Obama winning is a joke nonetheless; even many of his supporters agree (so long as they are not Obama groupies)

yeah why exactly did Obama receive the Nobel Peace Prize ?? People have gone too far in putting Obama on a pedestal.

Based on this award, I won't be surprised if a future Nobel Prize for Medicine goes to the inventors of Botox... if anything Botox has been around longer.

You guys forgot the Beer Summit that bought peace between a police department and a Harvard professor.

Lets see if Kanye West will interrupt this award ceremony.

A war ended in Sri Lanka, and they found no heroes there? They found no one in Iraq who works for the welfare of people in the war there, that they had to go congratulate the President bombing them? They didn't find one single hero in Rwanda or Sudan? Not one person who advocates against the genocide there---so that bring that person into spotlight may actually achieve something?

But then, the peace prize didn't think Gandhi to be worthy of it. But yeah, Kissinger who gloated about nuking India got one---after all, from the western perspective, Gandhi is a fly in the ointment while Kissinger was a hero.

I don't know how else to really justify the ludicrous decisions that have been made for this prize. Obama will do well to remember that validation by this committee is not necessarily something to be proud of, and redouble his efforts into doing something good.

Lets see if Kanye West will interrupt this award ceremony.

I was hoping Sepia Mutiny would be the one place where I wouldn't find that joke. No such luck. It was old eight hours ago.

The award is a joke clearly the celebrity wins than actual accomplishments

My heart goes out to Hillary. She came just so damn close, and now this guy goes on to get a Nobel. On sheer hype!

Once again the the inconsistency on SM is true to form. MIA beats up on Bush and war and she is lauded. Then she does a nosedive on the Great One and then folk are indignant. You cannot suddenly turn around and call for musicians to stay the hell out of politics when you dont care for the message. Sure Maya is inconsistent, but then so are you.

MIA's ranting and raving has increased lately. Half her tweets are reserved for screaming and whining about Sri Lanka, now that her poster boys the LTTE have been taken out. So I am surprised she actually decided to change topics. I actually kind of agree with her about Obama. Obama does not deserve the award and he should return it. I just hope MIA doesn't return to screaming and whining and frothing at the mouth about Sri lanka.

Can't believe there's actually people defending obama on the award.

The Nobel Peace Prize is a joke (see previous winners). => hence it making sense for MIA saying to return the Nobel.
Obama winning a Nobel Peace Price is a joke (what has he done?)

MIA seems perfectly reasonable here.
cicatrix is just hating.

MIA should stick to what she does best - mixing sick beats vs rewritting history. and if the prize is such a joke, why does anyone care who wins it? sad there isnt a sliver of this obama-magnitude controversy reserved for past winners like kissinger and arafat. it makes me seriously wonder for the first time, "why do people resent him so much?".

Obama beat out fellow nominee Mahinda Rajapaksa from Sri Lanka for the prize. Its pretty obvious why M.I.A. is upset, and frankly, I am too. The guy ended a war! An entire war! Maybe Obama will also go on to do great things one day, but you shouldn't award the nobel prize for just talk.

"MIA should stick to what she does best - mixing sick beats vs rewritting history. and if the prize is such a joke, why does anyone care who wins it? sad there isnt a sliver of this obama-magnitude controversy reserved for past winners like kissinger and arafat. it makes me seriously wonder for the first time, "why do people resent him so much?"."

Because he's black obviously. I mean why else?!!!

I am trying to decide of the people who follow MIA's tweets and the members of the Norwegian Nobel committee, who's the most retarded. To be fair though, it has been argued that this isn't just the triumph of style over substance and that this could be a cynical attempt by the Nobel committee to influence the policy decisions of a sitting US president. Obama is going to have an interesting time, for example, justifying a troop surge in Afghanistan. This could also be intended as a slap in the face of Bush. I don't think the members of the committee are as naive and as stupid as people think they are.

musicians are people that say strange weird stupid things just like all people. but never want them stop talking politics because when they get it right, they knock it for a six. examples too many.

give peace a chance.

Why could they not have given it to Bill Clinton instead? He made a lot more love and a lot less war, both sustained over a longer period.
It fitted the Kafka cliche perfectly - "when Barak awoke one morning from troubled dreams, he found himself changed into a Nobel Laureate"

Bill Clinton would have been a much better pick...It would still be an anti-bush, pro-america signal by the norwegian committee.
So why didnt Bill get it (even ignoring other worthy contenders) ? The committee offers some clues. http://bit.ly/7c25J

Is Obama the Narcissist-in-Chief ?

Admittedly, from cicatrix' POV, this was a poorly worded statement. Although, I think this post reads too much into her 2-sentence tweet - I think she was only commenting on the act of returning the award, not necessarily saying that obama should return it for the same reasons.

And I really question when people get ticked off with musicians, actors etc talking about politics - I understand that they may be politicizing certain things in relation to their profession or position as celebrities, but would you tell the average citizen to just shut up and not think/talk about politics? They may be opinions that sound "stupid" or with which you don't agree, but they are opinions nonetheless - I think they have a right to express them, just like you have the right to ignore or discount them.

There's always the chance that she's had a change of heart and now agrees with Jonathan Kay--Mahinda should've gotten it (or Netanyahu or McCrystal or perhaps Mahinda's main squeeze Ahmedinejad.)

http://transcurrents.com/tc/2009/10/mahinda_rajapaksa_not_barack_o.html

then returned it in 1969 for a list of ludicrous reasons that included the failure of his song with the Plastic Ono Band.

Actually, I thought that was kind of funny and cool. Lennon was definitely politicised at this point and did feel unease with the British establishment and the political stances over Nigeria-Biafra and Vietnam. And coming from a working-class background from Liverpool, there was always a remnant of unease with being feted by the London establishment, especially royalty. And the line about Cold Turkey slipping down the charts was really funny, I thought, classic Scouse (Liverpool) humour.

Bill Clinton would have been a much better pick...It would still be an anti-bush, pro-america signal by the norwegian committee. So why didnt Bill get it (even ignoring other worthy contenders) ? The committee offers some clues. http://bit.ly/7c25J

Is Obama the Narcissist-in-Chief ?

Are you suggesting that he somehow selected himself? He accepted it in the spirit in which it was offered, i.e. a request to keep the US from waging wars of choice.

Okay seriously, people are getting too wrapped up in this. It's a freaking medal! LOL. Who really cares? It's his actions and decisions which are gonna affect me that I care about... on both national and international platform. There are SO many unsung heroes that should get this medal everyday but don't, because they are not famous or thrust into the limelight so I don't give these kindda "symbolic handouts" too much thought.

From reading the comments, I can tell readers of SM are also big fans of Rush Limbaugh.

Anyways, it is just a dumb prize. The world is not better because people are handed prizes from some committee. Obama really cant do anything right in the eyes of people who dont like him. If he gave it back then he is a ignorant American, who thinks that he knows what is best for the world. If he keeps it then he is a ignorant American, who thinks that Americans can do know wrong. In his own country, if he gives it back then the right will call him a narcissist and if he keeps it then he is a narcissist.

I am sure he is going to give that million dollar prize away, so I am sure some good will come out of this.

This whole argument over, who is the most deserving person in the world for a peace prize is ridiculus. "So and so saved hundered thousand people, but this guy saved 2 hundered thousand people so that other guy can suck it."

Um, who gives a shit if she used a bad analogy? Her point is still right: Obama should've rejected the Peace Prize. He did not earn it or deserve it in any way.

Who is Mia? Never heard of this insignficant person

"Obama really cant do anything right in the eyes of people who dont like him"

this is right on the money. its like people put up there just to tear him down.

Speaking of Sri Lanka and Cicatrix, why all the silence on the topic? When the war was on cicatrix couldn't help but write screeds against the evil of the LTTE, couldn't help working potshots against MIA for supporting them. All under the guise of speaking for the people.

Now that the government has won the war, defeated the LTTE and interned 280,000 (tamil) people. Suddenly cicatrix, formerly so outspoken, is silent. Why is that?

can't we all just get along?

Dr Optimist wrote:

can't we all just get along?

Two words: human nature.

nobody complained when the dalai lama got the award and there is still no solution between tibet and china.

"and if the prize is such a joke, why does anyone care who wins it?"

Because it's not a joke? I'd expect some of Obama's critics to cry sour grapes. But they're mostly partisan hacks. The prize does come with some cash. More important, it can bring attention to the cause of some obscure saint.

Weird that it's the Obama fans who are crapping on the idea of the award.

"and if the prize is such a joke, why does anyone care who wins it?"

Because it's not a joke? I'd expect some of Obama's critics to cry sour grapes. But they're mostly partisan hacks. The prize does come with some cash. More important, it can bring attention to the cause of some obscure saint.

Weird that it's the Obama fans who are crapping on the idea of the award.

The news headlines are something akin to what The Onion would publich : "Obama Awarded Nobel Peace Prize For Bringing Hope To The World".Soon the White House will become a pilgrimage site for the faithful seeking a cure for their ills. MAybe he'll turn water into beer and pass it around.

The award is a joke, in the sense that having a contest for "peace" kind of doesnt make sense.

You have this list of people, who have done such great things with their time on this planet and this other group of people gathers at a table to judge, who is the "ultimate" nice guy. "This guy is nice, but that other guy is a shit ton nicer".

Recognition is great because it beings attention to events around the world, but when it makes people say "Fuck that guy who saved a ten thousand babies. I know a guy a saved 10,001 babies", it starts to make the award look superficial.

I wish that they give it to Gaddafi next year to further bolster their credibility. Also, the acceptance speech would be awesome.

Who is Mia? Never heard of this insignficant person

She's never heard of you, either, except she has the Grammy and Oscar nominations, while haven't even acquired a fully functioning sense of humor yet. She wins.

No Biggie, Maya. it's all good. we all make simple mistakes like that. lol. nothing to blog about.

The mutineers have been pretty ironic lately. None of you guys would has cared about billboard charts till now when Jay Sean is #1. The opposite is true for The Nobel Prize. If someone worthy would have won the Nobel prize there would have been series of posts about it he or she deserves it but when Obama wins one (which he shouldn't have), instead of calling him out on it, everyone talks about how the prize means nothing at all.

i wonder, all the naysayers and dissenters, did you perhaps voice your discontent when previous undeserving laureates won their prizes (the list is quite long)? were you as loud abt it? maybe you ought to read up on the criteria of what makes for a good prize nominee. easy enough to find on the charter on their website.

i am puzzled how so many deshis are so upset abt this both in the desh and abroad. president obama clearly was shocked as much as the gasping people were at the announcement, and he clearly accepted in with due humility, turning the prize into something others beyond him are deserving.

i'd say the sort of reaction to president obama's nobel peace prize is exactly one of the very reasons they gave it to him. hope wins over cynicism.

also, show some respect, it's "president" obama, he's not your college buddy! unless.. ahrm, he is actually your buddy from college, in which case, carry on.

anon-i-mouse wrote:

nobody complained when the dalai lama got the award and there is still no solution between tibet and china.

or when arafat et al, yet still no palastinian peace or state, or al gore, yet people still don't care abt climate change... etc etc etc...

why the agro? i think it has little to do with whether it is deserving or not (which it clearly is according to the the committee's charter/criteria).

guys, harsh much? i dont think mia thought this one through properly but she isn't the first person in the world to tweet something off-hand. you cant expect people to always come up with a perfectly well-thought-out researched and historically accurate comparison that is a perfect fit in every way. she was just trying to make the point that obama doesn't deserve the award, a point made by like half of twitter that day.

We may think President Obama doesn't deserves this NPP so soon, but you know what he doesn't serve even more? all this venom from all over the political spectrum.

The vast majority of the people who suddenly are experts on who should get the NPP probably couldn't even name who got it last year or can articulate what the official criteria is without Googling it now. You don't really give a @#$% who gets the NPP each year, so save me the nuclear outrage now.

It is their prize and can award it to whom they feel fits their criteria. We can agree or disagree with them without being such jerks to President Obama.

Take it out on the Nobel Committee not President Obama. They are the ones who made the choice.

This is their criteria: "According to Nobel's will, the Peace Prize is to go to whoever "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"." http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/about_peaceprize/

This is their reasoning why they gave it to President Obama. "Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened. " Read it all there too http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/home/announce-2009/.

And no, I don't think he should have gotten it so soon, but I am not ripping him apart for it. Think about it. Last year someone threw his shoes at our then President. This year our President gets a Nobel award. Things have changed.

(FYI #47 is me. I entered the comment not realizing I forgot to re-enter my name.)

"...shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations"

hmmm, who has done quite a bit of that in the last 9 months... wait, wait, let me think..

@ sameer: the impression i got from the various interviews of the head of the committee was that they realise it's work unfinished, but they would like to promote and encourage such works, and President Obama seems to be in a good place to be the one doing it...

Dr Optimist wrote:

can't we all just get along?

Two words: human nature.

three alternative words: global power structures.
my line was a quote from rodney king, who was beaten by los angeles police officers who were subsequently acquitted, with riots ensuing. it was a plea for social cohesion and a critique of the idea that you can get it by not confronting ideas about conflict and what motivate them, as obama and the nobel committee seem hellbent on doing, in a broad way.

what can you do? we don't run the world...they do, unfortunately. for now :D

Sincerely yours,
dr. optimist

oh and the "plea for social cohesion" was mostly directed at this space. cicatrix is a nice, thoughtful person. there's no reason to trash her for something like this post, regardless of what you think about it. civility would serve just as well.

what disturbs me about this award is not that obama hasn't done enough yet to deserve this award, but the fact that he has done things which should prevent him receiving a peace award. not only has he not stopped any of the wars that were handed down to him but he is in fact planning to escalate the war in afghanistan and he has authorized bombings which regularly result in civilian deaths like this
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6237189.ece
his record so far on civil liberties issues, including preventive detentions is similar to bush (in fact at one point he was trying to strengthen bush's policies). similarly his record on transparency is dismal (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/06/17/transparency/). recently his administration is even supporting attacks on the freedom of information act.
i appreciate the way he has handled iran and his stance on israeli settlements, but all his good work is far outweighed by the above

to add to the above his closing down of guantamano, but simultaneous expansion of bagram, with similar or worse detention policies
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/detention/40997prs20090915.html
is another example.
more on obama and climate change...
http://redgreenandblue.org/2009/09/30/us-playing-spoilsport-at-international-climate-negotiations/

Just so you know, I'm the Sameer of #46,47,48.

All the other Sameers or Samirs are not me.

Specifically all the other sameers/Samirs I'm talking about are #4, #52, #53.

My posts are #46, 47, 48, 54 and this one.

phew, i thought you went away came back with some very different thoughts.. hah! maybe you could be "S"ameer, you know, with a capital S. =)

So far I am the Sameer (#46,47,48,54,55) with the capital "S." Perhaps it ain't enough. ;)

cicatrix is a nice, thoughtful person. there's no reason to trash her for something like this post, regardless of what you think about it. civility would serve just as well.

I ditto that.

On a different note, there are two ways a prize can be given. Many times in the basic sciences and medicine the Nobel prize is given when the recipient is far along in his life and is senile. I remember seeing a Nobel laureate sending a note to his friends,' I got this (Nobel) prize for something I did sometime, somewhere during my career.' (It was long expected and long overdue and the field has advannced forward). In a field like world peace the activist and the world at large may be benefited if it came after a threshold is reached in a movement than at the conclusion.

To be technical in the case of President Obama, he did contribute, IMHO, to the lessening of standing armies in the world today, a requirement for the NPP. Imagine if other candidates, John McCain and Sarah Palin at the helm of affairs today. Let me hazard a guess, we would have escalation of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with a third war with Iran in progress.

hoi polloi said

Let me hazard a guess, we would have escalation of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with a third war with Iran in progress.

p.s.- changed from sameer to sam to avoid confusion

not all war is necessarily bad. wars that stop other bigger wars from occurring or greater destruction and displacement of people would be considered good (the WW's for instance). the fight was always in afganishtan, the iraq side-show was an unnecessary disruption that has resulted in countless iraqi lives and great destruction. president obama (then candidate obama and nominee obama) had always said less in iraq, more in afganistan. saying a person is incapable of seeking long term global peace because they are now engaging in wars seems silly to me.

no sitting US president would ever be up for the npp because somewhere sometime they would have ordered military action by their armed forces or via nato or the u.n.

I'm just wondering what it is about conservatives or right wingers that makes it so easy for them to resort to personal or ad hominem attacks at the drop of the hat? I'm really disturbed by this trend and I see it all over the comment boards here of all places.

MIA is a cokehead indie band scenester groupie what do you expect?

no sitting US president would ever be up for the npp because somewhere sometime they would have ordered military action by their armed forces or via nato or the u.n.

Yes! Exactly! The only time they should be given a Nobel Peace Prize - if ever - is to pat them on the head for extraordinary effort given the confines of the position towards something that will actually have a positive result. You can make the argument that Obama has done that, but I thinkt he awarding of the prize to him says more about the Nobel Committee and how degraded American government public relations on foreign policy had become prior to Obama than it does about Obama himself.

I'm just wondering what it is about conservatives or right wingers that makes it so easy for them to resort to personal or ad hominem attacks at the drop of the hat? I'm really disturbed by this trend and I see it all over the comment boards here of all places.

To be fair, it's not just conservatives or rightwingers who engage in such things - I've been known to do the same, and I'm not either.

However, I agree that there is an extremely disturbing trend, which in the UK is called 'fascism' or 'the far right.' they have more power in the u.s. and there are more religious idioms used but it's basically the same thing - a total lack of responsiubility, rampant use of stereotypes, and a collective and exclusive mentality, and tacit incitement to violence. well usually tacit.

The mutineers have been pretty ironic lately. None of you guys would has cared about billboard charts till now when Jay Sean is #1. The opposite is true for The Nobel Prize. If someone worthy would have won the Nobel prize there would have been series of posts about it he or she deserves it but when Obama wins one (which he shouldn't have), instead of calling him out on it, everyone talks about how the prize means nothing at all.

I'm curious at what point in the last two years you decided that Obama was in any way of South Asian descent. :) There are certainly very good reasons to talk about Obama and his policies on a South Asian blog (notably the war) but the celebrity grounds that you discuss are kind of silly.

"awarding of the prize to him says more about the Nobel Committee and how degraded American government public relations on foreign policy had become prior to Obama than it does about Obama himself."

Agreed. I can't understand the vitriol towards somebody who simply won an award that he didn't even nominate himself for. Your anger should be directed towards the process if you disagree, not the recipient! Logic fail.

I am an Obama supporter, but even I feel the prize was a joke.
Having said that, funny to see outrage from some middle aged republicans who have had no record of bashing the Kissinger Nobel Peace Prize.

I like MIA's songs, but the analogy is not a good one. Good to see her bust the stereotype of the brainy Asian.

I'm just wondering what it is about conservatives or right wingers that makes it so easy for them to resort to personal or ad hominem attacks at the drop of the hat?

As opposed to the sweet and kind comments from left wingers exemplified by Betty Williams who repeatedly expressed her desire in public about wanting to kill George Bush while he was still President. The Secret Service usually takes a dim view of such opinions. She got a pass. Ironically enough, she's the 1976 Nobel Prize winner.

and here is a pretty disgusting video put together by media matters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8e28D4vxsU
there really isn't much difference between republicans and democrats. things just depends on whose in power.

Now that the government has won the war, defeated the LTTE and interned 280,000 (tamil) people. Suddenly cicatrix, formerly so outspoken, is silent. Why is that?

Prolly cuz she's Sinhalese. At least she sounds like one based on the search that I just did of previous posts. I don't know too many non-Sinhalese who attempt to explain the institutionalized discrimination of Tamils in Sri Lanka based on the fact that Tamils were overrepresented in academia relative to their population. Or that Sinhalese chauvinism at the time of independence from the British as "birthing pains of a new country trying to establish itself" and therefore understandable. I'd like to see the reaction a statement like that would get here if it were made in the context of Hindu-Muslim relations in India.

Link

institutionalized discrimination of Tamils in Sri Lanka

President Obama is worthy of a Nobel prize, however it may be too soon to get one in his first year. Nevertheless, if MIA and Rush Limbaugh are both hating on Obama for getting the Nobel peace prize, something ain't right.

Akash: Thank you for your valuable contribution. It really does require remarkable skill to somehow link the issue of watersharing of the Kaveri to the civil war in Sri Lanka. Bravo sir! It will go down in history, I'm sure, as yet another of one many valuable contributions the people of Karnataka have made along with giving the world Rajnikanth and Anil Kumble. Us Tamils only have three Naubel Laureates to our credit.

Naubel Laureates = Nobel Laureates

i dont think mia thought this one through properly but she isn't the first person in the world to tweet something off-hand.

I think she did think it through. I'm proud of her conceptual leap and I think she's right, because it's a back-handed compliment just like a British knighthood- it requires that the recipient show respect and fealty to someone or something that has no actual control or influence over you. Also, it is clearly directed towards his future decisions which is strictly speaking nobody's business in any part of Scandinavia. This is a weird, gremlin-like or trollish form of social control, and should be eschewed.

Next thing you know, Obama will have to travel to Stockholm and get woken up by a singing Lucia girl with candles on her head bringing him pastries in bed, This could really put Michelle's nose out of joint, and he doesn't need that. He can't even keep the money--this sucks, Cicatrix. I think he could wait four years, sure, that would make sense and have more impact.

I'm just wondering what it is about conservatives or right wingers that makes it so easy for them to resort to personal or ad hominem attacks at the drop of the hat?

Well, that's what happens when you throw in your "lot with the terrorists - the Taliban and Hamas" while putting "politics above patriotism at every turn."

Dear CdnMedStudent, I wouldn't get too cocky buddy; "You Tamils" have also produced most of the world's suicide bombers, pioneered the suicide bomb jacket and set up the most proflic group of child soldiers. The people of Karnataka couldn't ever compare to that. Just saying.

here is a nice read abt the "O"utrage pandemic some peoples seem to be suffering from.

".....and against “Cold Turkey” slipping down the charts. With love. John Lennon of Bag"

I thought that was very funny! Typical Lennon, combining biting social commentary with sly wit!

Hey, Henry Kissinger got the Nobel Peace Prize! Nothing can be more absurd than that, considering his very insidious and bloody backroom deal making!

The BBC has just announced that the First Lady has won the Nobel Prize for Economics! Have they no shame? The committee should stop pandering to the US and resign right now. Otherwise we'll soon hear that Sasha has won the Prize for Geography and Malia for History.

Granted he won the prize deserved or not folks are getting upset like he made them give it to him. I hope he gives it back I am tired of people whining about it..

Wow. Slow down and back up, everyone. This post was about M.I.A. shooting her mouth off and the veracity of the example she used. In that context, the Obama bashing (though disappointing personally to me) and the arguments about whether he "deserves" the NPP are relevant.

CndMedStudent, Akash, Naresh...this post is NOT about the LTTE and this Tamil-bashing is appalling. Further comments will be deleted.

Piqued, this comment:
"Speaking of Sri Lanka and Cicatrix, why all the silence on the topic? When the war was on cicatrix couldn't help but write screeds against the evil of the LTTE, couldn't help working potshots against MIA for supporting them. All under the guise of speaking for the people."

Is hilariously disingenuous. I don't take "potshots against MIA" as much as bemoan the fact that a fellow Sri Lankan whose music I LOVE and who I quite admire, is confused about Sri Lanka and generally tends to mangle most political issues.

I haven't written anything on Sri Lanka's current state because I haven't written anything at all in a long while. Since May, to be precise. New job with pop-culture focus that left no time for much else. Sorry to disappoint.

CndMedStudent, your research is sloppy. I'm half-Sinhala, half-Tamil. I've written about this in comments all over this site, boring the regulars silly.

I hope that's enough house-keeping to tidy up the comment thread so far. Further comments re LTTE or me will be deleted (off-topic, this thread will NOT devolve into another GoSL/LTTE thread), repeat offenders will be banned, and this thread will be closed.

Until then, Obama's a Nobel Peace Prize winner! Have at it :)

UberMetroMallu: total fail. The Nobel Prize was awarded to U.S. professors Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson.

I should say, the nobel prize for economics.

As opposed to the sweet and kind comments from left wingers exemplified by Betty Williams who repeatedly expressed her desire in public about wanting to kill George Bush while he was still President.

Before you resort too quickly to the 'I know you are but what am I?' defense, how often did this happen in public discourse in the United States over the 8 years of the Bush Presidency and how serious a threat was it?

In contrast, compare the number of times that guns were brought to HEALTH CARE debates in August, the number of claims against Obama (racist, hitler, Stalin, communist, socialist, nazi, born in Kenya) that are so mutually inconsistent the only common link is an effort to dehumanise, and the ongoing public arguments by 'respectable' rightwing leaders for the internment of the Japanese (Michelle Malkin), a crusade against Muslims (Ann Coulter), public calls for violence (G Gordon liddy).

It's not the ad hominem attacks that are scary (which as pointed above, people of all political stripes occasionally or frequently engage in) but the combination of them with their tone, their violence, and the trend towards outright violence. If and when there are serious assassination attempts against Obama, one factor for them will definitely be the total failure of the rightwing to exercise any kind of discretion, leadership, or other nonfrightening tools in engaging in politics in the past year, if not further back. In my opinion this is a function of the amount of social power they have and the lack of political power as wella s the failure of the entire American elite to deal with economic issues affecting the middle and working classes at all, but that's not going to make it feel any better if there's some kind of dramatic failure of politics that leads to a crisis.

closing one's eyes to this or pretending there's an equivalency with 'the left' (which BARELY exists in the U.S.) is absurd and imo cynical.

Oprah wuz robbed

In contrast, compare the number of times that guns were brought to HEALTH CARE debates in August, the number of claims against Obama (racist, hitler, Stalin, communist, socialist, nazi, born in Kenya) that are so mutually inconsistent the only common link is an effort to dehumanise, and the ongoing public arguments by 'respectable' rightwing leaders for the internment of the Japanese (Michelle Malkin), a crusade against Muslims (Ann Coulter), public calls for violence (G Gordon liddy).

You must have missed the film that came out a few years ago graphically depicting Bush's assassination on theless than subtle poster (for those obtuse individuals still unsure what the content and agenda of the film was) ? With the added hypocrisy of claiming it was a serious documentary, and the leftwing critics who even awarded it a prize, it apparently didn't raise anyone's ire. It even got a theatrical release in the US. On a side note, back in '88 John Kerry repeated a joke about how the Secret Service was under orders to shoot Dan Quayle if Bush Sr was incapacitated. Oddly all this death tinged hostility comes the supposed liberals. So we have less than veiled incitements to violence from a Nobel Peace Prize winner, a movie that got fairly wide theatrical release all during Bush's office. And not much of a reaction about that. Yet now any opposition or dislike if Obama is seen as an "incitement to violence". Ok. the 2010 elections are just about a year away. We'll see if Obama can prove that famous Lincoln adage wrong.

The only criteria that matters is the one Alfred Nobel decreed for the prize in his name to be given to the person whom most met it in the past year - not their entire lives:

Mother Teresa Undeserving of Nobel Peace Prize, Author Says http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3701741,00.html

The Nobel Peace Prizes awarded to Mother Teresa and Al Gore violated the terms of Swedish inventor Alfred Nobel's will that created the awards, the author of a book on the subject has said...

...The Peace Prize, the only one awarded by a Norwegian committee, was to be presented each year 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."

Only 45 percent of the Nobel Peace Prizes awarded since World War II are in line with the spirit and terms of Nobel's will, according to Norwegian lawyer Fredrik Heffermehl, author of the book "Nobels vilje" ("Nobel's Will").

"Disarmament and anti-militarism was what Nobel wanted to promote," Heffermehl told Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten's English desk. ..."

Otherwise we'll soon hear that Sasha has won the Prize for Geography

now everytime the president authorises more troops to the theatres of war, or approves another special ops, the loud-crowd will say, "see, totally undeserving!!!".

there is very little this man can do for the good of his country or the good of the world community that some will "not" find fault with.

now everytime the president authorises more troops to the theatres of war, or approves another special ops, the loud-crowd will say, "see, totally undeserving!!!".

See this morning's Huffington Post sensational headline: "Peace Prize? - Obama Quietly Authorizes 13,000 more Troops for Afghan War"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/12/obama-authorizes-13000-mo_n_318150.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/12/obama-authorizes-13000-mo_n_318150.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/12/obama-authorizes-13000-mo_n_318150.html

FYI those are not more troops, they are actually replacement troops.

Seriously, you don't need Rush when you have Huff Po.

Link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/12/obama-authorizes-13000-mo_n_318150.html

FYI those are not more troops, they are actually replacement troops.

Seriously, you don't need Rush when you have Huff Po.

there is very little this man can do for the good of his country or the good of the world community that some will "not" find fault with.

i think the point was to encourage him to end the war, the nobel committee is obviously making a political move. is it fair that the man who ended a war didn't receive it? no. but if it lights a fire under obama's toosh to actually DO what he SAYS then its worth it... i suppose they're hedging their bets that he'll end up doing the right thing.

He did bring a great problem solving constructive approach to the US economy that also saved the global economy which is in turn lifting millions from poverty.
The Nobel Peace Committe does not have an exactly stellar record in the past for unbiased elections because they rejected Mahatma Gandhi’s election 5 times(inspiration for Dr. Mandela and Dr. king) who even Einstein described as : ” A man the world will find hard to believe walked the surface of the earth with us.”

I always hated MIA and her overhyped so called music. She sucks I'm not suprised she would say something like this.

MIA should have rejected her Grammy and Oscar nominations for making people ears bleed with her lame music.

i really dont get the logic behind this. are liberals not allowed to attack obama when they feel he is doing something wrong?

Sure. Voice your dissenting opinions. That is different.
Obama always said Afghanistan is not a war of choice and he would focus more there as we wind down Iraq. Even the Nobel Committee was aware of that, and still thought he deserves the NPP. The point is most lay people will just use this award to bash him without really getting why the Nobel Committee gave him the award.

"..."We simply disagree that he has done nothing," committee chairman Thorbjoern Jagland told the AP on Tuesday. "He got the prize for what he has done."

Jagland singled out Obama's efforts to heal the divide between the West and the Muslim world and scale down a Bush-era proposal for an anti-missile shield in Europe.

"All these things have contributed to - I wouldn't say a safer world - but a world with less tension," Jagland said by phone from the French city of Strasbourg, where he was attending meetings in his other role as secretary-general of the Council of Europe.

He said most world leaders were positive about the award and that most of the criticism was coming from the media and from Obama's political rivals.

"I take note of it. My response is only the judgment of the committee, which was unanimous," he said, adding that the award to Obama followed the guidelines set forth by Alfred Nobel, the Swedish industrialist and inventor of dynamite, who established the Nobel Prizes in his 1895 will.

"Alfred Nobel wrote that the prize should go to the person who has contributed most to the development of peace in the previous year," Jagland said. "Who has done more for that than Barack Obama?"

Aagot Valle, a Norwegian politician who joined the Nobel panel this year, also dismissed suggestions that the decision to award Obama was without merit.

"Don't you think that comments like that patronize Obama? Where do these people come from?" Valle said by phone from the western coastal city of Bergen. "Well, of course, all arguments have to be considered seriously. I'm not afraid of a debate on the peace prize decision. That's fine."

In Friday's announcement, the committee said giving Obama the peace prize could be seen as an early vote of confidence intended to build global support for the policies of his young administration. ..." from the Washington Post "Nobel Jury Defends Obama Peace Prize Decision"

hah, Sameer, was going to list the huffpo and Jagland 2nd interview myself. you beat me to it. =)

I agree with a previous poster that said Obama can't do anything right. Obama did not ASK for the Nobel prize the committee gave him the award. Of course Obama should keep the award. I don't think people see the bigger picture. Unlike Bush Obama is attempting to reach out to many parts of the world that are former enemies of the United States. Also, how do people EXPECT Obama to change foreign policy in 10 months? Give me a break!

Obama is not Jesus Christ I think people expect too much from Obama he is a politician he cannot change the world. I do feel Obama can do MORE obviously and I sincerely hope he does. I think people are a bit frustrated and impatient with Obama. Now if Obama had been president for two or three years and he had done NOTHING then perhaps MIA comments would have some veracity. However, the guy has only been in office for 10 months. I feel Obama needs a little bit more time. I think next year is the real test for Obama.

Also, how do people EXPECT Obama to change foreign policy in 10 months? Give me a break!

I don't know - maybe by not escalating the war in Afghanstian and now Pakistan? Or at least not mentioning soldiers int he acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize.

There are many ways. I'll give the administration credit for at least making a nod towards delaying an IMF loan to the government of Sri Lanka, but even that didn't seem to be a very high priority - but I don't know how firmly entrenched the opposition of the governments of China and Russia were in the Security Council but I would be curious to know what kind of political capital it would have taken to get that delay until a plausible and humane solution was found in Sri Lanka. and of course you could argue that they didn't have to go through the UN since they don't for a lot of other stuff.

Obama is not Jesus Christ

Hey, quit insinuating he's the antichrist.

Wonder what Rahul (le Gandhi) is gonna get when he comes to power......

oh, holy crap. I know it's fashionable and just all the rage to pooh-pooh Obama's Nobel, but seriously, I expected more from this crowd than the usual parroting of the "conventional wisdom."

Here's the why of it, since some of you really do seem to have trouble getting it.

1. Bush was a moron who did real damage to "world peace" as a goal, and to our country's reputation abroad (and fuck the Republicans who seem to think that foreign opinion is irrelevant. The reasons are obvious for why international support for our nation's policies are important. If you can't think of any, you're stupid.

2. Obama could literally do nothing but talk, and people feel better about him (in Oslo, and presumably in most other countries that have even a remotely favorable opinion of the US).

3. People in this and other countries have high hopes for him and his presidency. To the naysayers, please...shut the hell up. As my very southern godmother used to say, either help or get out of the kitchen. You're not accomplishing anything much except look like an idiot when you keep forcing questions about the president's legitimacy as a leader (yeah, I'm talking to you, birthers, tea-baggers (ha! only a true fucktard willingly wears THAT appellation), and healthcare reform obstructionists.

One last thing, which makes me practically quiver with rage. All these pukes saying stuff like "why does Obama deserve an award that went to Gandhi and Mother Theresa" are totally missing a pretty huge point. That point is that all those people who've won the Nobel Peace Prize espouse *liberal* values: tolerance, multiculturalism, the greatest good for the greatest number, financial opportunities for the lower social rungs, civil rights for all, a deep belief in fair play and level playing fields, environmental justice and awareness...what many of us nowadays call "progressive" values.

I mean, what exactly are these mealy-mouthed hypocrites really saying? That they actually *love* Al Gore, the IPCC, Anwar Sadat, Menachem Begin, George C. Marshall and the United Nations? That Obama does not belong in such heady company? Suddenly it's all praise for this rabble of foreigners and wimps who espouse peace and doing good for the common man?

It makes me want to say mean things and ruin my chances at winning it myself one day.

Finally, as per the post itself: MIA got it wrong, but she's just a talent. We tend to expect too much from the people who dance on our stages, even if they're all "daughter-of-a-rebel" authenticated. She's smart, but she's only human.

Kudos for setting the record straight. If she's a good person and the criticism actually reaches her ears, then I hope she'll have the good grace to acknowledge it.

Salil,

you're saying that the peace prize itself ISN'T a joke? That Kissinger, Carter and Gore really exemplify the 'progressive' values you identified? When did a) knowingly perpetuate war, b) fail to accomplish anything your big mouth set in motion, c) pushing climatologists off center stage and into the exits qualify as expressions of those values? The "not bush" argument for giving Obama the nobel is more succinctly stated than in your rant: "he is not bush." It's not a great argument but it's still made in regards to a meaningless trophy--not an issue but certainly an annoyance.

All these pukes saying stuff like "why does Obama deserve an award that went to Gandhi

gandhi wasn't deemed worthy of the peace prize.

In my mind Obama deserves Nobel Peace Prize just for becoming US President. I don't see it as a small accomplishment to be the first black president in US. It is a human rights achievement to rise awareness of their potential to racial minorities in US. Some Nobel laureates don't even have that...

I found Gore winning the prize as more absurd.

Wow, Salil, way to defend homey. How about you reflect on your own condescension towards MIA based on an effin' tweet? "Those who dance on our stages", huh? As opposed to erudite, articulate and thoughtful polyglots who miss the point altogether because, hey, let's take the 'talent' to task for supposedly reckless comments while the great hope continues the policies of that moron he is supposed to have saved the world from. Get perspective!

The real reason!