Nobel Peace Prize to Obama!

123 posts / 0 new
Last post
Caissa

Post 35 and 40 unionist.

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

Caissa wrote:

Okay, so what would people like Obama to do to be worthy of this award?

Grant the International Court of Justice jurisdiction to both investigate and prosecute U.S. officals for violations of treaties and conventions banning torture. That would be damn impressive.

Caissa

I was going to answer post 50 with YHWH, Unionist but I thought that was too cheeky.

Thanks for adding to the list bagkitty.

Chester Drawers

Wow 12 days in office and on the close of nominations Feb. 1, 2009 he qualifies for this.  Imagine what he must have accomplished since Feb. 1st.  The Vatican must be gearing up for a fasttracking Saint-hood.  The pigs are starting to sleep on beds without sheets.

Sad, truely sad.

Unionist

Caissa wrote:

Post 35 and 40 unionist.

Ah, thanks Caissa, I had those on ignore I must have missed those words of wisdom no comment.

I think Obama's Peace Prize is appropriate.

If you read the [url=Nobel">http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html][colo... Committee's announcement[/url], it was awarded primarily for things that he pledges to accomplish.

Just like the presidency, in other words.

 

remind remind's picture

Joey Ramone wrote:
Why the shock and outrage?  War criminal Henry Kissinger won this award... Did anyone still think that this award means anything?

Exactly, was just going to mention war criminal Kissenger myself, as that was when I realized it for the BS endeavour it was.

 

Unionist

Chester Drawers wrote:

Wow 12 days in office and on the close of nominations Feb. 1, 2009 he qualifies for this.  Imagine what he must have accomplished since Feb. 1st. 

"Imagine" is an excellent choice of words.

 

Star Spangled C...

Unionist wrote:

I think Obama's Peace Prize is appropriate.

If you read the [url=Nobel">http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html][colo... Committee's announcement[/url], it was awarded primarily for things that he pledges to accomplish.

So if I pledge to cure cancer and AIDS, should I expect a Nobel Prize in medicine?

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Unionist wrote:

Michelle wrote:

Sky Captain, please try to stay civil.  I don't think your attacks on other posters here is going to do anything other than start flame wars.  Thanks.

Who's Sky Captain?

Are we going to have to go through this every time somebody uses that stupid "ignore" script? 

Unionist

M. Spector wrote:

Unionist wrote:

Michelle wrote:

Sky Captain, please try to stay civil.  I don't think your attacks on other posters here is going to do anything other than start flame wars.  Thanks.

Who's Sky Captain?

Are we going to have to go through this every time somebody uses that stupid "ignore" script? 

Actually, I'm only doing it 1% of the time. So give thanks. Speaking of which: Happy Thanksgiving, M. Spector!

 

Unionist

Star Spangled Canadian wrote:

Unionist wrote:

I think Obama's Peace Prize is appropriate.

If you read the [url=Nobel">http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/press.html][colo... Committee's announcement[/url], it was awarded primarily for things that he pledges to accomplish.

So if I pledge to cure cancer and AIDS, should I expect a Nobel Prize in medicine?

No need to go that far - all you need is to pledge to reform health care!

Plus, I thought Obama's charisma would've clinched the Chemistry award.

 

George Victor

I think Michael Moore's posting is fair:

 

"Congratulations President Obama on the Nobel Peace Prize -- Now Please Earn it!

 

Friday, October 9th, 2009

"Dear President Obama,

How outstanding that you've been recognized today as a man of peace. Your swift, early pronouncements -- you will close Guantanamo, you will bring the troops home from Iraq, you want a nuclear weapon-free world, you admitted to the Iranians that we overthrew their democratically-elected president in 1953, you made that great speech to the Islamic world in Cairo, you've eliminated that useless term "The War on Terror," you've put an end to torture -- these have all made us and the rest of the world feel a bit more safe considering the disaster of the past eight years. In eight months you have done an about face and taken this country in a much more sane direction.

"But...

 

"The irony that you have been awarded this prize on the 2nd day of the ninth year of our War in Afghanistan is not lost on anyone. You are truly at a crossroads now. You can listen to the generals and expand the war (only to result in a far-too-predictable defeat) or you can declare Bush's Wars over, and bring all the troops home. Now. That's what a true man of peace would do.

 

"There is nothing wrong with you doing what the last guy failed to do -- capture the man or men responsible for the mass murder of 3,000 people on 9/11. BUT YOU CANNOT DO THAT WITH TANKS AND TROOPS. You are pursuing a criminal, not an army. You do not use a stick of dynamite to get rid of a mouse.

 

remind remind's picture

So...Obama really isn't too pleased with receiving it.

Think this is actually been used for a socio-political division.

 

1% is too much.

mahmud

Ghislaine wrote:

Ok, What?!?!? I seriously thought this was a complete joke and didn't click on it, but I just the story on cbc. Wow. Even if he had not been so intent on changing nothing from the previous administration...he has been there nine months and accomplished nothing! Just goes to show that the Nobel Peace Prize is still a complete and utter joke.

Complete and utter joke, indeed. Well said.

But perhaps it is a new Nobel Prize in a discipline called "Mere Expression of Political Intent". But again every politician in the US and Canada should claim his/hers.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Obama will travel to Oslo to collect the Peace Prize if he's not too busy with the two wars he's fighting.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Quote:
Remember how, during the Bush years, the GOP would disgustingly try to equate liberals with Terrorists by pointing out that they happened to have the same view on a particular matter (The Left opposes the war in Iraq, just like Al Qaeda does! or bin Laden's statement on Israel sounds just like Michael Moore! ).  It looks like the Democratic Party has learned and adopted that tactic perfectly ("'The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists - the Taliban and Hamas this morning - in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize,' DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse told POLITICO"; Republicans are "put[ting] politics above patriotism," he added). 

Apparently, according to the DNC, if you criticize this Prize, then you're an unpatriotic America-hater -- just like the Terrorists, because they're also criticizing the award.  Karl Rove should be proud.  Maybe the DNC should also send out Joe Lieberman's 2005 warning that "in matters of war we undermine Presidential credibility at our nation's peril."  Hamas also thinks that Israeli settlements should be frozen -- a position Obama shares.  So, by the DNC's Rovian reasoning, doesn't this mean that Obama "has thrown in his lost with the terrorists"?

[url=http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/10/09-7]Glenn Greenwald[/url]

Pogo Pogo's picture

Nobody can pledge world peace and get the prize.  Obama already took that one.  You have to come up with a new pledge to have a chance.  It also helps to vet your pledge with Oprah.

Fidel

Was it a pre-emptive manouver by the Nobel Prize committee? Hawks pulling Obama's strings won't like it one bit, and especially if they've decided months ago to bomb Iran, or escalate the warfiteering in Afghanistan. Perhaps a covert operation/pretext for war will be put on hold, or at least for the time being. 

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Alexander Cockburn wrote:

I suppose we should not begrudge Barack Obama his Nobel Peace Prize, though it represents a radical break in tradition, since he's only had slightly less than nine months to discharge his imperial duties, most concretely through the agency of high explosives in the Hindu Kush whereas laureates like Henry Kissinger had been diligently slaughtering people across the world for years.

Woodrow Wilson, the liberal imperialist with whom Obama bears some marked affinities, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1919, having brought America into the carnage of the First World War. The peace laureate president who preceded him was Teddy Roosevelt, who got the prize in 1906 as reward for sponsorship of the Spanish-American war and ardent bloodletting in the Philippines. Senator George Hoar's famous denunciation of Roosevelt on the floor of the US Senate in May of 1902 was probably what alerted the Nobel Committee to Roosevelt's eligibility for the Peace Prize:

Quote:
"You have sacrificed nearly ten thousand American lives - the flower of our youth. You have devastated provinces. You have slain uncounted thousands of the people you desire to benefit. You have established reconcentration camps. Your generals are coming home from their harvest bringing sheaves with them, in the shape of other thousands of sick and wounded and insane to drag out miserable lives, wrecked in body and mind. You make the American flag in the eyes of a numerous people the emblem of sacrilege in Christian churches, and of the burning of human dwellings, and of the horror of the water torture."

TR was given the peace prize not long after he'd displayed his boundless compassion for humanity by sponsoring an exhibition of Filipino "monkey men" in the 1904 St Louis World Fair as "the missing link" in the evolution of Man from ape to Aryan, and thus in sore need of assimilation, forcible if necessary, to the American way. On receipt of the prize, Roosevelt promptly dispatched the Great White Fleet (sixteen U.S. Navy ships of the Atlantic Fleet including four battleships) on a worldwide tour to display Uncle Sam's imperial credentials, anticipating by scarce more than a century, Obama's award, as he prepares to impose Pax Americana on the Hindukush and portions of Pakistan.

People marvel at the idiocy of these Nobel awards, but there's method in the madness, since in the end they train people to accept without demur or protest absurdity as part and parcel of the human condition, which they should accept as representing the considered opinion of rational men, albeit Norwegian. It's a twist on the Alger myth, inspiring to youth: you too can get to murder Filipinos, or Palestinians, or Vietnamese or Afghans and still win a Peace Prize. That's the audacity of hope at full stretch.

[url=http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn10092009.html#]Source[/url] 

M. Spector M. Spector's picture
M. Spector M. Spector's picture

JUAN GONZALEZ: Your reaction to this surprise announcement?

NAOMI KLEIN: You know, I try not to speak about things before I really had a process-you know, a chance to process it, because my raw reaction is really that this represents - it's very significant and disappointing, cheapening of the Nobel Prize. And, you know, it's been cheapened before, and it will be cheapened again, but I think there's something really striking here. And even just listening to the rationale that, despite overwhelming evidence, they're giving this prize in the hopes that it will change Obama's mind or encourage him to do things he hasn't done - this is a candidate that ran a campaign that was much more based on hope and wishful thinking than it was on concrete policy. So we have hopes being piled on hope and wishful thinking.

This is supposed to be a prize that rewards concrete behavior, concrete action. And there are many people out there in the world who were under consideration for this prize, who every day perform acts that are taken at enormous risk for concrete benefit. I mean, I think that one of the people - one of the names under consideration this year was Dr. Mukwege in the Congo, in the DRC. This is somebody who is under personal threat because he is saving the lives of women every day who have been violently raped. And giving the prize to Dr. Mukwege - and I'm just giving one example - would have been such a concrete victory and encouragement for that action. It would have put pressure on the United States to take action, on the international community to take action, for the women of the Congo. And instead of that, we have this very, very political decision, and in many ways it's like a pat on the head for good behavior or the hope of good behavior, because actually we've seen a lot of bad behavior.

[url=http://www.democracynow.org/2009/10/9/as_us_continues_afghan_iraq_occupa... more[/url]

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

George Victor wrote:

I think Michael Moore's posting is fair:

"Congratulations President Obama on the Nobel Peace Prize -- Now Please Earn it!"

You left out the sick-making P.S.:

Quote:
...There are those who say you've done nothing yet to deserve this award. As far as I'm concerned, the very fact that you've offered to walk into the minefield of hate and try to undo the irreparable damage the last president did is not only appreciated by me and millions of others, it is also an act of true bravery. That's why you got the prize. The whole world is depending on the U.S. -- and you -- to literally save this planet. Let's not let them down.

BTW, how does one undo irreparable damage? Isn't that a logical impossibility? 

NDPP

Nobel Committee: War is Peace

http://littlealexinwonderland.wordpress.com/2009/10/09/nobel-committee-w...

Well the prize' gifter Nobel did make it rich on high explosives after all...

this winner is more to my liking:

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2005/pinter-lect...

George Victor

"BTW, how does one undo irreparable damage? Isn't that a logical impossibility?"

 

Yeah, Mike Moore isn't as smart as some of us. Maybe a bit more than the average Limbaugh listener though. Or Harper harpie. Better stop. Discussing sensibility of the electorate - the folks who vote people into power - is too tempting. We'll see if they become conscious of the "planetary" needs that you have systematically summated, MS. The pres. is sure ahead of Harper eh? :)

abnormal

Since the Peace Prize is now being awarded for things that somebody wants to do (or at least says they want to do) I predict that the next winner will be Miss Universe.  After all she said she wants world piece AND an end to hunger AND the end of global warming.  On that basis she's a shoe in.

In other news Sarah Palin has been awarded the Pullitzer Prize because she says she'd like to write a book someday.

nussy
Wilf Day

Found on Facebook:

Quote:
I think this is classic victim behaviour from the world. Victims of sexual or spousal abuse or bullying often reward the perpetrator with lavish praise for small gestures of anything that isn't abuse in order to encourage them. I think this award is less Nobel Peace prize, more a "Thanks for not actually destroying the world yet and only occupying two countries with 200,000 combat troops" kinda prize.

al-Qa'bong

Sky Captain wrote:
5. Tell Unionist, al-Qa'bong, Ghislane that they're just being the equivilant of the extremists on the far-right who hate Obama's guts, and to stop, their behaviour is coming close to trolling

For someone who accuses others of being delusional, I think you should share whatever hallucinogen you're taking with the rest of us.  I haven't even posted in this thread.

On the subject of promoting world peace, for her efforts Sandra Bullock deserves the Nobel Peace Prize more than Obama.

 

Unionist

M. Spector wrote:

BTW, how does one undo irreparable damage? Isn't that a logical impossibility? 

 

We CAN do it!

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

abnormal wrote:

Since the Peace Prize is now being awarded for things that somebody wants to do (or at least says they want to do)...

 

Found this on a friend's blog:

 

"For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges." Oslo, October 9, 2009 (bolding emphasis mine)

Interesting. I thought the Nobel was strictly for accomplishments, but their official release says they are trying to push Nobel recipients in a certain direction. Isn't that lobbying?

West Coast Greeny

To play devils (or centrist liberal's) advocate here, it's not as if Obama has done nothing.

He's in the process of pulling out of Iraq, with troops having left the cities a couple months back - He scrapped missle defence - He eased tensions between the US and... pretty well everyone: the Mid-East, Europe, the United Nations.

NDPP

Obama's Mandate From and Vanunu's Letter to the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize Committee:

http://www.paltelegraph.com/opinions/editorials/2583-obamas-mandate-from...

"Within days of the announcement for 2009's Nobel Peace Prize, twenty-two time nominee, Mordechai Vanunu declined the honor in a letter to the Nobel Peace Prize Committee in Oslo:

'I am asking the committee to remove my name from the nominations...I cannot be part of a list of laureates that includes Shimon Peres...Peres established and developed the atomic weapon program in Dimona in Israel...Peres was the man who ordered [my] kidnapping...he continues to oppose my freedom and release...WHAT I WANT IS FREEDOM AND ONLY FREEDOM...FREEDOM AND ONLY FREEDOM I NEED NOW.'"

Polunatic2

Ever since Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize, I haven't really taken it very seriously because it's hard to have peace without justice. I find it a bit amusing to hear so many people - from left to right - in a tiff about it - sometimes saying the same thing - "what has he done?". WCG gave a couple of examples which are not insignificant. To ignore or dismiss them completely is to simplify the real world in a way that reduces our reaction to rhetorical cynicism (cynical rhetoric?).  

Maybe it is better that the prize stand as a living challenge rather than as kudos to the likes of Kissinger? At least it might be able to be used to as a lever of some kind for the peace movement (whatever that is now) to inject itself into the discussion about US foreign policy and maybe even have an influence. If Obama hired the likes of Van Jones, then it's probably safe to assume that there are other doves in the administration who don't need to be further isolated by declarations that the book has already been written on Barak Obama and that he's a hopeless, failed imperialist just like Bush & Cheney. 

On the other hand, I'm not sure that the Nobel Peace Prize really matters in determining the course of anything. Al Gore and 100 scientists won the science award and CO2 emissions continue to rise. That doesn't mean our slogan should we "NO WE CANNOT". 

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Polunatic2 wrote:

Ever since Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize, I haven't really taken it very seriously because it's hard to have peace without justice. I find it a bit amusing to hear so many people - from left to right - in a tiff about it - sometimes saying the same thing - "what has he done?". WCG gave a couple of examples which are not insignificant. To ignore or dismiss them completely is to simplify the real world in a way that reduces our reaction to rhetorical cynicism (cynical rhetoric?).  

Maybe it is better that the prize stand as a living challenge rather than as kudos to the likes of Kissinger? At least it might be able to be used to as a lever of some kind for the peace movement (whatever that is now) to inject itself into the discussion about US foreign policy and maybe even have an influence. If Obama hired the likes of Van Jones, then it's probably safe to assume that there are other doves in the administration who don't need to be further isolated by declarations that the book has already been written on Barak Obama and that he's a hopeless, failed imperialist just like Bush & Cheney. 

On the other hand, I'm not sure that the Nobel Peace Prize really matters in determining the course of anything. Al Gore and 100 scientists won the science award and CO2 emissions continue to rise. That doesn't mean our slogan should we "NO WE CANNOT". 

The fact that Kissinger was awarded a peace prize and that Peres is a nominee demonstrates the peace prize is really about propaganda and legetimizing organized industrial violence against the indigenous peoples of the world. That's all it is and all it ever was. It should be regarded no different than an Iron Cross or other such military decorations.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Frustrated Mess wrote:

The fact that Kissinger was awarded a peace prize and that Peres is a nominee...

[url=http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/]Peres won it in 1994[/url].

Which only makes your point stronger.

abnormal

Alfred Nobel's will specifies that the peace prize would go "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I feel a tiny bit more optimistic today than I was yesterday, with the hope that the Nobel just might, possibly, even just a tiny little bit, nudge Obama in the direction of peaceful progress on various fronts. That, and watching news clips of Michelle Obama this summer on the White House lawn resurrecting the WH garden and with the help of local children. Maybe it's just the fact we have a bright sunny day here today - our first in over a week, and it's affecting my judgement.Sealed 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

oops - double post

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

"The simple fact that he was elected was reason enough for him to be the recipient of this year's Nobel Peace Prize."

- Michael Moore, October 10, 2009

George Victor

And here's Michael Moore's "next day" modified assessment (the last half):

 

"All I ask of those who voted for Obama is to not pile on him too quickly. Yes, make your voice heard (his phone number is 202-456-1414). But don't abandon the best hope we've had in our lifetime for change. And for God's sake, don't head to bummerville if he says or does something we don't like. Do you ever see Republicans behave that way? I mean, the Right had 20 years of Republican presidents and they still couldn't get prayer in the public schools, or outlaw abortion, or initiate a flat tax or put our Social Security into the stock market. They did a lot of damage, no doubt about that, but on the key issues that the Christian Right fought for, they came up nearly empty handed. No wonder they've been driven crazy lately. They'll never have it as good again as they've had it since Reagan took office.

But -- do you ever see them looking all gloomy and defeated? No! They keep on fighting! Every day. Our side? At the first sign of wavering, we just pack up our toys and go home.

 

"So, at least for this weekend, let us celebrate what people elsewhere are celebrating -- that America now has a sane and smart man in the White House, a man who truly wants a world at peace for his two daughters.

 

"Many, for the past couple days (yes, myself included), have grumbled, "What has he done to earn this prize?" How 'bout this:

The simple fact that he was elected was reason enough for him to be the recipient of this year's Nobel Peace Prize.

Because on that day the murderous actions of the Bush/Cheney years were totally and thoroughly rebuked. One man -- a man who opposed the War in Iraq from the beginning -- offered to end the insanity. The world has stood by in utter horror for the past eight years as they watched the descendants of Washington, Lincoln and Jefferson light the fuse of our own self-destruction. We flipped off the nations on this planet by abandoning Kyoto and then proceeded to melt eight more years worth of the polar ice caps. We invaded two nations that didn't attack us, failed to find the real terrorists and, in effect, ignited our own wave of terror. People all over the world wondered if we had gone mad.

And if all that wasn't enough, the outgoing Joker presided over the worst global financial collapse since the Great Depression.

 

"So, yeah, at precisely 11:00pm ET on November 4, 2008, Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. And the 66 million people who voted for him won it, too. By the time he took the stage at midnight ET in the Grant Park Historic Hippie Battlefield in downtown Chicago, billions of people around the globe were already breathing a huge sigh of relief. It was as if, in that instant, one man did bring the promise of peace to the world -- and most were ready to go wherever he wanted to go to achieve that end. Never before had the election of one man made every other nation feel like they had won, too. When you've got billions of people ready, willing and able to join a cause like this, well, a prize in Oslo is the least that you deserve.

 

"One other thought. The Peace Prize historically has been given to those who have worked to throw off the yoke of racial discrimination and segregation (Martin Luther King, Jr., Desmond Tutu). I think the Nobel committee, in awarding Obama the prize, was also rewarding the fact that something profound had happened in a nation that was founded on racial genocide, built on racist slavery, and held back for a hundred-plus years by vestiges of hateful bigotry (which can still be found on display at teabagger rallies and daily talk radio). The fact that this one man could cause this seismic historical event to occur -- and to do so with such grace and humility, never succumbing to the bait, but still not backing down (yes, he asked to be sworn in as "Barack Hussein Obama"!) -- is more than reason enough he should be in Oslo to meet the King on December 10. Maybe he could take us along with him. 'Cause I also suspect the Nobel committee was tipping its hat to all of us -- we, the American people, had conquered some of our racism and did the truly unexpected. After seeing searing images of our black fellow citizens left to drown in New Orleans -- and poor whites seeing their own treated no better than the black man they had been raised to hate -- we had all seen enough. It was time for change.

Thank you, Barack Obama, for giving us the opportunity to redeem ourselves. Now for the tasks ahead. We need you to do all that you promised to do. We need it. The world needs it.

 

"My prediction for the future? You become the first *two-time* winner of the Nobel Peace Prize! Yeah"

 

I think he brings rational perspective - certainly, an understanding of what Obama faces in cuckooland, and what eight Republican years have done to us all.  Methinks, we are about to experience what the Canadian people will put in place for four years here. Good luck to us all.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Nattering nabobs of negativism! LaughingSealed

al-Qa'bong

Quote:
"So, at least for this weekend, let us celebrate what people elsewhere are celebrating -- that America now has a sane and smart man in the White House, a man who truly wants a world at peace for his two daughters.

 

Shouldn't this be the minimum we expect from anyone in any position of responsibility anywhere?  It's pretty sad to see how yanquis are gushing because they are no longer governed by the village idiot. 

Would they be so proud today if presidents were allowed a third term in office?

Polunatic2

Maybe Michael Moore read my post Smile

George Victor

al: "  It's pretty sad to see how yanquis are gushing because they are no longer governed by the village idiot. "

 

Half, at least, should be gushing. Can't imagine what people with the smarts are going to say about rule by the guy the "village idiot" anointed as "Steve".

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

John Walsh wrote:

Quick. What do Barack Obama, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Kissinger and Egar Moniz have in common? All won the Nobel Prize, the first four for "peace" either as sitting presidents, or in Kissinger's case, while his bombs were falling on innocents in Vietnam. Moniz won the prize in Physiology or Medicine for his invention of the lobotomy. Of these five, he wrought the least carnage.

[url=http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/10/obama-will-go-naked-to-oslo/]Obama Will Go Naked to Oslo[/url]

---

 

ETA:

Quote:

The Nobel peace committee should retire, and turn over its huge funds to some international peace organization which is not awed by stardom and rhetoric, and which has some understanding of history.

- [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/oct/09/nobel-pea... Zinn[/url]

al-Qa'bong

Quote:
Half, at least, should be gushing.

 

Why? Is it that much of an accomplishment to have not elected a moran?

 

And the best we can say about Stevie-boy is that he's an embarassment to Canadians.

George Victor

Where Sarah Palin can be put forward as VP...yeah, it's an accomplishment to not elect a moron.

And again, just a portion of we Canucks would be put out by Steve's gaining a full term, unchallengeable, supreme...gah, I can't go on. 

A_J

M. Spector wrote:
Alexander Cockburn wrote:
. . . Teddy Roosevelt, who got the prize in 1906 as reward for sponsorship of the Spanish-American war and ardent bloodletting in the Philippines.

Roosevelt did not become president until after the conclusion of the Spanish-American War, and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for mediating an end to Russo-Japanese War and for his support for the International Court of Arbitration at the Hague.

Unionist

Well formally speaking you're correct, A_J, but I suspect Cockburn was speaking ironically.

 

NDPP

Former CIA Asset Obama's Fictional Nobel Prize Statement

http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=149495;article=126695;

Pages

Topic locked