I would like to win the nobel peace prize just to turn it down.

Okay, but these don't have much to do with the Nobel Peace Prize, and the ability to effect global change versus domestic is kinda important for that.

kool?

hey goofy how have you been great to see you around

Abolishing the Fed is pretty important. Trying to end war is pretty important. But whatever tho, if you think Obama is going to actually try and change things, in a decade you can say "told ya so" if he turns out to be legit.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/99945/satu...-obama-address

The vote was unanimous.

LDO

A Primer on Presidential Nobel Prize Predecessors

It appears the President could have kept the $1.4 Million for himself but decided to give it to charity. As if he had a choice.

And move them to Afghani cities. Also, didn't this start under Bush?

Human rights maybe. Not sure about peace.

I am going to strongly disagree with this.

It seems to me that this can be considered as something, although there's a good argument that more nukes out there means less war.

And move them to Afghani cities. Also, didn't this start under Bush?

We all agree that the man talks a good talk.

And I strongly disagree. He's a war mongerer who's merely much more "diplomatic" (AKA dishonest) about it than Bush was, and being lied to about their wars is what the American people want.

This is a ****ing embarrassment.

Well, I thought I was done with this thread, but here's a decent summary provided by Ezra Klein :

Wa...wa..wat?

+1 on alex's last post

Hi RollinHand! Welcome to the celebration thread for Obama's historic Nobel Peace prize win.

Strengthened diplomacy???

Kissing dictator's butts?

Kneeling to Iran and North Korea and both firing off test missiles days after, and spitting in his face?

This is a dangerous world... and this guy Obama doesn't have the slightest clue as to what to do, I promise you this. We have a community organizer trying to keep our country safe from animals who want to ruin our way of life and kill us.

I mean heck, he doesn't even talk to Mchrystal the guy he appointed. I couldn't help but laugh looking at the picture of Obama and Mchrystal having their brief 25 minute meeting on air force one in Copenhagen...........On one hand you have a highly decorated general who has served his country probably his entire adult life, and probably has every decorated award imaginable and obviously exceedingly brilliant to be a general, and in the same picture you see empty suit Obama, President of the United States, who has done next to nothing of substance in his life, except being a corrupt crooked CHICAGO politician.

The general must have been thinking to himself, how on planet earth am I taking orders from this guy. How could he not? Mchrystal says he needs more troops or it is going to be a failure in Afghanistan, and this community organizer doesn't want to give it to him, or can't decide if the decorated general he appointed is right.... Just LOL's everywhere

Obama's most important achievement is that he allows the world to delude themselves into thinking the US government is well intentioned and competent with the best interests of all nations in heart.

+1

I found out today after 30 minutes of disbelief while listening to my local talk show. They were discussing if Obama deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. I mean what kind of question is that???????

This really isn't any different than any other president

Meh this is just rhetoric. Bush was a failed businessman and a decent governor, but no means did he fight evil forces every day. Clinton was a lawyer, Bush Senior probably knew best because of his CIA cred, Regan was a actor, and Jimmy Carter was a peanut farmer. None of these guys ,except GW senior, facing " animals who want to ruin our way of life and kill us" on a daily basis. I think you mean he isn't puffing his chest out and shaking his fist enough.

First this isn't that unusual. McChystal is a theater commander. He reports to the JCOS, who report to the President. It isn't like Obama is not getting any reports by not talking to him. Besides he needs the JCOS's perspective on how Afghanistan affects other theaters. Also, presidents have had a mixed bag when its comes to interaction with their generals. Some have taken a micromanaged approach and others have taken a hands off approach.

This can be said of most Presidents. In fact, some ex generals have not made good presidents in spite of their war accomplishments. ( Besides Obama has the Peace Prize now lol)

Again there is civilian leadership of the military for a reason.

Semi-nit alert, but Clinton was a governor too. I don't know much about his track record but he wasn't *just* a lawyer.

yea but Pokersux conveniently forgot to mention that Obama was a senator as well so I thought it was a tit for tat thing. ( Reagan was governor of California as well).

I thought we were talking about executive experience here, not legislative.

I wouldn't expect Obama to be embarassed since he's an ego maniac, however if this were me I would be super embarassed.

Imagine if you had just started a job at a huge company with tons of talented individuals and you had been there two weeks and then they informed you they were giving you their employee of the year award and that you'd get a huge parade and have to give a speech to the whole company and you're getting a huge bonus. I would be mortified.

You are right, executive position would be better suited. My general point was that, for the most part ( excepting GW senior) our modern presidents haven't had hands on experience on fighting those who want to " ruin our way of life" or our "freedoms" before becoming President. To fault Obama for a perceived lack of experience on this is to blame almost every president.