• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

Zephyr

Moved on
Sometimes it feels like everyone has a Nobel Prize but me :sad:

Clearly I need to become a professor and nominate you. And Sunstone.

Also FFH, just to see if I can convince him that he's the antichrist when he wins.

Edit: Shame about the 50 year confidentiality period on nominations. My dad was placing a lot of hope in Zackie Achmat, given how much a Nobel Prize could help bring more attention to the HIV problem. Statistically speaking, I'll probably be dead before we even know if he got a nomination.
 
Last edited:

Smoke

Done here.
I didn't think Henry Kissinger or Mother Teresa deserved it, either, but at least they won the prize on the strength of their perceived accomplishments, and not on the basis of their presumed good intentions.

Honestly, I thought this was a joke thread till I read the BBC article.
 

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Obama was nominated for the prize TWELVE DAYS after he took office.

And there is no chance in hell that he will refuse or return the prize.

Oh well, Arafat won it once - so I'm already immune to shock and dismay. It's a worthless accolade at this point.

TACKY!
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
It's clear this award is for purely symbolic notions. Based on popular hype as well as opposed to any realistic achievements.

Barely heard of before becoming a congressman.

Spent a very small time in Congress before becoming President.

9 months into the Presidency.

Nominated well before the award was given so his Presidency to date has basically no bearing at all.

It's a shame.
 

Just_me_Mike

Well-Known Member
I'm just going to say what others are thinking, but are afraid to say.

If Obama get's assassinated (I hope not) he will go down in the books as equal too or more than Ghandi, for really not doing anything, but being the recipient of a lot of good fortune.

All very strange.
 

Smoke

Done here.
I'm just going to say what others are thinking, but are afraid to say.

If Obama get's assassinated (I hope not) he will go down in the books as equal too or more than Ghandi, for really not doing anything, but being the recipient of a lot of good fortune.
Well, I wasn't thinking anything like that, and I'm just sitting here wondering how anybody could possibly consider being assassinated a big part of "a lot of good fortune."

However, that is in my estimation pretty much what happened with JFK. Personally, I'd take Lyndon Johnson over Kennedy any day, but Johnson had the bad luck to be president when everybody got sick of Vietnam, and everybody knows that demigods don't have big noses and big floppy ears and show their gallbladder scars to the press.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Oh come on, guys. I think awarding the prize to Obama was -- at best -- premature, but several of you sound like it was also the apocalyptic end of all justice, fairness, and decency.
 

Smoke

Done here.
Oh come on, guys. I think awarding the prize to Obama was -- at best -- premature, but several of you sound like it was also the apocalyptic end of all justice, fairness, and decency.
I think it's just mind-boggling, but at least he hasn't done as much actual harm as Kissinger (remember when people said he was the Antichrist?) and that demented little nun.
 

linwood

Well-Known Member
Personally I really don't care but.....:clap

At least he isn't Bush.....

Yeah, it is kinda nice to be able to argue whether or not the president deserves the award instead of knowing for certain the debate couldn`t possibly even exist.

:biglaugh:
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Oh come on, guys. I think awarding the prize to Obama was -- at best -- premature, but several of you sound like it was also the apocalyptic end of all justice, fairness, and decency.
I don't think I am sounding like that but I do think that this shows how political the so-called "Peace Prize" has been for many years.

Like, c'mon... Al Gore? Mother Theresa? Arafart? The IPCC? :rolleyes:
Mohammed Elbaredei? (Seriously) The IAEA? Jimmy Carter? :rolleyes::rolleyes:
The UN & Kofi Annan? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: and on and on...
 

Metalic Wings

Active Member
Alright, I've been shot down on this one three times today, but right before I heard that President Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize, I found out that they were shooting missiles. At the moon.

As big of a controversy as the whole Nobel Prize has been, doesn't that idea bother anyone? At least a little? I mean, THEY SHOT AT THE MOON. And they only gave the public a two day's heads up? (At least, that's the earliest I've heard anyone mention hearing about it). Do they really know SO MUCH about EVERYTHING that it's perfectly okay to shoot two missiles full blast at the moon and not think to tell everyone until it's a "Hey, isn't this cool?" thing?

Sorry, I know this is off-topic (except for me, it isn't, because I heard about them one right after another).
 

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
I think it`s perfectly fine to shoot at the moon as long as it doesn`t shoot back.

moonbomb.jpg
 
Top