Breaking News: Nobel prize to OBAMA

[Scam of God]

He's really probably as deserving of it as any other figure of major importance from last year - that is to say, not particularly. But there's nobody better to give it to.

[Scam of God]

Obama will next win the Physics prize for his ability to walk on water.....

To be fair, Obama's probably the most deserving sitting President to win the Prize. Wilson of course involved us in an unnecessary war, and Teddy Roosevelt was always an expansionist hawk.

[Scam of God]

Nobel Prize=fail. Seriously? Obama? This lovefest has got to stop.

Of course, had it gone to Reagan, it'd have been because he was the greatest national leader in WORLD HISTORY. Objectively speaking, of course.

The fact of the matter is that none of the Presidents awarded the Prize have particularly deserved it, and the two other sitting Presidents - T. Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson - deserved it significantly less than does Obama.

[Scam of God]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Stop being stupid, if you so can.

You have given me no evidence that it would be otherwise from you.

[Scam of God]

What was the Norwegian Nobel Committee smoking, and where can I get some?  The Peace Prize has been a political creature for decades, but whether you agreed with the committee's choices or not, at least you could point to something concrete the laureate had done to deserve the award.  While Obama certainly would like to do things of the sort that attracts the committee's attention, he hasn't really done them yet.

Which President awarded the Prize has deserved it? Roosevelt? Certainly not. Wilson? Most certainly not. Carter? Yes, but he wasn't the President when he won it. Obama would only deserve it if his rhetoric matched his reality; but I can't name anyone else who especially does, either.

[Scam of God]

What was the Norwegian Nobel Committee smoking, and where can I get some?  The Peace Prize has been a political creature for decades, but whether you agreed with the committee's choices or not, at least you could point to something concrete the laureate had done to deserve the award.  While Obama certainly would like to do things of the sort that attracts the committee's attention, he hasn't really done them yet.

Which President awarded the Prize has deserved it? Roosevelt? Certainly not. Wilson? Most certainly not. Carter? Yes, but he wasn't the President when he won it. Obama would only deserve it if his rhetoric matched his reality; but I can't name anyone else who especially does, either.

While Roosevelt's efforts to broker peace in the Russo-Japanese War were overhyped , as were Wilson's efforts to found a League of Nations, as least they were efforts that had had a actual concrete effect one could point out.

Roosevelt also championed every American war and what would today be hilariously called "police actions" of his three-decade career, and Wilson dragged the nation headlong into a Great War. Obama's win looks almost reasonable in comparison.

[Scam of God]

It's a Peace Prize, Einzige, not a Pacifism Prize.

And the other two Presidents contributed exactly nothing to the cause of peace, and both actively did real and quantifiable damage to it. Better a President with no accomplishments than two with net-negative accomplishments in the given area.

[Scam of God]

Unless I misread something, Ernest just defended Woodrow Wilson. Strange.

Don't look for anything approaching consistency with him: the Left is his Enemy, and their enemies are his Allies, regardless of position.

[Scam of God]

I'm sure the Israelis, who were probably the real target of all of this, are saying to themselves, "We're screwed now!"

It's all a conspiracy, jm. Watch for the black helicopters.

[Scam of God]

I'm sure the Israelis, who were probably the real target of all of this, are saying to themselves, "We're screwed now!"

It's all a conspiracy, jm. Watch for the black helicopters.

black helicopters aside, unless you think the Nobel committee is a bunch of Obama worshippers (which I don't), would there be any other reason to give Obama the Nobel at this point in time?

Because Obama is the first American President to actually attempt to portray Muslims and Arabs more generally as human beings, and not impose an aggressive foreign policy propping up the State of Israel for eschatological reasons?

[Scam of God]

dude...this is nothing more than an attempt to contol obama

If Obama were anti-Israel (as you pretend in your paranoid masturbatory fantasies of the end-times), and the Nobel Committee is anti-Israel (as you pretend in your paranoid masturbatory fantasies of the end-times), why would either need to control the other to achieve its nefarious, diabolical purposes?

[Scam of God]

dude...this is nothing more than an attempt to control obama

If Obama were anti-Israel (as you pretend in your paranoid masturbatory fantasies of the end-times), and the Nobel Committee is anti-Israel (as you pretend in your paranoid masturbatory fantasies of the end-times), why would either need to control the other to achieve its nefarious, diabolical purposes?

I know you're not too bright, so I'll type slowly to keep you from getting lost:

my end time beliefs require neither an obama nor a UN nor a nobel committee nor a second coming of Christ within this century.

what i am saying is that it is hard to believe they don't see Obama simply as a tool.  the choices of the nobel committee for peace are based upon politics, and this is an attempt to tie the hands of Obama early in his administration by making Obama seem hypocritical if he were to initiate military action (e.g. against Iran).

I understand you're not intelligent whatsoever, so I'll simplify my point for you:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Understand, dumbsh**t? If Obama is anti-Israel, and has been from the time he took the Oath of Office, there's no need for him to be 'controlled' by the conspirators in the Nobel Committee, as he'll act against Israel anyway.

[Scam of God]

Understand, dumbsh**t? If Obama is anti-Israel, and has been from the time he took the Oath of Office, there's no need for him to be 'controlled' by the conspirators in the Nobel Committee, as he'll act against Israel anyway.

you're assuming the Nobel committee trusts Obama

Why wouldn't they? Surely the Rockefeller Committee for the Final Solution of Judeo-Christians funds them all, no? *sn*

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And if Obama is the paragon of Israel-hating heathenish evil as you paint him to be, why would they need that?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And right he is. If only the idiot-hawk extended that reasoning to the United States, and we could cut our useless expenditures on dick waving.