He could announce that when he’s elected, he’ll have Putin arrested and brought to the States and put on trial.
I’m sure if Edward Snowden wins it, the Republicans’ heads will collectively explode.
I know a university professor. Wonder how much I have to bribe him to get nominated. “Nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize” sure looks better than Eagle Scout on a resume 
Surely we have some college professors on here.
I wonder what qualifies as a peace research or foreign policy institute? Can we start a 501(c)(3) with an appropriate name?
Sorta like “Even a broken calendar is right once a century”? 
Agree completely that Chomsky is a poster child for the axiom that most famous scientists had one great idea that propelled them to fame. And then a long list of pure trash ideas in any/every other field they could think of. Plus a few trash ideas in their original field just to demonstrate how thoroughly fame has addled their brain.
Yes I am, but not for the Peace Prize. I’ve even nominated some who’ve won (but several years after I nominated them, and they would have been the choice of many others.) Please don’t ask, I really can’t say more.
OldGuy, are you limited to 1 nomination? I think all the other Republican candidates should be nominated so Trump can’t lord it over them. And for fun, nominated them for the Nobel Prize in physics, so they can stumble around trying to explain the Big Bang theory, or repudiate it.
Yes, there are 14 possible monthly arrangements of dates and days that repeat on a cycle.
I was thinking of the standard paper calendar back in the 1950s & 60s that would say “January '57” on top and be a grid of dates in that one month. That part would only be right once a century.
When we overly these two facts, it’s better to say a (monthly) calendar is only right every 7 centuries if not February and only once every 14 centuries if February.
Once we get to 1400-year repeat cycles we need to allow for the likelihood of a calendar reformation happening. Certainly we haven’t gone 1400 years on our current system yet.
And yet another throwaway joke is broken on the wheel of SDMB pedanticism. Or is pedanticity?
I’m going to sit over here and entertain the idea my brain got that it was Pres. Obama who nominated The Donald.
Just for shits and giggles, and all.
As noted above, the award didn’t exactly do Obama a lot of good at the time. Perhaps he’s hoping for the same effect against DT. 
Never mind that, should “anal retentive” include a hyphen or not?
I’ve said before that being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize means nothing. Dozens of nonentities and cranks are nominated for the prize by other nonentities and cranks. Now winning, on the other hand, that does mean something. (Sometimes.)
Depends. Are you talking about being overly fussy or are you referring to a proctological problem?
I think those who accuse Chomksy or lying are confusing “lying” with “saying things that I don’t like and/or agree with”. As far as I can tell Chomksy is incredibly well researched and honest, as well as being wildly appreciated outside of the US, but his political leaning annoys those who would like to imagine the world to be different to what Chomsky describes.
Nah, he was nominated for the Knife and Fork Pizza Prize
What outstanding contribution for world peace did Obama accomplish in his first nine months as POTUS that qualified him as a recipient in the eyes of the five Norwegian judges? Or was it something Obama did during his four years as a U.S. Senator?
*In his will, Alfred Nobel tasked the Parliament of Norway with selecting the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize.
…The other Nobel Prizes were to be awarded by Swedish bodies (Swedish Academy, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Karolinska Institutet) that already existed, whereas the responsibility for the Peace Prize was given to the Norwegian Parliament, specifically “a committee of five persons to be elected” by it. A new body had to be created—the Norwegian Nobel Committee.*
Damn but that was hard to find.
Should be called the Nobel *Pussy *Prize, amirite?
Thanks for making the effort.
Jagland said “We have not given the prize for what may happen in the future. We are awarding Obama for what he has done in the past year. And we are hoping this may contribute a little bit for what he is trying to do,” noting that he hoped the award would assist Obama’s foreign policy efforts. Involvement in which can now be proven as early as March 2009. Jagland said the committee was influenced by a speech Obama gave about Islam in Cairo in June 2009, the president’s efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation and climate change, and Obama’s support for using established international bodies such as the United Nations to pursue foreign policy goals. The New York Times reported that Jagland shrugged off the question of whether “the committee feared being labeled naïve for accepting a young politician’s promises at face value”, stating that “no one could deny that ‘the international climate’ had suddenly improved, and that Mr. Obama was the main reason…‘We want to embrace the message that he stands for.’”
It appears that the five Norwegians did award Obama for what they expected Obama to accomplish in the future. Has Obama’s foreign policy created a more peaceful world? It doesn’t appear that it has.
Did Obama’s Islamic speech in Cairo result in a more peaceful world? It doesn’t appear that it has.
Has Obama’s efforts prevented nuclear proliferation in Iran, China, or N Korea? I don’t think so.
Has Obama been successful in turning U.S. policy decisions over to the UN? Not yet.
The five Norwegian’s assumed that the international climate had suddenly improved because of Obama’s election and these five Norwegian’s wished to embrace Obama’s message of hopey changey. It appears that the international climate has not improved and all of the dissenters listed in your linked article were correct when they suggest that Obama received the award prematurely, if he should have received the award at all.
I suggest that most of the other 204 nominations for the 2009 award had actually accomplish something that could actually be considered an extraordinary effort to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people.