Good Luck With This One

[A.D. Miller]

It will take every single Republican straining at the bit to even begin to put a negative spin on this one . . .:D

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/10nobel.html?hp

[John Arnold]

It will take every single Republican straining at the bit to even begin to put a negative spin on this one . . .:D

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/10nobel.html?hp

I still can't tell when you're being serious. Ok, I'll assume you are and then be reminded to notice the big smiley face.

The Rebublicanites will have no trouble whatsoever sneering at the silly Norwegians awarding Obama the Peace Prize. They will do it reflexively. They could do it in their sleep.

[A.D. Miller]

I still can't tell when you're being serious. Ok, I'll assume you are and then be reminded to notice the big smiley face.

The Rebublicanites will have no trouble whatsoever sneering at the silly Norwegians awarding Obama the Peace Prize. They will do it reflexively. They could do it in their sleep.

JA: Yes, speaking (and even "thinking") for Republicans is much like farting, which is easily accomplished while they sleep.

[Scott Patterson]

Hey Jimmy Carter won as well, this just shows how seriously those five guys in Norway think about it! Jimmy is the shining star of his party!

Congratulations Mr. President on your win. Did you know that many winners give their money award to charity?

[Dan Harris]

I hope he spends the money on a new hut for his 1/2 brother.
Maybe then hannity will have something positive to say about him :D :D

[John Arnold]

It's about time they gave the Peace Prize to a Democrat, after all those Republican presidents getting one. You know, like, uh, ummm, ......

[Ron Bibler]

BAGDAD BOB Come back to us:D We miss you....

Best

Ron

[Michael Larson]

Ya gotta love that lefty thinking.

Good intentions are the same as real accomplishments.

I desire to end all wars.

There, do I get the peace prize next year?:rolleyes:

[Michael Thomas]

Looks like a natural ONION headline to me:


OBAMA RECEIVES NOBEL PEACE PRIZE
FOR NOT BEING GEORGE BUSH

[Ted Menelly]

It will take every single Republican straining at the bit to even begin to put a negative spin on this one . . .:D

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/10nobel.html?hp


Isn't the idea to do something or accomplish something other than mentioning some words. I applaud the Pres for getting it though.

I do believe this is more in the line of bolstering the Pres initiative and maybe helping to move things along.

[A.D. Miller]

Ya gotta love that lefty thinking.

ML: What, on Earth, would you know about that subject?:D

[Michael Larson]

ML: What, on Earth, would you know about that subject?:DAnd you know anything about what the NPP?

Can you admit to yourself that Obama has done nothing to deserve this? Or are you somewhat less than objective?

I just listen to you to learn all I need to know about leftist views.

[Matt Fellman]

Let me preface this by saying my political views tend to be pretty middle of the road. I've been known to argue and agree numerous times with people on both sides.

This will likley be a time to argue with those leaning to the port side of the ship.

How does a guy waging war win a peace prize? I'm sure he's doing great things for the world but we're still at war and even moving the war (yes, I know, the one that GWB started) into new countries. How does that qualify for a peace prize? This just seems like awarding the MVP trophy to the 6th man on the bench. I just don't think he is a standout in the peace process currently.

And while this is being kicked around.... where did all the war protesters go anyway? I can't seem to find any coverage of protests on the news lately. It seems strange.... there were headlines everyday while there was a republican in office. Now that a democrat is needlessly wasting our money and, much more importantly, our soldier's lives overseas it's all okay, right?.

Partisan politics sure is a great drug.... it's better than anything I've ever had. You can justify your double standards and live your life in a totally euphoric state all while feeling no guilt at all. Only in the grand old U.S.A.

[Ted Menelly]

Let me preface this by saying my political views tend to be pretty middle of the road. I've been known to argue and agree numerous times with people on both sides.

This will likley be a time to argue with those leaning to the port side of the ship.

How does a guy waging war win a peace prize? I'm sure he's doing great things for the world but we're still at war and even moving the war (yes, I know, the one that GWB started) into new countries. How does that qualify for a peace prize? This just seems like awarding the MVP trophy to the 6th man on the bench. I just don't think he is a standout in the peace process currently.

And while this is being kicked around.... where did all the war protesters go anyway? I can't seem to find any coverage of protests on the news lately. It seems strange.... there were headlines everyday while there was a republican in office. Now that a democrat is needlessly wasting our money and, much more importantly, our soldier's lives overseas it's all okay, right?.

Partisan politics sure is a great drug.... it's better than anything I've ever had. You can justify your double standards and live your life in a totally euphoric state all while feeling no guilt at all. Only in the grand old U.S.A.

Friday I was watching the news and the mention of war protesters came about for about 2 seconds. Supposedly they are in front of the white house everyday. No, you never hear anything of it....There is a Democrat in office.

Protest the war anyway you wish . It would be a serious catastrophe if we were to pull out now. It has some time to go before we are out of there no matter who is President.

Afganistan had to happen with out a doubt.

Iraq was going to happen anyway. There was no avoiding it. An entire military force was over there for a many years keeping an eye on the fool that was in control. We were spending billions just watching the fool and fly overs. If it were no George It would have been Obama. If we were to pull out of Iraq now it would be the second most serious mistake this country has made.

Bringing yet another country into it??? Pakistan has been a boil on the worlds but for decades. With out moving it to Pakistan there will never be an end to Afganistan. We are dealing with people with the mindset of hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of years ago and the leaders of those particular folks are modern day educated folks with the mind set from thousands of years ago.

There are a lot of screwed up things going on in this world and unfortunately if they are not kept in check from some government some where then I do believe we are all doomed. The brutal control from the leaders of those countries was the only way to control people with those mind sets. That is a sad thing to say and way to honest but seriously true. We look at Sadams brutal bloody rule. People disappearing by the thousands all the time. If it were not him doing it then it would have been someone else. Very sad..............very true. If you look at this realistically us being there keeps thousands and thousnads of people being slaughtered to maintain that control and hopefully someday in the near future there will be police and military that will control there own country with the kid gloves we do. Lots of innocents have been killed in these conflicts but a whole lot more would have been for ever in time if the 2 wars did not happen.

Enough said.

[Richard Stanley]

The Heisman will be next. It doesn't matter that he doesnt play football.

[Matt Fellman]

Friday I was watching the news and the mention of war protesters came about for about 2 seconds. Supposedly they are in front of the white house everyday. No, you never hear anything of it....There is a Democrat in office.

Protest the war anyway you wish . It would be a serious catastrophe if we were to pull out now. It has some time to go before we are out of there no matter who is President.

Afganistan had to happen with out a doubt.

Iraq was going to happen anyway. There was no avoiding it. An entire military force was over there for a many years keeping an eye on the fool that was in control. We were spending billions just watching the fool and fly overs. If it were no George It would have been Obama. If we were to pull out of Iraq now it would be the second most serious mistake this country has made.

Bringing yet another country into it??? Pakistan has been a boil on the worlds but for decades. With out moving it to Pakistan there will never be an end to Afganistan. We are dealing with people with the mindset of hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of years ago and the leaders of those particular folks are modern day educated folks with the mind set from thousands of years ago.

There are a lot of screwed up things going on in this world and unfortunately if they are not kept in check from some government some where then I do believe we are all doomed. The brutal control from the leaders of those countries was the only way to control people with those mind sets. That is a sad thing to say and way to honest but seriously true. We look at Sadams brutal bloody rule. People disappearing by the thousands all the time. If it were not him doing it then it would have been someone else. Very sad..............very true. If you look at this realistically us being there keeps thousands and thousnads of people being slaughtered to maintain that control and hopefully someday in the near future there will be police and military that will control there own country with the kid gloves we do. Lots of innocents have been killed in these conflicts but a whole lot more would have been for ever in time if the 2 wars did not happen.

Enough said.

Agree for the most part. It's a mess over there and some action is necessary. The rose colored glasses and double standard depending on who's driving the ship is what drives me nuts.

[Kevin Barre]

Generally, I try to stay out of this political crap. But this is so far beyond absurd that I have to comment. Here's some text DIRECTLY from the Nobel Prize website regarding the selection process:

February – Deadline for submission. The Committee bases its assessment on nominations that must be postmarked no later than 1 February each year. Nominations postmarked and received after this date are included in the following year's discussions. In recent years, the Committee has received close to 200 different nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize. The number of nominating letters is much higher, as many are for the same candidates.

Did you catch that? the DEADLINE for submissions was February 1!

Meaning, of course, that Obama had been in office less than a month before his name was submitted! Less than two weeks, in fact, since the inauguration was January 20th.

Impressive...or a crock? I wholeheartedly vote for the latter.

Geez. Give me a break. I don't care how much you worship the man, Obama certainly hadn't earned a Nobel Prize after 11 days in office.

I feel sorry for any other potentially worthy nominee who got the shaft. I think this casts a giant shadow over the credibility of the selection process.

Now I'll leave it to anyone else who might care to comment. I'm out of this discussion.

[Scott Patterson]

Not that I have been a fan of Bill Clinton (as this has been Democrats only club), but he did more last year IMHO than Obama had done in his first two weeks! Actually he has been doing better after he left office!

[Jerry Peck]

Generally, I try to stay out of this political crap. But this is so far beyond absurd that I have to comment. Here's some text DIRECTLY from the Nobel Prize website regarding the selection process:

February – Deadline for submission. The Committee bases its assessment on nominations that must be postmarked no later than 1 February each year. Nominations postmarked and received after this date are included in the following year's discussions. In recent years, the Committee has received close to 200 different nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize. The number of nominating letters is much higher, as many are for the same candidates.

Did you catch that? the DEADLINE for submissions was February 1!

Meaning, of course, that Obama had been in office less than a month before his name was submitted! Less than two weeks, in fact, since the inauguration was January 20th.

Impressive...or a crock? I wholeheartedly vote for the latter.

Geez. Give me a break. I don't care how much you worship the man, Obama certainly hadn't earned a Nobel Prize after 11 days in office.


Kevin,

I too was staying away from this, but ...

You forget the other possibility, one which you covered above - I've highlighted it in red for you.

You seemed to jump too quickly at the one option you wanted to espouse on, and totally ignored the other option.


I feel sorry for any other potentially worthy nominee who got the shaft.

I agree.

[Jim Luttrall]

It will take every single Republican straining at the bit to even begin to put a negative spin on this one . . .:D

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/10/world/10nobel.html?hp

I've stayed out of this since it did not take the "right" straining at all, the left has put all the spin on it that was needed. When the left leaning entertainment, late night comedians, and virtually the entire world has spoken up about the joke, no need for me to waste brain power to try to explain the fallacy.

[A.D. Miller]

I've stayed out of this since it did not take the "right" straining at all, the left has put all the spin on it that was needed. When the left leaning entertainment, late night comedians, and virtually the entire world has spoken up about the joke, no need for me to waste brain power to try to explain the fallacy.

JL: I only post stuff like this from time to time to keep the extreme partisan morons from both sides of the fence off of the other threads. It makes for a much nicer atmosphere there. Here, and on threads like this one, they can beat each other (more) senseless without disturbing the rest of us with their blather. I still think that Brian should make two sections for them: hyper-political and over-the-top-religious. That would keep their little minds busily and safely squirming indefinitely.:D

[Mike Schulz]

The Nobel just became a worthless nick nack patty whack give the dog a bone. It's inline with getting a gold star sticker in Kindergarten....ohh wait...you had to do something for a gold star.........