Oh he wants to wipe you out. He is just polite about it.
I expect to be notified any day now of my Nobel Prize for Literature for the novel I plan on writing.
What he said. This is sort of like naming an MVP after the first game of the season or handing out an Oscar on the movie’s opening night. Sure he’s good, but when he goes on to do something great, what are you going to do then?
Good for him, anyway, it’s kind of refreshing to see an American leader be appreciated for trying to do the right thing.
OTOH that is at the same time kind of scary, I mean, really,* everybody and everything else *has been so lousy that a new, charismatic POTUS merely showing up and announcing a policy of openminded outreach is the greatest thing that has happened all year to lead to a more harmonious world? Gee, even I wasn’t that pessimistic.
So he won’t be wearing a smirk like some pranking fratboy, but will look serious and concerned and actually pronounce the name of your country correctly as he threatens your obliteration. These little things count towards better understanding among nations ;).
As much as I respect Mr. Obama’s policies and leadership of the US, I can think of several World Leaders who have done just as much- if not more- than he has for “Peace”. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI spring readily to mind, for example.
Not that they’re likely to accept such an honour, of course, but it is a bit disturbing to see the Nobel Peace Price basically reduced to the C. Montgomery Burns Award For Outstanding Achievement In The Field Of Excellence.
Sadly it’s been the Dopey the Dwarf Award for Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Who We Wanna Make Happy for ages.
Sad indeed, that the Nobel Committee couldn’t come up with another way to get the man’s autograph.
Doesn’t scrapping the missile shield count for anything?
I like the Fark headline on this “Obama linked to terrorist Yasser Arafat”.
Is it possible to further devalue the Peace Prize?
I think I might have done more to earn the Peace Prize.
I’m coming to work thinking I’m going to be the only one in this thread to say how weird this is. Glad to see I’m not just in the majority here, but it’s damn near unanimous.
This doesn’t help him. Right now we’ve been defending the President for not accomplishing more because he’s only been in office for 9 months. It’s not an excuse. That’s not a terribly long period of time and he’s had a hell of a lot to do to even set the pieces in motion to implement change in about 200 different directions.
But now the international community is saying, in effect, “9 months is plenty of time to do what needs to be done.” Hell, they’re saying “in 9 months he’s actually done it” even though, truth be told, he really hasn’t done…well, whatever it is that he’s getting this award for. I dunno, this just seems so strange.
Why not? The award is made by the Nobel estate / trust / foundation / committee, not by Norway.
But we’re in MPSIMS, not GD or GQ.
I’m another Obama slight supporter who is going 
over this.
(I say “slight supporter” because my politics are primarily voting against a candidate.)
Hell, I’ve done more than he has, just by not letting my middle daughter kill my oldest daughter all these years she’s want to. . .
This just doesn’t make any sense.
I know he has a lot of good intentions, but seriously, until there is significant activity to back up the intentions, presenting him with this award is meaningless.
Here’s the text of the citation.
Okayyy. Hm. So basically, they’re trying to use him as a figurehead of the possible, rather than a show of what he’s accomplished? It’s about their goals, not him.
Also, he’s NotBush.
They had to go and announce this on a Friday, so there’s no Daily Show or Colbert tonight…doesn’t the Nobel prize committee realize what a comedy gold mine they have in this?
It’s worse than that, hombre:
Evidently, 12 days is plenty of time.
I mean, I really like this guy and I think if nobody pumps a hunk of lead through his cranium he’ll inspire this country and the rest of the world to great heights, but…maybe they should base the award on results. You know, give it to someone who not only has a desire to make the world a better place but also has the ability to reconcile cultural differences to make that vision come true. Someone like, oh, Bill Clinton.
i think they did it to give him leverage in his peace initiatives. some of the initiatives have been turned down by the parties right at the start so leverage is needed. he has time enough in his term to maybe get somewhere if he keeps at i aggressively. past presidents mention trying for peace and do nothing their whole term until they mention it again in their last six months in office.
Definitely premature. I’m a strong Obama supporter, but it’s clear that the main reason he won was that he wasn’t George Bush.
That’s pretty much always been the point of the Peace Prize, though. Most of the other prizes - in particular, the science prizes - are only awarded decades after the work that’s earned them, because the Nobel people want to make sure that the achievement is one that genuinely stands the test of time. But the Peace Prize has pretty much always been used to reward, and direct attention towards, anything that the committee thinks might reduce our constant background level of carnage a bit. See: the Palestinian conflict, Ireland, etc.
If Obama is able to make significant progress on even half the major international issues he’s dealing with - the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Iranian and North Korean nuclear programs, and Israel-Palestine to name a few - then he’ll have earned it. But I agree the committee is sending a message about his outreach efforts and rhetoric more than rewarding what he’s done. And it’s definitely a message to America, same as Carter’s win in 2002 was widely seen as a fuck-you to George W. Bush.
There is zero chance Obama will decline the prize. That wouldn’t be classy, it would come off as obnoxious. And the cash award is $1.4 million. I expect it’ll get put in escow or something so he can access it after he’s out of office.
Premature, yes.
I’d love for him to respectfully decline the award- and I disagree with **Marley **that it wouldn’t be classy to do so.
The main reason I want him to decline it, of course, is to see how the Right will try to spin his action as a bad thing.
“Obama admits he’s done nothing in office.” (ETA: “And we forced him to turn down the prize!”)
The only person to voluntarily turn down the peace prize is Le Duc Tho of Vietnam in 1973. He was given the award for the Paris accords when Vietnam was not at peace and he felt it would be wrong to accept. Kissinger felt no such pangs of conscience - no surprise there - and accepted.