What is Digg?Sponsored by Bing
When Should I Book My Flight Home for Christmas? view!
bing.com - Bing predicts if your fare is likely to fall by $50 or more within 7 days. Shockingly accurate.
307 Comments
- capheine, on 10/09/2009, -14/+230I like Obama. I voted for him. And I wholeheartedly agree that it's way too ***** early to award him a Nobel Peace Prize.
- mklopez, on 10/09/2009, -17/+137I think he may eventually earn it, but right now... is like giving an actor an Academy Award just after he gets cast in the role
- mtnboy, on 10/09/2009, -18/+110My respect in the Nobel Peace Prize has just decreased significantly after them making this decision. This was way to early for them to award him this honor. He has just got in the office, while he is a good speaker, he needs to prove himself which he hasn't done yet.
- jackjkaplan, on 10/09/2009, -17/+58For those who would argue that this is his "call to action" (as Obama had put it today in his acceptance speech).
According to Nobel's will, the Peace Prize should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."
That is... "shall have done", not "really hopes to do". - mrsurfboard, on 10/10/2009, -15/+48What's next? Obama getting inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and getting his own star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. It's a joke and cheapens the award for all those who great achievements warranted the price.
- lisaatucla, on 10/10/2009, -20/+50Lisa --
This morning, Michelle and I awoke to some surprising and humbling news. At 6 a.m., we received word that I'd been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.
To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.
But I also know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.
That is why I've said that I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations and all peoples to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. These challenges won't all be met during my presidency, or even my lifetime. But I know these challenges can be met so long as it's recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone.
This award -- and the call to action that comes with it -- does not belong simply to me or my administration; it belongs to all people around the world who have fought for justice and for peace. And most of all, it belongs to you, the men and women of America, who have dared to hope and have worked so hard to make our world a little better.
So today we humbly recommit to the important work that we've begun together. I'm grateful that you've stood with me thus far, and I'm honored to continue our vital work in the years to come.
Thank you,
President Barack Obama - LoneStarLizard, on 10/09/2009, -13/+39Yeah I think it was too early, especially considering that the deadline to nominate someone was February 1 of this year. He hadn't accomplished anything except campaigning and giving speeches at that point.
- idavidtang, on 10/10/2009, -12/+37Yes.
- Skywise, on 10/10/2009, -12/+37It's not a factor of it being "too early". If he had DONE something in 8 months worthy of it, there wouldn't be that big of an issue.
But he hasn't DONE anything yet. He's talked big. Made a lot of speeches, started some groundwork. But worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize because they like the way he talks?
If they had given it to him after 4 years because he TRIED, sacrificing 4 years of his Presidency for world peace I could at least see that... but this is obviously just a political bestowing of the prize which just cheapens it for those who've earned it with their blood and tears.
Carter got Egypt and Israel to sign a peace treaty and they didn't give him a peace prize until 30 years LATER! - sporkman, on 10/10/2009, -7/+29They're putting their support in him, and making it public. Yeah, it could be a big "***** you" to the Bush administration, which it is. It's just a symbolic gesture, they want Obama to succeed, and are behind him.
I think that it was undeserved, but fully understand their reasons for doing it. - NegativeDigg, on 10/10/2009, -4/+25Even he know he shouldn't have won it...but how can you blame the guy for something he had no control of?
- lisaatucla, on 10/10/2009, -2/+22i know crazy huh. that's how the digital age works now with a president who uses it!
- jackjkaplan, on 10/09/2009, -6/+22According to Nobel's will, the Peace Prize should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."
That is "shall have done", not "really hopes to do". - monkeyrun, on 10/10/2009, -10/+25no matter how much I dislike him less than Bush, I don't think he deserves a Nobel Peace prize.
- Barackalypse, on 10/10/2009, -13/+28I fail to see how continuing a policy of secret renditions, warrantless domestic wiretapping, and sending more troops to an active occupation has anything to do with peace. Of course, when you've given the same award to a guy like Yassar Arafat, the bar is set really low to begin with.
- Napiertt, on 10/10/2009, -2/+15I agree. This is an idiotic decision that discredits the Nobel prize, and also does Obama no favours domestically. Absolutely stupid, unwarranted decision.
- DigitAl56K, on 10/10/2009, -1/+13This isn't so much as a peace prize for Obama as much as it is a criticism of George Bush.
"You've been an American president for a few months and you haven't started an international war, threatened other countries, destroyed the rights of your own citizens, gave yourself retroactive immunity for violations of your own constitution, engaged in war crimes, etc. etc. Congratulations, here's a prize!". - TigerStar337, on 10/10/2009, -2/+13Hmm, I guess they gave Nelson Mandela the Nobel Peace Prize to early too. He received it 10 years before the Apartheid ended in South Africa. Hmmm. Oh, well.
Personally, I am glad our President is getting a Peace Prize instead of shoes thrown at him. - EtherGnat, on 10/10/2009, -1/+10It's legit. I got it too.
- PlatnumPlatypus, on 10/10/2009, -23/+32Great job at being black! Heeere's your prize!
- inactive, on 10/10/2009, -11/+19Eh, I kind of stopped caring about the NP prize when Al Gore won it for some bogus fear mongering power point presentation. Obama deserved it more than that guy did, for sure. I don't think any of the recent winners have done anything for peace though. It's mostly a political award, and Obama has the right politics for the award.
No big deal guys. - Snap65, on 10/10/2009, -3/+11Everybody here sounds pissed.
- TMLF, on 10/10/2009, -0/+8Whether you believe in global warming or not, Gore didn't simply show a presentation. He has been a very active environmentalist his entire life and through his time in the senate.
"An Inconvenient Truth" represented a life's work for Gore.
Whereas Obama got the nod two weeks in... - PatrickBrown, on 10/10/2009, -4/+12@Skywise
I think turning it down is too risky. You don't want to risk snubbing the international community. Everyone has had their fill of that over the past decade. - macmcraeart, on 10/10/2009, -2/+10.... we can withdraw from Afghanistan.
- Domthedude001, on 10/10/2009, -1/+8.... if you elect me another four years.
- bfunk88, on 10/10/2009, -8/+15he changed the international political climate and significantly elevated the way other countries view us. i think that's a pretty concrete achievement.
- gren99, on 10/10/2009, -0/+6as opposed to say. 1919, when woodrow wilson got it for proposing something that never really came to pass. right!
- wafla, on 10/10/2009, -0/+6Why not? We all know about how the NP prize is used. So, why isn't the award "supposed" to be used that way?
- regeya, on 10/10/2009, -1/+7Wait...you thought Reagan should have gotten a Nobel Peace Prize?
Holy poop on a platter. THAT would have confirmed the prize meant nothing... - quirkopatra, on 10/10/2009, -3/+9Captin - please show me where anyone said, "Wat! Our (racist term here) is getting a Nobel Prize?"
I'm gonna need a link for that assertion.
You just kinda did a Carter...saying that people who think he doesn't deserve it are racists.
I think the Dalai Lama deserved it. Why didn't Obama meet with him again? - lordmike, on 10/10/2009, -2/+8Americans seem shocked, but the rest of the world isn't. I don't think Americans realize what a breath of fresh air this new presidency brings to international relations. Americans also don't appreciate how the previous doctrine of unilateral aggression was despised around the world. So, it's not that big of a surprise that members of foreign nations still see Obama as a transformative figure, whereas our honeymoon with Obama has already worn off.
Giving the award out so soon? That seems over the top to us, but from foreign eyes, Obama has already significantly transformed the international landscape.
Take the award for what it is. It's not an award given out by Americans, but by someone else... and the rest of the world apparently really thinks he's great, so they gave him an award. It's a nice gesture. Appreciate the fact that America's standing in the world has improved significantly.
As one state department spokesman put it, "Better that the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes." - ChefGroovy, on 10/10/2009, -6/+12He did all of that between January 20th and February 1st? I don't think so.
I think in that 2 week period he was still talking about what kind of dog to get, and rambling about his "transparency" which he never enforced - TigerStar337, on 10/10/2009, -3/+9One would think that Americans should be happy their President is getting a Peace Prize instead of having shoes thrown at him.
- Atario, on 10/10/2009, -0/+5The prize is not given for results.
"- 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."
Also, from the horse's mouth:
" The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
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. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.
For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world’s leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama’s appeal that “Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.”
Oslo, October 9, 2009" - OfoarHeffinsake, on 10/10/2009, -1/+6@hasahugedig: So your argument is that talking about peace is not promoting peace?
So the Dalai Lama, all he does is talk, I guess he didn't deserve the peace prize. All MLK did was talk, I guess he didn't deserve the peace prize. All Al Gore did (in regards to global warming) is talk, so I guess he didn't deserve the Nobel Peace Prize.
Talking is promoting peace. What you and many other people seem to be arguing is that because Obama should personally do more to achieve great things, what he's already done by promoting peaceful causes is irrelevent.
No. Talk is not cheap. Talk is how people express themselves, champion a cause, and encourage others to follow them.
Yes, Obama has a lot he can do to help this country and the world. That doesn't invalidate what he's already done, which is to promote peaceful ideals in America and the world. - FyberOptic, on 10/10/2009, -3/+8It's not for a presidential act, it was simply for spreading a sense of peace and hope to countless people around the world. Like him or not, how many people can you say are capable of that?
- inactive, on 10/10/2009, -2/+7Bogus according to whom - you, the armchair climate scientist?
- TigerStar337, on 10/10/2009, -0/+5I guess they gave Nelson Mandela the Nobel Peace Prize to early too. He received it 10 years before the Apartheid ended in South Africa. Hmmm. Oh, well.
Personally, I am glad our President is getting a Peace Prize instead of shoes thrown at him. - lordmike, on 10/10/2009, -4/+9Wiungnuts angry! Wingnuts SMASH!!!
- dirtpoorchris, on 10/10/2009, -10/+15Nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize are Feb. 1rst. So Obama was president for 12 days and became good enough for Nobel? *****.
- inactive, on 10/10/2009, -2/+7Google knows...
Martti Ahtisaari, and President Obama has some hefty shoes to fill. I hope he can do it. - AgeofMastery, on 10/10/2009, -2/+7No, we have to be ashamed and unhappy, we have to ridicule and mock the President for winning this.
It's the right's definition of patriotism, ***** on everything the President accomplishes, celebrate everything that goes wrong, stress how America sucks. Then claim to love the country.
Maybe that's why the Republicans have a 9% approval rate. - RGB0099CC, on 10/10/2009, -6/+11Our (if you live in the US) President has just been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and all people do in response is argue. What a pathetic country I live in right now. Constantly bickering about everything, it's so obvious why we can't get anything accomplished. Our government is just the reflection of the sad state we, the people, are in right now.
- TheGrifter, on 10/10/2009, -0/+5He was in office 11 days before he was nominated.
- Akedz, on 10/10/2009, -1/+6Seems you didn't quite read, he's continuing a war. Is he not?
- Skywise, on 10/10/2009, -10/+15He could've turned down the prize.
- Ahnteis, on 10/10/2009, -11/+16> self gratification?
I'm pretty sure he didn't nominate himself. "wienie". - PlatnumPlatypus, on 10/10/2009, -1/+5Obama's job is not to slap an authority in the face. It's the authority's job to recognize the actions of nominee's and judge accordingly.
It would be a great disrespect to the Nobel community currently and historically to deny. Altough some may view Obama's win as a disrespect already, the fault is on the community, but the recipient.
Nonetheless, I do see your point in him denying the prize as an attempt to honor other recipients. - BaphClass, on 10/10/2009, -7/+11I'm gonna guess that there's no point in responding in anything other than a mocking, cynical manner, as you're either a troll, or an individual suffering from an EXTREME case of anger and social ineptitude. Your world must be one of infuriating helplessness and unexpressed rage at the actions of others around you, what's that like? Strangely righteous? Or deeply, deeply saddening?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 312 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is