The Nobel

Not sure why he was given it, other than as a repudiation of the Bush way of doing things, but man I am enjoying the freak-out from the usual suspects.

Allahpundit sounds like he is about to stroke out, Breitbart probably won’t speak for two weeks, and this is yet another opportunity for Republicans to show the entire country what assholes they can be.

I’m really looking forward to it. There should be some pretty quality stuff coming from the wingnuts who just 24 hours ago were getting themselves worked into a froth over the art in the White House.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit






158 replies
  1. 1
    Hunter Gathers says:

    Comedy Gold for the next 2 weeks. Hi-larious.

  2. 2
    SGEW says:

    Where did you get that video?! Magnificent!

    The Wingularity has been breached . . . Oh, the humanity!

  3. 3
    Shawn in ShowMe says:

    Shorter Nobel:

    “Sorry the IOC dissed you dawg, we got ya back.”

  4. 4
    Kevin K. says:

    Some of the reactions from the primary deadenders (I will not summon the acronym) and the insufferables on the left are pretty great, too. Frankly, I’m shocked it didn’t got to Peter Daou for his emo poem “Like All of Us” for Sarah Palin.

  5. 5
    Joshua Norton says:

    Not sure why he was given it

    Probably because, unlike the last resident of the White House, he can actually pronounce “Nuclear”. The nutters will probably claim affirmative action is to blame.

  6. 6
    Delta says:

    I admit it, my primary political emotion these days is schadenfreude, and today will give me many opportunities to indulge in it.

  7. 7
    Notorious P.A.T. says:

    Do wingnuts even believe in, or value, peace?

  8. 8
    Evinfuilt says:

    He got it for:

    A) not named George Bush
    B) Didn’t bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.

  9. 9
    Xenos says:

    I expect that Obama will find a way to accept the prize in such a way that gives credit to W. for his good works (opposing the trafficking in women, whatever he did in Africa) as well, and thereby with some class accept the award on behalf of the country as a whole. And then the wingnuts will complain about his narcissism some more.

  10. 10
    Tattoosydney says:

    Bwaaaaahahahahahahahahah! Hah. Hee. Who knew that DougJ was on the Nobel Peace Prize committee?

  11. 11
    stacie says:

    Those Norwegians are going to feel dumb when a shooting war breaks out in Alabama.

  12. 12
    dmsilev says:

    I hereby declare the Nobel Committee the winner of this year’s Best Internet Trolling award.

    -dms

  13. 13
    LoveMonkey says:

    Not sure why he was given it

    The answer is right out there, Google is your friend.

    The award is generally given to encourage the recipient to pursue his efforts for peace all the more diligently. Not for past accomplishments.

    See the previous thread.

  14. 14
    Notorious P.A.T. says:

    @Kevin K.:
    That column is hilarious!

  15. 15
    Incertus says:

    Like TNC said, Limbaugh is going to be all-world today, Beck will be all-universe. Media Matters is going to have to take on extra people for the next couple of weeks, I’ll bet.

  16. 16
    adolphus says:

    What I find interesting is that so many of the right wing blow-hard were already pronouncing his presidency a fat failure, with a culture of corruption, etc etc. It seems to me if they get to judge him a failure after only nine months, isn’t it fair that someone else gets to judge him a resounding success after only nine months?

    Just sayin’.

  17. 17
    oh really says:

    It seems a bit premature.

    Perhaps, the Nobel committee should have just issued a press release stating the obvious: “The Nobel Committee wants the world to know we think George W. Bush (not to mention Dick Cheney) was a colossal POS.”

    I sure hope that exploding heads don’t contribute to climate change or we’re in trouble. The Winger heads that are empty don’t pose a threat, it’s the ones that are full of shit that worry me.

  18. 18
    Rob C. says:

    As fun as it is to watch yet another wingnut meltdown, I’m pretty astounded by this move. I mean – the Nobel Peace Price? What the f**k for?!

  19. 19
    El Cid says:

    As was suggested on Sadly No!, this is partly the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Americans for not having voted for President Sarahgeddon, and to Barack Obama for not being George W. Bush.

  20. 20
    JK says:

    There should be some pretty quality stuff coming from the wingnuts

    Quality stuff from the MSM

    George Packer’s reaction

    President Obama should thank the Nobel committee and ask them to hold on to the Peace Prize for a couple more years. The prize should be awarded for achievement, not aspiration, and so far Obama’s main achievement has been getting elected President, which is in a different category. He shouldn’t contribute to the unfair accusation that he is all talk by accepting an award based on speeches he gave in Berlin, Prague, and Cairo. Europeans’ relief in seeing the last of George W. Bush and their adoration of Obama are entirely understandable, but in the U.S. we’ve moved on from November 4, 2008, and these days Obama is—in a way that’s both inevitable and healthy—a working President, with his share of troubles and mistakes, who is trying to get some difficult things done but hasn’t come close to accomplishing them yet. This seems like a prize for Europeans, not Americans, and I worry that at home it will damage him politically by reinforcing the notion that he is—and will be—a world icon rather than a successful President. I don’t mind him being the former, but I most want him to be the latter. Not even a Rookie of the Year is ready to be elected to the Hall of Fame. I’m afraid this prize will be bad for Obama. For political reasons and on the merits, he should quote Shakespeare to the Nobel committee: “As you shall prove me, praise me.”

    h/t http://www.newyorker.com/onlin.....rizes.html

    Mark Knoller Tweets

    Should Pres. Obama accept the Nobel Prize? Should he suggest the award is premature and there might be others more deserving?

    Even WH trying to figure out how to spin the awarding of the Prize to Pres. Obama for the promise of his policies rather than achievements.

    The Nobel Committee risks being discredited for a political decision honoring aspirations for peace rather than a concrete accomplishment.

    Do we now mark Norway as a “blue state” for awarding Nobel Prize to Pres. Obama?

    http://twitter.com/markknoller

    John Dickerson’s reaction

    The award has essentially been given for the president’s speechmaking ability, which means his political handlers made the right call by sending him to Berlin during last year’s election. The prize highlights the juxtaposition between the 44th and 43rd presidents: from a verbally challenged leader who seemed at time to revel in shunning world opinion to a wordsmith who came to office promising to embrace the globe.

    The award will feed into the automatic sorting mechanism of politics. Conservatives who scoffed that Obama’s Olympic defeat meant a drop in prestige should, by the same logic, herald this as an even greater spike in the same. They won’t, because no one gets a prize for consistency.

    Other parties that benefit from the prize are the producers at Fox News, who now know what they’re going to talk about this weekend. Pundits win because the Nobel committee has validated the idea that speeches and atmospherics are really important. The award also offers the opportunity for all of us elites to do what we do best, which is miss how regular people might react. While we’re talking about how the Nobel committee has jumped the shark, some people might like that a president who they elected, in part, to improve America’s image in the world has been rewarded for it.

    http://www.slate.com/id/2231909/

    Mickey Kaus’ reaction

    Turn it down! Politely decline. Say he’s honored but he hasn’t had the time yet to accomplish what he wants to accomplish. Result: He gets at least the same amount of glory–and helps solve his narcissism problem and his Fred Armisen (‘What’s he done?’) problem, demonstrating that he’s uncomfortable with his reputation as a man overcelebrated for his potential long before he’s started to realize it. … Plus he doesn’t have to waste time, during a fairly crucial period, working on yet another grand speech. … And the downside is … what? That the Nobel Committee feels dissed? … P.S.: It’s not as if Congress is going to think, well, he’s won the Nobel Peace Prize so let’s pass health care reform. But the possibility for a Nobel backlash seems non-farfetched. …

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/blo.....prize.aspx

  21. 21
    Napoleon says:

    I doubt I would have voted for Obama at this point in his career if I was on the NPP committee, but I am so glad they gave it to him for how it is going to give the media and the right in this country another opportunity to show how far they are separated from normal people.

  22. 22
    Comrade Jake says:

    I think the best thing on this I’ve seen so far is that the Taliban have described the situation as “unjust”. I have to laugh at these guys thinking about Obama getting the Nobel peace prize while they’re dodging American artillery.

  23. 23
    Brick Oven Bill says:

    The reason for the Nobel Peace Prize is the soft bigotry of low expectations.

    Racists.

  24. 24
    Delta says:

    Moderation? Is it because I said schadenfreude? I can’t help it. Watching the right wing give themselves fits just amuses the heck out of me. Or maybe I should go back to being an observer instead of a commenter.

  25. 25
    El Cid says:

    The reason for the Nobel Peace Prize is the soft bigotry of low expectations.

    Exactly. Look at how easy it was for an immigrant like Kissinger to get it while in the midst of carpet-bombing an entire nation and undermining peace talks in the U.S. war against Vietnam. Immigrant lovers.

  26. 26
    JK says:

    MSM to Obama: GIVE IT BACK

    George Packer’s reaction

    President Obama should thank the Nobel committee and ask them to hold on to the Peace Prize for a couple more years. The prize should be awarded for achievement, not aspiration, and so far Obama’s main achievement has been getting elected President, which is in a different category. He shouldn’t contribute to the unfair accusation that he is all talk by accepting an award based on speeches he gave in Berlin, Prague, and Cairo. Europeans’ relief in seeing the last of George W. Bush and their adoration of Obama are entirely understandable, but in the U.S. we’ve moved on from November 4, 2008, and these days Obama is—in a way that’s both inevitable and healthy—a working President, with his share of troubles and mistakes, who is trying to get some difficult things done but hasn’t come close to accomplishing them yet. This seems like a prize for Europeans, not Americans, and I worry that at home it will damage him politically by reinforcing the notion that he is—and will be—a world icon rather than a successful President. I don’t mind him being the former, but I most want him to be the latter. Not even a Rookie of the Year is ready to be elected to the Hall of Fame. I’m afraid this prize will be bad for Obama. For political reasons and on the merits, he should quote Shakespeare to the Nobel committee: “As you shall prove me, praise me.’”

    Mark Knoller Tweets

    Should Pres. Obama accept the Nobel Prize? Should he suggest the award is premature and there might be others more deserving?

    Even WH trying to figure out how to spin the awarding of the Prize to Pres. Obama for the promise of his policies rather than achievements.

    The Nobel Committee risks being discredited for a political decision honoring aspirations for peace rather than a concrete accomplishment.

    Do we now mark Norway as a “blue state” for awarding Nobel Prize to Pres. Obama?

    John Dickerson’s reaction

    The award has essentially been given for the president’s speechmaking ability, which means his political handlers made the right call by sending him to Berlin during last year’s election. The prize highlights the juxtaposition between the 44th and 43rd presidents: from a verbally challenged leader who seemed at time to revel in shunning world opinion to a wordsmith who came to office promising to embrace the globe.

    The award will feed into the automatic sorting mechanism of politics. Conservatives who scoffed that Obama’s Olympic defeat meant a drop in prestige should, by the same logic, herald this as an even greater spike in the same. They won’t, because no one gets a prize for consistency.

    Other parties that benefit from the prize are the producers at Fox News, who now know what they’re going to talk about this weekend. Pundits win because the Nobel committee has validated the idea that speeches and atmospherics are really important. The award also offers the opportunity for all of us elites to do what we do best, which is miss how regular people might react. While we’re talking about how the Nobel committee has jumped the shark, some people might like that a president who they elected, in part, to improve America’s image in the world has been rewarded for it.

    Mickey Kaus’ reaction

    Turn it down! Politely decline. Say he’s honored but he hasn’t had the time yet to accomplish what he wants to accomplish. Result: He gets at least the same amount of glory–and helps solve his narcissism problem and his Fred Armisen (‘What’s he done?’) problem, demonstrating that he’s uncomfortable with his reputation as a man overcelebrated for his potential long before he’s started to realize it. … Plus he doesn’t have to waste time, during a fairly crucial period, working on yet another grand speech. … And the downside is … what? That the Nobel Committee feels dissed? … P.S.: It’s not as if Congress is going to think, well, he’s won the Nobel Peace Prize so let’s pass health care reform. But the possibility for a Nobel backlash seems non-farfetched. …

  27. 27
    jurassicpork says:

    Welcome Back to Pottersville has just obtained a draft of Barack Obama’s acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize.

  28. 28

    The Nobel makes sense to me. In fact, every president should get some kind of boat anchor like the Nobel thrown around their necks, as if the entire world were to say, “hay gai, here’s something to live up to, now DON”T FUCK IT UP!”

  29. 29
    NickM says:

    Cole:

    I’m really looking forward to it. There should be some pretty quality stuff coming from the wingnuts

    BOB:

    The reason for the Nobel Peace Prize is the soft bigotry of low expectations.

    Now that’s what Cole’s talking about! Keep it coming!

  30. 30
    Rathskeller says:

    I also am a huge Obama supporter who thinks this is a little premature.

    But I can’t stop laughing at the responses. God, it’s like I’ve eaten a pot brownie at work. The Taleban & Michael Steele: “It’s outrageous!”. Oh, I’m dying over here. I gotta settle down.

  31. 31
    SenyorDave says:

    Brick Oven Bill,

    Disappointed in ya, you mailed that one in. As Otter said in Animal House:

    This requires a really futile and stupid gesture, be done on somebody’s part

    And Bill, you’re the guy to do it!

  32. 32

    It has to be a slap at Bush. Europe is is probably giggling its head off right now and making plans to stick America’s bra in the freezer when it falls asleep.

  33. 33
    scav says:

    Anything that gets the Limbaughistas, Beckoids, Talibani, Fauxers, Malkinese, and Villagers engaged in sychronized hissy-fits is golden in my book. And when the far-lefters start fighting for their fair space on the same fainting couch, the whole thing goes platinum.

  34. 34
    liberal says:

    @El Cid:

    Look at how easy it was for an immigrant like Kissinger to get it while in the midst of carpet-bombing an entire nation and undermining peace talks in the U.S. war against Vietnam.

    This.

  35. 35
    Da Bomb says:

    Interestingly here’s Andrew Sullivan’s reaction to it:

    “If any person has done more to advance some measure of calm, reason and peace in this troubled word lately, it’s president Obama. I think the Cairo speech and the Wright speech alone merited this.He has already done more to bridge the gulf between the West and Islam than anyone else on the planet.”

    –Andrew Sullivan

    @Kevin K.: Insufferables on the left!! I love it. Oh so true.

  36. 36
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @Adolphus #15, 10:38 am

    That is an excellent point, and so obv ious that you are possibly the first one to point it out. (And for anyone who says the nominations were in by last Feb 1st, I would simply respond that many on the right were declaring BHO’s presidency “failed” within days of his inauguration.)

  37. 37
    Comrade Dread says:

    What exactly has Obama done on the foreign policy scene other than being not-Bush?

    There hasn’t been a radical rethink or reworking. We’re still in Iraq. We’re still in Afghanistan and considering escalation. We’re still threatening military action against Iran. (Though, admittedly, Obama is far more benign on this that McCain would have been.)

    As to Republicans freaking out. Yeah, I no longer expect rational thought or critique when it comes to Obama. The hyperbole has been turned up to 11 (which is more than ten…) and I expect to find a great deal of entertainment when I surf the conservoblogs.

  38. 38
    LoveMonkey says:

    Christ, another fun day at BJ. The spooftrolls spam the threads, and the site crashes.

    I have other things to do.

    All the “questions” about the Nobel thing have been answered on a previous thread. If you can get to that thread, you can find out all you need to know.

  39. 39
    Svensker says:

    Allahpundit sounds like he is about to stroke out,

    The interesting part to me was that A.P. basically says Obama is no different from Dubya……….so then why do A.P. and his minions all hate The One so much?

    I think it’s way premature (Greenwald’s take is where I’m at), but the hysteria of the Goopers is simply delicious.

  40. 40
    anonevent says:

    Just tell everyone to go look at why the NPP committee decides to give it to someone. Even if only 1 in 10 actually go look it up, that’s 10% of people that you can now say “Go google it,” and they will understand what you mean.

  41. 41
    El Cid says:

    After Obama’s rudeness in stealing the Nobel prize, Michelle Bachmann needs to step in and allow Taylor Swift to finish.

  42. 42
    J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford says:

    @Brick Oven Bill:

    Oh, what a surprise. Brick Oven Bigot’s diseased mind is focused on race.

  43. 43
    Meyer says:

    What I find interesting is that so many of the right wing blow-hard were already pronouncing his presidency a fat failure, with a culture of corruption, etc etc. It seems to me if they get to judge him a failure after only nine months, isn’t it fair that someone else gets to judge him a resounding success after only nine months?

    WIN.

    And that video just about made my day.

  44. 44
    raptusregaliter says:

    @Rathskeller:

    I agree, but the fact that heads are exploding over in Freeperville makes it all worthwhile. And I hear David Gregory is already sharpening his pencil to come up with some Sunday questions about how this is good for John McCain.

  45. 45
    Comrade Jake says:

    But what does John McCain think about all of this?

  46. 46
    Da Bomb says:

    @adolphus: I have your comment, because you are making sense!
    Hat-tip!!

  47. 47
    LoveMonkey says:

    The Nobel Committee risks being discredited for a political decision honoring aspirations for peace rather than a concrete accomplishment.

    Yes, this blurb discredits you, and all of the barking hyenas you cite. None of these people has apparently done even the most cursory look at the facts. The prize is generally awarded to people who are being encourage to continue their efforts toward peace. I think you will find that it is not pundits, but members of the prize committee, who are saying these things. Just in case you are keeping track of sources.

    I put the important part in bold for all of you who can’t take five minutes to Google up the background information.

  48. 48
    Zifnab says:

    @adolphus:

    It seems to me if they get to judge him a failure after only nine months, isn’t it fair that someone else gets to judge him a resounding success after only nine months?

    Not if you want to retain any credibility. Obama has made some genuine progress domestically, and he’s made serious changes in foreign policy that aren’t worth ignoring. But he’s 9 months into his Presidency. This is about as absurd as standing on the deck of an Aircraft Carrier and announcing Mission Accomplished.

    The Nobel Committee shouldn’t just be a bunch of knee jerk reactionaries. I’d be happy to see Obama win this award in 2012 or 2016, if he’s actually delivered on his promises. But this “anticipatory Nobel Award” is just dumb.

    Give the award to one of the lead Gitmo defense lawyers. Give the award to anyone currently operating relief efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan. Give the award to freak’n Michael Moore. But for Obama? It really does just look silly.

  49. 49
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @JK #23, 10:45 am

    Boy oh boy, there sure are a lot of people out there who really can’t stand to contemplate the formulation *Nobel Laureate President Barack Obama*, aren’t there? And all of them sounding so reasonable and rational and caring, like a mommy saying “No, sweetheart, you’re not old enough to stay up late right now, but if you work very hard and do what I tell you, maybe I’ll reconsider in a few years.”

    FSM-damned wankers, the lot of them.

  50. 50
    SGEW says:

    I’m curious to see if Erick Erickson’s “affirmative action” take on the prize catches on.

  51. 51
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @JK #23, 10:45 am

    Boy oh boy, there sure are a lot of people out there who really can’t stand to contemplate the formulation *Nobel Laureate President Barack Obama*, aren’t there? And all of them sounding so reasonable and rational and caring, like a mommy saying “No, sweetheart, you’re not old enough to stay up late right now, but if you work very hard and do what I tell you, maybe I’ll reconsider in a few years.”

    FSM-damned wankers, the lot of them.

  52. 52
    JK says:

    @Comrade Jake:

    But what does John McCain think about all of this?

    Hopefully, John McCain is currently experiencing extreme intestinal discomfort.

  53. 53
    Comrade Sock Puppet of the Great Satan says:

    Love the fact that it’s pissed off the wingnuts.

    However, at risk of being a concern troll, it is premature. He shouldn’t win it just because he’s not GWB or Sarah Palin. There should be at least a few futile efforts at resolving Israel/Palestine conflict before awarding this. Tony Blair, Mo Mowlam, Peter Brooke and George Mitchell didn’t to share in the Nobel for resolving the Northern Ireland conflict. If Mitchell and Mowlam didn’t get one, then I can’t see how Obama gets one so early in his administration.
    Unless the Nobel committee were trying to strength Obama’s hand w/the coming Iran crisis.

    However, I’m looking forward to the wingnuts taking back all the “The World Doesn’t Respect Obama” ‘cos Chicago lost the Olympics” guff they were spouting the other week. I’m sure they’ll acknowledge now that the furreigners lurrve Obama, and they were all wrong.

  54. 54
    ...now I try to be amused says:

    Gore, then Krugman, then Obama… wingnut repudiation via the Nobel Prize has become an annual thing. Hee!

  55. 55
    LoveMonkey says:

    @Zifnab:

    Jesus John, just shut down the blog. Your commenters are all a bunch of goddam idiots.

    The award has generally nothing to do with his presidency. It has mostly to do with his advocacies over the recent couple of years.

  56. 56
    General Winfield Stuck says:

    Obama is about to make a statement on the Nobel prize. I don’t much care that he got it, except for the wingnut reaction, but wouldn’t it be cool if he gave it a pass and thank the Nobel committee anyways. Wingnuts would start feeding on their own intestines.

    Now back to FakeArtGate and Malkontents absolutely uncontrollable racism. From which she always ends her post with “here comes the your a racist 1, 2 3”. Well yes Michelle, what do you expect?

  57. 57
    Tsulagi says:

    Not sure why he was given it, other than as a repudiation of the Bush

    Yep.

    Obama certainly isn’t deserving of the award, but you gotta love the comedy from the lutefisk eaters. It’s like they couldn’t resist breaking out their giant foam finger for a last world gesture to Bush and his band of nuts.

  58. 58
    JK says:

    @SiubhanDuinne:

    I fully expected Michelle Malkin, Lou Dobbs, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, and Rush Limbaugh to go totally insane with this news, but I’m very surprised at the reactions of George Packer, Mark Knoller, and John Dickerson. They come across as major league jackasses by suggesting that Obama turn down the Prize.

  59. 59
    Koz says:

    He ought to decline it of course, but I don’t think his vanity will allow for that. As it is, this will just hurt him politically. Republican majorities just got that much closer.

  60. 60
    Col. Klink says:

    Has anyone commented yet on how excellent this news is for John McCain?

  61. 61
    General Winfield Stuck says:

    @Koz:

    Your concern is concerning for the concerned.

  62. 62
    Comrade Jake says:

    I suspect Cheney’s reaction to this will be to go hunting and shoot off another one of his friend’s faces.

  63. 63
    General Winfield Stuck says:

    @Comrade Jake:

    and shoot off another one of his friend’s faces.

    Seemingly, an Endangered Species.

  64. 64
    Zifnab says:

    @LoveMonkey:

    The award has generally nothing to do with his presidency. It has mostly to do with his advocacies over the recent couple of years.

    Oh bullshit. You can parse the deeper inner meaning of the award, but you can’t parse public perception. There is absolutely no good reason for Obama to be receiving this award. Advocacies my ass. Giving it to post-posthumously Kennedy would have made more sense. Hell, give it to Feingold. You know, someone who wasn’t waxing poetic about the “bad war” and the “good war”.

  65. 65
    Bobby Thomson says:

    The best thing about this? It just bigfooted the talking point about how the IOC decision shows that the world is rejecting Obama. AP (a.k.a. Fournier Daily) still has some of that shit running in the locals.

    Huh-larious.

  66. 66
    Demo Woman says:

    John, Not sure whether or not you saw Mike Luckovich’s cartoon today or not but after reading the conservative reaction to the peace prize, it seems appropriate. link

  67. 67
    Bostondreams says:

    @Koz:

    Yes, because Americans cannot stand it when another American is recognized for his actions and encouraged to pursue them to greater heights. How dare Obama have the audacity to not nominate himself for an award he was never aware he was up for.

  68. 68
    Maude says:

    I was so glad when I heard that the peace prize went to Obama.
    One reason is because of his ability to get countries with nukes to start getting rid of them and to think about non proliferation. That is huge.
    The turn around in the attitude toward the US is remarkable. Remember a year ago when Bush was being given the cold shoulder.
    The wingers are jealous, and for that, Obama deserves it even more.

  69. 69

    […] media stunned, skeptical over Nobel Peace prize, Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize. No, really., The Nobel, The GOP Will Whine About the Obama Nobel Peace Prize, Verbatim, Obama Nobel: But what will the […]

  70. 70
    Little Dreamer says:

    @JK:

    Would you mind not just posting the same shit over and over again?

  71. 71
    Martin says:

    New wingnut conspiracy theory:

    Obama threw Chicago under the bus to win the prize. Clearly two such prestigious honors could not go to one person in a year, and ‘It’s all about me and my teleprompter’ Obama decided that the good, loving, peaceful people weren’t worthy of the stimulus and torrent of money that the games would bring the city when he had a Nobel on the line.

  72. 72
    JK says:

    @LoveMonkey:

    Yes, this blurb discredits you, and all of the barking hyenas you cite.

    Bitter Much? I think the handwringing by the members of the Wash Press Corps is more interesting to read than the reactions of Erick Erikson, Michelle Malkin, and Ann Coulter.

    Citing the statements by Packer, Knoller, Dickerson, and Kaus does not mean I endorse their sentiments.

  73. 73
    Little Dreamer says:

    @Zifnab:

    Well, perhaps you haven’t read the guidelines on what criteria they choose, because posthumous awards are no longer given. Do you not believe they should follow the rules they establish for themselves? If you aren’t a member of the Nobel Committee, then it’s not your choice to make, is it?

  74. 74
    Joel says:

    This reminds me of the following editorial from LIFE Magazine (October 25, 1963) on Linus Pauling’s Peace Price (the only person to win two unshared Nobels):

    http://books.google.com/books?.....38;f=false

    Also, the New York Times:

    http://osulibrary.oregonstate......52-01.html

    I have no idea if the Google Books search works, but if not, search “A Weird Insult from Norway”.

  75. 75
    Gravenstone says:

    @Brick Oven Bill: BoB, BoB, BoB – come back after you’ve had your coffee. That’s weak, even for you.

  76. 76
    Gwangung says:

    @LoveMonkey: This, too. He had a life before becoming President.

  77. 77
    slag says:

    The Wingularity has been Breached: duck and cover.

    Made of awesome. And a possible book title.

  78. 78
  79. 79
    Morbo says:

    Should be fun to watch, almost makes me wish I was sitting here all weekend just so I could watch Sadly, No! for reaction mockery. I expect at least one call for complete isolationism.

    That said, it does seem a little strange to give the prize to a sitting president. What if he does go the full Hitler (note: he’s not going to go the full Hitler)? That Peace Prize would look pretty silly then. Not to go all Greenwald, but Bagram and Guantanamo are still open last I checked. Just sayin’, prize committee, just sayin’.

  80. 80
    ominira says:

    Okay, I love Obama, I really do, but this struck me as a little premature. Sure he’s talking about reducing nuclear proliferation, but it’s not like a whole lot has actually been achieved. I started thinking, are they trying to force his hand in Afghanistan? Is this a new way to say “US we like you again and we’re glad you elected not-George-Bush”? I will enjoy the rightwing freakout, but this prize made me scratch my head. Then again, I just remembered that Henry Kissinger won the peace prize. It would be nice if he donated the prize money to ACORN. LOL.

  81. 81
    gopher2b says:

    I don’t know — in the short term, it will be very entertaining and I’m all for the passive aggressive bitch slap to Bush. But in the long term, I don’t think this is a good thing of him or the country. The expectations continue to build and build. If he doesn’t start to make some real progress on some big issues soon, this thing will be a real weapon in the election.

  82. 82
    Joel says:

    @JK: I don’t see why Dickerson – for example – should surprise. I’ve always suspected that he had his rib removed so he could suck Terry McAuliffe’s dick. He’s a pre-Dean DNC flunky and his pieces reflect that.

  83. 83
    slag says:

    If only Rio had won the prize, wingnuts would be happy. “Rio is awesome!”

    Allow me to say, because I rarely get to say it with any enthusiasm: U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!

    That said, I do think Obama should turn it down. And be prepared to accept it after he closes Guantanamo, ends indefinite detentions, and restores our domestic privacy rights to where they ought to be. Not to mention shutting down Iraq and Afghanistan and getting something meaningful done in Israel.

    I know he wasn’t born yesterday and has done good work in his life (three cheers for community organizing and de-proliferation work and advocacy!), but few people really understand those things. It will be to his benefit to give an exceptional and inspiring nonacceptance speech.

  84. 84
    Sentient Puddle says:

    The guy in the cube across from me has Rush on whenever he’s around during the show (which is not always). Typically, I either tune it out or put on my headphones. Today, I’m kinda hoping he’s around and turns on the show so that I can experience the a sploding heads in real time.

  85. 85
    Bruce (formerly Steve S.) says:

    Not sure why he was given it, other than as a repudiation of the Bush way of doing things

    Did I ever wake up to a “uh, WHAT” moment this morning. What in the holy hell has Barack Obama done to deserve a Peace Prize? That’s rhetorical, I know it’s because he’s NOT George Bush. So that’s all it takes? Where’s MY fucking prize? Sorry, gang, for the first time in forever I’m with the wingnuts on this one, though for different reasons than theirs. For fuck’s sake, he’s not dismantling the Empire, he’s just reshuffling the cards. He’s continuing the amoral policy of raining terror and death upon huge swaths of rural south Asia with drone murdering machines. And that’s not even to mention all the stuff Glenn Greenwald rails about.

    Of course, they also gave one to one of the most notorious war criminals of the twentieth century, Henry Kissinger. I guess this is a modest step up from THAT.

  86. 86
    gopher2b says:

    @slag:

    I’m ambivalent.

    It would be interesting to see what he does with the money. I would like to see him use it to start some kind of school violence program on the South Side of Chicago. A million bucks is nothing but it would be a conduit to bring attention to an important issue (that happens across the country). He can send the message that people learn violence.

    PS I say Chicago because the right is throwing every school fight in Obama’s face…because, you know, its his fault.

  87. 87
    Flugelhorn says:

    You folks do understand that the Nobel Peace Price has become nothing more than a political football?

    This is a meaningless award. Kudos to Obama. After all, he did very little to warrant the award and certainly did not give it to himself, so I am happy for him that he gets the windfall. However, Obama winning it has done nothing but diminish the intent of the award when it was first created.

    The facts:

    Obama became President Jan. 20th 2009. The deadline for nominations for the award was February 1st, 2009. The esteemed Board of Trustees for the Nobel were able to gleen from that short period of his presidency that he was worthy of the Nobel Peace prize?

    Please do not insult me with your @LoveMonkey:

    Yes, this blurb discredits you, and all of the barking hyenas you cite. None of these people has apparently done even the most cursory look at the facts. The prize is generally awarded to people who are being encourage to continue their efforts toward peace.

    This is utter crapola. I think the facts need to be laid out for you. Obama had done nothing more than get elected without being a member of the Republican party. This is a slap at Bush, not a reward to Obama for any actual efforts.

    Again, happy for Obama. Yet I am very sad for what the Nobel Peace Prize has become and for those in the world who *HAVE* actually accomplished something who were by-passed in this political decision.

  88. 88
    ThatLeftTurnInABQ says:

    @Zifnab:

    The Nobel Committee shouldn’t just be a bunch of knee jerk reactionaries. I’d be happy to see Obama win this award in 2012 or 2016, if he’s actually delivered on his promises. But this “anticipatory Nobel Award” is just dumb.

    The Nobel committee changed their rules in 1974 so they can no longer give out posthumous prizes. Maybe the committee took a look at the fevered political environment on the right here in the US and decided they’d better give the prize to Obama now while they still can, just in case.

  89. 89
    PaulW says:

    @Rathskeller:

    I also am a huge Obama supporter who thinks this is a little premature.

    But I can’t stop laughing at the responses. God, it’s like I’ve eaten a pot brownie at work. The Taleban & Michael Steele: “It’s outrageous!”. Oh, I’m dying over here. I gotta settle down.

    I am with you, Rathskeller. I do think the Peace Prize came before Obama did anything truly tangible, but I also think the Far Right response to this will be full-blown histrionics that will make for fun viewing.

    Dear Wingnuts: Obama wouldn’t have won if Bush the Lesser was, you know, actually good at his job. You know, the President’s job of representing the nation and ensuring strong bonds of fellowship with our allies? The job that Dubya really screwed up royally even with the entire planet consoling us after 9/11? So don’t go whining that this is all about dissing Bush. ‘Cause it is. So there.

    Also funny: I’ve seen a few entries on the ‘Net that Bill Clinton might be upset because for all his peace efforts – especially in Ireland – he STILL hasn’t won while fellow Dems Carter, Gore and now Obama have won.

  90. 90
    Koz says:

    “Your concern is concerning for the concerned.”

    Not me. I’m playing for the other team. Btw, we’re not “angry” about the Nobel, we’re amused.

  91. 91
    Ditka says:

    Obama deserves the Nobel Peace prize, right now, on the merits, for agreeing to reduce the worlds nuclear arsenal by a third. Did you all miss this? It should have been the biggest story of the year if we didn’t have broken discourse.

    http://www.npr.org/templates/s.....=106292556

  92. 92
    iceweasel says:

    @SGEW:
    @slag:
    @Meyer:

    The video is from me and my friend: Jimmah-Ice Productions. We did a whole series of the Greater Wingnuttia Butthurt Warning Alert System, featuring Beck, O”Reilly, Malkin, Coulter, and Bachmann.

    They’re here:
    Massive Butthurt: Glenn Beck: A Balloon Juice reference in this one: “The Wingularity has been breached” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpicUOJ9xL0

    Throbbing Butthurt: Bill O’Reilly : “all wingnut systems on outrage” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht2pEivC5sQ

    Moderate Butthurt: michelle malkin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPeZzfNxCCI

    Smarting Butthurt: Ann Coulter http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tISh6tJKYW0

    Safe: No Butthurt Detected. Michelle Bachman “prepare for lurch towards right”. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI0-RklMBe8

    Here’s our youtube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/JimmahIceProductions

    Apologies if this looks like whoring our channel out; i wouldn’t have posted it if people hadn’t asked. Enjoy!
    Cheers,
    ice

  93. 93
    NWB says:

    TPM’s Josh Marshall nailed it:

    “And Obama has begun, if fitfully and very imperfectly to many of his supporters, to steer the ship of state in a different direction. If that seems like a meager accomplishment to many of the usual Washington types it’s a profound reflection of their own enablement of the Bush era and how compromised they are by it, how much they perpetuated the belief that it was ‘normal history’ rather than dark aberration.”

    I used to get pissed at this kind of thing (wing-nut, villager reaction) but I’m actually loving the freak-out.

  94. 94
    NWB says:

    TPM’s Josh Marshall nailed it:

    “And Obama has begun, if fitfully and very imperfectly to many of his supporters, to steer the ship of state in a different direction. If that seems like a meager accomplishment to many of the usual Washington types it’s a profound reflection of their own enablement of the Bush era and how compromised they are by it, how much they perpetuated the belief that it was ‘normal history’ rather than dark aberration.”

    I used to get pissed at this kind of thing (wing-nut, villager reaction) but I’m actually loving the freak-out.

  95. 95
    LD50 says:

    @Koz:

    He ought to decline it of course, but I don’t think his vanity will allow for that. As it is, this will just hurt him politically. Republican majorities just got that much closer.

    Good news for McCain, eh?

  96. 96
    pablo says:

    Barack may have gotten a prize, but they also gave one to Dick!

  97. 97
    Little Dreamer says:

    @Flugelhorn:

    You do understand that the criteria the committee uses to choose a winner has nothing to do with what you think it should? It doesn’t matter what merits you think should have been earned before the prize was awarded, if you think it does then perhaps you should start the Flugelhorn Peace Award and come up with your own rules (good luck in getting anyone to give a fuck!). The committee chose based on it’s own reasons and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change it, too bad, so sad, bye bye!

  98. 98
    LoveMonkey says:

    This is utter crapola.

    Really? Because the Nobel guy said it. I guess he doesn’t know the facts then?

    Geir Lundestad, secretary of the secretive committee that awards the prize, outlines for The Associated Press some of the most common misunderstandings:

    From an article I cited on another thread earlier today.

    I think your beef is with Lundestad, do you want me to try to get his email addy for you?

    He said this:

    • Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.
    More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.

    But I am sure that you know more about it than he does.

  99. 99
    Flugelhorn says:

    @Ditka: The deadline for nominations was Feb. 1st 2009. When exactly did Obama agree to this nuclear thing?

    Want to reconsider?

  100. 100
    kay says:

    @Martin:

    I’m hoping Chicago Mobster Democratic Politician version-of-Obama appears again and strongarms Rangel into stepping down.

    But, I’m craven and shallow. Back to the topic at hand.

  101. 101
    iceweasel says:

    @SGEW:

    Where did you get that video?! Magnificent!

    Ok, I tried commenting earlier but think I lost it…now I am blogwhoring, sort of. The video is from a series my friend and I did, a Greater Wingnuttia Butthurt Warning System. It has five levels, featuring Beck, O’reilly, Malkin, Coulter, and Bachmann. They’re all at our youtube channel. Hope you enjoy!

    The line about the Wingularity being breached in this voiceover was of course an homage to Balloon Juice.

    Cheers,
    ice

  102. 102
    Flugelhorn says:

    @LoveMonkey: Did you bother to read anything I wrote other than the piece I quoted from you?

    Again… The deadline for nominations was Feb. 1st 2009. What exactly had Obama done to indicate future peace efforts 11 days into his Presidency?

    Utter crapola.

  103. 103
    Napoleon says:

    @LD50:

    Koz has apparently created his own reality.

  104. 104
    Tattoosydney says:

    @Ditka:

    This. I remember that START was big news. Its replacement is apparently so 80s it doesn’t deserve reporting.

  105. 105
    Flugelhorn says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    You do understand that the criteria the committee uses to choose a winner has nothing to do with what you think it should? It doesn’t matter what merits you think should have been earned before the prize was awarded, if you think it does then perhaps you should start the Flugelhorn Peace Award and come up with your own rules (good luck in getting anyone to give a fuck!). The committee chose based on it’s own reasons and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change it, too bad, so sad, bye bye!

    So.. They nominated him on Feb. 1st 2009, 11 days into his presidency, just in case he might do something worthy of a Peace Prize? Makes perfect sense.

  106. 106
    me says:

    Jake Tapper is a huge dick.

  107. 107
    Little Dreamer says:

    @JK:

    Really now, I find it totally endearing that you tell me to GTH and add that nice FY to the mix, but, spamming this site is NOT acceptable and I am politely asking you to decline doing so in the future.

  108. 108
    LoveMonkey says:

    @Flugelhorn:

    Perhaps if you refer to the statements of the prize committee, you will find the answer. The prize was awarded for his leadership and advocacy in the recent past, not for anything done in his presidency.

    If you can’t refer back to any number of his papers and speeches in 2008 to answer your own question, then you obviously don’t get this. You seem to think Obama only started to have an effect on the world on Jan 20? That’s your problem, but it has nothing to do with what the prize committee was looking at.

    Idiot.

  109. 109
    Woodrowfan says:

    wait, Obama won? what happened to all those votes we’ve been casting for Lil Bitsy?? I thought she was winning!!

  110. 110
    Flugelhorn says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    You do understand that the criteria the committee uses to choose a winner has nothing to do with what you think it should? It doesn’t matter what merits you think should have been earned before the prize was awarded, if you think it does then perhaps you should start the Flugelhorn Peace Award and come up with your own rules (good luck in getting anyone to give a fuck!). The committee chose based on it’s own reasons and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change it, too bad, so sad, bye bye!

    So.. They nominated him on or prior to Feb. 1st 2009, 11 days into his presidency, just in case he might do something worthy of a Peace Prize? Makes perfect sense.

  111. 111
    Napoleon says:

    @Flugelhorn:

    It must suck for someone like you that is from a political movement that is so full of incompetents and which has been totally and utterly discredited in the eyes of the vast majority of Americans, as well as the world.

  112. 112
    slag says:

    @gopher2b: Holy Christ! I forgot about the money. Yeah. Don’t turn that sh#t down! We’re going broke over here.

  113. 113
    djork says:

    Flugel,

    He was nominated, along with likely hundreds of others, in February. The actual prize wasn’t voted on until recently.

    Idiot.

  114. 114
    Flugelhorn says:

    @Napoleon:

    It must suck for someone like you that is from a political movement that is so full of incompetents and which has been totally and utterly discredited in the eyes of the vast majority of Americans, as well as the world.

    Funny how comments like these always come back to bite you in the ass. Ascendency is always temporary.

    Come back and talk to me in 2, 4 and 8 years. We can re-evaluate your position.

    BTW, Republicans do not own a monopoly on incompetents. As an example, If you happen to support Obama’s healthcare reforms, I would imagine you think there are quite alot of them in your own party considering the fact that nothing has been passed and the Dems own an astounding majority.

  115. 115
    AllenS says:

    AllenS, Mr. Wingnut to everyone. Would it be out of the ordinary for President Obama to be Major League Baseball’s Player of the Year?

  116. 116
    parksideq says:

    Sorta OT, but Chris Hayes at The Nation referenced “Peak Wingnut” in a recent tweet about the Peace Prize fauxtrage.

    If anything, the BJ Lexicon was the best thing to happen to the internet in a while. I can now understand what everyone’s saying!

  117. 117
    General Winfield Stuck says:

    @Napoleon:

    Koz has apparently created his own reality.

    The Wizard of Koz

  118. 118
    Dreggas says:

    @Flugelhorn:

    Anyone can be nominated and unless I am mistaken they probably take into account actions after being nominated when they vote. I mean we nominate people for president months before we vote for them so it’s the same deal.

  119. 119
    Steeplejack says:

    @Little Dreamer:

    I can see (but don’t condone) JK’s irritation. Your original comment came across not as “politely asking” but as slightly dickish. To more than one reader, at least.

  120. 120
    Flugelhorn says:

    @djork: I realize this, Ass.

    So, we are in the habit of nominating people who have done absolutely nothing, nay not even had an opportunity to do anything, just in case they might happen to do something by the time the vote comes around? Nevermind that in the intervening 9 months, he actually *HAS NOT* done anything? Interesting philosophy, moron.

    Now if you will excuse me, I have a beef with a rather interesting sign post that I really must get to.

  121. 121
    kay says:

    @Flugelhorn:

    Nothing has passed on health care in 9 months? Nothing has passed on health care for forty years. All of a sudden, conservatives demand action?
    They’ll pass health care. Rove as much as admitted it, in his column yesterday. Bob Dole knows it too. The tea party nonsense was just cable tv blather.
    Not to worry, though. It’s a “loss” for Democrats, because, well, because Rove says so.

  122. 122
    Johnny B says:

    Bill Kristol is now reaching peak wingnuttia by arguing that McCain should have won the peace prize due to his support for “the Surge” in Iraq.

    Based on Kristol’s reasoning, Hitler’s tank commanders have won the Nobel Peace Prize, because their strategy of blitzkrieg prevented a long protracted land war in Western Europe from 1940 until 1943. Hitler’s rocket scientist should have won the award for providing a new method to prevent an invasion of France by the Allies. Or Stalin should have won the award for halting the military advance into Warsaw, thereby allowing “peace” to reign in the city while the German Army and the SS “relocated” its civilians to “more secure” locations in Buchenwald and Auschwitz.

    The stupidity that masks as “informed commentary” in this country really knows no bounds.

  123. 123
    Little Dreamer says:

    @Flugelhorn:

    No, see, I knew you’d make that assumption. The DOING or performance of a feat is not involved in the selection of the winner, and if you had studied the criteria you’d know that.

    By the way, he has done a lot, but, that was not the reason he was chosen; he was chosen because of the strides and influence he is gathering (and his philosophy of peace) to do what he CAN do in the future.

  124. 124
    Flugelhorn says:

    @kay: What does your comment have to do with the price of tea in China?

    Really. This time I’m out. For real.

  125. 125
    RedKitten says:

    You know what? I’m happy for Obama, and I’ma let him finish, but Beyonce had one of the best strategies for international diplomacy of all time!

  126. 126
    mey says:

    The correct response to anyone pissing on about this is: “Hey, it’s better than getting a shoe thrown at you.”

  127. 127
    LD50 says:

    @Flugelhorn:

    @djork: I realize this, Ass.

    Well, yeah, now that djork pointed it out, you do.

  128. 128
    Flugelhorn says:

    @Little Dreamer: Keep drinking the Kool-aid, brotha/sistah.

  129. 129
    LD50 says:

    @Flugelhorn: So providing evidence that you said something ridiculous is irrelevant? Go figger.

  130. 130
    Little Dreamer says:

    @Steeplejack:

    Well, Steeplejack, by the time I asked him to stop, I’d read that same post at least six times on at least two different threads, pardon my being sick to death of seeing the same shit posted numerous times.

  131. 131
    LD50 says:

    @Flugelhorn: Huffy wingnut is huffy.

    Didn’t you say you were leaving, like 2 or three times?

  132. 132
    wasabi gasp says:

    When George rings up God these days he gets Rainy Days and Mondays piped into his ear while on hold.

  133. 133
    Little Dreamer says:

    @Flugelhorn:

    It’s not Kool-aid, it’s the rules they established, if you don’t like it go to Oslo and argue with the Nobel committee.

    This was copied by TZ on a previous thread, read the blurb below and if you want to know more, please visit an info page with the facts detailed. Of course, you can just decide to not let facts get in the way of your beliefs and go on being pissed because Obama didn’t DO anything to deserve this award, but, considering the committee doesn’t require any specific performance prior to the award, you end up looking like a foolish Kool-aid drinker, not me.

    Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.
    Fact: More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.

  134. 134
    Martin says:

    You know what? I’m happy for Obama, and I’ma let him finish, but Beyonce Sarah Palin had one of the best strategies for international diplomacy of all time!

    That’s better…

  135. 135
    Rathskeller says:

    Aw, I come back and everyone’s all pissy. Have fun, people!

    Obama has won the Nobel fucking Peace Prize. He’s shown the world that being thoughtful and kind can have positive effects. And a million clams. And Bill O’Reilly’s heartburn and sour face from a sea of unhappy tea baggers.

    As I said before, I think it is a premature award, but if there are two good things he has done so far that would merit this extraordinary response, one would be the emphasis on nuclear reduction and the other would be the speech in Cairo, where he spoke respectfully and intelligently to the Islamic world. Because of that speech, some people will hate the U.S. less, some people will not join Islamist movements, and some people will not die.

    It’s a good thing.

  136. 136
    Rathskeller says:

    man, an edit function would sure be nice.

  137. 137
    Steeplejack says:

    @Flugelhorn:

    So, we are in the habit of nominating people who have done absolutely nothing, nay not even had an opportunity to do anything, just in case they might happen to do something by the time the vote comes around?

    Here’s an outside-the-box angle to consider:

    Everyone keeps harping on Obama as president and what he has or has not accomplished in the last nine months. Fair enough. Throw that out, and let’s look at what Obama accomplished before he became president (and before the Nobel nomination deadline).

    Against long odds, he engineered the election of a black man with a Muslim-sounding name to the presidency of the United States, arguably the most powerful position in the world. And his stated goals ran directly counter to what many in the outside world–and inside the United States–saw as an ongoing slide by the world’s remaining superpower into lawless imperialism and outright crimes against humanity. And Obama got a majority of the U.S. electorate to agree with him. We can argue about whether that’s worthy of a Nobel Prize, but I see it as a significant contribution to peace in the world–regardless of his further accomplishments in office.

    P.S. I hope he donates the $1 million prize money to ACORN. Never happen, but still . . .

  138. 138
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    The competition for Best Asshurt Wingnut Reaction is tough, but this one is my frontrunner thus far:

    Still waiting for that announcement for the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction (Birth Certificate).

  139. 139
    D-Chance. says:

    Hey… little lawyer guy, Glenn Greenwald, is a Republican, according to the White House. Who knew?

    And I now eagerly await my Heisman Trophy. I’ve never played a down of college football (yet); but, since the precedent has now been set that you don’t have to actually accomplish anything to win these things… why not?

  140. 140
    slag says:

    @Martin:

    That’s better…

    Beyonce might beg to differ.

  141. 141
    LoveMonkey says:

    @RedKitten:

    Funny, but irritating.

    ;)

  142. 142
    slag says:

    @D-Chance.:

    And I now eagerly await my Heisman Trophy.

    You should consider holding your breath while waiting. Don’t worry. You won’t lose any brain cells in the process.

  143. 143
    LoveMonkey says:

    @Steeplejack:

    Love it. Sign me up for your newsletter.

  144. 144

    Via Andrew Sullivan, that notorious wingnut Jake Tapper says that apparently there are more stringent standards for receiving an honorary degree from ASU.

  145. 145
    Steeplejack says:

    @LoveMonkey:

    Thanks. Much of my best work is done in thread-killing comments at 3:00 a.m., so it’s a little disconcerting to find that someone actually read one of my comments. Guess I should post more in the daylight.

    And I really think this is a good way to look at Obama’s achievement (so far). Wasn’t just putting it out there to tweak Flugelhorn.

  146. 146
    Calouste says:

    @ThatLeftTurnInABQ:

    The Nobel committee changed their rules in 1974 so they can no longer give out posthumous prizes. Maybe the committee took a look at the fevered political environment on the right here in the US and decided they’d better give the prize to Obama now while they still can, just in case.

    I don’t think the Nobel committee has ever handed out posthumous prizes (although one or two laureates have died between the announcement and the ceremony), although it might not have been an official rule until 1974.

    Most obvious example is the non-award of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1948, which was expected to go to Gandhi, but he was assassinated earlier that year.

  147. 147
    LoveMonkey says:

    Check my url. Is this what the Flugelhorn Peece Award For Actual Peace Only would look like?

  148. 148
    Bruce (formerly Steve S.) says:

    Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.
    Fact: More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.

    Well, that would go without saying, that the prize is intended to encourage ongoing efforts. Obama’s does come across as a little unseemly, though, when compared to other recent winners’ ongoing efforts that are measured in years-to-decades rather than months. But whatever, committees can give awards on whatever basis they want.

  149. 149
    Tsulagi says:

    @Bruce (formerly Steve S.):
    See, now do you get it? It’s like Rumsfeld and Cheney who got the Medal of Freedom. It was meant to encourage them in their future freedomizing endeavors. That worked out well.

  150. 150
    auntieeminaz says:

    @Steeplejack:

    Please do. You had a particularly good post recently in the wee hours that I enjoyed very much. (Don’t remember which thread.)

  151. 151
    Inncent Bystander says:

    They should have a Nobel War Prize. Give it to Cheney for his work to start a major war based on lies and his personal financial bottom-line…you know he won’t give the prize money away like that Socialist Commie-Fascist Obama…he’ll invest it in Haliburton and off-shore investment funds!

    Seriously, a real Nobel War Prize with all expenses paid to the ICC wouldn’t be a bad idea.

  152. 152
    Makewi says:

    I would think this would have been an opportunity to break out the foam fingers and chant USA-USA-USA. I guess you must hate your country.

  153. 153
    oh really says:

    Ya gotta feel sorry for the Wingers (yeah, right) because they realize no Republican will ever again win a peace prize based on, um, peace. Therefore, the really rich Wingers, who finance all the Winger Welfare, need to create a new peace prize based on Republican notions of peace. Perhaps the Curtis LeMay Peace Through War Peace Prize awarded each year to the person who advocates or causes the most acts of war designed to result in peace once every evil doer is killed, no matter how many innocents have to die to accomplish that peaceful goal.

    Actual fighting in a war would not be necessary, which means the Winger Prince of Peace, William Kristol, would be a virtual guaranteed winner within the first three or four years. Hell, Bloody Billy (in the name of peace) might be a multiple winner since in any given year BB proposes peace through war at least a half dozen times (that would be a half dozen different wars, not different proposals — those run to the hundreds).

  154. 154
    Mjaum says:

    Short version of what the Nobel people just told Obama: “You are the leader of an immensely powerful nation that has recently shown marked signs of bugfeck crazyness and belligerancy. We observe that you have taken action to change this, and we would very much like to encourage you to continue making such changes.”

    If Obama had made these changes to Russia, or China, all americans would understand why he got the NPP. But since you cannot see how you have lately appeared to those of us not living in the US, you can’t see what he has done.

    Bush wasn’t dumb, wasn’t laughable. He was f-ing *SCARY*. Okay? (Part of why he was scary was the fact that he was also f-ing dumb, but hey…)

    It’s as if you americans, no matter your political allegiance, are still incapable of understanding that your nation has murdered, tortured, invaded and bombed real people. And that this scares other real people who have no clue what you might decide to do next. And that your changing course away from bugfeck craziness just might matter to the rest of us.

  155. 155
    slightly_peeved says:

    So, we are in the habit of nominating people who have done absolutely nothing, nay not even had an opportunity to do anything, just in case they might happen to do something by the time the vote comes around?

    Nope – because your statement that Obama’s done nothing yet is flatly false. Obama’s already done plenty to advance world peace as a senator, through the Lugar-Obama nonproliferation initiative:
    Link

    He’s actually worked on nonproliferation issues since 2005. Nuclear proliferation, and unsecured nukes, are one of the biggest threats to world peace out there.

    His nomination is reasonable based on existing work he has done, even before taking into account the potential for him to do more in the future. And heck, if Henry Kissinger can get it…

  156. 156
    LD50 says:

    @Makewi: Jesus Christ Makewi, you are a friggin *BORE*. Do you have any setting other than arrogant, snide twit?

  157. 157
    Steeplejack says:

    @auntieeminaz:

    Thanks. Just got home from work again–hence the night-owl syndrome. But the part-time gig with weird hours gets me health insurance. Yee-haw.

  158. 158
    Minnesota Native says:

    Michele Bachmann is a disgrace to the USA, MN, and the 6th. If you’re interested in getting rid of Bachmann, support democratic candidate Dr. Maureen Reed! You can learn more about Maureen, and donate, at:
    http://maureenreedforcongress.com/
    and
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maureen_Reed

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] media stunned, skeptical over Nobel Peace prize, Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize. No, really., The Nobel, The GOP Will Whine About the Obama Nobel Peace Prize, Verbatim, Obama Nobel: But what will the […]

Comments are closed.