Barack Obama 2009 Nobel Peace Prize Winner... wait, wtf?

Cort said:
THIS JUST IN, EVERY REPUBLICAN BELIEVES THE SAME THING.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they all believe the same thing, but as a party they enabled Bush policies and offered largely unwavering support for his agenda. Even the so-called "maverick" John McCain voted witi his party far more often than the voted against it. The last election and the international reaction to it underscores what I said: the GOP as a whole has a very tarnished image right now (justified or not) for being swaggering cowboy neocons with a gun in one hand and a Bible in the other, who started wars we didn't need and (as a bonus) set our economy on fire.
 
Last edited:
Halifirien said:
I didn't say they all believe the same thing, but as a party they enabled Bush policies and offered largely unwavering support for his agenda. The last election and the international reaction to it underscores what I said: the GOP as a whole has a very tarnished image right now.
Click to expand...

I almost pity the GOP at this point. ... but now the Nobel Peace Prize going to Obama can be seen as one more "Fuck you" to their view of the world and yet another repudiation of the Bush Doctrine.
Click to expand...

But they all have the same world view, eh?
 
I didn't blame everything on Bush. I said he compounded existing problems (and I said it pretty clearly) and caused more than his share of his own. I never said the Clinton presidency was without fault. I would define someone's intelligence partially on reading comprehension (that would be a zinger, fyi).

And Cort - my eyes are wide open. W wasn't the only problem, but he's a good sized portion of it. And if you can't see that my friend, then you are blind.
 
Last edited:
Clinton could have prevented Sept 11. This is a proved fact. Before you scream thriving, look at how much per house hold was being paid in taxes for that. Cut government spending and not give a tax reduction. Bush lowered taxes and had two wars. Oddily enough we seem to have won Iraq. Mind you I have the HIGHEST RESPECT for the iraqi people. They are a very strong people. As will afgahnistan, their people are very strong. They just need the chance and hand to get there.

Airplanes being crashed into buildings to kill americans resulted in two wars. Yes Saddam did support terrorism. On CNN it reported his paying suicide bomber families in the confrontation with isreal and Palistine. Do you think Al Gore who caused mass STARVATION in latin america with his corn to ethenol would have done better? FYI it is cheaper and cleaner to make it from sugar cane. Beyond stupid politics. The quote of the 1984 award....the man had already been doing a lot of work. Obama's award was based on nothing more than being popular.

As for people expecting so much in under one year? LOOK AT THE MAN! BANK BAIL OUT was at most 2 weeks. Less really since he was on the campaign and said oh this is a multitasking. MInd you there was no safe gaurds build into it. You have 2 weeks to make and pass a medical reform. You have 1 week to pass a stimulus package. It is his actions that has people expecting fast results. Everything he has done to date has been done with speed and no real effort. Hell he has not even written a health care reform bill. He told the Dems to make one. This is based more on his actions to date. Yes he could have refused the award. "I am honored, but I do not deserve. PLease give it to someone else."
 
Zyndara said:
And Cort - my eyes are wide open. W wasn't the only problem, but he's a good sized portion of it. And if you can't see that my friend, then you are blind.
Click to expand...

Tip of the iceberg, so your eyes are indeed closed.
 
Hexx said:
In the sense that, the Nobel Peace Prize is given out regardless of political leanings.
Click to expand...

Recent American Noble Peace Prize winners:

Barack Obama
Al Gore
Jimmy Carter

Yeah, I see absolutely no political leaning there. 100% unbiased.

I swear some of need a bucket of ice cold water dumped on your heads so you can wake up to reality.
 
Last edited:
Tomasello said:
Recent American Noble Peace Prize winners:

Barack Obama
Al Gore
Jimmy Carter

Yeah, I see absolutely no political leaning there. 100% unbiased.

I swear some of need a bucket of ice cold water dumped on your heads so you can wake up to reality.
Click to expand...

Others:

Muhummad Yunas, and Grameen Bank of Bangladesh
Mohammed ElBarahei and the IAEA
Wangari Muta Maathai
Shirin Ebadai
Kofi Annan

cold water incoming.
 
Zyndara said:
I didn't blame everything on Bush. I said he compounded existing problems (and I said it pretty clearly) and caused more than his share of his own. I never said the Clinton presidency was without fault. I would define someone's intelligence partially on reading comprehension (that would be a zinger, fyi).
Click to expand...

Oh? I what I read was this:

Zyndara said:
But please tell me you're not so ignorant to think that W. didn't compound any situation he walked into. He was inept. It wasn't a case of "oh poor republicans getting dumped on by the democrats." It was a case of a poor fucking president with neither the intelligence nor the fortitude to think things through past his own presidency. He fucked up over and over and gleefully got more money from congress to dig that hole a little deeper.
Click to expand...

Which leads to the BIG whammy.

Zyndara said:
So please. Don't blame that bullshit on a president who hasn't had 8 years to mess everything up.
Click to expand...

Way to go and get personal with the zinger, nice job. I guess there is no reason to add insult to injury though, so my work here is done.
 
All I will say on the political talk in this thread is that history judges more accurately than the media. Good president, bad president, lame duck, all are decided in the long run when their actions have had time to run course and truly show what has changed, and what wasn't their doing in the first place.

I'm of the opinion that Obama did a gracious thing in how he accepted the award. I disagree with him accepting it, but it's not exactly something you can turn down. I have hope that he will be a great president, and perhaps he will fix some things that are wrong with this country. The problems he must face are those of a bloated government that is coddling the nation's elite, while the middle class and poor are forced to fight for their share of that bailout fad. How he will handle it in the coming months and years is up to him.

Fun fact: If the dollar amount of the total bailouts this year alone were to be divided up amongst US citizens evenly, we would all take home approximately 28,000 dollars each. Or to put it in relative terms, they could give every man woman and child in America our very own fully loaded hybrid car.
 
Last edited:
What's really goin' to make or break it is how he uses the prize money. Considering his modesty towards this award and his recent spats with racial concerns, which he amicably called B.S. on, I look for him to do something other than pocket this money.
 
Zyndara said:
Not so much but keep telling yourself that.
Click to expand...
You're gonna need one of these to get through this post,
seeing-eye-dog.jpg



I didn't know Bush was involved in :

The Federal Reserve Act.
Fiat Money/Federal Reserve Notes.
Ending the gold standard.
The beginning of our Imperialism.
The Monetary Control Act.
The Emergency Banking Act.
The fact that we have troops in 140+ countries.
Keynesian Economics
Community Reinvestment Act.

So on an so forth.

So, did that seeing eye dog help? :cool:
 
Taurothar said:
All I will say on the political talk in this thread is that history judges more accurately than the media. Good president, bad president, lame duck, all are decided in the long run when their actions have had time to run course and truly show what has changed, and what wasn't their doing in the first place.
Click to expand...

I agree yet strongly disagree with this statement because even the history books are largely biased. For example according to the history books Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Teddy Roosevelt, and Lincoln are all shown to be great presidents and almost nothing is said about the fact that all of them exceeded what they should have been allowed to do as president and also the books make it seem as if there was no opposition to their policies.

"The history of a nation is, unfortunately, too easily written as the history of its dominant class." - Kwame Nkrumah
Click to expand...

The last sitting president to be awarded the nobel prize was Wilson if my memory serves me right and that was because of his work in creating the league of nations. While i don't deny that in the future Obama may do something warranting the award at this time he has not done a thing to deserve it. Obama was put in a very tough spot here... if he rejects the award he will offend many people and if he accepts the award... he will offend many people and in this case he has done nothing wrong. The Nobel prize committee on the other hand are fucking retarded.

:2cents:

To me this award was mostly... "You are not GWB... Congrats!"
 
Last edited:
Tomasello said:
Wow, they're Republicans? I guess I was wrong.
Click to expand...

It wasn't the point of whether or not they were Republicans or Democrats; more that they aren't specifically Democrats. Jeez, Tom, even you have to agree that *not* everything is black and white, right?

Also, if you end up saying that "you can't win the Nobel Prize as an American and not be a Democrat", I'll just say you're reaching a little too far.
 
Alan Grayson said:
They understand that if Barack Obama were somehow able to cure hunger in the world, the Republicans would blame him for overpopulation. They understand that if Barack Obama could somehow bring about world peace, they'd blame him for destroying the defense industry. In fact, they understand that if Barack Obama has a BLT sandwich tomorrow for lunch, they will try to ban bacon!
Click to expand...

this coming from this guy...

Yea he is not partisan at all
 
Tristam Green said:
Also, if you end up saying that "you can't win the Nobel Prize as an American and not be a Democrat", I'll just say you're reaching a little too far.
Click to expand...


You can't win the Nobel Prize as an American and not be a Radical Left-Wing Socialist like the aforementioned American winners. I doubt Clinton would ever win he, or she for that matter, are not extremist enough.
 
Last edited:
 
Tomasello said:
You can't win the Nobel Prize as an American and not be a Radical Left-Wing Socialist like the aforementioned American winners. I doubt Clinton would ever win he, or she for that matter, are not extremist enough.
Click to expand...

Perhaps because Radical Right-Wing policies are often counter-productive to peace?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top