captain1976 0 #51 October 9, 2009 Hi WendyYou live more in the few minutes of skydiving than many people live in their lifetime Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,648 #52 October 9, 2009 QuoteWhile on this subject, Adolf Hitler was nominated in 1939 Even YOU could be nominated. Winning is a different matter altogether.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 24 #53 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteHere is the list of people who have won this prize since 1980. I'm seeing a lot of far left wing liberals and muslims........ Hm. How many morons and bigots? Yet more proof that Obama is a muslim.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,648 #54 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteHere is the list of people who have won this prize since 1980. I'm seeing a lot of far left wing liberals and muslims........ Hm. How many morons and bigots? Yet more proof that Obama is a Kenyan muslim. You forgot something.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #55 October 9, 2009 QuoteIt's a bad, bad day for people with ODS. I imagine ER rooms must be filling up as we speak. It's a bad, bad day for people that actually deserved the award. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarkM 0 #56 October 9, 2009 I'm guessing the reasons will be: *The Cairo speech *His work on nuclear disarmament *Removal of the missile defense system in Eastern Europe that improved relations with Russia *The beginnings of dialogue with Iran and Cuba Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #57 October 9, 2009 It is not unusual for the prize to be awarded to persons who are in a position that gives them excellent potential to further the cause of peace. With that consideration, Obama seems to be a reasonable choice.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dumpster 0 #58 October 9, 2009 When I first saw the headline I had to check and see if it was The Onion - Seriously. Easy Does It Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #59 October 9, 2009 QuoteWhile on this subject, Adolf Hitler was nominated in 1939 Oh, best post in the thread so far!! Obama's kinda like Hitler. Fucking classic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,149 #60 October 9, 2009 From MarkMQuote*The Cairo speech *His work on nuclear disarmament *Removal of the missile defense system in Eastern Europe that improved relations with Russia *The beginnings of dialogue with Iran and CubaAnd jcd11235QuoteIt is not unusual for the prize to be awarded to persons who are in a position that gives them excellent potential to further the cause of peace. With that consideration, Obama seems to be a reasonable choice.This is the beginning of my being able to figure out WTF they might have done it. Often ascribing decisions one doesn't agree with to stupidity isn't really accurate. Yeah, sometimes people are stupid -- but it's better to understand their rationale. Because then you can see the good or bad by themselves, without conflating them with the perpetrators. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,648 #61 October 9, 2009 QuoteI'm guessing the reasons will be: *The Cairo speech *His work on nuclear disarmament *Removal of the missile defense system in Eastern Europe that improved relations with Russia *The beginnings of dialogue with Iran and Cuba and * Piss off Republican bigots... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kbordson 8 #62 October 9, 2009 Several comments in this thread did make me stop and think. 1. Why the "rightous" indignation about a U.S. President winning an International award of Peace? -comments listed included that he was nominated too soon on day 11 of his Presidency (no big "peace" acts during those 2w that I'm aware of, but if this was given as an inspiration to continue to work toward peace, then, as nerdgirl noted, that is NOT unprecedented.) that there are "better qualified" (Nobel Peace Prize Nominees - personally Ingrid Betancourt, French-Colombian ex-hostage would have gotten my vote) and some other random grumbling (which means... that I started a list and got to two....) 2. Should he accept it? (it has been previously refused in 1973 by Le Duc Tho as he did not believe peace had been reached in Vietnam.) Are there any implications of conflict of interest (and before you start yelling "hater"... think about it. He is the standing President for the United States of America. If he accepts $1million, from a foreign country for "peace" will that influence how he might preform in his office. I'm not saying that he SHOULDN'T be a peaceful President, but unfortunately there IS a place for defense.... and even aggression and war. Will this in any way limit his ability to fulfill that or will it even give an "appearance" of conflict?) If he declines, the money goes back - but his name is still entered. I personally feel it would be more noble on his part to very respectfully decline. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #63 October 9, 2009 QuoteDon’t know why he won, but lets see an American president wins a prestigious award………….I think that’s a good thing right? yes. and it would be even better if it was for a reason other than who he isn't-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #64 October 9, 2009 QuoteI'm guessing the reasons will be: *The Cairo speech *His work on nuclear disarmament *Removal of the missile defense system in Eastern Europe that improved relations with Russia *The beginnings of dialogue with Iran and Cuba so why was he nominated? What did he do before Feb 1? I'm curious who nominated him and what their reasons are.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #65 October 9, 2009 QuoteDon’t know why he won, but lets see an American president wins a prestigious award………….I think that’s a good thing right? Why's that good? Because he's an American? Because he's president?-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SimonBones 1 #66 October 9, 2009 Quote It's a bad, bad day for people that actually deserved the award. I think it's an even worse day for many of those who've already received the award. This has completely devalued it. There are a lot of people out there that received the award through significant accomplishment over a life's work with lots of personal sacrifice. People who've taken a lot of pride in receiving what was thought to be a prestigious awards now have to open their newspapers to find out that they're just giving these things away 108 way head down world record!!! http://www.simonbones.com Hit me up on Facebook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BDashe 0 #67 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteI like Obama, but to award this to a president less than nine months into his first term, who has yet to score a major foreign policy success, seems very odd. from the article: "The deadline for nominations for the peace prize was February 1, so someone nominated the President of America for his achievements 11 days into his presidency. So does the prize come with a box of cracker jacks, or in one? just to further the ridiculousness: "Nominations for the prize had to be postmarked by February 1 -- only 12 days after Obama took office. The committee sent out its solicitation for nominations last September -- two months before Obama was elected president. " Wow...I suppose it goes in line with my generation's view on the world- always demanding instant gratification, without having worked hard for any ends.So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #68 October 9, 2009 Can anyone, please, explain how Obama is more deserving than Tsvangirai? Anyone?-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,648 #69 October 9, 2009 Quote now have to open their newspapers to find out that they're just giving these things away Really? Can I have one?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MarkM 0 #70 October 9, 2009 Quote so why was he nominated? What did he do before Feb 1? I'm curious who nominated him and what their reasons are. Nominations don't mean squat. Hitler got nominated. I imagine most presidents get nominated. I believe Bush got nominated in 2002. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SimonBones 1 #71 October 9, 2009 No, I'm sure you have too many accomplishments.108 way head down world record!!! http://www.simonbones.com Hit me up on Facebook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,648 #72 October 9, 2009 QuoteCan anyone, please, explain how Obama is more deserving than Tsvangirai? Anyone? Because the Nobel committee chose him. Just like the Supreme Court decides what the Constitution means, so the Noble Committee decides who wins the prize. Last time I checked, neither the Supreme Court nor the Nobel Committee consults DZ.COM... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #74 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteCan anyone, please, explain how Obama is more deserving than Tsvangirai? Anyone? Because the Nobel committee chose him. Well that explains it. Thank you for your in depth explanation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #75 October 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteCan anyone, please, explain how Obama is more deserving than Tsvangirai? Anyone? Because the Nobel committee chose him. Just like the Supreme Court decides what the Constitution means, so the Noble Committee decides who wins the prize. Last time I checked, neither the Supreme Court nor the Nobel Committee consults DZ.COM That crap sounds like a dad talking to his kids. "Because I said so... that's why." Never mind listing possible reasons or accomplishments... it's just because the Committee said so... I actually feel a little bad for the President. He sounds like he's embarrassed, which I would be too. "I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many transformative figures that have been honored by this prize," Obama said. And if anyone thinks this wasn't really aimed at Bush (at least in part), from the committee... The award appeared to be at least partly a slap at Bush from a committee that harshly criticized Obama's predecessor for his largely unilateral military action in the wake of the Sept. 11 terror attacks. "Those who were in support of Bush in his belief in war solving problems, on rearmament, and that nuclear weapons play an important role ... probably won't be happy," said Valle, the Nobel Committee member. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
