ask for this, so you can't hold him responsible for it!
That said...my thought is this...Really? Obama was awarded this for his approach to the world. I respect that he is going about things differently and I hope it works, but that's the point isn't it? I hope it works....we haven't yet seen if anything WILL work or not!
I think that the President is a great speaker and a bright guy, but that doesn't equate to much in the way of RESULTS right now. Hopefully he will do all the things that have now not only been pre-ordained, but pre-rewarded.
"Unlike the other Nobel Prizes, which recognize completed scientific or literary accomplishment, the Nobel Peace Prize may be awarded to persons or organizations that are in the process of resolving a conflict or creating peace."
Here's a link to The Norwegian Nobel Committee's statement:
I don't see Obama doing much to advance peace, though. He's continuing the tradition of Imperial Presidents of the Cold War and Post Cold War era, a very interventionist policy.
"I'm curious why 95 people feel he will never be worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize."
Yes, that is a very troubling observation.
But it is consistent with the most vocal opposition to the Obama administration, in large part not articulating alternative policies, but aiming at the president's personal destruction as its only agenda.
For example, whether the Olympics came to Chicago or not he would have been attacked. Either (a)an embarrasing defeat, or (b1)he's just a Chicago pol bringing home the bacon. Even with people dancing in the streets of Chicago, there would have been loud voices of criticism just the same.
The Nobel Peace Prize is one of the most significant awards in the whole world. President Obama didn't ask for it, he didn't lobby for it, and his initial response suggests that the award will be a motivation for him to do even more for peace. Having a President with that kind of motivation is a good thing.
Completely disingenuous to claim he didn't ask for this. His campaign rhetoric was clearly the talk of a world changer often speaking in terms more global than national and complete with grandiose ideals and promises which are left unfulfilled.
Alfred Nobel the benefactor of the award wrote in his will that the peace prize should go "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses."
Let's take a brief look at the facts (and it has to be brief since he has only been President for 9 months). Troop levels in Afghanistan are actually higher(although slightly) under his administration. He has continued the policy of indeterminate detention without trial for certain terror suspects. Gitmo is still open. His foray into nuclear negotiations has resulted in North Korea and Iran snubbing their noses at the world by launching numerous short and long range missle tests. Isreal stands on the precipice of being forced to rightfully defend itself before it is erased from the map. Other than Chavez, Castro, and Qhaddafi, no other world leader has come out and praised the President like one would expect for a world peace innovator. Even the IOC didn't recognize the accomplishments and reward the great global uniter with a shot at the Olympics, booting us out in the first round. We don't even have peace in our own country as we find ourselves more politically, racially, and socially divided as a nation then we have been in decades.
Take a look back at the quote from Alfred Nobel's will and decide if this prize has been reduced to a shred of what it was originally intended to be.
Howard, when your enemy fly’s planes into your cities and you defend yourself, that is not interventionism. Afghanistan is a war of self defense. Afghanistan is the real war we should have been fighting all along. Instead we got side tracked.
Dennis, I'm an anti-interventionist. That's different from an isolationist.
Charlie, that connection between Afghanistan is questionably past its sell-by date. Bush blew that one and now we're just spinning our wheels there.
But read Obama's foreign policy speeches from the campaign. His level of willingness to get involved in any foreign entanglement would make any neoconservative proud.
So far he's no different than the warmonger George Bush. He's killing brown people just like GW. I wonder what happened to all the anti-war protesters; do they like the illegal wars now? Obama has expanded the Patriot Act that everybody on his "team" complained about, he's still arresting legal medical marijuana farmers in California when he said he'd stop. He's printing money just a fast as GW did, which will only create inflation and enrich the central bankers. He's as arrogant as GW in thinking he he needs 63% of my money for taxes because knows better how to spend my money than I do. He's ignoring the freedom of information act just like GW did, and in many cases hasn't allow the 5 day review period for new bills as he promised, again just like GW. There are many more examples of how Obama is just another GW. Just wonder how many more innocent people have to die in Afghanistan before we consider that war over, won or lost. Obama won the peace prize for rhetoric and charisma - in the one arena where he could actually create peace he continues to wage war.
what troubles me is this: nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize are due by Feb 1st, meaning that President Obama would have been in office for eleven days when he was nominated, what did he do in the first eleven days of his administration to deserve this honor (I understand it could have been something he did prior to being elected), but again the question is--What did he do to deserve the nomination??
Some misconceptions about the Nobel Peace prize. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_nobel_peace_myths
• Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.
More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.
I completely lost interest in who won the peace prize after they gave it to a terrorist. It should never be given to anyone that promotes killing people. There are people out there that promote causes that have never ordered anyone to kill for or die for their cause. They are the only ones who should get a peace prize.
<i> "The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way:
"The capital shall be invested by my executors in safe securities and shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work of an idealistic tendency; <b>and one part to the person who <i>shall have done</i> 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.</b>
"The prizes for physics and chemistry shall be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiological or medical works by the Caroline Institute in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm; and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storting. It is my express wish that in awarding the prizes no consideration whatever shall be given to the nationality of the candidates, so that the most worthy shall receive the prize, whether he be Scandinavian or not."</i>
I think some of you are missing the reason why Obama was chosen to receive this prize. This award is given by people who have a very different perspective that some of us do. Right or wrong, much of the world looked at George Bush as a war monger and a rogue.
Obama defeated Bush in a peaceful election and overturned his foreign policies. Obama has also put an end to the in your face rhetoric of the Bush administration. That's called peace to a good part of the world.
Obama defeated Bush in a peaceful election and overturned his foreign policies
He beat John McCain, and he is dragging his feet on withdrawing from both wars. If I had voted for him, I would be disappointed in his disregard for his campaign pledges.
I didn't miss the point, Charlie...Cult of Personality
Bud,
Yet, you stood quietly by, without a sense of urgency for eight years of the Bush Administration, and you voted for him and you weren't disappointed!
So, in ten months you expect unwinding the years of mismanagement should be accomplished.
I think Saturday Night Live summed it up best. Nothing has changed in 9 months. Gitmo is still open, no decrease in troops in Iraq, owns both houses and still no health care, no gay rights, patriot act power increased, war in Afganistan about to increase. Where's that change I was promised and beleived in? Strong majority in the House and a filibuster proof Senate and nothing has changed. I'm not blaming it all on Obama. The the party isn't helping him either. The Gay Rights Initiative could be sent through in a heartbeat, yet he chooses no to do it. That's why there were more protesters outside than at the luncheon the other day. He signed the order on his first day, yet the only prisoners that have left Gitmo are the "weegers"(don't know how it's really spelled). As Bea said, he may have been nominated in February but the vote came much later. He hasn't stopped any orders to kill so how does he win a Peace Prize?
That whole peaceful election thing would be worthy if it wasn't the usual in America. If we have had violent elections in the past then a peaceful one would be a feather in his cap. But bragging about the norm isn't anything to brag about. Change can be bragged about.
Someone aptly pointed out that if simply talking about intentions for peace and addressing of global issues were enough to merit the Nobel Peace prize then why havn't any of the Miss America contestants won. Every one of them talks about world peace, ending hunger, keeping children safe, obliterating poverty, etc.
Someone also said, on TV yesterday, that if Obama walked into a deli and ordered a BLT, that the Republicans would find something wrong with it. The degree of hate for this man is unbelievable.
They actually cheered when Chicago didn't get the Olympics; they bemoan the Nobel Peace Prize...oh gee, maybe it should have gone to Bush?
Joe Scarborough, who is a Conservative, even commented on the mean spiritness of the Obama haters.
Will this be the M.O. throughout his term (s) of office?
He didn't ask for this award, he was surprised to receive it. He is the first to say he didn't deserve it.
Here is his comment:
"This morning, Michelle and I awoke to some surprising and humbling news. At 6 a.m., we received word that I'd been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.
To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.
But I also know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.
That is why I've said that I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations and all peoples to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. These challenges won't all be met during my presidency, or even my lifetime. But I know these challenges can be met so long as it's recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone.
This award -- and the call to action that comes with it -- does not belong simply to me or my administration; it belongs to all people around the world who have fought for justice and for peace. And most of all, it belongs to you, the men and women of America, who have dared to hope and have worked so hard to make our world a little better.
So today we humbly recommit to the important work that we've begun together. I'm grateful that you've stood with me thus far, and I'm honored to continue our vital work in the years to come.
"Someone also said, on TV yesterday, that if Bush walked into a deli and ordered a BLT, that the Democrats would find something wrong with it. The degree of hate for this man is unbelievable."
Oh, wait, that's not what you wrote.
Just to bang on one of my regular themes: The problem issue isn't Obama or Bush. It's partisanship. Until people stop identifying themselves as Republicans or Democrats and start thinking first about how to make things better, the hating and the stagnation and the silliness will not abate.
reply to Bea
Yet, you stood quietly by, without a sense of urgency for eight years of the Bush Administration, and you voted for him and you weren't disappointed!
That is a huge assumption ma'am! I will affirm I voted for GW Bush in 2000, and I would probably do it again, given what I knew at that time. I didn't, however, vote for him in 2004. Neither did I vote for John Kerry, but I did vote. The Libertarian candidate was a moderate right winger named Mike Bednarik(hope I spelled that right). You see, I didn't agree with Iraq. Just another instance of the US playing police for the rest of the world, and a personal vendetta against Saddam by W for his daddy.
I vote for the ideas, not the people. Voting for the looks and charisma of an individual is something that should be delegated to homecoming or a beauty pagent.
Some would say I wasted my vote, I would say I exercised my great privilege of choice.
Miss Bea, am I to believe you have NEVER voted anything but democrat?? Even Carter in 1980?? Seriously??
Bud, a lesson you seemed to have not learned: If you oppose any portion of the Obama ideology, it is automatically assumed you adored the Bush presidency. Many who continue to bash Bush on a regular basis are shocked that you may disagree with many of the extreme ideas and associations of Mr. Obama. Some presidents are okay to speak out against; others are clearly not. You just gotta love him. If you do not, you are a whole host of adjectives I prefer not to mention again in this forum. Not a fan of Obama = the worst sort of being possible.
_________________________
I remember the speech that then state Senator Obama gave at the Dem. convention. I was moved and saw a great deal of hope for our country in the up and coming young politician. I thought to myself that THIS may be THE guy. Years forward, I carefully examined his prior voting record on issues, his associations and agendas he had been endorsing and decided he was not the candidate I would vote for. He won and I hoped. Hoped that he would prove my vote wrong - and he has yet to do that. Thankfully, I believe in miracles.
Kelly, your post is everything that is right about decision making in elections. You were understandably impressed by Senator Obamas convention speech but instead of voting on words alone, you researched all aspects of the candidate and made an educated decision that the rhetoric did not match reality. Even after he won you rightly held out hope and in an honest assessment, have been left waiting.
I recall that speech at the 2004 dem convention. I thought Obama was at the top of his game that night, and I remember being impressed by how articualte he was. I had no clue that 5 years later, all that hot air would get him where he is.
When I saw the speech, I figured some day Obama would be president -- you know, after 20 or 30 years experience in the Senate, with maybe a break to be governor of Illinois. I was very impressed. Then.
One of the key points I think is -- what happened to the anti-war movement on the left? He mentions Code Pink, but MoveOn.Org has totally capitulated as well. The militarism they opposed in Bush they either now support or are silent on with Obama.
Just another example of the hypocrisy of partisanship.
I went to the website shown throughout that piece www.campaignforlibery.com and got a surprise when I tried to go through my browser.
I'm surprised John Tate, a well known lobbyist, would let a mistake like that go through.
Didn't he do the motorhome tours?
Tim, are you now a card carrying member of the Libery party?
Bea, Howard made a mistake crediting me with that post. My brother posted that, ask him. Just so you know, I'm not a card carrying member for anybody. I said all I needed to say about a pro-war, pro-violence and a person actively ordering killing everyday, winning the peace prize. How can someone who orders the death of people on a daily basis win a peace prize?
Tim, I was addressing you and Terry.
Lorie, I agree, we read it on the left all the time, and MSNBC isn't exactly leaning to the left 24/7.
See ya tonight :)
You're right, that person types as poorly as I do - the web address is mispelled in the video. It should have been campaignforliberty.com.
I'm not sure what you mean about John Tate.
I'm also not sure what you mean the Motor home Tour, I am familiar with the liberty activist from the Motor home Diaries.
I am an adherent of the NAP (non aggression principle) as well as an advocate of property rights.
I'd like to make it clear I'm not an Obama hater, I am a big government hater. I voted for GW in 2000 because of his promise of not policing the world and his non interventionist foreign policy and small government. As we know that was a lie (as evidensted by two illegal wars and a 58% increasing in the size of government). I am ashamed of that vote and the lives that where lost because of it. Since 2000 I haven't voted in a national election because I can no longer vote for anyone who supports murdering innocent people. I believe true nonviolent people will feel the same about the innocent lives lost in the short time of this administration. I am also afraid of the continuation of the massive spending, which by simple math shows can not be paid for.
Bea, I have always been a supporter of our volunteer military. They work their butts off for little pay and sub-standard benefits from the government that orders them to war. I have never been a supporter of war or military bases outside our borders. If we closed all our bases abroad Obama might actually be able to afford his ridiculously expensive healthcare. I have never carried a card for any party no matter which one I belonged to. There is not or ever has been a political party that I could always agree with. I myself have a problem with anyone that can support a parties every position. I be willing to bet that that makes me the same as about 99% of the rest of us. Do you support every position of the Democrats? Do you know where all the anti-war activists went after November of last year? Those protesting the Patriot Act (that has been expanded even further since January) and it's intrusions? At least the Equal Rights initiative was marched on this week. I'm glad that at least one group hasn't sat back and let this President slide. Actions matter, not intention or speaches.
I find it odd that the
I find it odd that the nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize are due no later than February 1 each year, yet our president was nominated less than one month into his presidency. It is my opinion that he was nominated because he is not George W. Bush.
Before the debate begins,
Before the debate begins, anyone who attacks Obama himself for this is on the short end of the long stick.
Take your beef up with the committee that nominated him.
"It is my opinion that he was
"It is my opinion that he was nominated because he is not George W. Bush." I think you are right Kelly, after all George W. was an Ignoble Warmonger.
Looks like the norwegians
Looks like the norwegians were impressed by the charasmatic figure that is our president. It absolutely couldn't have been given on merit, since he was in office only 11 days when nominations were due.
Reminds me alot of the Living Colour song "Cult of Personality", because that is exactly what we are dealing with. I bet Ahmedinajade is impressed.
I agree Dan, Obama didn't ask
I agree Dan, Obama didn't ask for this, so you can't hold him responsible for it!
That said...my thought is this...Really? Obama was awarded this for his approach to the world. I respect that he is going about things differently and I hope it works, but that's the point isn't it? I hope it works....we haven't yet seen if anything WILL work or not!
I think that the President is a great speaker and a bright guy, but that doesn't equate to much in the way of RESULTS right now. Hopefully he will do all the things that have now not only been pre-ordained, but pre-rewarded.
That's a position I sure wouldn't want to be in!
I'm curious why 95 people
I'm curious why 95 people feel he will never be worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize.
"Unlike the other Nobel
"Unlike the other Nobel Prizes, which recognize completed scientific or literary accomplishment, the Nobel Peace Prize may be awarded to persons or organizations that are in the process of resolving a conflict or creating peace."
Here's a link to The Norwegian Nobel Committee's statement:
http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/home/announce-2009/
Today -- more than ever -- I'm proud to be an American!
I just threw up in my mouth.
I just threw up in my mouth. Yasser Arafat won too, oh yeah and they gave it to Gore for the global warming farce.
I don't see Obama doing much
I don't see Obama doing much to advance peace, though. He's continuing the tradition of Imperial Presidents of the Cold War and Post Cold War era, a very interventionist policy.
"I'm curious why 95 people
"I'm curious why 95 people feel he will never be worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize."
Yes, that is a very troubling observation.
But it is consistent with the most vocal opposition to the Obama administration, in large part not articulating alternative policies, but aiming at the president's personal destruction as its only agenda.
For example, whether the Olympics came to Chicago or not he would have been attacked. Either (a)an embarrasing defeat, or (b1)he's just a Chicago pol bringing home the bacon. Even with people dancing in the streets of Chicago, there would have been loud voices of criticism just the same.
The Nobel Peace Prize is one of the most significant awards in the whole world. President Obama didn't ask for it, he didn't lobby for it, and his initial response suggests that the award will be a motivation for him to do even more for peace. Having a President with that kind of motivation is a good thing.
Congratulations, President Obama!
Completely disingenuous to
Completely disingenuous to claim he didn't ask for this. His campaign rhetoric was clearly the talk of a world changer often speaking in terms more global than national and complete with grandiose ideals and promises which are left unfulfilled.
Alfred Nobel the benefactor of the award wrote in his will that the peace prize should go "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses."
Let's take a brief look at the facts (and it has to be brief since he has only been President for 9 months). Troop levels in Afghanistan are actually higher(although slightly) under his administration. He has continued the policy of indeterminate detention without trial for certain terror suspects. Gitmo is still open. His foray into nuclear negotiations has resulted in North Korea and Iran snubbing their noses at the world by launching numerous short and long range missle tests. Isreal stands on the precipice of being forced to rightfully defend itself before it is erased from the map. Other than Chavez, Castro, and Qhaddafi, no other world leader has come out and praised the President like one would expect for a world peace innovator. Even the IOC didn't recognize the accomplishments and reward the great global uniter with a shot at the Olympics, booting us out in the first round. We don't even have peace in our own country as we find ourselves more politically, racially, and socially divided as a nation then we have been in decades.
Take a look back at the quote from Alfred Nobel's will and decide if this prize has been reduced to a shred of what it was originally intended to be.
Obama an inverventionist? As
Obama an inverventionist? As opposed to the last guy whose policy of pre-emption was used to justify an invasion of soveign country?
Howard - do you advocate isolationism?
Howard, when your enemy fly’s
Howard, when your enemy fly’s planes into your cities and you defend yourself, that is not interventionism. Afghanistan is a war of self defense. Afghanistan is the real war we should have been fighting all along. Instead we got side tracked.
Dennis, I'm an
Dennis, I'm an anti-interventionist. That's different from an isolationist.
Charlie, that connection between Afghanistan is questionably past its sell-by date. Bush blew that one and now we're just spinning our wheels there.
But read Obama's foreign policy speeches from the campaign. His level of willingness to get involved in any foreign entanglement would make any neoconservative proud.
So far he's no different than
So far he's no different than the warmonger George Bush. He's killing brown people just like GW. I wonder what happened to all the anti-war protesters; do they like the illegal wars now? Obama has expanded the Patriot Act that everybody on his "team" complained about, he's still arresting legal medical marijuana farmers in California when he said he'd stop. He's printing money just a fast as GW did, which will only create inflation and enrich the central bankers. He's as arrogant as GW in thinking he he needs 63% of my money for taxes because knows better how to spend my money than I do. He's ignoring the freedom of information act just like GW did, and in many cases hasn't allow the 5 day review period for new bills as he promised, again just like GW. There are many more examples of how Obama is just another GW. Just wonder how many more innocent people have to die in Afghanistan before we consider that war over, won or lost. Obama won the peace prize for rhetoric and charisma - in the one arena where he could actually create peace he continues to wage war.
what troubles me is this:
what troubles me is this: nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize are due by Feb 1st, meaning that President Obama would have been in office for eleven days when he was nominated, what did he do in the first eleven days of his administration to deserve this honor (I understand it could have been something he did prior to being elected), but again the question is--What did he do to deserve the nomination??
Some misconceptions about the
Some misconceptions about the Nobel Peace prize. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_nobel_peace_myths
• Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.
More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.
Hmmmm. That makes sense.
Another misconception. Yes,
Another misconception.
Yes, the nominating process started in January but the vote was taken within the last few weeks. Over 400 were nominated.
I completely lost interest in
I completely lost interest in who won the peace prize after they gave it to a terrorist. It should never be given to anyone that promotes killing people. There are people out there that promote causes that have never ordered anyone to kill for or die for their cause. They are the only ones who should get a peace prize.
Good point Bea.
Good point Bea.
From Nobel's will: "The
From Nobel's will:
<i> "The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way:
"The capital shall be invested by my executors in safe securities and shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work of an idealistic tendency; <b>and one part to the person who <i>shall have done</i> 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.</b>
"The prizes for physics and chemistry shall be awarded by the Swedish Academy of Sciences; that for physiological or medical works by the Caroline Institute in Stockholm; that for literature by the Academy in Stockholm; and that for champions of peace by a committee of five persons to be elected by the Norwegian Storting. It is my express wish that in awarding the prizes no consideration whatever shall be given to the nationality of the candidates, so that the most worthy shall receive the prize, whether he be Scandinavian or not."</i>
Tim, are you referring to
Tim, are you referring to Kissinger?
Jim, humor or actual
Jim, humor or actual question?
I think some of you are
I think some of you are missing the reason why Obama was chosen to receive this prize. This award is given by people who have a very different perspective that some of us do. Right or wrong, much of the world looked at George Bush as a war monger and a rogue.
Obama defeated Bush in a peaceful election and overturned his foreign policies. Obama has also put an end to the in your face rhetoric of the Bush administration. That's called peace to a good part of the world.
Obama defeated Bush in a
Obama defeated Bush in a peaceful election and overturned his foreign policies
He beat John McCain, and he is dragging his feet on withdrawing from both wars. If I had voted for him, I would be disappointed in his disregard for his campaign pledges.
I didn't miss the point, Charlie...Cult of Personality
Bud, Yet, you stood quietly
Bud,
Yet, you stood quietly by, without a sense of urgency for eight years of the Bush Administration, and you voted for him and you weren't disappointed!
So, in ten months you expect unwinding the years of mismanagement should be accomplished.
I think Saturday Night Live
I think Saturday Night Live summed it up best. Nothing has changed in 9 months. Gitmo is still open, no decrease in troops in Iraq, owns both houses and still no health care, no gay rights, patriot act power increased, war in Afganistan about to increase. Where's that change I was promised and beleived in? Strong majority in the House and a filibuster proof Senate and nothing has changed. I'm not blaming it all on Obama. The the party isn't helping him either. The Gay Rights Initiative could be sent through in a heartbeat, yet he chooses no to do it. That's why there were more protesters outside than at the luncheon the other day. He signed the order on his first day, yet the only prisoners that have left Gitmo are the "weegers"(don't know how it's really spelled). As Bea said, he may have been nominated in February but the vote came much later. He hasn't stopped any orders to kill so how does he win a Peace Prize?
But, Tim, he says lots of
But, Tim, he says lots of pretty things. Do actions really matter?
Thanks Howard! I needed a
Thanks Howard! I needed a good chuckle today!
That whole peaceful election
That whole peaceful election thing would be worthy if it wasn't the usual in America. If we have had violent elections in the past then a peaceful one would be a feather in his cap. But bragging about the norm isn't anything to brag about. Change can be bragged about.
Someone aptly pointed out
Someone aptly pointed out that if simply talking about intentions for peace and addressing of global issues were enough to merit the Nobel Peace prize then why havn't any of the Miss America contestants won. Every one of them talks about world peace, ending hunger, keeping children safe, obliterating poverty, etc.
Someone also said, on TV
Someone also said, on TV yesterday, that if Obama walked into a deli and ordered a BLT, that the Republicans would find something wrong with it. The degree of hate for this man is unbelievable.
They actually cheered when Chicago didn't get the Olympics; they bemoan the Nobel Peace Prize...oh gee, maybe it should have gone to Bush?
Joe Scarborough, who is a Conservative, even commented on the mean spiritness of the Obama haters.
Will this be the M.O. throughout his term (s) of office?
He didn't ask for this award, he was surprised to receive it. He is the first to say he didn't deserve it.
Here is his comment:
"This morning, Michelle and I awoke to some surprising and humbling news. At 6 a.m., we received word that I'd been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.
To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.
But I also know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.
That is why I've said that I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations and all peoples to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. These challenges won't all be met during my presidency, or even my lifetime. But I know these challenges can be met so long as it's recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone.
This award -- and the call to action that comes with it -- does not belong simply to me or my administration; it belongs to all people around the world who have fought for justice and for peace. And most of all, it belongs to you, the men and women of America, who have dared to hope and have worked so hard to make our world a little better.
So today we humbly recommit to the important work that we've begun together. I'm grateful that you've stood with me thus far, and I'm honored to continue our vital work in the years to come.
Thank you,
President Barack Obama"
"Someone also said, on TV
"Someone also said, on TV yesterday, that if Bush walked into a deli and ordered a BLT, that the Democrats would find something wrong with it. The degree of hate for this man is unbelievable."
Oh, wait, that's not what you wrote.
Just to bang on one of my regular themes: The problem issue isn't Obama or Bush. It's partisanship. Until people stop identifying themselves as Republicans or Democrats and start thinking first about how to make things better, the hating and the stagnation and the silliness will not abate.
reply to Bea Yet, you stood
reply to Bea
Yet, you stood quietly by, without a sense of urgency for eight years of the Bush Administration, and you voted for him and you weren't disappointed!
That is a huge assumption ma'am! I will affirm I voted for GW Bush in 2000, and I would probably do it again, given what I knew at that time. I didn't, however, vote for him in 2004. Neither did I vote for John Kerry, but I did vote. The Libertarian candidate was a moderate right winger named Mike Bednarik(hope I spelled that right). You see, I didn't agree with Iraq. Just another instance of the US playing police for the rest of the world, and a personal vendetta against Saddam by W for his daddy.
I vote for the ideas, not the people. Voting for the looks and charisma of an individual is something that should be delegated to homecoming or a beauty pagent.
Some would say I wasted my vote, I would say I exercised my great privilege of choice.
Miss Bea, am I to believe you have NEVER voted anything but democrat?? Even Carter in 1980?? Seriously??
Bud, a lesson you seemed to
Bud, a lesson you seemed to have not learned: If you oppose any portion of the Obama ideology, it is automatically assumed you adored the Bush presidency. Many who continue to bash Bush on a regular basis are shocked that you may disagree with many of the extreme ideas and associations of Mr. Obama. Some presidents are okay to speak out against; others are clearly not. You just gotta love him. If you do not, you are a whole host of adjectives I prefer not to mention again in this forum. Not a fan of Obama = the worst sort of being possible.
_________________________
I remember the speech that then state Senator Obama gave at the Dem. convention. I was moved and saw a great deal of hope for our country in the up and coming young politician. I thought to myself that THIS may be THE guy. Years forward, I carefully examined his prior voting record on issues, his associations and agendas he had been endorsing and decided he was not the candidate I would vote for. He won and I hoped. Hoped that he would prove my vote wrong - and he has yet to do that. Thankfully, I believe in miracles.
Kelly, your post is
Kelly, your post is everything that is right about decision making in elections. You were understandably impressed by Senator Obamas convention speech but instead of voting on words alone, you researched all aspects of the candidate and made an educated decision that the rhetoric did not match reality. Even after he won you rightly held out hope and in an honest assessment, have been left waiting.
I recall that speech at the
I recall that speech at the 2004 dem convention. I thought Obama was at the top of his game that night, and I remember being impressed by how articualte he was. I had no clue that 5 years later, all that hot air would get him where he is.
When I saw the speech, I
When I saw the speech, I figured some day Obama would be president -- you know, after 20 or 30 years experience in the Senate, with maybe a break to be governor of Illinois. I was very impressed. Then.
Comments from one of the few
Comments from one of the few truly principled politicians today.
[video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbcDk-bNoc8#]
Good post, Tim. One of the
Good post, Tim.
One of the key points I think is -- what happened to the anti-war movement on the left? He mentions Code Pink, but MoveOn.Org has totally capitulated as well. The militarism they opposed in Bush they either now support or are silent on with Obama.
Just another example of the hypocrisy of partisanship.
I went to the website shown
I went to the website shown throughout that piece www.campaignforlibery.com and got a surprise when I tried to go through my browser.
I'm surprised John Tate, a well known lobbyist, would let a mistake like that go through.
Didn't he do the motorhome tours?
Tim, are you now a card carrying member of the Libery party?
You're not reading what I am.
You're not reading what I am.
Believe me there is plenty of criticism from the left.
From MoveOn -- http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090706/hayden
From DU yesterday -- a post actually making a list of critiques. Some a bit silly.
http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_…
From DailyKos -- http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/9/791705/-Reactions-from-the-left…
Fireddoglake's Jane Hamsher -- http://firedoglake.com/2009/06/05/rahms-whipping-on-the-afghanistan-war…
I could put up hundreds of links, but want to be outside enjoying the sunshine.
I read left leaning criticism of Obama every day. There are plenty of opinions.
Bea, Howard made a mistake
Bea, Howard made a mistake crediting me with that post. My brother posted that, ask him. Just so you know, I'm not a card carrying member for anybody. I said all I needed to say about a pro-war, pro-violence and a person actively ordering killing everyday, winning the peace prize. How can someone who orders the death of people on a daily basis win a peace prize?
Tim, I was addressing you and
Tim, I was addressing you and Terry.
Lorie, I agree, we read it on the left all the time, and MSNBC isn't exactly leaning to the left 24/7.
See ya tonight :)
Bea You're right, that
Bea
You're right, that person types as poorly as I do - the web address is mispelled in the video. It should have been campaignforliberty.com.
I'm not sure what you mean about John Tate.
I'm also not sure what you mean the Motor home Tour, I am familiar with the liberty activist from the Motor home Diaries.
I am an adherent of the NAP (non aggression principle) as well as an advocate of property rights.
I'd like to make it clear I'm not an Obama hater, I am a big government hater. I voted for GW in 2000 because of his promise of not policing the world and his non interventionist foreign policy and small government. As we know that was a lie (as evidensted by two illegal wars and a 58% increasing in the size of government). I am ashamed of that vote and the lives that where lost because of it. Since 2000 I haven't voted in a national election because I can no longer vote for anyone who supports murdering innocent people. I believe true nonviolent people will feel the same about the innocent lives lost in the short time of this administration. I am also afraid of the continuation of the massive spending, which by simple math shows can not be paid for.
Bea, I have always been a
Bea, I have always been a supporter of our volunteer military. They work their butts off for little pay and sub-standard benefits from the government that orders them to war. I have never been a supporter of war or military bases outside our borders. If we closed all our bases abroad Obama might actually be able to afford his ridiculously expensive healthcare. I have never carried a card for any party no matter which one I belonged to. There is not or ever has been a political party that I could always agree with. I myself have a problem with anyone that can support a parties every position. I be willing to bet that that makes me the same as about 99% of the rest of us. Do you support every position of the Democrats? Do you know where all the anti-war activists went after November of last year? Those protesting the Patriot Act (that has been expanded even further since January) and it's intrusions? At least the Equal Rights initiative was marched on this week. I'm glad that at least one group hasn't sat back and let this President slide. Actions matter, not intention or speaches.