On 10/9/09 10:01 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 17:45:38 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:



Look at the wiki page about the Nobel Peace prize.

Ok, I looked. Obama doesn't belong on the list.
My opinion.
Seems the committee is working on "hope" criteria instead of
established work as in the past.
Maybe he'll justify it in the end, but the "rules" have certainly
changed.
BTW, John Paul II, the Polish Pope, should be on that list.
He exuded peace and love, and spread it where ever he went.

You're right he might or might not, but most presidents have far-reaching
impact. GWB is an example. Not for good, but his impact on the world was
large.

I don't think you're a bad person. If I implied that, it was unintentional.

I was just kidding. I know I'm not a bad person. Mostly.

--Vic

The Nobel committee has awarded on the basis of "hope" before.

Desmond Tutu won the prize for working for the end of apartheid, which
was not achieved for more than 10 years after his selection.

The Dalai Lama won the prize for struggling for the liberation of Tibet,
which has not been achieved.

Aung San Suu Kyi won for her efforts to liberate Burma, which has not
happened.

I can think of many reasons why Obama won, including these few:

his ending of the concept of pre-emptive war
his ending of the policy of not talking to our enemies
his shutting down of the torture mills
his message of hope and a brighter future for people all around the world





--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All