Friday, October 9th, 2009...6:26 am

Neon Lights, a Nobel Prize

Jump to Comments

As much as I am enjoying the grand mal seizures that this has already inspired on the right, it does seem to be a bit premature doesn’t it?

Written by: Tedski on 9 October 2009.

33 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama, Gratuitous Music Reference

33 Comments

  • Bruce AshNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 8:30 am

    Just a tad premature

  • Eli_BlakeNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 8:39 am

    With all due respect to President Obama, Morgan Tsvangarai deserved this award, if for nothing else the period after he withdrew from the election to save his supporters from more beatings and murder and then called on them to continue to work within the system, as corrupt as it is, and not to take to the hills as many of them wanted to do. Robert Mugabe must be a very relieved man this morning.

    Apparently the White House is surprised by this, and to be honest so am I.

    I fully support what President Obama is trying to do in re-integrating the U.S. into the international community but most of what he intends to do remains largely undone as yet. I’d thought that awards were supposed to go to people based on what they have done, not on what you hope they will do.

    With all due respect to the President and the committee, if hope and inspiration are now what you base the award on, why did they give the Nobel Chemistry prize to actual Chemists instead of giving it to “Bill Nye, the Science Guy” for inspiring kids to study more science?

  • Kanye WestNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 8:52 am

    Obama, I’m really happy for you, and I’ma let you finish, but MLK had one of the best Nobel Peace Prizes of all time.

  • VWgalNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 8:56 am

    The media sure is going to have a hay day over this… kinda fustrating when we have actual topics of importance to discuss and actual work to be done.

    Some day up the line, I would have no issue with him getting this amazing award… but it just seems like such odd timing and just too soon.

  • Crabby PirateNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 9:36 am

    Another distraction. Another point of ridicule by the Right. What a weird year.

    r.

  • Julian DillerNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 9:47 am

    Aren’t we increasing troops in Afghanistan? And I don’t exactly remember the date the troops left Iraq. This seems way to premature.

    I agree with Eli_Blake. Should have gone to Tsvangarai.

  • SteveNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 9:58 am

    It IS premature. Sure he’s killed some innocent women and children in Pakistan, and yes he has escalated the unnecessary and evil war in Afghanistan. But Teddy Roosevelt had to kill a LOT of Filipinos to earn his Nobel Peace Prize. And let’s not forget how many people Wilson murdered to win his Nobel Peace Prize.

  • Francine ShacterNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 10:11 am

    Ah! but what you are not recognizing is that Obama has made diplomacy his first line of defense against the idiocy of war! As an old dog trainer, I am reminded that behavior which is reinforced will – not may, but will – recur!!! So, I say Hooray!!!

  • SteveNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 11:10 am

    @Francine

    It is actions that matter. Not rhetoric. Who cares if he has changed the tone in international diplomacy, if the result is the same? That is all I am saying.

    I guess some people just yearn to be convincingly lied to.

  • SteveNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 11:14 am

    I wonder if the U.S. attacking Iran would be enough to jar Obama supporters out of their amazing cognitive dissonance. Somehow I doubt it. Lefties hate war until they’re in charge. Then it’s just dandy.

  • BrittNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 11:16 am

    Britt Farbo
    Actually the head of the nominating committee is a man name Thorbjørn Jagland who is subsequently the was the speaker of the Norwegian Parliament and is now the Secretary General of the Council of Europe. He is a major proponent of the European Union here in Norway. I am curious if the choice of Obama is a signal to the rest of the world that America is now more of a stable diplomatic force than it has been in the past eight years. And the choice stems less from the man and more of a mea culpa to the American people so to speak.

    I am also curious on less of an idealistic front to see if that this also has something to do with the waning support by the Norwegian people on the troop presence in Afghanistan and the potential for Norway to tap into the larger renewable and fossil fuel markets in the US. I highly doubt that it was altruism on the part of the Norwegian government as much as I love them…They are a government none the less.

    I also find it ironic that the announce was held on Leif Erickson Day.

  • azw88No Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 11:37 am

    Read the reasons they gave for awarding President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize…. if you look carefully between the lines, hidden like some secret message like you’d expect from the plot in a Dan Brown novel you will see the words:
    “FUCK YOU GEORGE BUSH!”

  • aztemblorNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 11:50 am

    The world understands it if the US doesn’t. For the last 8 years, if the Nobel Committee had a Nobel War Prize, that is what they would have awarded the Bush U.S. Over that time, the US has thumbed its nose at the world on every major issue. Now, the Nobel Committee is signaling that it and the world appreciate Obama bringing the US into the international community again.

  • DonnaNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 12:39 pm

    WTF, people. I cannot BELIEVE what I’m reading here.

    Obama deserves the prize. Period. That there were others who you think “more deserving” doesn’t diminish the presence and impact of Barack Obama on the world stage since he was a candidate. Go to youtube and watch video clips of the world reaction to his election night victory. The celebrations weren’t just in U.S. cities. The entire planet erupted in a cheer of joy and relief when he won. He was an astonishing candidate, who ran an amazing campaign, and gave billions of people around the world and hope for the future. That’s why they nominated him when he’d “only” been President 2 weeks.

    Congratulations, President Obama.

  • Eli_BlakeNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 1:01 pm

    Donna,

    Consider for a moment though that President Carter had to server for four years as President without starting or escalating any wars, broker peace between Israel and it’s largest neighbor and then spend decades promoting peace before he won.

    As to the previous sitting Presidents, Theodore Roosevelt won for brokering a peace treaty ending the Russo-Japanese war and Wilson won for founding the League of Nations (even though Congress didn’t let the U.S. join it.)

    I’m not saying that Obama’s victory isn’t an inspiration, it is– absolutely. But a prize like this should be given for what someone has done, not for what you hope or even believe they will do. This is the equivalent of naming a freshman as the future valedictorian of your class. You may expect them to achieve that title, but they still have to earn the grades first.

    I’m encouraged by Obama’s foreign policy direction (except for Afghanistan and rendition) and his taking the lead in pushing for an obvious change by replacing the G-8 with the G-20 was a big step forward.

    But think of it this way– suppose for the sake of argument that Obama does something really big in terms of peace in a year or two like produces a comprehensive Middle East peace deal, ends the war in the Congo or negotiates a peaceful reunification of Korea. Do they not give him the award then because he got it today mainly just for getting elected?

  • azw88No Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 1:33 pm

    Donna, I didn’t say he didn’t deserve it, but you have to admit when reading the reasons they gave, this was a big flip-off to GWB.

  • Bruce AshNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 3:23 pm

    Actually the award is a preemptive wave off from any potential US attack on Iran nuke sites. How could a Nobel Peace Prize recipient ever dare to attack Iran ( or Pakistan or where ever ) ?

    Pretty smart of them guys in Oslo ( and Tehran and Islamabad ) to figger this all out !!

  • Tom PrezelskiNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 4:40 pm

    Is Bruce Ash aware that some imbalanced loon who can’t spell is using his name to post wacky things on this blog? He should do something about this, as it might negatively affect his reputation in this community.

    Perhaps “Bruce” should get together for a chat with “Steve,” who posted above. “Steve” says that Obama already has a secret plan to attack Iran. One of you is not following the talking points.

  • DonnaNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 5:10 pm

    Damn, Bruce, you’ve foiled those crafty Norwegians again!

  • Thane EichenauerNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 6:03 pm

    I’ll have to say that Bruce Ash (impersonator) and Steve have made some great points.

    If awarding the Nobel peace prize to Obama keeps Iran from being pre-emptively bombed, I will have to support his re-nomination each year for the next 4-8 years.

  • Eli_BlakeNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 7:07 pm

    Thane:

    I believe based on what President Obama has been trying to do regarding Iran and what their reaction has been that he has figured out where they are most vulnerable and they know he has and are working to prevent it.

    Let me quote from a post I wrote more than three years ago:

    http://tiodt.blogspot.com/2006/08/iran-defies-un-and-what-we-should-do.html

    And what should we do about Iran…?

    That’s an easy one. Trade with them…

    In Iran, 2/3 of the population is under thirty, and they don’t remember the Shah, Ayatollah Khomeini or the revolution. Many of them hate living under the strictures of an Islamic society. Young people in Iran want reform, and they want a better life, which despite the countries’ oil wealth they aren’t getting. Ordinary Iranians don’t hate us, and in fact the only way that Ahmadinejad got elected was that the mullahs who pull the strings there had to disqualify many candidates from the ballot and manipulate the election in ways that make Katherine Harris look like a picture of integrity. People in Iran want something else, and American and western goods, music and celebrities, while officially on the ‘bad’ list, are very popular in the subculture that exists among the youth in Iran. A current of wanting to break out of the vicelike grip of this society is bubbling just under the surface and the mullahs have to spend a great deal of effort now just to keep it under wraps.

    And we have the perfect weapon to deal with Tehran. The same weapons that brought down the thousands of nukes in the former Soviet Union, and the same weapons that we haven’t used against North Korea or Cuba (hint: alone among old line traditional communist societies, they still stand.)

    Disney. McDonalds. Hillary Duff. MTV.

    And with products, inevitably follow ideas.

    I’m surprised conservatives (who are still railing for an invasion of Iran, as if we have some secret armies somewhere that are just waiting for the command) don’t see this. If anyone would see it, I’d expect it to be conservatives.

    Some conservatives praise free trade, suggesting that the market determines the direction of society, and point out that it was free trade that opened the door behind the iron curtain that evetually led the people there to replace their system with a free system. Other conservatives bemoan monetary mammon and the effect materialism has on the religious fervor and strength of society.

    And that’s why we should unleash our best weapon on Iran.

    Let mammon go to work.

    If he gets his way with Iran the regime there, which is an unnatural form of government to begin with, will begin to crumble and they won’t be able to prevent it. I think we’ve already seen symptoms of what I was writing about three years ago. The governmental system in Iran is an unnatural one and to maintain power it has to butress itself internally by having an external bogeyman, and we’ve served that role for thirty years. Take the butress away, the regime will fall.

    If we quit looking at Iran as an enemy and recognize that there is a whole generation of young Iranians who want something different we can help them make those changes from the inside (remember what happened in the Soviet Union.)

  • SaraNo Gravatar
    October 9th, 2009 at 7:29 pm

    I’m happy that our President was given this prestigious award, but the best part of the whole thing for me was listening to the sound of wingnut heads exploding!

  • BrittNo Gravatar
    October 10th, 2009 at 12:27 am

    Ja, vi nordmenn er veldig flink. Osgå Nobels Fredspris er lutefisk dekket i gull.

  • Matt CapalbyNo Gravatar
    October 10th, 2009 at 8:37 pm

    All right people, we definitely have a case of not seeing the forest for the trees. Honestly, think about the last eight months, he has put together the best foreign relations team our nation has had since George Marshall. He has the best people in the business, unlike Bush’s political hacks. The President has the most kick-ass Secretary of State in forty -five years, Mitchell in the Middle East, Holbrook in Pakistan, Bosworth dealing with North Korea, General Gration dealing with Darfur, Susan Rice at the UN. That’s like Jordan leading the U.S. Olympic Basketball Dream Team. They have brought about more significant and profound peaceful change in the last eight months than has occurred in the last eight years.

    When the President came to power, the international community was at odds and adrift. While recognizing there is still a long way to go, there is general concurrence that the international community is cooperating and moving in a positive and peaceful direction.

    Yes, there were others such as Tsvangarai that were deserving but there impacts have been regional at best. Obama has affected positive and peaceful change across the board. Unfortunately many of us are unable to see this due to the horrible and degraded level of discourse our nation has fallen into. To me, the President winning the Nobel was a no-brainer.

  • Eli_BlakeNo Gravatar
    October 10th, 2009 at 10:40 pm

    Matt,

    He has made some real changes in U.S. foreign policy, I don’t disagree with that (though at least in the case of Afghanistan I’m not sure I agree with them.)

    However, it appears that he may have in effect gotten this award simply by not being Bush. I’m glad he’s not Bush, but until we see his foreign policy team (which he is still at the helm of) producing a real change someplace, such as the examples of some of the things that we can only hope to see one day that I posted in the last paragraph of my response yesterday to Donna at 1:01 PM, I don’t see how he should get this award after only eight months in office.

  • Penny LaneNo Gravatar
    October 11th, 2009 at 3:43 pm

    What a sham. What a piece of crapp. Barrack Hussein Obama MMM MMMM MMMMM
    Peace? He can’t help withthe 508 chicagoans brutally murdered in his adored streets of Chicago. A young kid gets his brains beat out and this worthless louse of a president send Eric HOlder to the 4 Seasons Hotel in Chicago to bring about change. What a laugh. Hysterical. Norwegian people are fruity, stupid, silly, inane, pompous, smug and just plain pieces of crapp. I picked up dog dirt with the article and their faces.

  • Matt CapalbyNo Gravatar
    October 11th, 2009 at 7:26 pm

    Yep, need I say more in regards to discourse? I remember in the not to distant past, that such comments regarding the President would be considered un-American, un-patriotic and treasonous. Oh the hypocrisy.

  • aztemblorNo Gravatar
    October 12th, 2009 at 9:45 am

    Nice thoughtful comment, Penny Lane. It’s intelligent analysis that has made our country great. Please use the napkin to wipe the foam away before you leave the table.

  • Eli_BlakeNo Gravatar
    October 12th, 2009 at 10:03 am

    According to conservatives, I guess Norwegian must be the new French.

  • Walt StephensonNo Gravatar
    October 13th, 2009 at 9:50 am

    You do realize of course the cutoff date to nominate was twelve days after Obama came into office.

  • TedskiNo Gravatar
    October 13th, 2009 at 10:11 am

    Walt-

    Apropos of what? You know that the deliberation process takes months. That’s a handy but deceptive trope you guys have been flinging around. Next, please.

  • PaisistratusNo Gravatar
    October 13th, 2009 at 7:47 pm

    Penny Lane:

    Some things that will now be changed:

    1. It will henceforth be taught that Leif Erickssen was an American, who went on a voyage of self-discovery.

    2. ‘Lute’ will only refer to a former Wildcat basketball coach, never to a fish.

    3. The viking homeland has always been Minnesota.

    4. ‘Fjord’ is the name of an American automobile company, founded by Henry Fjord.

    5. Oslo is the name of a fictitious place in a book by Frank L. Baum, where Dorothy-o was taken to by a tornadolo.

    6. A renewed emphasis will be placed on William of Normandy’s successful conquest of England in 1066, especially the part about how it happened after the Norwegians failed.

    7. “Norway” will now mean ‘done Grover Norquist’s way.’

    8. Roald Amundsen made his fortune in the South. (OK to play ‘Dixie’ when you teach this.)

    9. By 1492, most Europeans had developed sail powered caravels for long ocean voyages. By the twentieth century the Norwegians had finally advanced to where they could build the Kon-Tiki.

    10. Quisling was still a Norwegian.

  • SkenwNo Gravatar
    October 23rd, 2009 at 9:52 am

    You need to finish the gratuitous reference:
    “Neon lights, a Nobel Prize
    The mirror speaks, the reflection lies”

hidden hit counter

Rum, Romanism and Rebellion is using WP-Gravatar