www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize

Since Pres. Obama has continued the war of errors on both fronts per the status quo....

I'm disgusted that he got nominated.

Interesting isn't it...

Alfred Nobel, Industrialist

* Born: 21 October 1833
* Birthplace: Stockholm, Sweden
* Died: 10 December 1896 (cerebral hemorrhage)
* Best Known As: Inventor of dynamite

Swedish chemist Alfred Bernhard Nobel invented dynamite in 1866 and it made him rich. Nobel was as interested in drama and poetry as he was in chemistry and physics, but it was in the sciences that he made his fame, and by the time of his death he held more than 350 patents and controlled factories and labs in 20 countries. The story goes that when Nobel's brother died, a newspaper mistakenly published an obituary of Nobel that emphasized the fact that he had invented things that blew up and killed people. Nobel, not wanting to be remembered in that way, pledged his wealth toward the betterment of humanity. In his will he directed the establishment of a foundation to award annual prizes for achievement in chemistry, physics, literature and efforts toward international peace. The Nobel Prize is considered one of the most prestigious awards in the world and includes a cash prize of nearly one million dollars. In 1968 the prize field was broadened to include an award in economic science.
http://www.answers.com/topic/alfred-nobel

America's leaders want America to be decidely NON Christian in so many ways. If a single payer health system were to be seen as Christian, Pelosi, Reid and the Democrats would be sure to kill any prospect of it just to spite any thought of religious overtones!

The health care system they are proposing is decidedly anti-Christian and anti-Life!

Pres. Obama has himself been a proponent of full term abortion, and he is awarded a "peace" prize??? And more strangely the Vatican approves of his being awarded the peace prize???

One has to understand that, under the terms Nobel set to award the Peace Prize, a committee selected by the Norwegian parliament chooses the winner each year. At the time, Norway did not have an independent foreign policy, being subordinate to Sweden, so it could be an "honest broker", so to speak.

Today, the Norwegian parliament is perhaps the most leftist body in Western Europe, far more radical than the parliament of Italy was in the 1970s, and more socialist than the parliament of Sweden is today. The Norwegian parliament chooses a Nobel Peace Prize committee in its own image, and they select winners based not on objective criteria (i.e., what someone has done to advance world peace) but on purely ideological grounds (i.e., who most closely mirrors the values of the Norwegian parliament).

Hence, a nobody like Obama is nominated over someone like the Dalai Lama, a host of dissidents from democracy movements in Russia, Iran, China, Burma, Iraq, Egypt, Latin America and do forth; or the myriad humanitarian groups around the world who are relieving the suffering of millions through the work of their hands and the sacrifice of their time, their comfort and sometimes their lives.

Someone noted that the NFL changed the name of the Super Bowl Trophy to the Vince Lombardy Trophy, since Lombardy most closely embodied the values the trophy represented. He suggested that the Peace Prize should be renamed the Yasser Arafat Prize, since the scuzzy terrorist most closely embodies the values the Nobel Peace Prize has come to represent.

I have no problem with the headline, "Barack Obama Wins Yasser Arafat Prize".

Could you please elaborate? I would love to know how you arrived at this conclusion.

The current Norwegian government consists of a small socialist party, the much larger social democratic Labour party, and a small centrist party. Together these centre-left parties have a majority of three (3). So, the Norwegian parliament may be a bit further to the left than the Swedish one, but I don't understand your comparison to 1970s Italy.

It is also worth noting that the Norwegian parliament has been more fiscally conservative than the U.S. Congress in recent years.

This is not quite fair. The will of Alfred Nobel [nobelprize.org] specifies the criteria: The prize is to be awarded "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." The terms of the will are thus sufficiently broad to allow the Norwegian Nobel committee a lot of room for manoeuvre.

The Dalai Lama, Aung San Suu Kyi (Burma) and Shirin Ebadi (Iran) have already received the prize. Of course it would have been nice if this year's price had gone to Chinese activist and dissident Hu Jia to mark the PRC's 60th anniversary, but unfortunately I'm not on the committee...

Those are the kinds of conclusions I was referring to before when I said that (at least on this forum) the countries of Europe get almost as caricatured as America.

And although often based on a limited truth, caricatures are never really very helpful.

Well, I have visited Norway several times at the behest of the DoD to discuss defense industrial policy, in the course of which I met with Norwegian government and industrial representatives, who described their country's economic policies in some detail. In addition, if you look at various indices of economic freedom, Norway ranks pretty close to the bottom for all OECD states. It has the highest marginal taxes in Western Europe, and maintains a more elaborate social welfare system even than Sweden.


Everything in politics is relative. The center in Norway is the left in most other places. The left is, therefore, a lot further to the left. Italy in the 1970s had a large and active Communist party which controlled a number of city governments and looked at one point to be poised to lead a national coalition government.


Fiscal conservatism is not related in any way to the degree of economic freedom in a particular country.


As I said, the Parliament chose a Committee in its own image--leftist, multilateralist, relativist and anti-American.


By its selection of Barack Obama, the Committee seems to have abrogated its mandate.

It's interesting that here in the United States, the Left is increasingly angry with Obama for failing to implement the changes of policy on which he ran. The Patriot Act, for instance, is about to be re-authorized with minimal changes, even though (a) the Democrats denounced its provisions for eight years (despite having voted for it in 2001); and (b) possessing a majority in both houses of Congress. The Obama Administration is working behind the scenes to ensure that the main provisions of the Patriot Act remain intact.

Just this morning, a coalition of human rights activists in Washington protested Obama's prize because his statements and policies since taking office have cut the legs out from under democracy and human rights movements around the world. But hey, at least he's not George Bush, right?

Like I said to friends the other night I am embarassed at my Norwegian heritage, once I was proud to be a Norwegian, now I am ashamed.
Stephanos I
This is an affront to all the holy innocents and humanity in general.

You did it!!! YEAH!!!

Interesting that those defending Mr Obama all live outside of the US, whilst those deploring him and his objectives are all from the US, and have to actually deal with his atrocities. Lets make a deal. We'll gladly give Mr Obama and Co. over to any one of your nations that wants him. All we ask in return is for you NOT to allow him to come back to the US. He was voted in by the ignorant unwashed masses who are only looking for a handout at others expense and by a small group of ivory towered liberals with no grounding in reality. You can have them as well.

Alexandr

The lack of Charity in this thread amazes me, such judgment and hatred due to political leanings. How do actions and words such as these lead to changes of heart? I am a very outspoken person, but I have learned to do so with Christian Charity. Referring to people as anti-this or anti-that, or "ignorant unwashed masses," etc...

But the lack of Charity extends to all threads, the sense of decorum was thrown out faster than most of the tradition after Vatican II.

Well said, Erie Byz. I've noticed this more lately than ever, and especially as one who was away from this forum for a couple years. One can certainly disagree with and be appalled by Obama's policies, as I definitely am, without being loutish.

I posted this poll because I was curious to know how people on the forum would react to the award. I think it is fair to say that we have had a broad range of reactions, but that the vast majority think the award was a mistake. As I have already said, I think the award is at best premature and at worst naive. This is not because Mr. Obama is a bad president or an evil man, as some seem to think, but simply because he hasn't been president for very long and hasn't had the time to achieve very much yet. Whether or not he will achieve great things in the future we don't know. For the sake of both America and the world, I think we should all wish him well.

The problem, in my opinion, isn't Mr. Obama ("It is too early to laud Obama – or to be disappointed" [ft.com]), but the Norwegian Nobel committee ("Why the Nobel selection committee chose Barack Obama" [politico.com]). This is a group of five people who seem to be caught in a timewarp (they seem to think it's still January 20) and who clearly haven't registered the fact that the time for celebrating the inauguration of the first African-American president of the United States is over, and we're back to politics as usual. The president has become fair game [youtube.com], as he should be, and the impression is beginning to form that he is all words and no action. And this, incredibly, is the moment that Mr. Jagland and the Nobel committee have chosen to award Mr. Obama the Nobel peace prize for ... talking! Instead of helping him, the committee may have caused him some unnecessary extra trouble. The problem is that the committee members obviously don't watch SNL!

The new National anthem of the USA.



Alexandr

That's inflammatory and uncalled for.