Topic: 2009 Nobel Peace Prize Winner

[Laminar]

Yeah, read a little bit:

Obama's response:

I am both surprised and deeply humbled by the decision of the Nobel Committee.

Let me be clear, I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations.

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 this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women and all Americans want to build, a world that gives life to the promise of our founding documents.

And I 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.

And that is why I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st century.

[Jerry Rxman Griffin aka MuthaF'er]

He was left with #$%* to start with. Appears to me he is trying to get the countries to be civilized and listen to one another. Wouldn't that be considered peace?! Someone has to take the initiative. Market is almost to 10,000 now. Anyone notice that?! He didn't get the world into the predicament he inherited. 

[DammitDan]

I as an independent, was willing to give him every chance to succeed. It's a shame that he couldn't even get a single one of his campaign promises accomplished. An for that he deserves the prize? give us a break. maybe we should nominate moammar-kadafi next year huh?

What the hell?  First off, President Obama has only been in office for 9 months.  In that time he's actually done some pretty impressive stuff.

Obama inherited an economic disaster which sent our country to the brink of total meltdown and has managed to turn it around...  He has effectively reignited global diplomacy...  And is currently working with a group of politicians who are COMPLETELY party-driven (regardless of their cries for "bi-partisanship").

I personally don't think he has earned the Nobel Peace Prize (yet).  But have a little patience!  By this same time in Bush's first term, he had already taken 96 days of "vacation time" (3 out of 9 months) away from the White House.  Here's a short list of Bush's "accomplishments" in his first year:

Cut funding for research into cleaner, more efficient cars and trucks by 28 percent
Broken a campaign promise to invest $100 million per year in rain forest conservation
Cut funding for the Girls and Boys Clubs of America programs in public housing by $60 million
Pulled out of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol agreement on global warming, ultimately signed by 178 other countries
Rejected an international accord to enforce the 1972 treaty banning germ warfare
Nominated former mining company executive Dan Lauriski as Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health
Pushed for development of "mini-nukes," designed to attack deeply buried targets-a violation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
Appointed John Bolton, an opponent of nonproliferation treaties and the United Nations, as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security
Canceled the 2004 deadline for auto makers to develop prototype high-mileage cars
Named Bennett Raley, who has called for the repeal of the Endangered Species Act, as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Water and Science

I would rather Obama "do nothing" as you incorrectly assume than have the reputation of America destroyed from the inside out like Bush did.

[Retro Rocket]

Well said Dan, another thing Obama is doing in spades is improving your reputation over seas,  I'm sorry but Bush had the US looking like a redneck backwater. 9 months is a long time in politics but a very short time when change is needed, it will take him most of his first term to turn things around. Our new leader has copped flack from the opposition since he was elected and still is but he managed to keep us from going into recession and we have the lowest unemployment rate in the western world, the detractors are still pushing the policies that got them voted out in the first place, some people just can't see the forest for the trees.

Mick

[BeSeeingYou]

srust58,
you remind me a lawyer friend of mine....pure party to the end didn't care who was the best candidate...only voted for his party's choice......but guess what.....our current POTUS has him rethinking his previous policies. He might even not vote his party next time.
I as an independent, was willing to give him every chance to succeed. It's a shame that he couldn't even get a single one of his campaign promises accomplished. An for that he deserves the prize? give us a break. maybe we should nominate moammar-kadafi next year huh?

No, I am not a member of any political party and never have been so I don't know how you came up with this idea about my voting habits.

You are oh so willing to give him every chance to succeed....what in 9 months?  Obama is handed the biggest stinking pile of dogsh!t after eight years of totally incompetent conservative rule and somehow he hasn't made it into a silk purse for you yet....how sad that you have been disappointed.  Give us a break.  The sore loser whining is getting so tiresome and pathetic that I find it hard not to be a sarcastic a-hole.

[buffalogt750]

So anyone who doesn't support Obama's radical socialist agenda is a whiner and a sore loser? That crap gets old too. And you called Bush a conservative? Obama's "inherited" mess was caused, in part, by Bush's liberal policies. Republican does not always equal conservative.

[DammitDan]

Obama's "inherited" mess was caused, in part, by Bush's liberal policies. Republican does not always equal conservative.

So I'm guessing you voted for Bush twice then...   

[buffalogt750]

Yes I did. But only once in each election.

[moham]

maybe we should nominate moammar-kadafi next year huh?

he has really come a long way in the last few years...

[Freaky1]

srust58,
you remind me a lawyer friend of mine....pure party to the end didn't care who was the best candidate...only voted for his party's choice......but guess what.....our current POTUS has him rethinking his previous policies. He might even not vote his party next time.
I as an independent, was willing to give him every chance to succeed. It's a shame that he couldn't even get a single one of his campaign promises accomplished. An for that he deserves the prize? give us a break. maybe we should nominate moammar-kadafi next year huh?

Wait...eight months into his first term and he's supposed to have accomplished everything he promised?

That is what Republicans expect from him, they already were having fits when he didn't do everything in his first 100 days, even though their man George had already completed his FIRST vacation within his first 100 days. Funny how now they all say they didn't like ol' George but still voted for him and defend him, just more of that group think mentality of the right.

[BeSeeingYou]

Yes I did. But only once in each election.

So you supported "Bush's liberal policies", to use your own words.  Whats the problem? Schizophrenia?

It is hilarious to see people who voted for and supported W changing their tune as his failures become more and more apparent but which to some of us were apparent all along.  Now it's all "well he really wasn't a conservative" spewing forth.  Wasn't Mr.Conservative El Rushbo one of his biggest supporters and cheerleaders?  Rush is such a man of principle it seems unlikely he would support someone who was not a conservative.  It all seems like rats fleeing a sinking ship.

[buffalogt750]

Who said I supported Bush? A vote does not always equal support. I simply considered him less of an a-hole than the other candidates. Lately they are ALL useless. It's a matter of voting for the one you think will do the least amount of damage to the country.

[Freaky1]

Who said I supported Bush? A vote does not always equal support. I simply considered him less of an a-hole than the other candidates. Lately they are ALL useless. It's a matter of voting for the one you think will do the least amount of damage to the country.

That says it all, someday there will be at least three parties and if not the maybe a revolution is in order.

[DammitDan]

Now everyone repeat after me...

"He wasn't MY President, he's not even a Conservative (anymore)!  But I voted for him twice because he:

was doing a good job.
was a great leader.
was the smartest guy in the room.
wasn't a Democrat."

Sounds completely sane and logical to me.  Now pass me some of what you're smoking, please.

[333]

I can no longer contain myself.  I've tried to stay out of this, but the stoopidity just was too much.

First;

NO.....BUT ONE WOULD BE NICE!   OH WAIT A MINUTE...HE HAS TWO......JACK    &   SQUAT  !

Nice one.  I believe you stole it from SNL.

maybe we should nominate moammar-kadafi next year huh?

he has really come a long way in the last few years...

Come a long way??  Please tell me this is some lame attempt at sarcasm.  Did you miss the whole thing where when they let the guy who brought down Pan Am flight 103 on top of Lockerbie Scotland, he welcomed the guy home with a hero's welcome.  Or when he spoke at the U.N.?  You probably watch Fox news, where they don't even know about those events.

That says it all, someday there will be at least three parties and if not the maybe a revolution is in order.

And how will that work?  Even with the Electoral College, it would no longer take a majority to win an election.


Now I've said this before, but this movement against Obama is just racism.  I'm not saying that anyone here is a racist.  I don't know any of you well enough to make that determination.  But the loudest voices heard are acting the part real well.  Take, for example, the phenomenon of white guys showing up where President Obama speaks wearing side arms.  When did that become a good idea?  Trust me, if a black dude showed up at a Bush speech, he wouldn't survive.  Obama speech- "silly white guy", Bush speech- "OMG, it's a N with a gun! Kill him!".  You know it's true.

And before Obama, when was a sitting President's motives questioned when he wanted to address school children at the beginning of a school year?  I'll tell you.  Never.  When has a President's residency ever been questioned?  Again, never.    When has a President ever been called a liar during an address to Congress?  Never.

Again, I want to stress that I'm not calling anyone here a racist.  But the extreme right sure is angry at something.  Way more angry than a sore loser should.  It has been said that not all Republicans are racist, but all racists are surely Republican.

[BeSeeingYou]

It's a matter of voting for the one you think will do the least amount of damage to the country.

Considering that you twice voted for Bush, how well did that work out for you and the rest of the country? 

[Jay B]

Now I've said this before, but this movement against Obama is just racism.  
And before Obama, when was a sitting President's motives questioned when he wanted to address school children at the beginning of a school year?  I'll tell you.  Never.  When has a President's residency ever been questioned?  Again, never.    When has a President ever been called a liar during an address to Congress?  Never.

Again, I want to stress that I'm not calling anyone here a racist.  But the extreme right sure is angry at something.  Way more angry than a sore loser should.  It has been said that not all Republicans are racist, but all racists are surely Republican.


[/quote]  

I'll start by saying I have been a lifelong Democrat. But a conservative one at that. The racism thing is pure bull#$%*. The reason that everyone is angry is the ultra liberal agenda he is trying to put forth. He's a damned socalist, and that's not what the American People want. We have built the greatest country in the history of the world, and all of a sudden it's not good enough. History will put him behind Jimmy Carter as our worst president, or maybe Chief Kommrad of the new world order. God help us.

[DammitDan]

Please define Socialist, Jay.

[Jay B]

Sure Dan, Entitlements for everyone. Tax the piss out of everyone making money. Income redistribution as a way of life. Discourage economic growth thorough taxation. There ya go.

[333]

There are no liberals anymore.  The right has moved further right(if that's possible), and the left has moved to the middle.

And what are these entitlements you say are proposed?  The only one I know of is healthcare.  And if the right has their way, it won't happen.  At least not without keeping the fat cat insurance companies rich and happy.

[ev0lve]

 
The reason that everyone is angry is the ultra liberal agenda he is trying to put forth. He's a damned socalist, and that's not what the American People want.

You do remember that the American People elected him, right? Just saying.

[DammitDan]

Sure Dan, Entitlements for everyone. Tax the piss out of everyone making money. Income redistribution as a way of life. Discourage economic growth thorough taxation. There ya go.

I always thought it was a theory of economic organization advocating public or direct worker ownership and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources, and a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals with a method of compensation based on the amount of labor expended.

But since we were just talking about Fox News buzzwords instead of the real definition of Socialism....

It sure is a scary word, though!

Thank you Senator McCarthy for laying the groundwork for everything modern Conservatives believe in!

[BeSeeingYou]

 We have built the greatest country in the history of the world, and all of a sudden it's not good enough. History will put him behind Jimmy Carter as our worst president, or maybe Chief Kommrad of the new world order. God help us.

No, it's not good enough.  Did not the last eight years show you anything? This is the modern conservative philosophy in a nutshell and why it is always a loser in the long run.  Protect the status quo, looking backward, resistant to change, always trying to curtail the rights and freedoms of others.  Why change anything, it's good enough right?  That could be your slogan.

I see you are a budding "future historian".   Well keep up the prognosticating but I am afraid that W may have already taken the worst position.  At least we have eight years to base that on.  Now if eight years from now we are all living in dreary communal flats, working on collective farms, and being forced to read Karl Marx while waiting in long lines for a loaf of bread you may have a point to argue

[Duke McDukiedook]

Meh, I had a good comeback but this has just devolved into another goofy name-calling contest. I'll just watch from the peanut gallery. 

[Retro Rocket]

We have built the greatest country in the history of the world,

Well sorry to tell you buddy but i also live in the greatest country in the world also, and if you had put that quote to a world wide vote when Bush was running the US into the ground you wouldn't have ranked in the top 5. Sorry to put a spanner in the works but i can't believe some of the single minded crap i hear on these political threads. Some of you guys need to travel the world and form a view from what you see hear and learn from the rest of the world... I have learned today that everyone that doesn't agree with the Bloody republicans are socialist.......

Mick