I'll give him this: it's not really something he asked for (I hope), and I do believe he dealt with it well, stating that he did not deserve it, that it was a call to action.
I just hope that it is the right action that he takes.
Mostly, however, I think it is more a statement about the politics of the Nobel committee than it is about the accomplishments of Barack Obama.
I was shocked about this too...and I absolutely adore Obama. However, I have been reading about this a lot and watched commentaries on CNN and I've heard that the Nobel Prize throughout history has not always given for tangible accomplishments but for the creation of 'vision' and 'ideals' as well. Obama certainly fits this bill. On a worldwide scale he's created such hope more than I've ever seen one person do and you can argue what is peace but a follow-up to hope. (Is peace always a actual tangible accomplishment or just a change of thinking/attitudes and hasn't Obama encouraged this worldwide?) I think this is a huge statement against George W. too of just how much he was hated and how glad the world was to have change. I admit there may be a bit of politics thrown in...but I mean heck Kissinger got the prize for the Vietnam War and what did he do? I've also heard that the Nobel Committee acknowledges that he may not actually finish all the tasks that he set out to do...but yet from what they said not all recipients in past did either. (Carter/Gore??)
I think this makes things much more politically difficult for Obama. He's already got so much on his plate leftover from George Jr and this makes it way worse. Can you imagine him trying to send more troops to Afghanistan now? It will be interesting to see if this changes some of his policies.
I wonder what charities he's donating the prize money to?
Humility is a weakness in the eyes of the leaders in such nations as Iraq and Russia. But it is still an essential character trait of any good leader. It is also essential, however, to mean business and be willing to follow through on the threats. Just like a mother, we need to show love and authentic concern for our children, but we aren't going to stand by while they do something that hurts another person. We should be firm and teach them what happens when they hurt others. If I just threaten them with consequenses they will quickly figure out I don't really mean what I say. We, the U.N., and other nations need to follow through with our threats of consequenses. Otherwise the respect will be lost and no one will listen or care what comes out of the mouth of "the most powerful man on earth". Besides, no one believes that Obama is really humble. That is laughable. I don't even really know what his end game is on the war and what he feels about our military and how he really feels about some other nations. At least with Bush he meant what he said. With Obama he just says what sounds good. I wish he really was "transparent".
Does the U.S. get to nominate themselves as the "parents" of the globe just because we are rich and powerful?
We spend a lot of time talking about defending freedom and liberty but it seems, to me, that we are continually dictating how other groups of people should live their lives and what forms their governments should take.
A federal republic with a capitalist economic system is not the only form of government in which personal liberty can be protected. In my opinion, in the U.S. we see personal freedoms eroded everyday by an increasingly irresponsible and continually growing federal government.
I find it "laughable" that one would consider Bush "transparent". All politicians have motives (again, my opinion). Whether someone is humble is a matter of opinion as well, not fact. And yes, there are some people who think that Obama has a measure of humility, as opposed to Bush who was arguably one of the most arrogant presidents in recent history.
Furthermore, I don't know who is, or is not, a member of the military on this blog, but I am. So, even if you are a member of this particular group, you certainly don't have to right to speak for ALL of us with blanket statements and cliches about the military.
I will continue on my tangent here. If you are not Russian or Iraqi, it would be wise not to make claims about their views either. We should all stick to statements about which we can speak intelligently with the credentials or reasonable personal experience to back it up.
5 comments:
I'll give him this: it's not really something he asked for (I hope), and I do believe he dealt with it well, stating that he did not deserve it, that it was a call to action.
I just hope that it is the right action that he takes.
Mostly, however, I think it is more a statement about the politics of the Nobel committee than it is about the accomplishments of Barack Obama.
I was shocked about this too...and I absolutely adore Obama. However, I have been reading about this a lot and watched commentaries on CNN and I've heard that the Nobel Prize throughout history has not always given for tangible accomplishments but for the creation of 'vision' and 'ideals' as well. Obama certainly fits this bill. On a worldwide scale he's created such hope more than I've ever seen one person do and you can argue what is peace but a follow-up to hope. (Is peace always a actual tangible accomplishment or just a change of thinking/attitudes and hasn't Obama encouraged this worldwide?) I think this is a huge statement against George W. too of just how much he was hated and how glad the world was to have change. I admit there may be a bit of politics thrown in...but I mean heck Kissinger got the prize for the Vietnam War and what did he do? I've also heard that the Nobel Committee acknowledges that he may not actually finish all the tasks that he set out to do...but yet from what they said not all recipients in past did either. (Carter/Gore??)
I think this makes things much more politically difficult for Obama. He's already got so much on his plate leftover from George Jr and this makes it way worse. Can you imagine him trying to send more troops to Afghanistan now? It will be interesting to see if this changes some of his policies.
I wonder what charities he's donating the prize money to?
I'm a huge fan of his ideas...but can he deliver?
I'm very willing to give him a year or two to see if he can, but as of now, nothing's changed!
So I think it's inappropriate to give him such a high honor.
But then I also think this shows what the rest of the world thinks of him, and as Christine says, what they think of President Bush.
Humility is a weakness in the eyes of the leaders in such nations as Iraq and Russia. But it is still an essential character trait of any good leader. It is also essential, however, to mean business and be willing to follow through on the threats. Just like a mother, we need to show love and authentic concern for our children, but we aren't going to stand by while they do something that hurts another person. We should be firm and teach them what happens when they hurt others. If I just threaten them with consequenses they will quickly figure out I don't really mean what I say. We, the U.N., and other nations need to follow through with our threats of consequenses. Otherwise the respect will be lost and no one will listen or care what comes out of the mouth of "the most powerful man on earth".
Besides, no one believes that Obama is really humble. That is laughable. I don't even really know what his end game is on the war and what he feels about our military and how he really feels about some other nations. At least with Bush he meant what he said. With Obama he just says what sounds good. I wish he really was "transparent".
Does the U.S. get to nominate themselves as the "parents" of the globe just because we are rich and powerful?
We spend a lot of time talking about defending freedom and liberty but it seems, to me, that we are continually dictating how other groups of people should live their lives and what forms their governments should take.
A federal republic with a capitalist economic system is not the only form of government in which personal liberty can be protected. In my opinion, in the U.S. we see personal freedoms eroded everyday by an increasingly irresponsible and continually growing federal government.
I find it "laughable" that one would consider Bush "transparent". All politicians have motives (again, my opinion). Whether someone is humble is a matter of opinion as well, not fact. And yes, there are some people who think that Obama has a measure of humility, as opposed to Bush who was arguably one of the most arrogant presidents in recent history.
Furthermore, I don't know who is, or is not, a member of the military on this blog, but I am. So, even if you are a member of this particular group, you certainly don't have to right to speak for ALL of us with blanket statements and cliches about the military.
I will continue on my tangent here. If you are not Russian or Iraqi, it would be wise not to make claims about their views either. We should all stick to statements about which we can speak intelligently with the credentials or reasonable personal experience to back it up.
Apologies if I have got this all wrong.
Post a Comment