Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

[cured]

I can't wait to see the latest round of Republican attacks on him for this one. Their true colors have really been showing lately.

A note from Andrew Sullivan:

Reading through all the reactions, compiled by Chris and Patrick, there are two obvious points: this is premature and this is thoroughly deserved.

Both are right. I don't think Americans fully absorbed the depths to which this country's reputation had sunk under the Cheney era. That's understandable. And so they also haven't fully absorbed the turn-around in the world's view of America that Obama and the American people have accomplished. Of course, this has yet to bear real fruit. But you can begin to see how it could; and I hope more see both the peaceful intentions and the steely resolve of this man to persevere.


This president has done a huge amount to bring race relations in this country to a different place, which is why the far right has become so vicious in attacking him and lying about him. They know he threatens their politics of division and rule. He has also directly addressed the Muslim world, telling some hard truths, and played a small role in evoking a similar movement of hope and change in Iran, and finally told the Israelis to stop cutting their nose off to spite their face.

[dubman]

god it's going to be disappointing for everyone when this guy doesnt get re-elected because repubs found a way to market him as a failure.
next carter, guys. hope im wrong but calling it now

[Sean]

god it's going to be disappointing for everyone when this guy doesnt get re-elected because repubs found a way to market him as a failure.
next carter, guys. hope im wrong but calling it nowThat's why we need to support Palin as the 2012 Republican nominee. What better way to insure Obama gets re-elected?

So I've been increasingly disturbed by how blatant Republicans have gotten in their opposition to Obama, because it's grown to the point where it's actually become flat-out opposition to American success. This Nobel Prize is a perfect example to start with. While we could, as a united country, celebrate the potential international leverage that our President winning this prize could provide, instead, Republicans are calling it things like "unfortunate" (Republican National Chairman Michael Steele) (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/2009/10/steele_on_obama_nobel_peace_pr.html), or worse if you listen to tools like Limbaugh or Beck. Who are Republicans putting first in this case, America, or Republicans? I'd say Republicans.

But there are other examples that have been striking me lately, too. Like cheering Chicago being voted out of the running for the Olympics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhMVRP0n-_c&feature=related), an event that would have injected millions and millions of dollars of badly needed revenue into our economy. There is literally no way to justify celebrating this loss other than as a celebration of Obama's failure to sway the Olympic committee. But what Republicans were actually cheering was the loss of a massive injection of money into the American economy. So who are Republicans putting first in this case, America, or Republicans? Once again, Republicans.

Then there's our previous discussion about Obama's address to schoolchildren (http://www.darktrain.org/dirty/forums/showthread.php?t=10297) urging them to work hard, assume personal responsibility, and stay in school. Republicans were in a frothy tizzy over this perceived "brainwashing" and "indoctrination" of our country's kids into Obama's "socialist", "communist" or "Hitler-like" agenda. Who were Republicans putting first in rabidly opposing a call to children to do well in school, America, or Republicans? Yeah....Republicans.

And as a final example, let's look at our own resident Obama-hater, Mongoose, who started his own thread decrying Obama for "bombing the moon" (http://www.darktrain.org/dirty/forums/showthread.php?t=10407). This is a mission that, if it does detect water, will be a vital step in our drive to further explore our solar system and beyond - an adventure that has and will benefit the entire planet with each new discovery, solution, and invention that it spawns. So yet again (assuming you are a Republican Mongoose), who are Republicans supporting, themselves, America, mankind? Tell America and mankind to fend for themselves, because they ain't gettin any support from Republicans on this one either.

So all of this is to get to my ultimate question. Who was it that was so eager to label Presidential opponents as "un-American" from 2000-2008, when people were demonstrating against a war that they were perfectly justified in opposing? Oh yeah....it was Republicans. So now that Republicans are actually taking stands that will obviously and decidedly hurt our country purely in the name of personal, political gain, are they also willing to assume the well deserved label of being "un-American". I mean it's one thing to protest a war, but totally another to try leveraging political advantage by celebrating significant American financial loss, or urging that we destroy American opportunity that has arisen in the form of a Peace Prize for our President, or actively fighting against calls to our children to work hard and stay in school, or campaigning against the major human advances that would arise from the confirmation of water on the moon. A notable portion of Republicans, and anyone who supports all of these machiavellian idiocies, have become one of the most ignorant and selfish groups of people currently on the planet.

[Deckard]

Seems like, once again, extremist Muslims and the conservative right of America have found common cause.

Michelle Malkin:
"It's the final nail in the Nobel Peace Prize Committee's coffin."

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid:
"We condemn the institute's awarding him the peace prize. We condemn this year's peace prize as unjust."

Oh, get an island!!

god it's going to be disappointing for everyone when this guy doesnt get re-elected because repubs found a way to market him as a failure.
next carter, guys. hope im wrong but calling it now
Yeah, I think you could well be right to call it like that. I honestly don't see how Obama can possibly outlive (in a political sense) the vehemence of his critics which, a mere 8 months into his presidency, just seems astonishing to me. You're right when you say he's being marketed as a failure. Sadly the impression I get is that it's working.

Can't help wondering how much of all this was seeded 12-18 months ago by the Clintons. We forget just how vicious that campaign was, and the amount of fear and nonsense that was doing the rounds, even before the guy got to flub his presidential oath. That Bill Clinton must be sucking lemons today following the Nobel announcement is at least a reason to smile.

[the mongoose]

Nope. I'm a Democrat, I never watch Fox, and I hated Bush's job in command as well. This is practically a one party system parading around as a two party system anyways.

OK fine, yes this looks good on America's resume or whatever........but, do you really believe that Pizza Hut has OMFG TEH BEST WINGZ EVA!!!! like they advertise?!? Of course they're not the best fucking wings out there, but if 50 million people are brainwashed cleverly like this:
>>>Click<<< (http://www.wivb.com/dpp/news/local/Buffalo_Wing_King_in_Pizza_Hut_spot_20091006)
then you are going to lose credibility like the Wing King has (aka sold out)


So when Nobel says that OBAMAS IS TEH BEST PEACER EVA!! I just say.......of fucking course he's not the best fucking Peace bringer of the year, but if 5000 million people are brainwashed cleverly like this:
>>>Click<< (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9hHKMUAHWM)
then you are going to lose credibility like the Nobel Peace Commitee has (aka sold out)


P.S. When you guys click on the Obomber the Moon thread to see what a looney batshit baby I am, read the other shit I say near the end about Miss America hopefuls and Super Bowl rings. I think that shit is relevant to this discussion.


But Obama - "YES YOU CAN! YES YOU DID! AND YES YOU DO!":D

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

but, but

I'm officially crack-free as of a month ago. In every sense of the phrase Mr. Goose.

[bryantm3]

what exactly has he done to win the nobel peace prize? he hasn't done anything yet! although he is an image of hope to many people, we have to realize that he is a human being, and he shouldn't be awarded for just being around. the only thing i can think of that he has accomplished is closing the Guantanamo bay prison, and why should he be awarded for that? jimmy carter was not awarded the nobel peace prize for forgiving those who ducked out of the draft. george bush was not awarded the nobel peace prize for leading the kuwaitis to freedom from sadaam. the nobel peace prize has turned into a political sham. the fact of the matter is that those that are running the nobel committee have become notoriously left-leaning, and they think obama is the biggest lefty socialist to be elected president in america yet, and they want to give him a trophy. what a bunch of garbage.

[bryantm3]

That's why we need to support Palin as the 2012 Republican nominee. What better way to insure Obama gets re-elected?

So I've been increasingly disturbed by how blatant Republicans have gotten in their opposition to Obama, because it's grown to the point where it's actually become flat-out opposition to American success. This Nobel Prize is a perfect example to start with. While we could, as a united country, celebrate the potential international leverage that our President winning this prize could provide, instead, Republicans are calling it things like "unfortunate" (Republican National Chairman Michael Steele) (http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/2009/10/steele_on_obama_nobel_peace_pr.html), or worse if you listen to tools like Limbaugh or Beck. Who are Republicans putting first in this case, America, or Republicans? I'd say Republicans.

oh, come off it. like the democrats don't pull the same stuff when republicans are in office? i'm sure that if george w. bush had won some award, most of us would be lauding it. it's not about 'supporting the country'. obama is not america. bush is not america. they are our leaders, not gods.


Then there's our previous discussion about Obama's address to schoolchildren (http://www.darktrain.org/dirty/forums/showthread.php?t=10297) urging them to work hard, assume personal responsibility, and stay in school. Republicans were in a frothy tizzy over this perceived "brainwashing" and "indoctrination" of our country's kids into Obama's "socialist", "communist" or "Hitler-like" agenda. Who were Republicans putting first in rabidly opposing a call to children to do well in school, America, or Republicans? Yeah....Republicans.

once again, what if the war in iraq had just broken out, fahrenheit 9/11 had just come out, and george w. bush wanted to speak to schoolkids about education. BRAINWASHING!!!

[chuck]

I agree with Sean that the rabid-ness of the opposition, as led by Glenn Beck and others is insane, and I wonder where all these people were hiding from 2000 - 2008. Surely there can't be that many villages missing their idiots? Or possibly the village sane person is simply missing.

Mongoose - your rant about the LCROSS mission was just random and even for your normal levels of dialectically mis-construed babble - just truly epic.

Let's keep this Nobel Peace Prize in perspective - it's always a symbolic and politically motivated prize. And by the nature of it being about "PEACE" - it's going to be seen as liberal, leftwing and socialist.

But check out the previous winners:

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/

In particular check WHY Obama was given it this year.

"for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"

If you live inside the USA you may not actually realise how low the standing, the credibility of your republic as a force for positive diplomacy and cooperation has sunk in the last 8 years.

The very fact that there's been discussions between Iran and the US - on the basis of Obama taking that first step means something. Considering the last 8 years - doing that is quite extraordinary. From 'axis of evil' to sitting down around a table for discussions - that takes some diplomacy.

I'm not saying Obama is a saviour of the universe. But in the last year - who would you put forward?

Most of the individuals given the laureate have been pretty specific players in certain times and events - Trimble and Hume in Northern Ireland, Romas-Horte in East Timor, Kissinger for Vietnam (hmmm...), Mandela and de Klerk in South Africa, Gorbachev for glasnost, Lech Walesa in Poland. Apart from a few individuals like Mother Teresa, or groups like MÉDECINS SANS FRONTIÈRES who are truly lifelong in their dedication to peace - most laureate winners have been honoured for specific events.

[Deckard]

Stop being all measured and sensible, Chuck.

I agree with Sean that the rabid-ness of the opposition, as led by Glenn Beck and others is insane, and I wonder where all these people were hiding from 2000 - 2008. Surely there can't be that many villages missing their idiots? Or possibly the village sane person is simply missing.

Mongoose - your rant about the LCROSS mission was just random and even for your normal levels of dialectically mis-construed babble - just truly epic.

Let's keep this Nobel Peace Prize in perspective - it's always a symbolic and politically motivated prize. And by the nature of it being about "PEACE" - it's going to be seen as liberal, leftwing and socialist.

But check out the previous winners:

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/

In particular check WHY Obama was given it this year.

"for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"

If you live inside the USA you may not actually realise how low the standing, the credibility of your republic as a force for positive diplomacy and cooperation has sunk in the last 8 years.

The very fact that there's been discussions between Iran and the US - on the basis of Obama taking that first step means something. Considering the last 8 years - doing that is quite extraordinary. From 'axis of evil' to sitting down around a table for discussions - that takes some diplomacy.

I'm not saying Obama is a saviour of the universe. But in the last year - who would you put forward?

Most of the individuals given the laureate have been pretty specific players in certain times and events - Trimble and Hume in Northern Ireland, Romas-Horte in East Timor, Kissinger for Vietnam (hmmm...), Mandela and de Klerk in South Africa, Gorbachev for glasnost, Lech Walesa in Poland. Apart from a few individuals like Mother Teresa, or groups like MÉDECINS SANS FRONTIÈRES who are truly lifelong in their dedication to peace - most laureate winners have been honoured for specific events.

So what you're really saying is, he's the messiah?
;)

[Sean]

oh, come off it. like the democrats don't pull the same stuff when republicans are in office? i'm sure that if george w. bush had won some award, most of us would be lauding it. it's not about 'supporting the country'. obama is not america. bush is not america. they are our leaders, not gods.



once again, what if the war in iraq had just broken out, fahrenheit 9/11 had just come out, and george w. bush wanted to speak to schoolkids about education. BRAINWASHING!!!You seem to have missed my point. I'm not saying that opposing Obama is opposing America. That would be a stupid assertion. What I said is that Obama's opponents have reached a point where they're opposing him at the expense of America. For instance, as I mentioned earlier, losing the Olympics meant losing a huge influx of revenue for the entire U.S. - liberals and conservatives alike - but many Republicans literally cheered the national loss because they prioritize any defeat of Obama over a victory for the country. That's ass-backwards.

Also, I didn't say Democrats don't do similar stuff. In fact, I was complaining about Democrats doing the same kinds of things here on these boards during Bush's administration. What bothers me is that Republicans are doing the same thing but on steroids now - and with guns.

[Deckard]

Fwiw, I guess my own take is:

Does Obama deserve some sort of recognition?
Yes. An enormous amount. Even going back to the primaries.

Does he deserve the Nobel Peace prize?
No. And his press briefing was quite graceful in acknowledging this, I thought.

Will this help him?
Politically, it's doubtful. I suppose it may help 'the world' if it bears additional responsibility down on his shoulders as a peace-maker, which seems to be what the Nobel committee had in mind. (Of course some would argue that, in some situations, the absence of action may be just as damaging to world stability). He already commands a great deal of respect internationally, so I don't see how this award can add much more than already exists. As for domestically...

Will this hinder him?
Yes. Certainly in the US, where - short and long term - it seems to be perfect ammunition for ridicule. Which is a shame, because it's normally something to be immensely proud of. Overseas, will it hinder him? Only if he fails to live up to expectations, which is not unlikely. If he some day becomes known as a warmonger, the award may come to be viewed with the same disdain as Kissinger's.

[Sean]

Nope. I'm a Democrat, I never watch Fox, and I hated Bush's job in command as well. This is practically a one party system parading around as a two party system anyways. I'm sorry, but I just can't believe you on this. You've parrotted every Republican and Glenn Beck talking point, and cut and pasted article after article from conservative sources like Townhall.com. You may not watch FOX, but you do seem to regularly follow the same sources they do.

P.S. When you guys click on the Obomber the Moon thread to see what a looney batshit baby I am, read the other shit I say near the end about Miss America hopefuls and Super Bowl rings. I think that shit is relevant to this discussion.That the differences between these examples needs to be pointed out to you is absolutely ridiculous. Does any Miss America or Super Bowl winner possess comparable world standing and intellect to effect change the way the President of the United States can? No, not at all. Which is why that shit is totally irrelevant to this discussion.

[Sean]

what exactly has he done to win the nobel peace prize? he hasn't done anything yet! although he is an image of hope to many people, we have to realize that he is a human being, and he shouldn't be awarded for just being around. the only thing i can think of that he has accomplished is closing the Guantanamo bay prison, and why should he be awarded for that? jimmy carter was not awarded the nobel peace prize for forgiving those who ducked out of the draft. george bush was not awarded the nobel peace prize for leading the kuwaitis to freedom from sadaam. the nobel peace prize has turned into a political sham. the fact of the matter is that those that are running the nobel committee have become notoriously left-leaning, and they think obama is the biggest lefty socialist to be elected president in america yet, and they want to give him a trophy. what a bunch of garbage.Watch this interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooqkvd8JPfU) to hear from the horse's mouth what the reasoning was behind awarding Obama the Nobel Prize.

[chuck]

Stop being all measured and sensible, Chuck.

;)

See - this is why my internet forum posting mojo is past its use-by date. I used to be a contrary bastid - now I'm just sensible.

;)

On topic - I agree that it's unfortunate that Obama has been given the award at this point. I can see the reasoning and purpose behind giving it. I can also see the actual value of the Nobel Peace Prize - as somewhat nominal and aspirational.

Unlike the other Nobel awards - by its very nature it's nebulous and open to dispute. And in this case - as you've said it's gone to be used by critics of Obama to further discredit Obama - despite it being nothing to do with him personally.

If he refuses the prize - he'll get even more grief by his domestic critics, and internationally it will be a received poorly as well. Regardless of what reasons he gives for refusing it.

FWIW - this is a good thing - when was the last time a serving President was honoured with an international award like this? It's a peace award - you'd think all of the right-wing christian conservatives would be applauding it - you know in keeping with the tenet from Jesus - "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall inherit the earth."

wait....

OMG!! Jesus was a socialist!!

aaaahh - cognitive dissonance warning!!

execute Plan B.

....

"He's not really an American!! Where's his birth certificate..."

[cacophony]

what exactly has he done to win the nobel peace prize?
he's done an outstanding job not being george w bush. and posing for photo ops. and....... not making a decision on afghanistan..... and...... i guess that's it.

now that the nobel committee has established this criteria, i've asked my employer for a raise based on the argument that i'm not as crappy as my predecessor. :p

the fact of the matter is that those that are running the nobel committee have become notoriously left-leaning, and they think obama is the biggest lefty socialist to be elected president in america yet, and they want to give him a trophy. what a bunch of garbage.
SFW? it's a private fund. they can lean however far whichever direction they please. they don't have to be fair, it's their own private money.

i was with you on the criticism of obama's do-nothingness, but this is just stupid whining. like when the conservatives cited "freedom of speech" when miss california was denied a crown. learn the difference between public and private before you boo-hoo about it.

[cured]

P.S. When you guys click on the Obomber the Moon thread to see what a looney batshit baby I am, read the other shit I say near the end about Miss America hopefuls and Super Bowl rings. I think that shit is relevant to this discussion.

Stuff you said or stuff you read from somewhere else, thought it was awesome, and then came here and represented it as your own? :)

Anyway, I agree with Deckard:


Will this hinder him?
Yes. Certainly in the US, where - short and long term - it seems to be perfect ammunition for ridicule. Which is a shame, because it's normally something to be immensely proud of. Overseas, will it hinder him? Only if he fails to live up to expectations, which is not unlikely. If he some day becomes known as a warmonger, the award may come to be viewed with the same disdain as Kissinger's.

To what Sean said, I read another interesting thing on Sullivan's blog awhile ago, which paraphrased went something along the lines of "Conservatives revolt because they feel they're the only ones fit to govern." At this point they really are reaching for anything. They're keenly aware that any positive remark or representation of anything Obama does will be replayed endlessly 2-3 years from now when the presidential TV ad campaign picks up. They never want to appear weak. Unfortunately, they haven't come up with any proposals that make any sense or that change the status quo.

How to raise revenue for the government? Cut taxes.

How to handle the housing crisis? Cut taxes.

How to get spending in control? Umm...cut taxes.

I wouldn't be surprised if the GOP cheered on another hurricane Katrina so they could blame the troubles with helping local residents on Obama. They're really the opposite of what they say they are; the GOP puts party first and America a distant second.

[bryantm3]

SFW? it's a private fund. they can lean however far whichever direction they please. they don't have to be fair, it's their own private money.

i was with you on the criticism of obama's do-nothingness, but this is just stupid whining. like when the conservatives cited "freedom of speech" when miss california was denied a crown. learn the difference between public and private before you boo-hoo about it.


caco-taco (that's your new nickname), i do know the difference between public and private groups, such as the boy scouts, who are private, and caused an uproar when they denied gay members to join. i'm not complaining about 'my tax dollars' going to anything— i just feel like the nobel committee has had a long standing precedent of rewarding those who advance society, make peace, etc, and awarding obama prematurely was a bad call, just as i think the boy scouts not allowing gays is a bad call. nothing i can do to change it, but it's a valid topic for discussion.

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

oooooooo, I love those too.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.tacojohns.com/images/food/desserts/3ChocoTaco.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.tacojohns.com/food8-Desserts3-ChocoTaco.asp&usg=__TJgDKkv88pMdYhDvk9RcLfgjoF0=&h=279&w=334&sz=23&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=2jV9RdrqUMEsWM:&tbnh=99&tbnw=119&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchoco%2Btaco%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1W1SUN A_en%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1

[Sean]

Interesting take on the prize awarded to Obama that a friend just passed on to me...


Nobel Peace Sparks War

By Patricia Williams
Oct. 21, 2009

Statistics show that there is a marked uptick in the amount of genuinely hateful yammering one finds in public and political discourse. "Interactive" media are all well and good, but there does seem to be a recurring motif of pointlessly fulminating ping-pong, no matter what the subject at hand. Someone writes an article. Some readers like it, some readers don't. At first they fling praise or invective at the author, but soon they're calling one another political poopy-heads and snarling about who's stupider than whom. Then it goes from being accusative in the singular (you're an idiot) to the stereotyped plural (your kind are all idiots).

Rush Limbaugh has applied this schoolyard Punch and Judy narrative to every topic he touches. But it has also been spread by "reality" TV and extends from Jon and Kate to Congressman Joe Wilson. Donald Rumsfeld was masterful at it, and George W. Bush used it to suck the air out of every diplomatic space he entered. As a national discourse, it's silly and uninformative. When elevated to the level of international relations, it has been disastrous, as clichés like "You're either with us or against us" have shown.

I say all this because I think that the art of diplomacy is something that has become largely invisible to us in the United States. We value directness, even where it insults someone; we want instant responses, even where answers don't come easily. Diplomacy, a carefully choreographed ballet with words, is quite foreign to our perceptions of the world. We tend not to think about strategies of approach and deflection, negotiation and accommodation, patience and translation, and care in choice of words combined with pointedly applied pressure.

This was certainly evident in the response to President Obama's having been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Lots of sniffing about his readiness, lots of disparagement about his "pretty words" and "empty promises." And then, of course, the formulaic fights: he's a wizardy warlord with the power of hypnosis! He's a dangerous con man whose only gift is charisma. You're wrong! You're wronger! Dope slaps all around!

It's helpful to consider exactly why President Obama was cited. It was given to him, said the Nobel judges, for his having "created a new climate in international politics." "Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future." Indeed, Obama has brought the United States back to the status of the most admired nation in the world, based on a survey of thousands of people in twenty countries around the globe.

Some commentators have chalked this up to Obama's silver tongue, as though great oratory is inherently about smoke and mirrors, emptiness and hype. But what Obama has done is nothing less than steer our huge ship of state back from the brink of "preventive war" and economic free fall. He restored competing theories of constitutional interpretation. No longer is the executive branch battling in a different textual universe: between due process and none at all; between the courts and images from 24; between privacy and supersurveillance; between accountability and official holes of dark secrecy.

These are serious accomplishments, with pragmatic consequences. As just one small example, after Obama was elected 1.6 million South Africans registered to vote. Maybe that just doesn't matter to many Americans, but diplomacy is the art of creating a geography where citizens and their leaders can develop means of negotiating with one another. Around 90 percent of Britons, French and Germans believe that Obama has affirmatively changed the course of diplomacy and that the United States is now a superpower that listens. The guiding question, the committee reminded us, was, "Who has done the most to enhance peace in the preceding year?" To enhance peace--that's the standard. It is not the impossible metric of ending all wars, of delivering peace on earth, right now. The committee summarized its conclusion succinctly: "Who has done more than Barack Obama?"

So how do you turn that into a negative? The headline in the Chicago Tribune read, "Europeans Honor US President for Not Being Bush." The New York Times sniffed, "Normally the prize has been presented, even controversially, for accomplishment"--making it quite clear the editors thought Obama had accomplished nothing at all. Everywhere, it seemed, the prize was described as "a political liability," "a mixed blessing," a "poison chalice," a reminder of the "gap" between his "star power" and "actual achievements." The prize was figured as somehow devalued by the choice, as though when this man enters the space of the world's highest honor, the property values fall. It was suddenly a European socialist foreign thing rather than a global honor, and therefore one more sign that Obama is not one of "us."

Whether or not Obama was your personal pick, the Nobel Peace Prize surely confers honor on our president, on America's reputation and on us, the people. Among left and right, there's a kind of shortsightedness of ingratitude and a failure to acknowledge the degree to which Obama's carefully constructed rhetorical interventions have created a new diplomatic space.

The words of an American president matter. The executive power is nothing more than the ability to craft policy, guide action, provide direction--all with words, and all with consequences for the future of the world. So Obama's Nobel Peace Prize is something all Americans should feel good about, a reassurance that we are moving toward a light, a globally hailed goal of prosperity and nuclear disarmament. It speaks to the unfortunate power of our "It's a Good Thing! It's an Evil Thing! Slimeball! Sucker!" habits of thinking, however, that not a single US newspaper I could find had a headline with anything as simple as: "Congratulations, Mr. President! Congratulations to Us, Every One!"

[//\/\/]

nice piece. but unfortunately, the right certainly are getting more and more 'deranged' about everything and everything. check the levels of paranoia in this fox 'debate' (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/10/24/decide-hn-emergency/?test=latestnews)

[Sean]

nice piece. but unfortunately, the right certainly are getting more and more 'deranged' about everything and everything. check the levels of paranoia in this fox 'debate' (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/10/24/decide-hn-emergency/?test=latestnews)Holy crap. Some of the comments from your link really should be posted here so they don't get lost as more are added.

First, the brief survey Ian linked:

Do You Think H1N1 Is a National Emergency?
President Obama declared a national emergency Friday related to the outbreak of H1N1 flu, allowing health officials greater leeway under federal regulations to respond to the virus. The virus has claimed the lives of 1,000 Americans, but it isn't clear yet whether the outbreak will be any worse than the annual outbreak of seasonal flu.

* Yes, we should prepare for the outbreak to get much worse
* Yes, though the outlook isn't as dire as it sounds
* No, but I'm still concerned about the flu's spread
* No, the outbreak is little more than media hype
* I don't know

Then come the comments:

atlanta100
Georgia

This declaration is total Obama hype to scare people into believing his healthcare reform fairy tales. He is a pathetic leader who needs to manipulate and scare people for his political domination. H1N1 is less serious than antibiotic-resistant TB which is around many of us everyday. Time to insert some calm and rational thinking into the H1N1 plans.
__________________________________________________ ____________

dianeplantation
Virginia

FOX is the only network to break this news at this time - so much for the allegation that FOX isn't a news network! Well, the H1N1 has been declared a pandemic, so why is the current administration so shocked that we would need extremely large number of doses to cover us all? Or do they want fewer Americans to deal with? Thank you Fox once again for keeping us informed!
__________________________________________________ ____________

zman61
South Carolina

I think it's a matter of "never waste a good crisis" "never let a good crisis go to waste" They already have Clinton's secretary of state mentioning bringing in the military to "maintain control" get used to this king of thing from Dear Leader Chairman Maobama
__________________________________________________ ____________

donaldc

THEY (THE ADMIN. MEDIA) CAN SAY WHAT THEY WANT. WHERE ARE THESE 1000 PEOPLE THAT DIED FROM SWINE FLU?, WHY DON'T THEY SAY 10,000. ONCE A LIAR ALWAYS A LIAR. THIS IS ONLY A STEP TO QUARANTINE THE SHOOL KIDS AND THE WORKERS OF AMERICA. WHEN THE SCOOL KIDS STAY HOME, THE PARENTS WILL HAVE TO PAY, DAY CARE OR THEIR JOBS. THE WORKERS STAYING HOME WILL BREAK MANY COMPANIES.
__________________________________________________ ____________

soulpatch
Pennsylvania

it's not an emergency it's an insurgency... of fear mongering
__________________________________________________ ____________

But then, a light shines through the darkness....

indythoughts
Texas

The regular flu normally kills senior citizens that alrady have other issues that make them more likely to die from it. This strain of flu kills young people and is much more deadly for pregnant women. That is why it is a national emergency. This is just the very beginnning of flu season and over 1000 kids and young adults have died. Burying your head in the sand won't save lives and the flu doesn't check for affiliation with a political party. Last but not least, the stimulus package originally had 1.5 billion to prepare for a fly (I assume he meant to write "flu") pandemic. It was stripped out at the request of Republicans when Obama was trying to get bipartisan support to rescue the economy. This is why the country can't afford to go back to Republican leadership.

Thanks for restoring some tiny bit of my faith in people, indythoughts. And thanks again for the link Ian.

[//\/\/]

sadly, you know the same people would have been shouting 'bush derangement syndrome' as some sort of dismissive defence when far more pertinent issues were raised...

[Rog]

"war is sometimes necessary", "oh, thanks for the peace prize":D

incidently, do think obama knowing he was going to oslo thought......" while i'm here i may as well pop to copenhagen for a carbonara....er i mean carbon footprint type thing".......hey where's my nobel prize for economics?;)