The "fuel to the fire" files -- Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize?!!?
No, I do not believe that ANY President of The United States of America should even be NOMINATED for the Nobel Peace prize, being that we're one of the most needlessly militarized countries ON. THIS. PLANET...
Never even bother MINDING that he has not yet accomplished the major issues that he set out to when we all handed him the keys to the car back in January.
So what, then WAS he nominated for?
So you mean to tell me that he was nominated based upon his INTENTIONS as President of The United States and not even what he DID as President? Seriously, look at the specifics there... He has not actually reduced the stock of nuclear arms, Palestine and Israel are still at each other's throats, North Korea is still on some bullshit -- not to mention two directionless wars taking place on what is now his watch -- and animals are still going extinct every day from reasons believed related to climate change...
The important part of that sentence, that struck me was
Small victories?!!?
I EXPECT this shit in The United States, but for a European body to recognize someone for an award based upon their stated -- yet unrealized -- intentions reeks of bullshit to me and cheapens the award... Remember back when someone had to wait 5-10-50 years after the impact of what they did was apparent before they were even NOMINATED for the prize for the first time, even if they had to wait a couple of cycles or even passed on from this existence in wait to actually win?
Look, don't get me wrong. The short-term successes of my life and mortgage are largely predicated on the successes of the president -- no matter who he should so happen to be -- and turnaround of the economy, so anyone who takes my words to mean I somehow want the president to fail has me confused with Rush Limbaugh, who can afford to lose a bit on this gamble. Nor am I saying that he WON'T accomplish anything he has stated he intends to accomplish.
[Phlip note - I AM saying that he won't accomplish all of it, quote me on that one]
I am disappointed again that MORE fuel has been added to the flames of those who oppose every little thing that the current President does in the awarding of an as-yet unwarranted award. Tell me, then... What exactly DID he do to win the 'peace' prize? Inciting the collective hatred, racial or otherwise (but mostly racial) of millions to the point where he is the most-threatened President in the history of keeping such statistics? What about the millions of blogs that have likely gone up before I type this at 12:46pm EST that are guaranteed to be a million times less objective than I have been? What about the people BEFORE him that actually have accomplished things that should warrant the giving of The Nobel Peace Prize?
Look, I am not saying that Barack Obama might not some day be worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, I am saying that he is not YET deserving of it. The precedent set by actually giving it to him is a dangerous one, as it now opens the door for the "well, one day he/she will get it so we might as well g'head and give it now, get it out of the way" or something equally asinine.
If giving people things based upon the breadth of their intentions or plans is the new vanguard, then why the fuck are so many in the situations they're in right now? The a good people with only earnest intentions? What happened to the days when the championship was decided when something was actually FINISHED?
At the end of it all, I hate the most that it LOOKS like he was just GIFTED the award for being the first black president, which by proxy means that he was given it simply because he was black. By extension, in this post-racial America [Phlip note - *cough*BULSHIT*cough*] means that being black is not as bad as black people make it out to be. I mean, we gave you the presidency and now live in this beautiful post-racial America [Phlip note - *cough*BULSHIT*cough*] and you people STILL complain? God, when the fuck will you people get the fuck over it?
The natural corollary to that is the people who will be waiting to tell me that I am somehow wrong in my opinions. That I am somehow "hating" because I cannot see one single solitary reason WHY he should have won the award and worry more about the pending backlash than I am able to blindly cheer for the man. Look, I voted for the man. I voted for him as a lesser of evils, in that I was not terribly impressed with either option.
[Phlip note - I wonder how many might chide me for even THAT?]
Anyways, I guess my points have been made here and there is little I can do apart from my now sitting back watching two warring factions argue back and forth from the polar-opposite points of "that nig--... um... Unqualified president can't possibly be right on ANYTHING he does!!!" and those who just refuse to accept that NO man is above OBJECTIVE criticism.
And no, criticism is not "hating," as the young brown people like to say when they lack an effective counterpoint.
Never even bother MINDING that he has not yet accomplished the major issues that he set out to when we all handed him the keys to the car back in January.
So what, then WAS he nominated for?
"The Nobel Committee lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation but recognized initiatives that have yet to bear fruit: reducing the world stock of nuclear arms, easing American conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthening the U.S. role in combating climate change.
"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," Jagland said.
Obama's election and foreign policy moves caused a dramatic improvement in the image of the U.S. around the world. A 25-nation poll of 27,000 people released in July by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found double-digit boosts to the percentage of people viewing the U.S. favorably in countries around the world. That indicator had plunged across the world under President George W. Bush.
[Source: Huffington Post]
"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," Jagland said.
Obama's election and foreign policy moves caused a dramatic improvement in the image of the U.S. around the world. A 25-nation poll of 27,000 people released in July by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found double-digit boosts to the percentage of people viewing the U.S. favorably in countries around the world. That indicator had plunged across the world under President George W. Bush.
[Source: Huffington Post]
So you mean to tell me that he was nominated based upon his INTENTIONS as President of The United States and not even what he DID as President? Seriously, look at the specifics there... He has not actually reduced the stock of nuclear arms, Palestine and Israel are still at each other's throats, North Korea is still on some bullshit -- not to mention two directionless wars taking place on what is now his watch -- and animals are still going extinct every day from reasons believed related to climate change...
The important part of that sentence, that struck me was
"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,"
So you means to tell me that all I have to do is WANT some shit to happen and it counts as an accomplishment now? Being popular is a qualifying factor for the Nobel now? I mean, I'm already looking at this in a "small victories" light as it is, given the "well, at least he's not George Bush" comment hinted at in the above quoted.Small victories?!!?
I EXPECT this shit in The United States, but for a European body to recognize someone for an award based upon their stated -- yet unrealized -- intentions reeks of bullshit to me and cheapens the award... Remember back when someone had to wait 5-10-50 years after the impact of what they did was apparent before they were even NOMINATED for the prize for the first time, even if they had to wait a couple of cycles or even passed on from this existence in wait to actually win?
Look, don't get me wrong. The short-term successes of my life and mortgage are largely predicated on the successes of the president -- no matter who he should so happen to be -- and turnaround of the economy, so anyone who takes my words to mean I somehow want the president to fail has me confused with Rush Limbaugh, who can afford to lose a bit on this gamble. Nor am I saying that he WON'T accomplish anything he has stated he intends to accomplish.
[Phlip note - I AM saying that he won't accomplish all of it, quote me on that one]
I am disappointed again that MORE fuel has been added to the flames of those who oppose every little thing that the current President does in the awarding of an as-yet unwarranted award. Tell me, then... What exactly DID he do to win the 'peace' prize? Inciting the collective hatred, racial or otherwise (but mostly racial) of millions to the point where he is the most-threatened President in the history of keeping such statistics? What about the millions of blogs that have likely gone up before I type this at 12:46pm EST that are guaranteed to be a million times less objective than I have been? What about the people BEFORE him that actually have accomplished things that should warrant the giving of The Nobel Peace Prize?
Look, I am not saying that Barack Obama might not some day be worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, I am saying that he is not YET deserving of it. The precedent set by actually giving it to him is a dangerous one, as it now opens the door for the "well, one day he/she will get it so we might as well g'head and give it now, get it out of the way" or something equally asinine.
If giving people things based upon the breadth of their intentions or plans is the new vanguard, then why the fuck are so many in the situations they're in right now? The a good people with only earnest intentions? What happened to the days when the championship was decided when something was actually FINISHED?
At the end of it all, I hate the most that it LOOKS like he was just GIFTED the award for being the first black president, which by proxy means that he was given it simply because he was black. By extension, in this post-racial America [Phlip note - *cough*BULSHIT*cough*] means that being black is not as bad as black people make it out to be. I mean, we gave you the presidency and now live in this beautiful post-racial America [Phlip note - *cough*BULSHIT*cough*] and you people STILL complain? God, when the fuck will you people get the fuck over it?
The natural corollary to that is the people who will be waiting to tell me that I am somehow wrong in my opinions. That I am somehow "hating" because I cannot see one single solitary reason WHY he should have won the award and worry more about the pending backlash than I am able to blindly cheer for the man. Look, I voted for the man. I voted for him as a lesser of evils, in that I was not terribly impressed with either option.
[Phlip note - I wonder how many might chide me for even THAT?]
Anyways, I guess my points have been made here and there is little I can do apart from my now sitting back watching two warring factions argue back and forth from the polar-opposite points of "that nig--... um... Unqualified president can't possibly be right on ANYTHING he does!!!" and those who just refuse to accept that NO man is above OBJECTIVE criticism.
And no, criticism is not "hating," as the young brown people like to say when they lack an effective counterpoint.
.jpg)
Comments