President Obama this week was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. This is a tremendous honor and Americans should be pleased an American president is the recipient of this long-admired and prestigious honor.
It is puzzling, however. Just what has the president accomplished to win the votes of those who determine the winners of the Nobel Prizes handed out in various categories?
There are many who suggest this year’s award to Obama was meant as a political signal from the Nobel crowd. The president had been in office for only a few weeks when he was nominated for the award.
As one critic noted, the award actually highlights a significant lack of accomplishments. Most of those awarded Nobel Prizes are recognized for a lifetime of significant work, whereas Obama’s record to date is working as a community organizer, service in the Illinois legislature, a short time as a U.S. Senator with a very limited voting record in this body and, now, president of the United States.
He is smart and a great speaker, but what has he accomplished?
A few days before the November 2008 presidential election Obama urged those in his audience to get out and vote and work for his election. He said, “We are five days away from fundamentally changing this country.”
Is this “change” what the Nobel judges are using to justify their vote to award Obama the Peace Prize?
Is this evidence of the political thinking of those who serve as Nobel jurors?
Obama does indeed intend to change America.
He goes abroad and apologizes for past American actions; he wants to close down and free many of the Guantanamo detainees; he has placed this nation and its citizens in record levels of federal debt; he is using every means to change this nation’s successful system of medical care; the federal government took over two of America’s biggest businesses, General Motors and Chrysler, and ruined thousands of dealerships; his “stimulus” efforts have done little and unemployment totals remain high; he has called for a change in the deployment of American missiles in Poland and other countries to defend against Soviet missile attacks; and he wants a redistribution of wealth in America.
“Change” is indeed the name of the game under the Obama administration.
Obviously Obama is a skilled politician and a gifted speaker. But, what has he done, or more importantly, what has he accomplished in furthering worldwide peace? Again, he talks a good game but, to date, where are the results?
Ronald Reagan did quite a bit in helping bring about peace and the dismantling of the Soviet empire. Bill Clinton has traveled the world, helping to raise more than $1 billion to help fight disease around the world. But neither of these presidents received the Peace Prize or any other Nobel award. Jimmy Carter was the last president to be recognized by the Nobel jurors, collecting the Peace Prize in 2002.
Could it be the European judges’ political leanings are far more liberal and want to recognize U.S. presidents who seem to favor a weakened Uncle Sam rather than a United States that stands firm for freedom for all people and a United States that is prepared to fight to protect those freedoms rather than to roll over, look the other way and pretend terrorists are not terrorists?
Again, Obama has enjoyed a tremendous and almost unparalleled rise in the political world. He organized and ran a superior campaign for the presidency. He and his aides raised a record amount of money to finance the campaign.
His campaign focused on “change” and he certainly has followed through on this pledge. However, did the majority of those who voted for him believe he actually intended to “fundamentally change this country”? For what, and for what reason?
Maybe Nobel jurors want to help bring about this change, and the Peace Prize is meant to strengthen Obama’s stature. If so, they must be basing their votes on what they hope may happen and how Obama may be able to lower the stature and strength of Uncle Sam.
So far, there has been a lot of talk, executive orders and many czars but little evidence to show how Obama has helped bring about a more peaceful world.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
merrill (anonymous) says…
The dollar may be trouble in fact it may be deemed worthless in many circles. Jobs jobs jobs is the central issue. Reagan/Bush began the big push of shoving jobs beyond our borders. Consequently millions upon millions lost jobs that have yet to be replaced.
FACE IT the USA needs 20 million new jobs with new industry as the source.
USA citizens and Pres Obama have got to say to hell with it we don’t need bi-partianship we need jobs and we need new industry!
The Kansas legislature has not been real good at new strong economic growth or public school support which is important to new economc growth. This Kansas legislature has become RINO Washington D.C. clones.
For the new administration it is about how Bush/Cheney wrecked the economy. It is about how Bush/Cheney and their worshippers being idiots trying to blame Obama for the economy After Bush/Cheney managed to put 8 million people out of work.
This is about a repub RINO party that took over the republican party and wrecking the good republican name. This repub RINO party is neither fiscally responsible nor socially responsible.
RINO's have taken over our city,state and federal governments. RINO's represent Reaganomics = Wreckanomics by way of tax favors, war and financial scandals.
It's about the new rino party that first entered the scene in 1980 which has cost the nation 15-20 million USA jobs.
Herein lies sources for much of our nations problem:
1. The Reagan/ Bush Home Loan Scandal
http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com...
2. The Bush/Cheney Home Loan Scandal
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archiv...
3. What did Bush and Henry Paulson do with the bail out money?
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/10...
4. Why did the RINO Lie About Social Security?
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archiv...
5. Reagan/Bush Iran-Contra Secret Weapons Deal
* http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publ...
* http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/reagan/p...
6. Reagan/Bush - Bush/Cheney Weapons Deals
* http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0...
* http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/4...
7. Nixon Watergate Spy Scandal
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/...
8. Bush/Cheney PNAC foreign policy document, "Rebuilding America's Defences," openly advocates for total global military domination. Many PNAC members held highest-level positions in the George W. Bush administration.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?...
9. $9 Billion Lost In Iraq
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/0...
10. Thousands of Weapons Lost In Iraq May be Going To Taliban
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/...
merrill (anonymous) says…
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blo...
If you’ve been watching the Senate Finance Committee’s markup sessions, maybe you’ve noticed a woman sitting behind Committee Chairman Max Baucus. Her name is Liz Fowler.
Fowler used to work for WellPoint, the largest health insurer in the country. She was its vice president of public policy. Baucus’ office failed to mention this in the press release announcing her appointment as senior counsel in February 2008, even though it went on at length about her expertise in “health care policy.”
Now she’s working for the very committee with the most power to give her old company and the entire industry exactly what they want – higher profits – and no competition from alternative non-profit coverage that could lower costs and premiums.
A veteran of the revolving door, Fowler had a previous stint working for Senator Baucus – before her time at WellPoint. But wait, there’s more. The person who was Baucus top health advisor before he brought back Liz Fowler? Her name is Michelle Easton. And why did she leave the staff of the committee? To go to work – surprise – at a firm representing the same company for which Liz Fowler worked – WellPoint. As a lobbyist.
You can’t tell the players without a scorecard in the old Washington shell game. Lobbyist out, lobbyist in. It’s why they always win. They’ve been plowing this ground for years, but with the broad legislative agenda of the Obama White House – health care, energy, financial reform, the Employee Free Choice Act and more – the soil has never been so fertile.
The health care industry alone has six lobbyists for every member of Congress and more than 500 of them are former Congressional staff members, according to the Public Accountability Initiative’s LittleSis database.
Just to be certain Congress sticks with the program, the industry has been showering megabucks all over Capitol Hill. From the beginning, they wanted to make sure that whatever bill comes out of the Finance Committee puts for-profit insurance companies first -- by forcing the uninsured to buy medical policies from them. Money not only talks, it writes the prescriptions.
In just the last few months, the health care industry has spent $380 million on lobbying, advertising and campaign contributions. And -- don’t bother holding onto your socks -- a million and a half of it went to Finance Committee Chairman Baucus, the man who said he saw “a lot to like” in the two public option amendments proposed by Senators Rockefeller and Schumer, but voted no anyway.
The people in favor of a public alternative can’t scrape up the millions of dollars Baucus has received from the health sector during his political career. In fact, over the last two decades, the current members of the entire finance committee have collected nearly $50 million from the health sector, a long-term investment that’s now paying off like a busted slot machine.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Smart National Health Insurance Improves Our Quality of Life, our wallets and our expendable cash availability! Yes more for birthdays,Christmas, vacations, home improvemnents,home purchasing or investments.
National Health Insurance does not remove competition from the actual health care industry. It will be alive and well. Profits will be based on customer service and clinic performance based on the clients experience. This is my perception of competition.
How many of the vocal minority out there supporting the most expensive medical insurance in the world are employees and/or shareholders?
How many are receiving corrupt campaign dollars?
Some of our reps on all sides of the aisle say “Let's slow down a bit”. I say consumers have been waiting for more than 60 years for fiscal responsible medical insurance how much slower can it go?
What could possibly be more american? Providing americans with the choice of National Health Insurance.
Shouldn't taxpayers have the choice of National Insurance For All? Absolutely!
HR 676 would cover every person for all necessary medical care including:
*long term care such that cancer demands
*prescription drugs
* hospital
* surgical
* outpatient services
* primary and preventive care
* emergency services
* dental
* mental health
* home health
* physical therapy
* rehabilitation (including for substance abuse)
* vision care
* hearing services including hearing aids
* chiropractic
* durable medical equipment
* palliative care
* long term care.
A family of four making the median income of $56,200 would pay about $2,700 annually for all health care costs.
HR 676 ends deductibles and co-payments. HR 676 would save $350 billions annuall by eliminating the high overhead and profits of the private health insurance industry and HMOs according to the CBO.
National Health Insurance
http://www.healthcare-now.org/
Doctors for Single Payer
http://www.pnhp.org/
Unions for HR 676
http://unionsforsinglepayerhr676.org/...
Organizations and Government Bodies Endorsing HR 676
http://www.pnhp.org/action/organizati...
Health Care In the USA
http://www.dollarsandsense.org/health...
oldvet (anonymous) says…
Just goes to show that you can fool some of the people all of the time....
News_to_me (anonymous) says…
Perhaps this award is more a reflection of what we and the world have had to put up with for the previous eight years. The election of President Obama and the removal of the Bush/Rove/Cheney/Rumsfeld "brain" trust has probably done more for world peace than those ------- could ever have hoped to accomplish.
"This nation's successful system of medical care?" You're kidding, right? Easy for you to say as you sit in your ivory tower with your monopoly on media in the area. How's putting Lawrence Freenet out of business working out for you?
Redistribution of wealth? Yea, I just had someone leave a big sack of cash on my front porch. How about a fair division of earnings and earning power? After all, the wealth of the few has been earned on the backs of millions of people who now can't afford health care or mortgages or college.
I could go on and on but I've got to get out there and look for some handouts. It's time like these that we recognize what LJWorld really is. A red pinhead in a pincushion of blue. Thanks Dolph
cato_the_elder (anonymous) says…
Incisive editorial, but I can't agree that Obama is an "excellent speaker." The simple fact is that he is a very average speaker extemporaneously, especially when his usually omnipresent teleprompter is absent or is not working properly.
jayhawklawrence (anonymous) says…
Great comments!
You nailed it Merrill.
..And I always thought Baucus was scum. You explained it to me.
jkilgore (anonymous) says…
Cato, as far as his speaking ability is concerned, you're less than fair. To your credit, though, think of the previous speaker and he sounds like Marcus Antonius.
I'm a Dem. The award shows just how badly the world needs US leadership and hopes it gets it for a change.
cato_the_elder (anonymous) says…
Jkilgore, I agree that GWB was a poor speaker, but Obama is not that much better extemporaneously. He ranks far below B.J. Clinton in that regard.
cait48 (anonymous) says…
Alan Grayson recently said, "If Barack Obama could somehow cure hunger in the world the Republicans would blame him for overpopulation. If Barack Obama could somehow bring about world peace they'd blame him for destroying the defense industry. In fact, if tomorrow Barack Obama has a BLT for lunch they will try to ban bacon."
To quote from your own editorial:
"....he has placed this nation and its citizens in record levels of federal debt..."
Barack Obama didn't do that, George W. Bush did. Barack Obama inherited a three trillion dollar deficit from the previous administration.
"...he is using every means to change this nation’s successful system of medical care..."
Excuse me but I had to wipe the coffee off of my computer screen at this one. Mr. Simons please tell this to the families of the 44,700+ people who die in this country yearly because they don't have health insurance. Tell it to the hundreds of thousands who have insurance and are still denied health care because of "pre-existing conditions" or conditions that are denied coverage in the fine print of their policies. The truth is a vast number of people have health insurance...until they try to use it.
Understand something. Barack Obama did not ASK for this award. Indeed, it's my belief that that the award *was* politically motivated, that it was a slap in the face of the past administration, the Republican party and this country's right wing extremists (of which you are dangerously close to sounding like) by the rest of the world. It's also a sigh of relief that our country is no longer being helmed by a bunch of crazies hell bent on alienating every other country on this planet.
It's my belief this award wasn't given to Barack Obama. It was given to the American people for finally having the sense to put a reasonable person in the White House. It's up to us to live up to the responsibility of that award as much as it is our President's.
cato_the_elder (anonymous) says…
Nschmi04, try learning how to spell "vacuum."
texburgh (anonymous) says…
Just not being the warmonger GW Bush is enough to earn the Nobel prize after watching America start one justified war - the invasion of Afghanistan - and then abandon it letting it devolve into anarchy and just for personal reasons invade Iraq. Bush did more to encourage war, death, and destruction than any other American president. Obama is trying to restore America's leadership for peace. Maybe we are not out of Iraq and Afghanistan but we now talk to our allies, try to work with them. That complete reversal of the Bush cowboy diplomacy is enough to earn the respect of the world community and the prize.
I'm certain Dolph was rooting for Dick Cheney.
tumbilweed (anonymous) says…
The last paragraph of cait48's post echoes my sentiments about this entirely. Without a doubt, enough of this nonsense already.
Thanks cait48.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
http://www.neatorama.com/2009/10/10/s...
kuhusker (anonymous) says…
Dolph really is 20 years behind the times:
"...he has called for a change in the deployment of American missiles in Poland and other countries to defend against Soviet missile attacks"
If the Soviets attack Poland, we have bigger problems then Obama...namely, a massive rift in the space-time continuum!
jayhawklawrence (anonymous) says…
Our growing inability to compete in the world market and the loss of our industrial base has much to do with our current economic plight.
Coupled with the Republicans hatred for any kind of government oversight and regulation, we have what we have today. They are blinded by their ideology and trapped by their ignorance.
That giant sucking sound that Ross Perot talked about is still sucking today. It will continue to suck until all the jobs and even this newspaper are gone.
On the Democratic side, gigantic jury awards kill business. They are also guilty of wronging the American people and incompetence. Both parties have failed us.
zzgoeb (anonymous) says…
Mr. Simon's list of closing Gitmo, apologizing to our allies, etc, is exactly why the committee gave the President the prize. To many, it looks like the "Thank God he's not Dubya" award...and that alone is reason enough!!!
jimmyjms (anonymous) says…
So, Dolph Simons, Jr., a man who was handed his livelihood, thinks President Obama hasn't accomplished much?
That's a hoot.
George W. Bush handed this president a flaming handbasket quick on its way to hell. That the country hasn't imploded is reason enough for this award.
thelonious (anonymous) says…
Dolph must have had a long, sleepless night last night after hearing the Obama peace prize news.
It's obvious that Obama bothers him a great deal - in this column he sounds like Rush, Beck, and Hannity all rolled into one. Scary!
Too bad insomnia doesn't result in better writing or logic.
BTW, excellent post by jimmyjms - it's usually the ones with inherited wealth that cry the loudest. You don't hear the same weeping and gnashig of teeth from the true self-made people!
lee66049 (anonymous) says…
Obama has not accomplished much. I mean since the democrats took over congress and the budget look at what has happened. I will remind you gas went over $4.00 at the time and the economy never got better since then. Obama accomplished much? See economy, see unemployment, see that joke called health care, see Afghanistan. Remember Afghanistan, the war Bush took his eye off the ball? That war? Well more are dead now since Obama took over than in the start of the conflict.
Oh Merrill...did you forget the millions of jobs that went overseas to China as a result of the money Clinton got from China to boost his economy? Parts of the flu vaccine for Americans are made in China for crying out loud because of Clinton. China owns the U.S. thanks to Clinton.
notajayhawk (anonymous) says…
Still waiting to see one liberal Larryviller justify this award without either using the words 'not Bush' or talking about what the Messiah hopes, plans, or is going to do.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…
notajayhawk: Why?
mr_right_wing (anonymous) says…
I never even had a suspicion that Michael Moore was a closet racist; then he wrote that letter to Obama.
They might as well suit him for an XXXL Grand Wizard hood and dress......
Wow.
Gareth (anonymous) says…
Again Dolph and his fellows show their lack of understanding of the world around them (at least outside of their own narrow back yards):
Read the history of the Nobel Peace Prize, and the statements of the Committee itself -- the Prize has, at times during its history, been given in an aspirational mode: To encourage or lend momentum to an ongoing process.
For example: The laureates from 1925 and 26, all connected to the Locarno Pact and Dawes Plan, in the hopes that those plans would lead to lasting peace. Söderblom in 1930 (an archbishop, with no achievements in the field), Pire in 1958, Lutuli in 1960, Hammarskjold in 1961, MLK in 1964, Kissinger and Tho in 1973 (intended to lend momentum to the Paris Agreement), Williams and Corrigan in 1976 (intended to lend momentum to their efforts to end The Troubles in Northern Ireland), Óscar Arias Sánchez in 1987 (encouragement for the Guatemala accords), Arafat/Rabin/Peres in 1994 (to lend momentum to the effort towards ending the Israel/Palestine conflict), etc.
Seriously, guys. Try reading some time.
Yeoman2 (anonymous) says…
Tom, you are full of crap. You and Dolph must be frat brothers.
This republican rag and it's promoters has a long history of supporting the radical republican rite and I for one am not a bit surprised at the racist attacks from Dolph. I wonder who cleans and presses his Klan hood sheets?
Fortunately, there are enough reasonable folks in Lawrence to stem the tide of bigotry and racism embraced by the owners of this rag.
akuna (anonymous) says…
Thanks Merrill for putting a bit of journalism in the paper today.
Too bad Dolph Simons Jr. owns this cutting edge paper.
Gareth (anonymous) says…
Is it too much to ask that the local newspaper reflect the majority politics of the residents?
Apparently so, since we're stuck with (A)Dolph's monopoly.
Seriously -- it's ridiculous that the paper of record for the most Liberal area of Kansas (and historically so) consistently endorses the right-wing candidate in *every* election, prints national right-wing lunacy like Cal Thomas, and occasionally has to put up with official editorials straight from the RNC playbook.
Another newspaper, one that more accurately reflected the views of the majority of residents, would certainly get my business.
ksjayhawk74 (anonymous) says…
"Maybe Nobel jurors want to help bring about this change, and the Peace Prize is meant to strengthen Obama’s stature. If so, they must be basing their votes on what they hope may happen..."
This part is absolutely true. But then it goes on.
"...and how Obama may be able to lower the stature and strength of Uncle Sam."
Then it sounds like an angry, hateful, old, racist, fear-mongering, hack "journalist" that has nothing better to do than poo poo everything President does.
cait48 (anonymous) says…
Make that poopoo ON everything the President does and you'll have it right ksjayhaw74
jaywalker (anonymous) says…
"So, Dolph Simons, Jr., a man who was handed his livelihood...?"
What a pathetic qualifier, jiminy. Heaven forbid family business or someone taking advantage of family success. Why, that should disqualify all progeny from ever having an opinon again. And the LJW isn't even a successful or award winning paper.....whoops.
What a moron.
beatrice (anonymous) says…
"He goes abroad and apologizes for past American actions;"
because some past actions deserve to be apologized for;
"he wants to close down and free many of the Guantanamo detainees;"
close, yes, but free detainees who are guilty of being enemies of the state? Wrong!;
"he has placed this nation and its citizens in record levels of federal debt;"
having come into office facing record levels of economic collapse. Some would have had us just fail completely, without shoring up the economy, for which there is a price;
"he is using every means to change this nation’s successful system of medical care;"
the many millions without medical care, and those with insurance who still must go into bankruptcy because of outrageous medical bills would strongly disagree that it is a successful system, as would people like John McCain, who simply sees another way to fix the very flawed system;
"the federal government took over two of America’s biggest businesses, General Motors and Chrysler, and ruined thousands of dealerships;"
rather than allowing hundreds of thousands (millions?) to lose their jobs outright if those businesses closed, which also would have brought about the ruin of ALL of the dealerships;
"his “stimulus” efforts have done little and unemployment totals remain high;"
the stimulus kept the economy from failing completely, although unemployment remains a concern that began before Obama took office;
"he has called for a change in the deployment of American missiles in Poland and other countries to defend against Soviet missile attacks;"
as someone else pointed out here, if the Soviets attack Poland, then our world has gone completely crazy;
"and he wants a redistribution of wealth in America,"
by removing the massive tax cuts for the wealthiest of the wealthy that were given during the last administration during a time of war(!) that added greatly to the economic collapse and the dept Obama inherited. Any taxes given to the wealthiest of the wealthy won't even be close to being what the taxes were under Reagan.
Dolph, your love of party is showing.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
The Heisman Trophy & the Grammy for Best Video, here he comes!
Gareth (anonymous) says…
“he has called for a change in the deployment of American missiles in Poland and other countries to defend against Soviet missile attacks;”
Someone should point out to this angry old man that it's not 1964 any more. There haven't been any "Soviets" since the early 1990s.... More than a freakin' *decade* ago!
(Not to mention the public polls in Poland and the Czech Republic that indicated that the majority of the citizens of those countries *didn't want the US missile systems there!*)
....and people wonder why the Republican party has turned into such a joke.
Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…
"he is using every means to change this nation’s successful system of medical care"===This may be the most curious of the editor's assertions. An interesting perspective, but one not uncommon from one who has not worried over a medical bill for decades. In a larger sense, it's always touching to hear people claim the Nobels are 'political.' This is most often found in the discussions of the literature and peace prizes. Are the prizes, in some cases, politically motivated? I am shocked, shocked. "Round up the usual suspects." If awarding the peace prize had no political shadings, Ghandi would have won when it was appropriate. Nobel himself started the prizes as political balm for his guilt over helping to blow so many men, women and children to bits.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
"...In part, Obama’s Nobel is a projection of how Norway—good, decent, provincial, lily-white, xenophobic Norway—would like to see itself. It’s not Obama’s fault if, at the same time, he galvanizes moral vanity in his supporters and inflames visceral hatred in his adversaries. (Indeed, awarding the prize to an as-yet untested Obama ignores the president’s individuality and flattens him into a representative symbol the same way his racist attackers do.) Rather, the Nobel committee has exposed its own fatal myopia. What were they thinking? It’s not just, as many people have rapidly pointed out, that Obama has not yet earned a prize for peace. The true surrealness of awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama is that this very same president will now have to wage what is ultimately going to be a shadowy, unpopular, and ambiguous war with the peace prize figuratively hanging around his neck.
The real meaning, however, of Obama the Nobel Laureate lies in its irony. For the Norwegians, Obama represents the victory of a crowded, cosmopolitan world, where citizenship is defined by proximity to Otherness, and where the problems and struggles of one country are shared by all. But such a place is the precise antithesis of the cloistered, homogenous universe of the Nobel Peace Prize committee—not to mention the one for literature—which is driven by the insecure and parochial need to shoulder itself into current history by issuing big statements, brimming with moral certitude and reprimand, out of their small precincts.
The world is now a more decentered and cosmopolitan place than it was when Alfred Nobel endowed his prize for peace and empowered the Norwegians to bestow it. Continuing to allow them to do so is like letting 12 guys from Bensonhurst decide who the president should be. The very fact—the very absurdity—of Barack Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize proves its obsolescence."
Read the rest at:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-an...
notajayhawk (anonymous) says…
Gareth (Anonymous) says…
"Seriously, guys. Try reading some time."
Seriously, Gareth, try thinking some time. Can you point to even one of the examples you listed whose recipient was involved in his efforts towards peace for less than two weeks when he was nominated?
"Is it too much to ask that the local newspaper reflect the majority politics of the residents?"
Wanna' try again?
http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2009/oc...
***************************************************
frwent (Anonymous) says…
"Fortunately, there are enough reasonable folks in Lawrence to stem the tide of bigotry and racism embraced by the owners of this rag."
And one more time:
http://www2.ljworld.com/polls/2009/oc...
Guess the majority of Lawrencians are racist, fr.
*****************************************
zzgoeb (Anonymous) says…
"Mr. Simon's list of closing Gitmo, apologizing to our allies, etc, is exactly why the committee gave the President the prize."
Um - is Gitmo closed, zz?
*****************************************
porch_person (Anonymous) says…
[whatever he's blathering about today]
Nice of pooch_pinhead to check in. Nothing demonstrates the imbecilic nature of the liberal arguments like a good rant from poochie.
"You run a newspaper. When did the current depression start?"
Hmmm. First poochie doesn't know the difference between single-payer and public option - now he doesn't know the difference bewteen depression and national debt.
"We have the most expensive health care system in the world. We're 33rd in the United Nations' rankings and 46th in the CIA's rankings in infant mortality rate. Again, you run a newspaper. Why aren't you aware of this?"
I'm sure he is, pooch. Unlike you, though, he's also aware that the cost of healthcare is not what causes that infant mortality rate.
"We're coming out of the Depression and the Stock Market is doing quite well at the present. That's a pretty good result for walking into the office nine months ago during the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression.
Again, you run a newspaper. Why don't you know this?"
Now, for extra credit, pooch (and I'm looking forward to a good laugh) - explain how Obama's actions caused the end of the recession.
"I grew up conservative, staunchly conservative."
Uh, yeah. Sure you did.
Anyway, shouldn't 'grew up' be in the future tense, child?
notajayhawk (anonymous) says…
beatrice (Anonymous) says…
"close, yes, but free detainees who are guilty of being enemies of the state? Wrong!"
Nice to know bea is sitting on the parole board, since she evidentaly knows which prisoners will be freed.
"Some would have had us just fail completely, without shoring up the economy, for which there is a price"
Ah, another 'spend-your-way-out-of-economic-problems' kool-aid drinker. That the way you do it at your house, bea? Can't pay the rent so you go shopping?
"the many millions without medical care, and those with insurance who still must go into bankruptcy because of outrageous medical bills"
Ah, yes, being without medical *insurance* is being without medical *care*. Another entitled, 'let's have someone else pay my way' liberal.
And, um, bea, dearie? You really bought into that BS about bankruptcies being mostly caused by medical bills? Seriously?
"the stimulus kept the economy from failing completely, although unemployment remains a concern that began before Obama took office"
There is absolutely no way of proving the economy would have worsened without Obama's interventions, and no responsible economist outside the administration is claiming that was the case. As for unemployment, dearie - what was the rate when he took office?
"by removing the massive tax cuts for the wealthiest of the wealthy that were given during the last administration during a time of war(!) that added greatly to the economic collapse and the dept Obama inherited."
The wealthy got the bulk of the tax cuts because - go figure - they pay most of the taxes. The share of income taxes collected from the wealthy increased after those cuts, dearie - as did total tax revenue. But don't let facts get in the way of a good class-jealous whine.
**************************************************************
Still waiting to see one liberal Larryviller justify this award without either using the words 'not Bush' or talking about what the Messiah hopes, plans, or is going to do.
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
"Unfortunately, character, good manners and personal conduct have been replaced by doing whatever it takes to win ...."
-Dolph C. Simons, Jr.
August 29, 2009
Indeed.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…
"Still waiting to see one liberal Larryviller justify this award without either using the words 'not Bush' or talking about what the Messiah hopes, plans, or is going to do."
Why? Do you like waiting for answers you already know? Or are you just avoiding the more pointed question?
"Why is 'not Bush' such a compelling argument?"
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
"Still waiting to see one liberal Larryviller justify this award without either using the words 'not Bush' or talking about what the Messiah hopes, plans, or is going to do.”
Why must an award be justified to your satisfaction? Are you a member of the Nobel family or something? Isn't the proper response to winning an award either, "thank you" if you are the recipient or "congratulations" if you are not? Do you suppose people care that you don't agree with the decision?
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
"What a pathetic qualifier, jiminy. Heaven forbid family business or someone taking advantage of family success. Why, that should disqualify all progeny from ever having an opinon again. And the LJW isn't even a successful or award winning paper…..whoops."
Actually, jay, it is somewhat relevant, isn't it, if Mr. Simons is complaining that Obama has not achieved enough to deserve this award and he himself was handed his comfort and fortune as an accident of birth, rather than any personal merit. Wasn't it Ann Richards who made the statement about george w. bush starting life at third base and thinking he'd hit a triple. Well, we all now know how accurate she was and the same, it seems to me, applies here. Mr. Simons view would carry weight if he was himself a superior achiever.
cait48 (anonymous) says…
@notajayhawk
"And, um, bea, dearie? You really bought into that BS about bankruptcies being mostly caused by medical bills? Seriously?"
____________________________________________________
http://download.journals.elsevierheal...
This is not BS.
62% of American bankruptcies are linked to medical bills. These medical bankruptcies had increased nearly 50 percent in just six years. 78% of these people actually had health insurance, but the gaps and inadequacies left them unprotected when they were hit by devastating bills.
You want to call it BS? Go argue with the American Journal of Medicine. This is their report.
beatrice (anonymous) says…
Oh, I just love how apoplectic the right is getting over this award for our President. Simply hysterical. The smaller their influence is, the greater their whining. What a hoot!
pilgrim, when you say "playing the race card," are you talking about all the conservatives out there saying Obama won this award because he is black?
nota, who is this Messiah of which you speak? Have you found religion recently? How sweet.
Oh, that's right, you are talking about the "issues." THAT is what is important to you, the issues. You just drive your issue-driven arguments home with comments of the "chosen one" and "messiah." Yep, I am completely convinced that you aren't just following your love of party over country.
"There is absolutely no way of proving the economy would have worsened without Obama's interventions"
Since Obama took action and it didn't get horribly worse, or completely collapse as some were predicting, then I guess you are right. I can't prove it would have gotten worse had Obama done nothing at all. I can just be thankful that he didn't just sit on his thumbs, that he took action and our economy didn't collapse. Now, I guess you can't prove that his actions didn't help, now can you?
Also, if you believe people haven't been driven into bankruptcy because of medical bills, you are a fool. If you just don't care since it hasn't happened to you and you think "screw everyone else, I've got mine," then you are a jerk. I suspect it is some of both.
Further, you are still defending tax cuts for the wealthiest among us at at a time of war and while we have a huge debt? Um, you really don't get why you and your fellow Republicans are on the downside looking up, do you? Too funny.
Finally, "dearie"? Are you still trying to make passes at me? Well, this isn't a dating service. Try craigslist instead. You can probably find what you are looking for over there.
cait48 (anonymous) says…
By the way, @notajayhawk, I object to your tone by calling beatrice "dearie". This an attempt to dehumanize, objectify, juvenilize and belittle your debated opponent. It's also sexist, implying that because she's a female she has less intelligence. This was not used as a term of affection by any means. It was an ad hominem attack and a very sleazy and low one at that.
jaywalker (anonymous) says…
"Actually, jay, it is somewhat relevant, isn't it, if Mr. Simons is complaining that Obama has not achieved enough to deserve this award and he himself was handed his comfort and fortune as an accident of birth, rather than any personal merit."
For the love, scott, NO, it's not relevant whatsoever unless Dolph was awarded the Nobel too. Not for nothin', but you're defending an ad hominem attack by jiminy, nothin' more. He went after the man, nothin' else. And no matter whether Mr. Simons was fortunate enough to have a father who achieved, he's still taken the ball and run the LJW to date, and the paper just won another award for outstanding work.
Considering President Obama had to be nominated for this award after less than a month on the job, I'm hard pressed to see much justification for his receiving it. And even if the nominations weren't done 'til last month, I still don't see a lot of merit behind the award. I'm not bent out of shape about it, but it's rather curious and not just a little peculiar.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/1...
Katara (anonymous) says…
cait48 (Anonymous) says…
By the way, @notajayhawk, I object to your tone by calling beatrice “dearie”. This an attempt to dehumanize, objectify, juvenilize and belittle your debated opponent. It's also sexist, implying that because she's a female she has less intelligence. This was not used as a term of affection by any means. It was an ad hominem attack and a very sleazy and low one at that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Beatrice is not the only person subject to notajayhawk's misogynistic insults. All posters he perceives as female get the "sweetie, dearie, little one, etc." treatment.
It is good to see that others find it unacceptable behavior too.
Katara (anonymous) says…
Pilgrim2 (Anonymous) says…
No, I'm talking about the loons from the left like frwent who call someone racist or an entire political party racist simply because they don't agree with him, but he has nothing else to fall back on.
There was nothing in that editorial that could be considered racist, but the charge has been leveled here multiple times. Those are the ones playing the race card, and it's obvious it's because they have nothing else.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Would you consider this "playing the race card"?
"Erick Erickson, writing on the conservative RedState.com, suggested Obama won in part because he is black.
“I did not realize the Nobel Peace Prize had an affirmative action quota for it, but that is the only thing I can think of for this news,” Erickson wrote."
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/oct...
beatrice (anonymous) says…
cait48, don't worry about notajay. I've knocked him around so many times on these boards that his sad little attempt at being condescending is just about all he has left for ammunition. This is sad, but true. Some guys just can't handle having their butts handed to them by someone they consider their "inferior." In the end, it just makes it that much easier to continue to knock holes in his pathetic excuses for arguments.
barry: "The people that want to destroy western civilization are being duped by the Poser."
Hyperbole much?
First off, it is "people WHO," not people "that" want to destroy western civilization. He also isn't a "poser," he actually is the President of the United States of America, elected by your fellow citizens. I'm sorry you hate Americans so much that you wish to diminish their votes. I have no doubt that you would prefer to live in a ultra-conservative, one-party society.
"fancy jet, fancy car" -- are you talking about Air Force One, and the presidential limosine? You do know that each president is provided these, don't you? Further, you know that the guy you voted for, John McCain, owns SEVEN houses, don't you? That his multi-millionaire wife said that the "ONLY" way to travel in Arizona was on a private plane, don't you? And you are complaining about the President's use of Air Force One? Too funny.
By reading your posts barry, I'm thinking that maybe Darwin was wrong after all.
beatrice (anonymous) says…
Pilgrim, I agree that just accusing someone of racism where none is obvious is wrong. It absolutely has happened too many times concerning the opposition to Obama. However, I would hope you would be able to see that those who make claims that Obama won the award just because he is black, or that he is president just because he is black (because, you know, blacks have such a long history of being president that it is a shoe-in that he would win), they too are playing the race card. Can't you see how the race card is being played in this manner as well?
If those who are saying he is only where he is because he is black aren't playing the race card, then they are really just being racist. Either way, it should stop -- in both directions.
jaywalker (anonymous) says…
"Would you consider this “playing the race card”?"
'Course it is, Katara. But it still doesn't change Pilgrim's point one iota.
Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…
It appears some of the O.D.S. brothers are nervous because Obama represents everything they fear, up to and including a powerful black man.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
Psst, Kathy, you do remember who Dear Leader's mother was, don't you?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Dunham
Ann's mother, Madelyn Dunham raised Dear Leader from the time he was ten until he left for college.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madelyn_...
Reality sort of puts a dent Dear Leader's essential blackness, don't you think.
Katara (anonymous) says…
jaywalker (Anonymous) says…
“Would you consider this “playing the race card”?”
'Course it is, Katara. But it still doesn't change Pilgrim's point one iota.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I was just curious about how he would downplay it and I see he didn't disappoint.
It is a play of last resort for both conservatives and liberals. Using the "race card" when there is no legitimate reason to believe race is a factor is bad enough but the whole concept of "playing the race card" suggests that one should not take racial discrimination seriously. It dismisses the seriousness of legitimate concerns in discussions about race by suggesting that minorities can always "fall back" on that reason just because.
lounger (anonymous) says…
Once again congrats to Obama and poo poo all you whiners !
jaywalker (anonymous) says…
"..but the whole concept of “playing the race card” suggests that one should not take racial discrimination seriously"
I respectfully disagree, Katara, that is if I i'm correct in my understanding of where you're going with that point. Speaking strictly from a personal pov and the people that are close to me, racism is not something to be taken lightly. And while I'm certain some people do throw the 'playing the race card' phrase out there in order to downplay the issue, I believe there's a greater number of people who are completely empathetic to the struggles and history of minorities here. But the classics in the game: Jackson, Farakahn, Sharpton, et al., have lost nearly all credibility and, I would argue, have done more to hinder their cause than help it. Short story:
In a creative writing class at KU there was a girl who was very smart and a very involved feminist. Problem was, EVERYthing was 'an affront to women'. And I do mean everything. A guy wrote a story about a Topeka gang, definitely 1st hand knowledge, and she went ape over the fact that the women in the story were subservient. After nearly a semester of listening to such rants, I lost it a bit and tore her down in front of the class. I felt awful afterwards. She approached me with a friend after class and asked why or what had she done? I apologized for my harshness, but I told her, no one's a bigger fan of women than I. By far, women are the superior gender and have it much rougher than men. But beating people over the head with a position at ev-er-y sin-gle opportunity, especially when a rational person knows their position in certain instances is ridiculously placed, can only lead to two things:
1. You take away your own crediblilty and will be hard pressed to get it back.
2. You alienate those that would normally back you.
Too often we see people on these boards and in the media who will throw out that card, and merely because one party has one pigmentation and the other another. Such cases are frivolous and only accomplish the two numbered points above. A solid majority (I believe) of people who point out others are 'playing the race card' aren't trying to diminish the seriousness of racial discrimination. They're sayin, "please don't piss down my leg and tell me it's rainin' ".
Katara (anonymous) says…
jaywalker (Anonymous) says…
I apologized for my harshness, but I told her, no one's a bigger fan of women than I.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That has to sound like one of the cheesiest pickup lines around. I really hope you did not tell that woman that. :P
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
jaywalker (Anonymous) says…
I respectfully disagree, Katara, that is if I i'm correct in my understanding of where you're going with that point. Speaking strictly from a personal pov and the people that are close to me, racism is not something to be taken lightly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And that's cool that you've experienced that.
I've worked in areas where the majority of the workers were black and the white workers would talk quite a bit about how the black workers would play the race card over this or that when nothing further was from the truth. Quite a few of the white workers would claim that the black workers got special treatment or they would play the race card to get "out of trouble". From my observations, management treated everyone the same - crappy. But it didn't stop the accusations of "playing the race card". It made the workplace pretty unpleasant when it didn't have to be that way.
There are people who cry wolf all the time. It happens regardless of race, gender, etc. But think about the actual phrase "playing the race card". It is dismissive. It pooh-poohs the issue. The whole phase is worded to be that way. That is the intention of it. A minority may very well perceive a situation to be discriminatory or racist and you may not. Who is to say your perception is superior and what right do you have to dismiss that person's perception of what is happening? Questioning a person's claim is legitimate but the phrase doesn't question, it assumes.
Dismissing others' concerns is not productive nor does it help to diffuse what may turn into a tense situation. The goal is to get along, right? You can't accomplish that if you refuse to listen to where the other person is coming from or why they perceive the situation as they do.
merrill (anonymous) says…
*People around the world have:
*had 8 years of observing Bush and his RINO pals disrespecting women
* had 8 years of Bush and RINO's blowing off the environment
*have watched two republican RINO administrations screw up USA and world economics
*watched the USA occupy the mideast under RINO admins
* had 8 years of Bush flipping the bird to the rest of the world
* have watched the USA gov't do nothing to stop the USA from no longer being THE world
financial superpower
* watched 3 RINO administrations put 20 million people out of work over the past 30 years.
It 's plain and simple the rest of the world IS NOT worshipping the arrogance of the USA government. Those days may be gone forever.
bushco rino's have deeply scarred the USA image.
Obviously the world sees hope in a new administration....
merrill (anonymous) says…
This is something to never forget. It is the private medical insurance industry that cancels YOUR medical insurance AFTER taking your money for years.
This could never happen with National Health Insurance
Filing bankruptcy due to medical care would never happen with National Health Insurance
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
"Obviously the world sees hope in a new administration…."
Let's call it a preemptive award and be done with it. Right wingers been big supporters of preemptive acts, after all (at least with regard to wars and invasions.) Anyway, they're giving him the award now so that they don't have to later.
jaywalker (anonymous) says…
"The goal is to get along, right? You can't accomplish that if you refuse to listen to where the other person is coming from or why they perceive the situation as they do"
And like I explained, that noble goal of 'getting along' won't be accomplished by beating people over the head with your cause at every opportunity. I'm not trying to downplay others perception of a situation. But it's ridiculous to believe that someone with even average intelligence can't tell the difference between the truly offensive and the frivolous injection of race into a situation. People can't expect to get the benefit of the doubt 'just because', and it'll inevitably lead to resentment and hinder their initial message.
Like I said, I'm certain there are those that use that phrase to water down the issue. .But that doesn't mean when others point it out it's not valid and true.
"Who is to say your perception is superior and what right do you have to dismiss that person's perception of what is happening?"
Never said it was superior, just my perception. But I reserve the right to 'dismiss' another's perception if it's obviously illogical and/or ridiculous. I have a brain, you have a brain, it's not usually that difficult to see or smell the bs.
"That has to sound like one of the cheesiest pickup lines around. I really hope you did not tell that woman that. :P"
Ha! That is funny. Not a chance of that for a couple of reasons, I assure you, but I can see what you're sayin'.
I'm confident she didn't take it as such, though.
gphawk89 (anonymous) says…
"Just what has the president accomplished to win the votes of those who determine the winners of the Nobel Prizes handed out in various categories?"
A portion of "those who determine the winners" are basically communists. Draw your own conclusions...
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
"A portion of “those who determine the winners” are basically communists. Draw your own conclusions…"
One of the committee members is Kaci Kullmann Five, former member of Parliament and cabinet minister for the Conservative Party.
Get the facts to draw valid conclusions.
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
Nobel's will provided:
"a Nobel Peace Prize should be awarded "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"
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
Merril as to what happened to the TARP bailout money, well, the last half was given to Geitner and Obama.
That is where half of it went.
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
Merril Wrote:
"This is something to never forget. It is the private medical insurance industry that cancels YOUR medical insurance AFTER taking your money for years.
This could never happen with National Health Insurance
Filing bankruptcy due to medical care would never happen with National Health Insurance"
Oh, no? What about all the "Federal Back and insured" home loans that got foreclosed?
Those people lost their houses.
Just coz you say it don't make it so.
Like the "Freddie and Fannie" bailout, that was supposed to cost $25 billion, then went to $100 and now is $348 in one year???? What this means is that the CBO and the U.S. Government's predictions at best SUCK and at workd are totally wrong. This happens bailout after bailout...
and now you want to hand them helath care. They state $859 billion over 10 years, and if all holds true 4 to 10 times that amount will be tha actual increase.
IF Obama passes this Healthcare bill he will become the most reviled President ever.
snap_pop_no_crackle (anonymous) says…
I wonder if the O'dude is getting his nose candy direct from the DEA since he moved into 1600 Penn. Ave....
yourworstnightmare (anonymous) says…
Mr. Simons is correct that President Obama has yet to accomplish enough to warrant a Nobel Prize.
It is also true that, if viewed in this way, this decision weakens the Nobel Prize's significance and also puts Obama in a bad spot.
However, the Nobel prize is an award to individuals. I think that by awarding the Nobel Prize to Obama, it was symbolically awarded to the American people and to American democracy. Obama said this himself, and I think he is correct.
The 2008 election was a testament to the power and practicality of American democracy: the ability to change leadership and direction when the people see things going in the wrong direction.
Obama has actually accomplished very little. I for one am a bit disappointed by his hesitancy. I think this is because Obama is a conservative in practice, much more conservative than Clinton would have been. He is cautious about every move he makes.
This frustrates liberals on the left, but should be a good sign to moderates and conservatives.
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
"I think that by awarding the Nobel Prize to Obama, it was symbolically awarded to the American people and to American democracy. Obama said this himself, and I think he is correct.The 2008 election was a testament to the power and practicality of American democracy: the ability to change leadership and direction when the people see things going in the wrong direction."
I agree and that doesn't frustrate me one bit
beatrice (anonymous) says…
Tom: "Porch, never denied W *had* a booze problem, but you and your far-left propaganda/smear machine..."
Porch, you never told me you own a "far-left propaganda/smear machine"! Those things are expensive, especially if you get the ones that make espresso on the side.
Asbestos: "IF Obama passes this Healthcare bill he will become the most reviled President ever."
I believe the word you are looking for isn't "reviled," but "revered." If Obama can accomplish a significant reforrm to health-care that helps provide all Americans access, something no other president has been able to do, he will prove himself to have done something truly significant for America. I'm sorry you don't think all Americans are worthy of affordable health care.
beatrice (anonymous) says…
porch, sweet! I just went for the hand-held, battery operated, far-left propaganda / smear machine myself. It was all I could afford at the time, so I don't get the extras, but I do like its smearing ability while traveling. I use rechargable batteries to help protect the environment.
beatrice (anonymous) says…
Pig! ;)
beatrice (anonymous) says…
exotic locales ... like Norway!
jayhawklawrence (anonymous) says…
I think it is important for the American President to be liked by the people of the world. Winning the award is just another indicator of how much he is liked around the world.
I am very happy for the President even though I don't expect to agree with him all the time. I do expect him to do the best job he can possibly do in a tough situation.
I am an independent with strong Republican friends and relatives. But even some of them are finally getting sick of the Republican Party.
commuter (anonymous) says…
If Obama wins the award for talking about what he wants to do, if he doesn't do anything significant, does he have to give the award back????