[Nuclear1]

I don't have to name someone else. It's not my job to propose canditates. I can, however, comment when those who's job it was don't do it right.

Yeah, actually, you do. Otherwise all you're doing is going on a tirade where you can't support your claims with examp--

Oh wait...

[redsniper]

What the hell is wrong with drinking milk?

[Nuclear1]

What the hell is wrong with drinking milk?

It's the drink of the liberal elitist scum. Drink Coke!

[Thaeris]

But... milk is an important source of calcium compounds and various other vitamins and minerals...

[Nuclear1]

But... milk is an important source of calcium compounds and various other vitamins and minerals...

Just the milk agenda of the liberal media.  Sounds like a bunch of gobbledygook.

[Janos]

But... milk is an important source of calcium compounds and various other vitamins and minerals...

sounds very suspicious to me

[TrashMan]

Yeah, actually, you do. Otherwise all you're doing is going on a tirade where you can't support your claims with examp--

Oh wait...

No, actually I don't.

There are people better suited for the award. Lots of them. You got smaller-scale conflict all around the world and people working to stop them.

[Ford Prefect]

No, actually I don't.

There are people better suited for the award. Lots of them. You got smaller-scale conflict all around the world and people working to stop them.

Reading this artful phrasing, I can't help but be reminded of that one closeted guy in everyone's college dorm who's had "lots of girlfriends" "back in his hometown."

[Bobboau]

are you honestly suggesting that he won by default? because if your argument is 'there was no one better' when you can't tell me what good he has done, then that's basically what you are saying.

[Ford Prefect]

Who? Me? I don't particularly care. Any peace prize that was given to Henry Kissinger is questionable in my book, and there are more pressing matters to debate right now. I just think the people who are so adamantly against it are making a train wreck of their argument.

[TrashMan]

Reading this artful phrasing, I can't help but be reminded of that one closeted guy in everyone's college dorm who's had "lots of girlfriends" "back in his hometown."

I can't help but be reminded of a freind of mine who demanded proof for everything - even the most mundane and obvious stuff.

Either way, it's a sad, sad word if there really is no better candidate for the prize than Obama.

[zookeeper]

Yeah, actually, you do. Otherwise all you're doing is going on a tirade where you can't support your claims with examp--

Oh wait...

No, actually I don't.

There are people better suited for the award. Lots of them.

So prove it by naming a few. Problem solved and probably takes only a minute of your time unlike all this pointless dancing around the simple question of whether you're right or not because you refuse to tell why you are right.

[Akalabeth Angel]

So prove it by naming a few. Problem solved and probably takes only a minute of your time unlike all this pointless dancing around the simple question of whether you're right or not because you refuse to tell why you are right.

Sima Samar
In 2002, Sima Samar became the first women's affairs minister in Afghanistan's post-Taliban interim government. Prior to her appointment, Samar had dedicated her life to the preservation of basic rights for women and girls in Afghanistan. She fled her country in 1984 during the Soviet ocupation and moved to the border town of Quetta, Pakistan, where she founded the Shuhada Organization to support the education and health needs of Afghan women and girls. With dogged persistence and at great personal risk, she kept her schools and clinics open in Afghanistan even during the most repressive days of the Taliban regime, whose laws prohibited the education of girls past the age of eight. When the Taliban fell, Samar returned to Kabul and accepted the post of Minister for Women's Affairs, even as she continued to run her clinics and schools. But her persistent calls for equality and justice attracted the attention of Afghanistan's powerful religious leaders, who still saw no place for women in Afghan public life. She was taunted by male colleagues, and she began to receive thinly veiled death threats from Islamic conservatives hoping to silence her. She was ultimately forced to step down from her cabinet post, which was left unfilled. She subsequently was offered a non-cabinet position chairing the Independent Afghanistan Human Rights Commission, a position she still holds. ]http://www.jfklibrary.org/Education+and+Public+Programs/Profile+in+Courage+Award/Award+Recipients/Sima+Samar/[/url]



Dr. Denis Mukwege: Doctor, founder and head of Panzi Hospital in Bukavu, Democratic Republic of Congo. He has dedicated his life to helping Congolese women and girls who are victims of gang rape and brutal sexual violence. http://www.benjaminbradley.com/politics/who-did-obama-beat-to-win-his-nobel-prize/

Etcetera . . .

[Blue Lion]

So prove it by naming a few. Problem solved and probably takes only a minute of your time unlike all this pointless dancing around the simple question of whether you're right or not because you refuse to tell why you are right.

Sima Samar
In 2002, Sima Samar became the first women's affairs minister in Afghanistan's post-Taliban interim government. Prior to her appointment, Samar had dedicated her life to the preservation of basic rights for women and girls in Afghanistan. She fled her country in 1984 during the Soviet ocupation and moved to the border town of Quetta, Pakistan, where she founded the Shuhada Organization to support the education and health needs of Afghan women and girls. With dogged persistence and at great personal risk, she kept her schools and clinics open in Afghanistan even during the most repressive days of the Taliban regime, whose laws prohibited the education of girls past the age of eight. When the Taliban fell, Samar returned to Kabul and accepted the post of Minister for Women's Affairs, even as she continued to run her clinics and schools. But her persistent calls for equality and justice attracted the attention of Afghanistan's powerful religious leaders, who still saw no place for women in Afghan public life. She was taunted by male colleagues, and she began to receive thinly veiled death threats from Islamic conservatives hoping to silence her. She was ultimately forced to step down from her cabinet post, which was left unfilled. She subsequently was offered a non-cabinet position chairing the Independent Afghanistan Human Rights Commission, a position she still holds. ]http://www.jfklibrary.org/Education+and+Public+Programs/Profile+in+Courage+Award/Award+Recipients/Sima+Samar/[/url]



Dr. Denis Mukwege: Doctor, founder and head of Panzi Hospital in Bukavu, Democratic Republic of Congo. He has dedicated his life to helping Congolese women and girls who are victims of gang rape and brutal sexual violence. http://www.benjaminbradley.com/politics/who-did-obama-beat-to-win-his-nobel-prize/

Etcetera . . .

How do either of those people meet the qualifications listed for the peace prize?

"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.""

It looked like you just picked womens rights leaders from the list and hoped we wouldn't notice the difference.

That list is almost sad.

[TrashMan]

Only pople with BIG influence and/or political power can hope to get that prize.

That said, pretty much all leaders talk about peace.

[Blue Lion]

Only people with BIG influence and/or political power can hope to get that prize.

That said, pretty much all leaders talk about peace.

A true statement. Find another leader who did what Obama did and/or more and we'll have ourselves a nice ol' viewing.

[Akalabeth Angel]

How do either of those people meet the qualifications listed for the peace prize?

"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.""

It looked like you just picked womens rights leaders from the list and hoped we wouldn't notice the difference.

That list is almost sad.

Regardless of the original intent there have been many winners who have fostered peace and human rights within single nations:

http://nobelprizes.com/nobel/peace/peace.html

Mother Theresa for example has won the nobel peace prize. Do you think this was undeserved? Advocating human rights is as much a pursuit of peace as idle talk. There is PRECEDENCE for human rights supporters. The Afghan woman for example was risking her life, doing real work in Afghanistan before 9/11 and the west woke up and gave a damn.


You see the thing is, every US leader that talks about nuclear arms reduction is full of **** in my opinion because every one says "oh, let's get rid of nuclear arms together". Well people lead by setting an example, if a US president was really serious about nuclear arms reduction they'd get rid of their whole stockpile unilaterally and then advocate others to do the same. I hate this half-hearted bull**** that people present as some real attempt. The US and USSR have been reducing stock piles for years and they still have enough to blow the world apart many times over.

[Blue Lion]

How do either of those people meet the qualifications listed for the peace prize?

"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.""

It looked like you just picked womens rights leaders from the list and hoped we wouldn't notice the difference.

That list is almost sad.

Regardless of the original intent there have been many winners who have fostered peace and human rights within single nations:

http://nobelprizes.com/nobel/peace/peace.html

Mother Theresa for example has won the nobel peace prize. Do you think this was undeserved? Advocating human rights is as much a pursuit of peace as idle talk. There is PRECEDENCE for human rights supporters. The Afghan woman for example was risking her life, doing real work in Afghanistan before 9/11 and the west woke up and gave a damn.


You see the thing is, every US leader that talks about nuclear arms reduction is full of **** in my opinion because every one says "oh, let's get rid of nuclear arms together". Well people lead by setting an example, if a US president was really serious about nuclear arms reduction they'd get rid of their whole stockpile unilaterally and then advocate others to do the same. I hate this half-hearted bull**** that people present as some real attempt. The US and USSR have been reducing stock piles for years and they still have enough to blow the world apart many times over.

This is pretty good, and by good I mean funny.

The reason it's funny is you've pretty much shot yourself in the foot here. You've basically destroyed any premise of the prize being based on the description given.

You've basically said that the winner can have almost nothing to do with what it's supposed to be and you're ok with that. But a guy who DOES meet the requirements doesn't live up to your expectations and we should give it to people who, by your own definition, don't really meet the requirements.

You would have been better off arguing for a strict interpretation of the prize. Now that's its gone, any argument about Obama not living up to it are now gone.

[Akalabeth Angel]

This is pretty good, and by good I mean funny.

The reason it's funny is you've pretty much shot yourself in the foot here. You've basically destroyed any premise of the prize being based on the description given.

You've basically said that the winner can have almost nothing to do with what it's supposed to be and you're ok with that. But a guy who DOES meet the requirements doesn't live up to your expectations and we should give it to people who, by your own definition, don't really meet the requirements.

You would have been better off arguing for a strict interpretation of the prize. Now that's its gone, any argument about Obama not living up to it are now gone.

        The difference between the precedence-setters and Obama is that they have accomplished something real and substantial on the ground. Not talked. Some have devoted years of their lives to their pursuit, not 9 months. What has Obama accomplished?

        The prize is premature. The Nobel committee is simply jumping on the Obama fan-wagon (I think you crammed in there months ago yourself).

[Blue Lion]

This is pretty good, and by good I mean funny.

The reason it's funny is you've pretty much shot yourself in the foot here. You've basically destroyed any premise of the prize being based on the description given.

You've basically said that the winner can have almost nothing to do with what it's supposed to be and you're ok with that. But a guy who DOES meet the requirements doesn't live up to your expectations and we should give it to people who, by your own definition, don't really meet the requirements.

You would have been better off arguing for a strict interpretation of the prize. Now that's its gone, any argument about Obama not living up to it are now gone.

        The difference between the precedence-setters and Obama is that they have accomplished something real and substantial on the ground. Not talked. Some have devoted years of their lives to their pursuit, not 9 months. What has Obama accomplished?

He met the requirements given by the Nobel Prize Committee. They stated what he did to earn it. We've spent time in this thread discussing exactly what he did to get it.

You're in kind of a weird position. Which are they supposed to follow? The requirements set up or another set based on whatever they feel like at the time? Either way you still can't argue against him.

You got caught trying to come up with someone who met it better than him, and when that didn't work out you tried to loosen the requirements, which was the whole argument to begin with.

So the precedent setters did stuff, so they got the award even though they didn't exactly meet the requirements? That's great. So now Obama has to meet the requirements AND do stuff? He has to do both when everyone else was one or the other?

I mean we already listed what he did, do you really want to copy paste another one?

The prize is premature. The Nobel committee is simply jumping on the Obama fan-wagon (I think you crammed in there months ago yourself).

Oh I jumped on before he won the nomination, before the campaign really started. But I was unaware that liking what a guy does is some kind of problem.