So Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. There is no greater evidence needed to confirm that this award is totally political and is presented without any recognition of reality. Carter and now Obama. There's a pair to draw to (and then to fold).
We are still in IRAQ and Afghanistan committing violence against the people of those countries. Barack Obama was elected with major support of millions of USAmericans that wanted an end to that violence.
Peace cannot be prized if we are still involved in WARS of our own making.
Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 10:09 am
The ship of state doesn't turn on a dime, Hal. This award is a recognition that the rest of the world sees Obama's potential to be a truly transformative leader, and they like the new course being set by the captain. I wouldn't have given him the award yet, but when he returns to private life in seven years, I believe he will have altered the global landscape for the much better.
It's interesting -- there's a guy at Hahvud, Roger Fisher who wrote "Getting to Yes" in the '90s and is now an emeritus professor in the law school, who was/is Jimmy Carter's conflict resolution advisor. I don't know whether he directly influenced Obama, too, but every time the Prez speaks, I hear Fisher's concepts. Fisher should get an assist on both those awards -- great man, he is.
Posted by Hal Bailey, a resident of another community, on Oct 9, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Neighbors have recommended to you that you establish a broader group of guest commentators that can write thorough articles on various issues. Please put Tom Cushing on your list and invite him to provide 200 words in guest articles on critical subjects.
In brief, Tom's thoughts above illustrate a willingness to take a very-savvy and well-considered look at issues.
Posted by Chet, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 9, 2009 at 11:18 pm
With the election of Pres. Obama and now the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Pres Obama we can all be very proud of our President and our country. The President and our country are leading the free world again in the direction of peace. We are starting to get out of the dark days of Bush/Cheney. Bush was the worst President in our history and he was also a plague on the whole world. With our election of Pres. Obama we have ended the days of torture in our name and the go it alone policy against all reason by Bush. The Nobel Peace Prize award can be taken to heart by all of us for the big change in direction toward peace we have taken with our election of Pres Obama. Pres Obama clearly understands the serious meaning of this award and the hard job of continuing to lead the free world toward world peace over the next seven years.
Posted by Dave, a resident of the Walnut Creek neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 9:55 am
I hate to throw water on your Kumbaya campfire, but what exactly did THE ONE do between January 20 and February 1 to deserve this great honor?
Oh I know, he’s not Bush/Cheney! “Bush was the worst President in our history and he was also a plague on the whole world.” To you and your followers I suggest you do a little reading. Try The Federalist Papers, The Declaration of Independence, and The Constitution Of The United States for starters. I am absolutely amazed how soon some people have forgotten about 9/11/2001. Least you forget we are dealing with irrational fanatics who want to drag the world back to the 13th century. Please heed the famous quotation of George Santayana: “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”
Posted by Citizen Paine, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 12:02 pm
So, Dave, you'd belittle the notion of peace and then expect us to believe you're an authority on the subject? Your immediate inquiry was answered above, of course, and your rant is a parade of the mismatched ploys. It was your Bush and Cheney, for example, who forgot the Constitution after 9/11 -- harming the very freedoms that set this great nation apart from 13th-century caliphates.
Since you're fond of quotations, try this one from ol' Ben Franklin: "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."
It is also the oldest, dumbest trick in the book to demonize whole populations, some of whom are our enemies. That kind of thinking won thousands of Japanese-American citizens government accommodations and financial ruin not so far back in history (perhaps you forgot?).
Sure we have enemies, but your blunderbuss, incendiary rhetoric only gets in the way of identifying and defeating them, and drives a much larger group of non-enemies into their camp. I am very glad to be shed of that cro-magnon level thinking, and leadership.
Posted by Dave, a resident of the Walnut Creek neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 1:22 pm
This is cute:
"It is also the oldest, dumbest trick in the book to demonize whole populations, some of whom are our enemies. That kind of thinking won thousands of Japanese-American citizens government accommodations and financial ruin not so far back in history (perhaps you forgot?)."
No ploys pal, which whole populations are you referring to?
As to " It was your Bush and Cheney, for example, who forgot the Constitution after 9/11 -- harming the very freedoms that set this great nation apart from 13th-century" On Sept. 12, 2001, it is highly doubtful that any member of Congress was worried that our government would be too harsh in its treatment of terrorists. When countries are threatened, basic survival trumps civil liberties not just for enemy combatants but for citizens as well. Our priorities change.
We saw that with the attack on Pearl Harbor. Days before Japanese warplanes destroyed the U.S. Pacific fleet on Dec. 7, 1941, 80% of Americans did not want to go to war against either Germany or Japan. The day after the attacks, those numbers reversed themselves. Over the next four years, the United States did things it would never do in normal times -- Japanese-Americans were placed in prison camps, press reports and the mail of American soldiers were censored by the military, and the FBI tapped phones without court orders.
In peacetime, a country can deliberate the balance of its security and civil liberties. It can even apologize for actions that were clearly wrong. When a nation is in peril, however, a forceful defense takes priority.
Also: "Since you're fond of quotations, try this one from ol' Ben Franklin: "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.""
Get your quotes right."They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
And by the way which Constitutional Liberty did Americans give up?
Also thanks for calling me dumb, I really appreciate that I take it as a compliment because I don't think like you, or belittle people like you. I call Our President "The One" because I am sick of the Messianic following he has.
But I am not like the Bush Haters I would never say "he's not MY PRESIDENT!" as many have.
Posted by Chet, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Who could ever forget how we suffered on 9/11 and the world united with us to defeat Osama Bin Laden. Our Pres Bush then took a united world and soon mistakenly invaded Iraq and Osama is still today free to plot attacks on us and the World. Bush was asleep at the switch before 9/11 and made the wrong decisions after 9/11. Our current Pres Obama is now leading us and the world in the right direction and making careful correct decisions.
Posted by Dave, a resident of the Walnut Creek neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 3:43 pm
"Who could ever forget how we suffered on 9/11 and the world united with us to defeat Osama Bin Laden."
Osama Bin Laden is Defeated? I missed that one.
"Our Pres Bush then took a united world and soon mistakenly invaded Iraq and Osama is still today free to plot attacks on us and the World." Osama is still free. Whew, I didn't miss it.
"Bush was asleep at the switch before 9/11 and made the wrong decisions after 9/11. Our current Pres Obama is now leading us and the world in the right direction and making careful correct decisions." You are certainly entitled to your opinions.
As to Iraq there were and are many geo-political reasons for liberating Iraq and for cleaning up the entire region. This is a situation that dates back over a Century to mistakes being compounded one upon another by many countries and regimes. You can agree or disagree, your choice and point of view. But keep your hatred of Bush to yourself. At least Bush had the guts to stand up for the Free World and call out the evil where he saw it. As to Obama it’s too soon to judge anything about him, time will be his judge.
Posted by Citizen Paine, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 5:31 pm
1 – I’m not your pal, and wonder if you realize that your derisive tone make you sound like a moronic bully wannabe – whehther you are or are not? The may not be the most effective forum in which to channel rightwing radio.
2 – Well-documented Bush II assaults on civil liberties: speech, association, establishment clause religion, privacy, search/seizure, due process, self-incrimination, speedy trial, by jury, and equal protection (to name a few fundamentals). Add torture and rendition, and you may start to see that America abandoned the moral high ground during those dark days – and squandered the ample global goodwill evoked by 9/11. This from a president who called the Constitution “just a damn’ piece of paper?” If you really need specifics – google is your friend.
3 -- This is not to even mention stupidly starting the wrong war – one that has cost the lives of many more Americans than the precipitating incident – and many more thousands of others, from which his successor has to extract us before making his own progress. And squandered any Republican pretense of fiscal responsibility. Is it really surprising that the most of the rest of the world is greatly relieved with our change of direction?
4 – My conception of the fundamental freedoms we enjoy under the protection of that damn’ piece of paper is not anywhere near as flimsy as yours – indeed, that’s why we have a Constitution. When we fall short of our ideals as expressed therein, that needs to be an opportunity to commit to strengthening those institutional protections so that it never happens again – not an opportunity for excuses. Our freedoms matter most, not least, when they’re under stress and attack. And these martial law-style atrocities that you so blithely excuse are a certain harbinger of tyranny. We see your vaunted history littered with examples to serve as warnings and lessons. I wonder if you’d be as tolerant of internal assaults on freedom if the freedoms sacrificed were Yours?
5 – Your presumed correction of my quotation is shallow pedantry – a distinction without a difference in meaning. You might spend more time pondering the content than parsing the prose.
Posted by Mike, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 5:41 pm
At precisely 11:00pm ET on November 4, 2008, Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. And the 66 million people who voted for him won it, too. By the time he took the stage at midnight ET in the Grant Park in downtown Chicago, billions of people around the globe were already breathing a huge sigh of relief. It was as if, in that instant, one man did bring the promise of peace to the world -- and most were ready to go wherever he wanted to go to achieve that end. Never before had the election of one man made every other nation feel like they had won, too. When you've got billions of people ready, willing and able to join a cause like this, well, a prize in Oslo is the least that you deserve.
Posted by Chet, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 7:00 pm
We as Americans can be very proud of our President and our country with the Nobel Peace Prize. With this prize and the Nobel Science awards also being given to Americans it proves again we are headed in the right direction and are turning away from the dark dark days of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld. Hip Hip Hooray for America.
Posted by disillusioned, a resident of another community, on Oct 10, 2009 at 8:06 pm
To all the kool-aid drinkers out there, I sincerely hope you are right but; To quote Thomas Sowell.........
"Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Moammar Gadhafi and Vladimir Putin have all praised Barack Obama. When enemies of freedom and democracy praise your president, what are you to think? When you add to this Barack Obama's many previous years of associations and alliances with people who hate America — Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Father Pfleger, etc. — at what point do you stop denying the obvious and start to connect the dots?"
In life you just have to remember one thing:
It's not who's right and who's wrong. It's what's right and what's wrong.
Posted by cardfark, a resident of the Diablo neighborhood, on Oct 10, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Fellas -- is That all you've got -- tired innuendo from the fossilized brain of Thomas Sowell, and some inane quote? I can understand Rush Limbaugh doing everything in his power to look small(er), but what's your excuse?
Pretty pathetic. Freddy -- remember, 'tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to express yourself and remove all doubt.
Posted by askidoo, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Oct 11, 2009 at 11:49 pm
Interesting to bring up that 66 million voted for Obama - 53% and 46% or 58 million for McCain. If that was such a landslide then similarly the 46% who now favor health care reform should be seen as a total loss for that topic and the 51% of Americans who believe Obama is not being aggressive enough in response to Iran's nukes is a landslide against Obama administration policy. Finally according to Rasmussen 58% believe politics is behind the Nobel Peace Prize not substance! After all what else could it be given 40+ days in office? A hope or a promise of what is to come? - maybe, possibly, perhaps....
Fascinating, isn't it that in the sciences it takes 30 to 40 years to get a Nobel Prize but not for the peace prize 40 days will do it.
Posted by Ralph Hoffmann, a resident of the Walnut Creek neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2009 at 6:42 am Ralph Hoffmann is a member (registered user) of Danville Express
President Obama (and everyone) should read the speech by The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964. Also, the last speech before leaving office by Republican President Dwight Eisenhower, about bewaring of the military-industrial complex. I hear a new mental illness has been discovered called FOX News Addiction Disorder.
Posted by Hal Bailey, a resident of another community, on Oct 12, 2009 at 7:48 am
Is it possible, as noted in the foreign press, that Barack Obama has been given the Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of the USAmerican people who, as voters, ended the global tyranny of the Bush administration, and its supporters, by voting the Republicans out of National control? Such press noted that USAmerican voters shifted towards participation in global economy, community and humanity in their national voting starting 2006.
WE, the people, have won the Nobel Peace Prize and Barack Obama symbolizes our direction toward peaceful participation according to such global news services. What becomes an issue in USAmerica is the lack of distribution of such balanced, considerate news in our country. Too many allow FAUX News (Fox News) and the schticks of Glenn, Russ and Sarah to dictate their perceptions.
Posted by Rodney, a member of the Vista Grande Elementary School community, on Oct 12, 2009 at 8:14 am
Seth Meyers said it best on Saturday Night Live by illustrating the legitimacy of it all by saying that “…in similar news, a high-school sophomore quarterback has won the Heisman Trophy, a 12 year-old girl in Arkansas has won the Miss America Pageant and an 11 year old boy has become People Magazine’s Sexiest Man Alive.”
I know this show build’s it’s success on poking fun at leaders in politics and in Hollywood, but funny AND true all the same. Seth went on to say that President Obama referenced the ‘call to action” that this meant to him while he was accepting the award, but wasn’t there also a call to action when he was elected???
Posted by Citizen Paine, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2009 at 8:52 am
Those who complain that Obama "hasn't done anything" ignore initiatives and progress on the economy, health care (it'll pass -- it may be sausage by then, but it'll be better than our current for-profit sop system), Iran, Israel and now, finally, gay rights -- all the while dealing with the inherited wars that suck us dry for no good reason (even just in financial terms, Iraq alone has cost us a ton-of-money more than either Obama's stimulus, or Bush's). It's an ambitious agenda -- superbly managed and balanced by the Prez. His ability to hold it all together is the thing at which I most marvel. In fact, what I like least so far is that he didn't get a pound puppy, instead of a breeder dog (but even that one was understandable -- a nice change in itself).
One thing's certain -- when he does succeed, and he will -- you Faux News devotees will like him even less.
Posted by Chet, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2009 at 9:40 am
The voting for the Nobel Peace Prize was just a couple of weeks ago not in Feb. Pres Obama was a obvious choice to be on the Nomination list and with his performance since his nomination he was given the prize. This could just be the first of many for Pres Obama. We Americans are very proud of our country and of our President.
Posted by Fred F, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2009 at 11:06 am
The problem is that the rest of the Nobel Prizes are now suspect and should be looked at with a great deal of skepticism. What other awards were made for purely political reasons rather than accomplishments?
Posted by Robert, a resident of another community, on Oct 12, 2009 at 11:37 am
I guess it would be safe to say that skepticism is always healthy in "awards". Even the Nobel prize for "the sciences" are decisions as to what to choose to recognize. Hopefully, there will always be many deserving accomplishments to choose from, and even being considered is an honor. As for choosing President Obama for this prize, I think it is generally acknowledged that it is for the hope of what could be. When you come down to it, it's their award to give as they see fit.
As for the discussion on this website, I came upon it by accident. I normally read the Pleasanton Weekly website, but decided to look at the publisher's other "papers" I was initially a bit envious of the tone of the comments, but then they begin to sink to the level of what I have come to expect. Thanks to those of both sides for reasoned, informative comments.
Posted by askidoo, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Oct 12, 2009 at 7:49 pm
So let's be reasonable on issues and topics rather than berating for whatever news channel is watched or not - now that is inane!
As part of the above thread the health care bill(s) was mentioned as to the sorry state of our 'current for profit sop system'. This is more important for most people and families than whether or not Obama gets a peace prize - so did Arafat - like he was a man of peace?
We should highlight that when we have examples of government run hospitals in the US like Walter Reed Medical Center for the Army in Washington D.C. that government let it decay to the point that it could not be renovated. That locally scarce dollars from the county in the county medical government run system never measures up to the progress or care of John Muir Medical Center - a for profit system that takes the profits and renovates to keep up to date. And please don't forget that several years ago when there was a heat wave in Great Britain that thousands died in those hospitals as they had no air conditioning or ice!! because the government had never renovated and updated the facilities.
These examples need discussion as well - how would an influx of patients in the millions be handled by the decreasing number of doctors per 1000 patients we already see? Same for nurses? Same for lack of increases in nursing and med schools?
Discussion, not blame of which channel you watch, and common sense of the fact that research and new drugs are more often created by for profit companies.
Discussion that medical malpractice is not at all mentioned in the House Bill even though it is well known that it is central to increased costs.
Discussion of why fraud in medicare is not being looked at before any huge overhaul.
Discussion of medicare cuts currently projected at the expense of the elderly versus adding all the other new patients vying for limited nurse/doctor time, drugs, procedures, facilities, etc.
Discussion of wait times for procedures and recovery rates of diseases.
Posted by Tom Cushing, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 13, 2009 at 11:06 am
These Qs probably deserve their own threads, at minimum. And, after reading that reform opponents have embarked on a costly PR campaign, I am only somewhat suspicious that this poster is shilling for the health insurance lobby.
That said, I was surprised to read in the WSJ and elsewhere that malpractice costs are a trivial element of the overall picture -- certainly not deserving of all the sound/fury they receive as the favorite whipping boy of the status quo. This from the NYT, by way of the Wall Street Journal (and therefore, perhaps, accurate in a bi-partisan way?):
"The direct costs of malpractice lawsuits — jury awards, settlements and the like — are such a minuscule part of health spending that they barely merit discussion, economists say. But that doesn’t mean the malpractice system is working.
The fear of lawsuits among doctors does seem to lead to a noticeable amount of wasteful treatment. Amitabh Chandra — a Harvard economist whose research is cited by both the American Medical Association and the trial lawyers’ association — says $60 billion a year, or about 3 percent of overall medical spending, is a reasonable upper-end estimate. If a new policy could eliminate close to that much waste without causing other problems, it would be a no-brainer.
At the same time, though, the current system appears to treat actual malpractice too lightly. Trials may get a lot of attention, but they are the exception. Far more common are errors that never lead to any action."
So, the cost problem is around three-whole-percent in the context of the health care reform debate, but the system fails to compensate those it ought. Sounds like this one could be set aside, or [gasp], as the Prez suggests -- dealt-with via pilot projects to see if we can correct its aim.
Posted by Eagle, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 13, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Don't you pathetic people have anything to do other than spew out drivel and bicker inanely on this forum day in and day out? Why don't you get a life, or get a job, or join the Marine Corps, or do something useful. Do you seriously believe that any of you are changing anyone's mind? Or do you think you are making a difference in the world through your trite comments? I think NOT!
Posted by TK Ree, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 13, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize because he is setting up Eastern Europe, and Central and South America for take over by his friends Putin and Chavez, and also for abandoning Israel to his fellow muslims.
The Nobel Prize has gone to Carter, Arafat, and Gore. It's easy to connect those dots!!!
Posted by Citizen Paine, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Oct 14, 2009 at 9:46 am
Here's what the Committee members had to say, Web Link, including the following comments:
""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 left-wing Norwegian politician who joined the Nobel panel this year, also dismissed suggestions that Obama was undeserving of the honor.
"Don't you think that comments like that patronize Obama? Where do these people come from?" Valle said from the 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."
World leaders have reacted positively to Obama's Nobel in most cases, the committee said, with much of the criticism coming from the media and Obama's political rivals.
"I take note of it. My response is only the judgment of the committee, which was unanimous," Jagland said.
In announcing the award Friday, the committee, whose members are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament, applauded the change in global mood brought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation. They also praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease U.S. conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen the U.S. role in combating climate change."