They certainly wouldn’t have said, “Obama, The Messiah thinks he is far too good for a prize awarded to mere mortals.”
Try again.
-Joe
You serious? Do you really believe that?
Try again. That’s not even remotely credible.
What in the last three years convinces you Merijeek’s hypothetical is not credible or the most probable response?
Alienhand, thanks for your question. The extreme reaction against him for accepting the award makes it very doubtful that there would be anywhere near that reaction if he had declined it.
Next, it’s hard to bust a man for being humble. It doesn’t sell well. Yes, the Republicans have attacked Obama for a wide variety of things … but if you have a citation for them ever attacking him for being too humble, I’d be very interested in seeing it.
Next, it is a huge leap from “He turned down the prize, saying others had done more and deserved it more” to “He thinks he’s too good for the prize.” I greatly doubt that leap would get any traction at all.
Finally, even if the Republicans had attacked on the (doubtful) basis Merijeek offered, the Democrats would not have done so. I would rather the Republicans unhappy with Obama for taking the high moral path, than have the current situation with Democrats unhappy with Obama for taking the easy, no-morals path.
PS - This whole Democratic mantra of “the Republicans will attack us no matter what we do” is getting very old. We are called “political opponents” for a reason, because they oppose what we do and we oppose what they do. Basing our actions on whether or not they will oppose us is crazy. The issue is not whether the Republicans will attack Obama if he were to decline the Prize. It is whether declining the Prize is the right path or not.
Well, it does have an effect on whether or not your criticism should be taken seriously, if no matter the result you will always criticize.
That said, it is overused as a defense to dismiss what could be valid criticisms. The other week there was a thread on the tariff on chinese tires, and some conservatives opposed it because they oppose tariff’s philosophically. A defender of Obama handwaived away their criticisms saying “well, if he didn’t put up the tariff, then you would blame him for letting chinese tires flood the market”
But in this case he was completely wrong. Those posters have always consistently been anti-tariff. The person dismissing their opposing viewpoint is “oh you’ll always oppose no matter what” was not giving their arguments the proper credibility.
“Megalomaniacal idiocy of the first order?” Really? Either hyperbole really is the greatest thing ever or you’re an idiot.
Ah. I get it. He should have turned down the award because the republicans are aggressive and stupid. That makes sense.
As has been stated, the peace prize is something done more to encourage rather than something based upon results. And if it hasn’t been stated, the “Obama wins far fetched award” comparisons aren’t clever anymore. It’s fucking ridiculous and done to death.
Golly. You are an emotional little thing aren’t you? He was given an award and because he accepted it, it’s “despicable theft.” Jeezy Creezy.
A spoiled teenager? Keep this sort of deranged anger going and you’ll likely pop something important in either your brains or bowels.
Lastly, can we put a fucking stop to stating ones political affiliation and voting preference as if it lends one shred of credibility to a damn thing? I only say this because I’m an independent who voted for Martha Stewart cause she fit an entire turkey up her butthole on South Park so my thoughts matter more than yours.
What evidence? The Apologize For America Tours? BHO was President for two weeks before the nomination period closed. Just what exactly did he do in those two weeks that so far exceeded what the other, far more deserving people on the list did?
He hasn’t stolen it. It’s not like he went out and campaigned, or held the Nobel committee at gunpoint. I think he should have refused it, but to get this out of shape over his handling of a situation where there was really no perfect solution is silly.
If the committee had made its decision two weeks after he was inaugurated, you’d have a point. It considered Obama and the other 204 nominees long after that. I suspect they decided not long before the announcement date. You clearly are repeating the “President for two weeks” glurge without any thought.
Did you hear his speech after the award was announced? Do you consider it arrogant? And yet it didn’t make a difference, did it? Do you think the party of Birthers is going to all of a sudden compliment him on turning it down?
No morals? Graciously accepting an honor you didn’t request or campaign for, and will turn into an opportunity to work for peace is having no morals? Now, it is not surprising that the same Republicans who trashed the reputation of the United States for 8 years would advise throwing the award back in the faces of the committee. What’s your excuse?
Campaigning for the prize would have been the wrong thing to do. Accepting it is the right thing. You seem to be the one saying that turning down the prize would somehow get cheers from the Republicans - which just shows you haven’t been paying attention.
Do you think Kerry taking the high road about the Swift Boat issue helped? The Republicans almost dragged us into a depression, destroyed our national reputation, and created massive deficits - and you want to play nice?
Deserving, schmeserving. The old guys in Oslo make the rules, and so they get to decide. If you don’t like it, start your own award and see if you can outplay, outsmart, and outlast them.
I suppose people would just giggle if he called his award the “Humpy.”
Suggested statuette design: old man in a lawn chair shaking his fist at kids.
No, I don’t think the Birthers are going to congratulate him for turning it down. I simply think it is the proper thing to do.
I fail to understand some of you folks attempting to take some high moral stance about “Birthers” when the DNC is saying anyone who disagrees with awarding Obama the Prize is “siding with the terrorists”. Once you take a stance on the DNC, then you can abuse the Birthers. Until then, it’s just 100% hypocrisy, to abuse the Birthers and ignore the DNC’s foolish comments.
Harborwolf’s claim that
is simply nonsense. Alfred Nobel’s will states that it is for the person who
(emphasis mine)
First, I would note that this is 2009, so “the preceding year” is 2008. What did Obama do in 2008 to earn the Nobel Peace Prize? Speak up, anyone. I’m waiting. Here’s your chance to list his 2008 achievements in the reduction of standing armies, etc. Anyone?
Second, according to the man who put up the money, the Prize is for the person who has “done the most or best work”. Not to encourage someone. Not in the hope that they will do the best work. Not for possibilities of future work. It is for the person who has done (i.e. accomplished, completed, finished) the best work.
As far as I can tell, by the terms of Nobel’s will, Obama has done absolutely nothing to deserve the award. However, I await someone to prove me wrong.
Finally, I stated my political allegiance to show that it is not just Republicans who oppose Obama accepting the award. Some Democrats oppose it as well, and despite what the DNC says, it doesn’t make us terrorists. Heck, even Lech Walesa, who put his life on the line in the winning of the Prize, disapproved:
Unless you think that Lech is “siding with the terrorists”, the DNC comment was as over the top as the Birthers and the Deathers … which is a very sad state of affairs.
To be honest, I do not feel that Obama deserves to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who’ve been honored by this prize. And if you or the DNC don’t like that statement, tough. I stand by it, and it doesn’t mean I’m allied with terrorists.
And in fact, Obama doesn’t think he deserves to be in that company either … so why accept the Prize?
I just think turning down the prize would be the wrong thing to do. It would make it an even bigger issue than it is now, and there’s frankly no reason to tell the Oslo club that they don’t know what they’re doing. It’s their freakin’ prize, and they can give it to whomever the fuck they want. Just got to Norway, make a nice speech, then get back to business.
Given that you’re comparing Obama’s acceptance of the award as despicable theft, I’m gonna guess that the DNC isn’t the only one looking for the high moral stance. It’s just a pity that they aren’t as good at it as you are.
No fair singling that claim out as nonsense. Everything I claim is nonsense. It’s my right as duly elected king of the moon. This time, it’s not my claim, but the Associated Press’
Now that we’ve given due credit to the nonsense, I’ll move on.
I could just take the easy way out and link to the Nobel committee’s report.
God I’m lazy.
Unfortunately for us all, that man is dead and his work has been passed to a committee. I know that you’re clearly still mourning, but it’s time to move on and accept that things can change. It’s not a sign of weakness to cry a little.
I don’t have to prove you wrong. The committee already did. You can go right ahead and take it up with them if you want though. I’m sure they’ll be happy to talk with you. Just march on up to the door with your copy of the will. I’m totally sure that they’ll listen.
And aren’t you a big democrat for opposing it. You must be the bestest democrat of all.
To be dishonest, I really respect your opinion, and don’t think the claims of theft were over the top at all. In fact, I think such strong claims make people respect your opinion more. They make you sound sooo smart and forceful and mature.
To be honest, I don’t think you’re allied with terrorists. I think you’re a moron riding your little high horse of outrage as far as it will take you. “Look at me. I’m more outraged than all of you. And I’m a democrat to boot. Aren’t I special?”
Probably cause he’s a total spoiled klepto teenager and he just couldn’t help himself. It was a cry for help.
That is true. And that’s why the 2009 award shows how totally meaningless the NPP has become.
Yeah. In 2008 the peace prize meant something. After this, it’s just another piece of garbage that comes with an oversized prize check.
Now I gots nothin’ to believe in. I’m going to clown college.
Well, Harborwolf, my sentence above was
However, in fact this was a minor paraphrase of someone else, who actually said:
I tried to warn you that Obama agreed with me, but noooo, you were so up on your little high horse of outrage, so lost in your puerile anger, so eager to insult me with your childish taunts that you didn’t pay any attention to my warning.
Sorry, bro’, but you’ve been pwned … next time, try engaging your brain before unleashing your electronic anger machine.
I’d actually care if Obama had actually agreed with any of the ridiculous gibberish about despicable theft and the like, but he kinda sorta didn’t. Turns out it was you who phrased it as “megalomaniacal idiocy.” If you’d stuck to “I don’t think he deserves this award,” neither one of us would be here. See, your over the top nonsense is where my “high horse” comment came from. Not your clever little turn of Obama’s phrase. Nice job on the warning though. Really. It’s very impressive. If you’d actually addressed the parts I cared about (theft, megalomaniacal hoopla, spoiled teenage whatnot, y’know, the stuff I’ve been repeating) instead of crowing over your little trap, I’d feel well and truly “pwned.” I’m almost moved enough to post a large font “zing.” Almost. Not quite there, and still a ways away from a large and colored “zing.” Certainly not time for that.
Also, this is my electronic childish taunt machine. I’m a little hurt that you didn’t notice.