HOME | FUNNY ARTICLES | TOP NEWS REPORTS | SUBMIT
|
Oct. 12, 2009 "This award is not simply about the efforts of my administration, it's about the courageous efforts of people around the world. That's why this award must be shared with everyone who strives for justice and dignity. For the young woman who marches silently in the streets on behalf of her right to be heard, even in the face of beatings and bullets. For the leader imprisoned in her own home because she refuses to abandon her commitment to democracy. For the soldier who sacrificed, through tour after tour of duty, on behalf of someone half a world away. And for all those men and women across the world who sacrifice their safety and their freedom and often their very lives, for the cause of peace". This was Barack Obama's statement to the press and to the world after finding out he had been awarded The Nobel Peace Prize. The bitching and the moaning started immediately, as expected, with people wondering why such a prestigious honor would be bestowed on a President who had only been in office for 9 months. An award that had only been given to three other President's. Woodrow Wilson, Teddy Roosevelt and Jimmy Carter. And in the case of Jimmy Carter, he didn't receive it until 20 years after he had been in office! Geir Lundestaad, the director of The Norwegian Nobel Institute explained their decision this way. "When we have a person whose ideals are so close to the ideals of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, we wanted to give whatever support we could for him to continue his efforts regarding our shared ideals. Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given it's people hope for a better future. President Obama has changed, very dramatically, the climate of international politics. We feel he has emphasized multi lateral diplomacy, he has addressed and engaged international institutions by promoting dialogue and has been a leader in his sincere efforts to negotiate for peace, creating an atmosphere of respect and understanding". (In a climate of mistrust, deception and suspicion that were the hallmarks of George Bush's administration) Ok ok, so I made that part up. Big deal. It's not anywhere close to the propaganda perpetuated daily by moron's like Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh, so chill homies! I know it's misguided to think Barack Obama and his administration would coast very long on the massive outpouring of hope and goodwill that were the cornerstones of his campaign, no one could live up to those kind of expectations. But if you put aside the rhetoric of the campaign and just evaluate him on what kind of person he is, how he's lived his life, how he conducted himself when he was a lowly politician in Chicago, dealing with his constituents everyday at the local level, you will understand more clearly why he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. He has demonstrated, through action, not words, what motivates him to make the decisions he makes. Why he approaches the leaders of the world the way he does, with the most important tools of all, respect and diplomacy. Anybody who thinks respect and diplomacy should be extended on a sliding scale basis, that the "other side's" positions and attitudes play a role in deciding if respect and diplomacy should be part of the discussion has no place in government. Diplomacy has to be at the heart of any discussion, it's absence means discussions are starting behind the line, not on it. Bush was clueless about the importance of diplomacy and it was never more obvious than on the morning of September 11, 2001. It only took 7 little words to divide the masses. "your either with us or against us". I know it was spoken when the wounds of 9/11 were new, but that comment would prove to be more than just the reaction of a country devastated by terror, it seemed to shadow his entire administration. It was divisive, threatening and ominous. He seemed to carry that philosophy into every decision he made, he wouldn't respect opposing views because if you opposed him you were against him, and not just in terms of the war on terror either, his position as "the decider" influenced everything he did, he just barrelled his way through whatever was in front of him. Remember how he tried to put Harriet Myers on the Supreme Court all by himself? How he threatened photographers with prison if they photographed the coffin's of dead soldiers returning from Iraq? Those are just two examples of many. He was out of control, the extent of his behaviour was beyond comprehension and I'm sure we still don't know just how far he went over the line. He came to personify the opposite of anything respectful or diplomatic. It was more than a disgrace, his actions took us closer to terror than we ever were, even on 9/11. The differences between the Bush administration and the Obama administration are so vast, I can't think of a single thing they have in common. Not one. They both have two daughters, ok, yeah. Who cares. Let's talk policy, compassion, diplomacy and accountability. I tried my hardest to locate one redeeming quality about George Bush that I could point to as an example of his humanity. I'm living in this world too and just like the rest of us I want desperately to find meaning and compassion in the hearts of those that govern, I want to extend my support and my loyalty to anyone anywhere on the planet who is sincere in their efforts to make the world a better place. At the end of the day isn't that what it all comes down to? But I never found anything in George Bush that made me think he was patient or diplomatic, that he cared about more than being a bully. "I find a lot of irony that the guy who won the Nobel Peace Prize won't meet with the Dali Lama because he's cow-towing to just about the worst human rights abuser in the world, the Chinese government. So yes, I'm shocked he got it because when I think of the quintessential Nobel Peace Prize winner, I think of Mother Teresa, who said we wouldn't have world peace until we ended abortion and I think it's Obama's radical abortion position that makes him the least qualified to receive an honor like that" Thank god I started this article a few days ago and hadn't submitted it before I had a chance to deal with the moron who spewed that drivel. Who is she? With a perspective like that her name hardly matters. If you want to know what it is look it up. She guest cohosted on The View today because Sherri's away sick. The hour spent listening to her today was 59 minutes too long, can you imagine if you had to listen to that every day? It almost happened! Talk about diverting a possible collision with stupidity! A few years ago when they were looking for another permanent cohost to replace the departing Lisa Ling, this wackjob went through several auditions before finally losing the spot to another clueless nut-case, one Elizabeth Hasselbeck. Where do they come from? Are they born this way or is this level of stupidity something they learned? Are they self taught? Recruited and indoctrinated? Brainwashed? The result of a bad acid trip? Too much starch? Not enough carbohydrates? Did they fall in with a bad crowd at school? Is there even a rational explanation for thinking that because President Obama believes in and supports a woman's right to choose what happens to their own bodies he's the least qualified to receive the Nobel Peace Prize? I fully understand the importance of addressing his campaign promises, of trying to live up to the expectations the world has placed on his shoulders, the expectations that were at the heart of his change we can believe in platform. But like I mentioned in the first paragraph of this article, isn't it a bit unrealistic, unfair even, to think he can change the world in less than a year? I stand by my belief that he has done more to promote diplomacy in 9 months than Bush ever did in 8 years! I know that sounds like favoritism, but were he a Republican President with the same approach to diplomacy I would feel the same way. The very second I found out Barack Obama had been elected, I was elated. I had such profound feelings of hope, of peace. As the news spread and people came to understand that this poised, principled man of change really had become the President of the United States of America I started to feel that peace might have a chance. I am not a groupie. I don't get caught up in appearances or expectations, which were both very prominent players in the way the world reacted when they heard the news. Yes, we all felt great, it was unifying, we rejoiced. But none of those initial reactions had anything to do with policy or fact, they were empowering and sincere, but they were inspired by the possibility of change, not change itself. Now that we've had a chance to see who he really is, and our view is no longer distorted by the overwhelming excitement we felt, I still think he's done, in a period of 9 short months, more to promote peace and diplomacy that Bush did in 8 very long years. Barack Obama is accountable to the citizen's of his country and that's one of the most obvious differences between him and George Bush. Bush was too busy fishing in Crawford, Texas to get off his butt and engage the populace. I mean please, how many town hall meetings did he participate in? Where are the results of the policies he initiated on behalf of the poor, on behalf of the citizen's in New Orleans? What did he do for the families of the soldiers who were over in Iraq on his order, willing to take a bullet for him? There was only one person George Bush was accountable to, himself. No one can expect Barack Obama, in 9 months, to clean up the mess Bush left behind. That is a valid, substantiated and unfortunate fact. If you take a realistic look at what Barack Obama has done during the first nine months of his administration you'd know why he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.
Honey-chile, I rest my case!
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
