Why did Obama win the Nobel prize? Oh because he made a promise to change things. In that case I promise to change things to, do i get it next year? No probably not, but I think there are a few who deserve this much more then Obama.
How about Scooby Doo? He's spent like the last 40 years fighting crime and solving mysteries. Doesn't that deserve some acknowledgement? He's certainly done more then Obama.
There's also Santa Claus. He's made boys and girls happy for generations. That's way more then just making a promise about things.
I think the most qualified person to receive the nobel peace prize would have to be James Bond. He's been keeping the world from destroying itself for like 50 years! Sometimes you need a little fighting to create peace. It probably doesn't hurt that he's super cool. Way cooler then Obama.
So yes I think it's completely ridiculous to award the nobel peace prize to man who hasn't actually done anything for peace. If lets say in a couple of years he's actually created a lasting peace then yeah give it to him. To give it to him for a promise that he's made is a travesty. Mostly because promises made by politicians hardly ever come true. Shame on the Nobel Prize committee.
5 comments:
I'm not saying that it's a little weird that Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize but there are people less deserving that could have received. Also, do you know the committee's reasoning for awarding Obama? Well here is an exact quote "...for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons." Which I would have to agree that it is a great vision for a world without nuclear weapons. He hasn't done a lot of work towards that but the little work that he has done is much more and better than what George Bush did through all of his time as president.
But he really hasn't done anything. Just because he says he has a "vision," doesn't mean he will ever act on it. When and if he does, then he would deserve it. Not before.
It's true. I'm not saying I agree with the decision. I just think there are a lot worse peole they could've given it to. Also, we (meaning Americans in general) should try to look at why they gave it to him so we can try to have a better attitude of our President as a whole.
Excuse me! Giving my president a nobel peace prize does not change my attitude or opinion about him. The Nobel Committee made their decision on February 12th. To that point, the only thing he had done was hoodwink the American public into voting for him. And, in 20 years, or much less, the American public is going to have a very different view of George Bush. They are going to be crying for a president who will ensure their rights guarrenteed by the constitution because Obama will have started us on the path to socializim. (Spelling doesn't count when you are fired up). WE ARE NOT A SOCIALISTIC COUNTRY AND I FOR ONE DO NOT WANT ONE. If I did I would move to a socialist country. Remember the prophecy about the constitution hanging by the thread of the priesthood? It's coming.
I agree that there could be worse people to give it to: How about Al Gore? How about Yassir Arafat? Of course, they already did.
It's their prize, let them say what they want, they seem to love him. (”Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future....”)
Post a Comment