Global Narcissism Culture
I was shocked, this morning, to read that our President -- who never did much in the Senate, and hasn't done much more as President than give speeches and go after the Olympics like the President of downtown Chicago instead of the President of the United States -- won the Nobel Peace Prize.
The AP writes that it honors "promise, not action." Well, yuck.
This is like taking the overpraising of children that's so common now in American culture and expanding it to an adult, and on a global scale.
This dishonors everyone who's righteously won a Nobel and disgusts me to the core.
I write about the sorry results of this sort of behavior in my upcoming book, and I'm reading a great book entirely about this sort of thing now, The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement. Can somebody please recommend it to the Nobel suckups?
P.S. Oh, and fuck you FTC, nobody sent it to me for free, and I'm still recommending it.
I am professionally embarrassed by my commander in chief. Beyond that, words fail me...
Beth at October 9, 2009 6:44 AM
This is really ridiculous. Nobel prizes are supposed to be awarded to recognize exceptional achievement.
The non-scientific Nobel prizes have always been awarded for political reasons as much as anything else. However, this is absurd. It is not even to Obama's discredit - he hasn't had the time to achieve anything as president.
The Nobel peace prize has destroyed any remaining credibility it may have had. What a joke.
bradley13 at October 9, 2009 6:50 AM
I would have rather seen Angelina Jolie getting it for adopting all those kids from foreign countries. Ok, that was a joke, but seriously, you can't tell me there are no people that were actually deserving of this. It is a slap in the fact to anyone who has ever been awarded before.
Kristen at October 9, 2009 6:54 AM
And I forgot to say, fuck you to the FTC also. I would have felt this way whether or not Amy wrote about it or recommended anything.
Kristen at October 9, 2009 6:55 AM
Well, didn't Obama bow to the Saudis? And ingratiated himself with other questionable world leaders? Maybe he's getting the peace prize because his lips are so sore from all the ass-kissing he's been doing lately.
o.O
Flynne at October 9, 2009 6:56 AM
Umm, what?
Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize?
Did I just wake up in an alternate universe where stories from The Onion come true?
Tyler at October 9, 2009 6:58 AM
The intent seems almost satiric; sandbagging, or whatever the opposite is, as if they meant to be so over-the-top that we might finally expect some results out of the guy.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 6:58 AM
By the way, don't you have to be nominated for that award? So who did the nominating? Or should we be asking who paid for him to be nominated? There's money backing him coming from somewhere that isn't the American public, and I'd just like to know where it's coming from.
Flynne at October 9, 2009 6:59 AM
Brilliant tweet from Kaus
Instant advice for Obama re: Nobel Peace Prize: Turn it down! http://bit.ly/2KaMRV It's win/win.
Postrel tweets: "WTF?"
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 7:00 AM
Excellent piece about entitlement culture via A&LD.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 7:04 AM
Good question, Flynne. I suspect somebody will dig that up soon.
Amy Alkon at October 9, 2009 7:04 AM
How many other black politicians are going to fall asleep tonight dreaming of their Nobels?
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 7:15 AM
He was nominated 12 days after becoming President. 12 days. I haven't seen who did it as of yet. Unreal. I'd like to extend my personal apologies to all who have had their real accomplishments undermined as a result of this.
It's enough to make one ashamed to be an american.
momof4 at October 9, 2009 7:17 AM
Well, well, well the "Celebradent" bought the prize. Now we can all be regaled by yet another aggrandizing speech about how wonderful he is. Then we can be utterly spellbound by his wife when she tells us that this is the first time in her life that she’s been proud of the planet Earth.
Funny how his approval rating around the globe is double digits up while in America his approval rating is double digits down. Could it be because we are headed in the same direction as the rest of the world? Welcome to Americastan, the kinder, gentler, fascist form of the former Constitution Republic known as America.
The world has gone fucking insane!!!!!
ED at October 9, 2009 7:20 AM
There was an ad for something a couple of days ago, a conservative web page or something, that reminded us: Arafat got a Nobel but Gandhi didn't.
It was never as big a deal as they'd want you to think.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 7:21 AM
The Peace Prize has been an unfunny joke for a long time, and it should not be put in the same category with the science prizes. Let's look at some of the recent Peace Prize winners:
# 2007 - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Al Gore. The IPCC's founding study has since been brought into disrepute by serious questions about where there data came from. As for Gore, this is the guy whose own home goes through enough energy to power a small city every day.
# 2002 - Jimmy Carter. The Nobel writeup doesn't cite anything specific, other than the Camp David accords, for awarding this.
# 1997 - International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Jody Williams. When Iraqi insurgents started using landmines against American troops, suddenly the transformed into "IEDs" and became politically correct. The International Campaign to Ban Landmines quietly disappeared at that point.
# 1994 - Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin. Arafat. Need I say more?
# 1988 - United Nations Peacekeeping Forces. WTF??? This was just the international leftist community patting itself on the back.
# 1985 - International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. They were advocating unilateral disarmament, as the Soviet Union was on the verge of collapse. They were also bitterly opposed to missile defense.
If you go back further, you do find some worthy receipients -- Norman Borlaug, Martin Luther King, Linus Pauling, George C. Marshall. But the last really worthy recipient was probably Lech Walesa in 1983. And more to the point, the Peace Prize has always leaned towards pacifism. They have seldom awarded the prize to anyone who achieved peace by helping to eliminate an existential threat. None of FDR, Churchill, Reagan, Thatcher, or Yeltsin was ever awarded the Peace Prize.
Cousin Dave at October 9, 2009 7:25 AM
It is bizarre. I say that as someone who voted for Obama, and as someone who, if she could turn the clock back a year, would still vote for Obama.
He just hasn't done anything that warrants the prize. Maybe some day he will. But he hasn't.
I don't think it is fair to be embarassed by him because of this, though... he didn't ask for the prize.
I think the Nobel Prize committee should be embarassed.
Who were the other candidates? Were they just realy desperate because nothing peaceful has happened this year?
NicoleK at October 9, 2009 7:28 AM
I love the way the Europeans use their institutions and prizes to influence American politics. Al Gore received a Nobel Peace Price for his apocalyptic vision of the world and Michael Moore won at Cannes with his Anti-Bush movie.
I see nothing out of the ordinary regarding their attitude towards Obama and the Nobel Peace Price. I just wonder how the Americans will react seeing their commander-in-chief being honoured by the same nations who refuse to send troops in Afghanistan and are lax on freedom of speech.
Toubrouk at October 9, 2009 7:33 AM
Obama is an appeaser.
America is becoming a nation of appeasers, whether domestic or foreign.
The world likes this as it makes America seem weaker and apologetic. Perhaps an apologetic America will be good for more funds for whatever their causes and more money can be siphoned off. This works domestically as well.
Appeased people expect a pay off somewhere down the line, to make things right for their imagined injustice.
It would be better if they called it The Nobel Appeasement Prize.
David M. at October 9, 2009 7:34 AM
Soon, no one will care much about the Nobel if they keep this up.
Spartee at October 9, 2009 7:54 AM
Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize. In other news, U.S. predator drones continue to kill insurgents in Pakistan.
Nick at October 9, 2009 8:01 AM
I was half asleep when I heard this on NPR this morning and thought I was dreaming. I, too, would vote for Obama again, but I don't think he deserved a freakin' peace prize.
MonicaP at October 9, 2009 8:17 AM
Also very bewildered by this (even knowing the cruddy history of the Peace gong).
So far - from hanging around liberal sites - most people seem more astonished than anything else.
Jody Tresidder at October 9, 2009 8:33 AM
In still other news, Obama has refused to meet with the 1989 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, the Dalai Lama.
Nick at October 9, 2009 8:33 AM
The Really shocking part is, we are questioning for what since he hasn't done much yet. But then it hits you Nominations had to be in Feb 1st. So he was nominated 12 days into his presedency.
12 days!?!
They don't mention when the various rounds of voting happen but, has to be months ago. They were taking so much on blind faith it's a laughing stock.
Joe at October 9, 2009 8:37 AM
> Soon, no one will care much about
> the Nobel if they keep this up.
If only! But it's like the United Nations: The fantasy of international elegance overwhelms the reality of wretched corruption.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 8:38 AM
Ever heard of the Ig Nobel Prizes?
Harvard holds the spoof ceremony every October. Every accomplishment is real. (Some were actually done by scientists - this is the case every year.)
From this year, quote:
Veterinary Medicine Prize: Catherine Douglas and Peter Rowlinson of the UK’s Newcastle University for showing that cows who have names give more milk than cows who are nameless.
Peace Prize: Stephan Bolliger, Steffan Ross, Lars Oesterhelweg, Michael Thali and Beat Kneubuehl, of University of Bern, Switzerland, for determining, by experiment, whether it’s better to be smashed over the head by a full bottle of beer or one that is empty.
Economics Prize: the directors, executives and auditors of four Icelandic banks (Kaupthing, Glitnir, Landsbanki and the Central Bank of Iceland) for demonstrating that tiny banks can be rapidly transformed into huge banks and vice versa, and for showing that similar things can be done to an entire national economy.
Chemistry Prize: Javier Morales, Miguel Apátiga and Victor M. Castano, of Universidad Nacional Autonoma de México, for their work in creating diamonds from liquid, particularly tequila. (Miss Sweetie Poo intervenes and receives a considerably large sombrero and bottle of tequila for her trouble.)
Medicine Prize: Donald L. Unger (California) for disproving a possible cause of arthritis of the fingers by diligently cracking the knuckles of his left hand — but never of the right — for more than 60 years.
Physics Prize: Katherine K. Whitcomb (University of Cincinnati), Daniel E. Lieberman (Harvard University) and Liza J. Shapiro (University of Texas) for analytically determining why pregnant women don’t tip over.
Literature Prize: Ireland’s police service for presenting more than 50 traffic tickets to the worst offender in the country — Prawo Jadzy — whose name in Polish means “driver’s license.”
Public Health Prize: Elena N. Bodnar (Illinois and Ukraine) and Raphael C. Lee and Sandra Marijan (Illinois) for inventing a brassiere that, in an emergency, can quickly be converted into a pair of gas masks, one for the brassiere wearer and one for a needy bystander. Bodnar effectively demonstrates the item with several somewhat stunned Nobel laureates.
Mathematics Prize: Gideon Gono of Zimbabwe’s Reserve Bank for giving people a simple way to cope with a range of very small to very large numbers by having his bank print bank notes ranging from one cent ($.01) to $100 trillion ($100,000,000,000,000.00).
Biology Prize: Fumiaki Taguchi, Song Guofu and Zhang Guanglei (Kitasato University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Japan) for demonstrating that kitchen refuse can be reduced more than 90 percent in mass by using bacteria extracted from the feces of giant pandas.
(end)
The main site is improbable dot com. The "List of Ig Nobel Prize winners" is at Wikipedia.
Previous literature winners include:
In 2000: "Jasmuheen (formerly known as Ellen Greve) of Australia, first lady of Breatharianism, for her book Living on Light, which explains that although some people do eat food, they don't ever really need to."
And, in 2005:
"the Internet entrepreneurs of Nigeria.....for creating and then using e-mail to distribute a bold series of short stories, thus introducing millions of readers to a cast of rich characters — General Sani Abacha, Mrs. Mariam Sanni Abacha, Barrister Jon A Mbeki Esq."
And the Peace Prize in 2004 went to: "Daisuke Inoue of Hyōgo Prefecture, Japan, for inventing karaoke, thereby providing an entirely new way for people to learn to tolerate each other."
(He was actually there to receive his prize, presented while the presenters sang "Can't Take My Eyes Off You," though he doesn't speak English.)
lenona at October 9, 2009 8:53 AM
> They don't mention when the various
> rounds of voting
Joe, are you the OLD Joe here?
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 8:56 AM
It honors "promise, not action". Well, damn, now I want one!
Pricklypear at October 9, 2009 8:57 AM
One of the small but interesting things that happened this week is that the state dept decided they were no longer going to fund the group documenting human rights abuses in Iran.
If you don't know people are being oppressed, tortured, and killed, doesn't it make the world seem more peaceful? It's a 'silence of the lambs' kind of thing.
The world's always been a dangerous place; appeasing the predators, hoping they'll become sheep will not make is less so.
LauraB at October 9, 2009 8:57 AM
What's really surprising is BHO not winning the Nobel Prize for Literature (his two autobiographies) and Science (creating the Illusion that he was really Presidential Material).
jksisco at October 9, 2009 9:14 AM
>>Joe, are you the OLD Joe here?
My heart rose too, Crid.
But it's not quite "old" Joe's style?
(Hope I'm wrong).
Jody Tresidder at October 9, 2009 9:15 AM
Perhaps he was given the prize to slap the warmaker--Bush--in the outgoing face!
don't you tire of being so negative all the time? You lost and the other team won. Figure out why and do something POSITVE instead of chewing your nether lip and spewing venom and being oh so snarky and clever. YOU LOST. Get it? Lost.
n. zuckerman at October 9, 2009 9:16 AM
This'll be an interesting test for Obama. The award is so absurd that it risks embarrassing him.
Will he accept it in his own name, and take credit for the distinction that it carries?
or will he accept it in honor of others, implicitly acknowledging the significance of their accomplishments over his own?
Malcolm at October 9, 2009 9:22 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/10/09/global_narcissi.html#comment-1671702">comment from Jody TresidderI know...miss Joe, too!
Amy Alkon at October 9, 2009 9:22 AM
> But it's not quite "old" Joe's style?
He was going to cure cancer with nasal spray or reverse trisomy with pills or something. It would be great to find out how that's going for him.
Merely thinking about him makes me want to slap around Justin Case, too, as a reflex.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 9:25 AM
This website asks: "Where's Kayne West when you need him?" I heard an Afghan women's rights activist got passed up for Obama.
Frum has an interesting take though (especially considering Barry's recent waffling in Afghanistan:
FTA: hat Nobel was not a gesture of Obama-worship by left-leaning Norwegians. It was the very opposite: It was a pre-emptive strike against Obama, an attempt to neutralize him. How can a Peace Nobelist strike Iranian nuclear plants? Or wage a protracted war in Afghanistan? Or tell the Palestinians, “Sorry, that’s the best offer, take it or leave it”? The hope of course is that he cannot.
Feebie at October 9, 2009 9:42 AM
In other news, blogger Amy Alkon was prosecuted by the FCC for obscenity for telling off our sister agency, the FTC.
Seriously, I know where our broke Federal Government could save some money.
MarkD at October 9, 2009 9:43 AM
Power comment from Feeb. Power.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 9:54 AM
Seriously, DOUBLE power. I thought the pre-emptive muscle of the award was just some backhanded European zombiedom about black people. But Feebie reminds us what's going on out there in reality.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 9:58 AM
Meet the People Who Were Passed Over for Obama
Feebie at October 9, 2009 10:00 AM
This reminds me of when Jethro Tull won a grammy for best Heavy Metal album...
-Julie
Julie at October 9, 2009 10:17 AM
Obama has tremendous appeal, get over it.
Right-wingers are becoming small-time snivelers. "Oh, Obama winning the Nobel Prize means we coddle our kids. Waa-waa-waa."
Since taking office, he has not used his pulpit to spread hate, and seems to want to wind down the ill-advised trillion-dollar offensive of his predecessor.
I just wish we could go back to the stance of our founding fathers--standing armies are evil. Read James Madison. Jefferson.
Even the much-ballyhooed Second Amendment, and the portion about "militias," was a slap-down on standing armies. The idea was that only citizens could form an army, and they had the right to do so. That was how much our founding fathers distrusted armies.
Or, read President Eisenhower's speech on the military-industrial complex, delivered when he left office, and at the height of the Cold War. Eisenhower! When we faced a real enemy, not a few punk terrorists!
Obama looks like a hawk in comparison.
I guess you guys think they should have given the Nobel Prize to Sarah Palin, or Terri Schiavo. Or maybe Bush jr. Hey, maybe Spiro Agnew.
butt-ever at October 9, 2009 10:17 AM
"This reminds me of when Jethro Tull won a grammy for best Heavy Metal album..."
I REMEMBER THAT!!! He was playing a freaking flute!
Feebie at October 9, 2009 10:18 AM
I REMEMBER THAT!!! He was playing a freaking flute!
Yup! I dig Jethro Tull when I am in the right mood, but no one who is aware of what Heavy Metal is could call Jethro Tull 'Metal', and no one could call any President of the US a peaceable person. We are the military of the world, we can't afford to be pacifists.
-Julie
Julie at October 9, 2009 10:27 AM
I just heard that Obama is up for an Oscar because he might be in film and might do a great job in it.
The Former Banker at October 9, 2009 10:28 AM
Ya, it would be the remake of "The Candidate". Prediction - he will play a convincing role (but without much substance).
Feebie at October 9, 2009 10:32 AM
I hear President Obama is looking pretty good to win the Heisman Trophy.
Pseudonym at October 9, 2009 10:39 AM
I think his Oscar will be for totally outdoing Peter Sellers in our modern-day, real-life verion of "Being There"
Bertha at October 9, 2009 10:40 AM
Obama has tremendous appeal, get over it.
So, apparently, do two halves of a quarreling couple known as "John & Kate Plus Eight." I believe the "Eight" are the unfortunate children the jerks have between them -- I say "I believe" because I have no interest in them, but they are constantly in all forms of media everywhere.
Having appeal isn't the same as having accomplished something. See Feeb's list of the candidates he beat out.
I learned something, knowing Marlon Brando, and it's that even stars are starstruck about other stars. (I could actually believe that Barbara Streisand would have cooked him and eaten him to get closer to him, after seeing her behavior in his presence. Travolta, too.) I'm guessing that's part of what's going on here, and I'm guessing that if Obama looked like Al Sharpton instead of like a handsome, 50s jazz musician, with the cool to go with, the Nobel would have gone to somebody who actually risked something for peace.
I also agree with the person above who said this was about pressuring him into not taking action in ways that would contradict a Nobel peace prize.
Amy Alkon at October 9, 2009 10:55 AM
I just wish we could go back to the stance of our founding fathers--standing armies are evil. Read James Madison. Jefferson.
Even the much-ballyhooed Second Amendment, and the portion about "militias," was a slap-down on standing armies. The idea was that only citizens could form an army, and they had the right to do so. That was how much our founding fathers distrusted armies.
Posted by: butt-ever at October 9, 2009 10:17 AM
=============================================
Not have a standing army? What color is the sky in your world?
If we didn't have a standing army and someone attacked us ala Japan Pearl Harbor type. Then we would have to scramble to form a military.
Even if weapons were available, we would have to train people to use them etc..
The idea of a non-standing army was before modern technology where all you had to do was pick up a rifle. Basically that's all the weapons we had. Could not be done in this day and age. Having a non standing army is very idealistic until you're attacked. Then people rihghtfully would say -How come we didn't have an army to protect us?-Then it's too late.
David M. at October 9, 2009 11:12 AM
> Soon, no one will care much about
> the Nobel if they keep this up.
If only! But it's like the United Nations: The fantasy of international elegance overwhelms the reality of wretched corruption.
Posted by: Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 8:38 AM
==============================================
Great statement, Couldn't agree more.
David M. at October 9, 2009 11:14 AM
"Get over it" seems to be Whatever's favorite phrase. (Or Iholi's... Same guy.) Brian does that too... It's all about claiming an elevation of perspective. "Simple!", he will say....
What is that?
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 11:14 AM
i-hole, the new name's not fooling anyone.
James Madison was initally opposed to standing armies and favored local militia for defense, believing that a group of men dending their homeland would perform better than a group of paid mercenaries.
Madison failed to account for training - an oversight in which he got a serious lesson when the British sacked and burned Washington, DC. Madison took command of the milita troops defending the capital and was dismayed (and almost killed along with the Secretary of State) when the milita was easily routed by trained British infantry troops. Madison re-examined his position on standing armies that day.
In today's military climate, a militia cannot stand against a trained army. That's one reason why the Iraqi and Afghan insurgents have resorted to IEDs (land mines when they're used by the US forces) and car bombs.
Modern military hardware is expensive. Unless you've got a garage full of AR-15s, Abrams tanks, and RPGs, you're not going to be much help when the PLA invades. It's also much more complex than a 17th century flintlock or cannon. That Browning over-under on your mantle ain't much good when the other guy's spraying hundreds of rounds a second at you.
Madison wrote the second amendment. See above.
Good speech. But Eisenhower wasn't saying get rid of the military. He was warning of being so scared of the Russians that we give too much power to defense industries and the military.
Don't dismiss those "punk terrorists" lightly. They're an organized multi-national militant force backed by several nation-states and organized to shape and affect global geopolitics. That's a bit more ambitious than the Crips and the Bloods trying to control a street corner.
Again, with the asinine comments.
People here are saying someone with actual accomplishments should win the Nobel Prize. Obama has yet to actually contribute to the global peace efforts.
i-hole, you're like a cartoonish Batman villian, gleefully cackling that you've put one over on the Caped Crusader despite the fact that your world domination device doesn't work and your unassailable fortress has been infiltrated by a band of girl scouts.
Conan the Grammarian at October 9, 2009 11:36 AM
> Eisenhower! When we faced a real
> enemy, not a few punk terrorists!
Let's all try to imagine how Iholi felt about the "real enemy" at the time. How do you suppose he reacted to Reagan's famous phrase, "evil empire"?
Or is he old enough to remember this "real enemy"? I'd guess not.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 11:43 AM
Obama should be both embarrassed and pissed off. He has ACCOMPLISHED nothing to deserve the prize, and knows that this is really just a pressure move to force him to follow through on his lofty foreign policy agenda.
Jay R at October 9, 2009 11:43 AM
Yeah, I was kinda wondering whether he gave himself 45 minutes or so this morning, maybe just a few moments during the shave, to do a Sally Fields "They like me, they really like me" kinda thing into the bathroom mirror. I imagined Rahm meeting him in the office for their 730am smoke, and bringing him down to Earth: "You're being manipulated, Mr. President..."
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 11:54 AM
Crid and Conan-
Yes, I am way old enough to remember the real Cold War, and when the Soviets had 2 million men in uniform, supersonic bombers on alert loaded with nukes, ICBMs, and a blue water navy. Subs, the whole works
Not 24 Saudi Arabians armed with box-cutters.
That Soviet menace was a real adversary, although it also turned out to not be as formidable as thought. Some of their Foxbot fighter-jets were probably more dangerous to their pilots than anybody else. The oversize, incredibly fat US military (constantly glorified by the right, in the most exalted language possible) was justified by such an enemy. Did we overspend? Possibly. As it turns out, they were going to collapse, but then hindsight is 20-20.
But 24 guys with boxcutters? This is what we spend trillions of dollars fighting? Yes, we are overspending now, there is little doubt.
We have become a nation of ninnies.
After the Brits left (and they had actually invaded, burned down towns, killed civilians) Washington stood down our army. Almost immediately.
After WWI we again radically downscaled our military, properly so, and did not upscale until needed. (The Bushes and the Tafts thought we should make pals with Nazi Germany, but we went to war anyway).
Eisenhower had it right. Read his speech--rings more true today than ever, especially as there is not a single nation even with the capability of invading us.
Marlon Brando? I thought you humped some black Rams quarterback (until you found out you weren't the only one "screaming like a white lady") Brando too?
butt-ever at October 9, 2009 12:22 PM
> We have become a nation of ninnies.
Not all of us.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 12:23 PM
Marlon was a friend. Period. Asshole.
I do understand that your perspective of the world apparently only involves people being interested in you if they can bend you over a chair, but that's not how it works for all of us.
Besides, he loved the brown ladies, and I am the color of fresh Wite-Out; in other words, not his type -- other than for friendship, co-pranksterism, and nerdy shared interests.
Amy Alkon at October 9, 2009 12:37 PM
What kind of a lesson does it teach the kids of America - you don't have to accomplish anything, but you get the big shiny prize. This is actually just a big-time version of what happens in our public schools every day. EVERYONE gets to be a winner!
Crusader at October 9, 2009 12:46 PM
"What kind of a lesson does it teach the kids of America - you don't have to accomplish anything, but you get the big shiny prize. "
Affirmative Action WORKS!
Feebie at October 9, 2009 12:51 PM
Properly so?
Tell that to the guys burned to death in their Ronsons (Sherman tanks had a tendency to burn when hit). Tell that to the guys at Pearl Harbor trying shoot down attacking planes with 30-year-old ammunition. Tell that to the guys flying obsolete aircraft (TBDs, F2As, etc.) at Midway. Thirty-seven of forty-one TBDs were shot down in one afternoon. F2A pilots on Midway were told to make out their wills before take-off because they would not be coming back (most didn't).
Following the Pearl Harbor attack, the US was in a panic that the Japanese planned to invade the West Coast. We were not prepared to defend any of it. Most of our weaponry was outdated. Soldiers and Marines rushed to defend the coast with the same rifles and helmets their fathers and grandfathers had carried at Beleau Wood.
In an era in which one bomb can massacre thousands, we cannot afford to be that far behind again.
Bring on the citations.
I cannot find references that either the Bushes or the Tafts favored appeasement, reconciliation, or alliance with Nazi Germany.
I can, however, find plenty of references to Joe Kennedy favoring appeasement of the Nazis.
Conan the Grammarian at October 9, 2009 12:54 PM
> Marlon Brando?...
C'mere you spineless, little, rat-fink...
Feebie at October 9, 2009 12:57 PM
I've read Eisenhower's speech many times. Perhaps you need to read it.
Eisenhower was not advocating the dismantling of the US military.
And
He also understood the threats we faced. In fact, his warning kinda sounds appropriate today, too.
Eisenhower, having watched the rise of Hitler and Stalin to power was warning of giving undue influence to our fears of our enemies.
Conan the Grammarian at October 9, 2009 1:15 PM
It's nice to have a few people around here who actually do the reading.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 1:34 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/10/09/global_narcissi.html#comment-1671781">comment from Conan the GrammarianA vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment.
This is why people who are "anti-war" are idiots. Sometimes, you need to fight a war to restore the peace.
Amy Alkon at October 9, 2009 1:56 PM
"YOU LOST. Get it? Lost."
Amazing. This is a troglodyte, thinking that the fate of the nation only affects part of the population. No, we all lost, as part of the public swoons over style with no substance and fights with anyone lamenting the Emperor's lack of clothes.
Both parties nominated the wrong people. But it was Election Day that the networks said, "We don't really know the man."
For all of you who "would vote for him again": Other than saying Kanye's a jackass, just what has the man done that you admire?
What has the man done?
He didn't write his own book.
Radwaste at October 9, 2009 2:58 PM
A presidential election is not about who lost or won (as if it were a sporting contest or lottery drawing).
A presidential election is about choosing the best person for the job of president. When we choose a president in an orderly, peaceful, and semi-democratic way, we all win (even if our preferred candidate doesn't).
But, here's the rub. The person who wins the election has to go out and actually do the job of president. Unlike the Super Bowl winner, he doesn't get to go to Disneyland or take his trophy and go home. Unlike an Illinois state legislator, he doesn't get to sit back and vote, "present" 129 times.
The winner of the election has to be the president of ALL the people of the United States. Telling your critics, "I won, you lost, get over it" is not the way to govern a country of 300 million people. It's not even the way to govern a book club.
Conan the Grammarian at October 9, 2009 3:11 PM
Yeah, that's right. People who are "antiwar" are idiots.
Vietnam was so worth it. Iraqistan is wonderful.
More accurately, I think it depends on context.
When the Nazis were going crazy, and the Bushes and the Tafts of Ohio wanted us to make nice, being anti-war was being an idiot.
When Bush jr. decides to spend $1 trillion establishing a Shiite-Islamic state in Iraq, supplanting a secular thug state, maybe being anti-war is reasonable.
Of course we need a military establishment, although at this juncture in history the threat of an nation-state attack on any Western democracy is extremely low, so our military posture should be apprised accordingly.
Yes, there are punk terrorists out there. We should get them, or perhaps better, just put huge bounties on their heads.
It is hard to fight punk terrorists with an aircraft carrier. It feels good, but ultimately rather ineffective.
Sorry Amy, you never bagged Brando, though I expect he was a few decades past his prime anyway, so maybe just as well. I never had any movie-star friends, unless Gary Coleman counts, and last I heard he was working as a security guard. He actually wants to star in a movie in a Rambo role.
Gary Coleman as Rambo.
butt-ever at October 9, 2009 3:23 PM
I always love the folks who sit in third world countries and throw stones at the US. I have no doubt that Thailand would not exist as we know it without a strong US presence in SE Asia at a critical time. But that's ok, continue to rewrite history as you see fit. Vietnam was not worth it in hindsight because we lacked the commitment to win it early, and of course we never really asked the people if they wanted "democracy". Iraq was another right war, wrongly prosecuted (IE fought on the cheap). Afghanistan however is a valid war because those fucks were harboring the very assholes that attacked us. We just need to change our methods a bit, and realize we are there for at least two generations. If we cannot commit to that we should just back out until the Taliban regroups, then pound their ass again with special forces efforts and airborne hit and withdrawel tactics
ron at October 9, 2009 3:32 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/10/09/global_narcissi.html#comment-1671795">comment from butt-everYeah, that's right. People who are "antiwar" are idiots.
"butt-ever" is so apropos.
I'm not "pro-war," either, but as I said, it's sometimes necessary to fight a war to keep the peace.
Marlon could be friends with me because I liked him because he was cool and smart and fun and used to call me at 3 a.m. to tell me stories about Madame Cheng the Chinese pirate, and because he knew I don't give a shit about actors or movie stars, and in fact, try to avoid them. (In general, I find them to be "egos in search of a landing pad," with some exceptions.)
FYI, I "met" Marlon in an AOL chat room in the early 90s, and had no idea who he was. He and I only met-met because I told him I'd be in California for a few weeks on a freelance job (I was living in NYC), and he said he lived in Beverly Hills, and we should talk on the phone and meet.
Amy Alkon at October 9, 2009 3:41 PM
"Afghanistan however is a valid war because those fucks were harboring the very assholes that attacked us."
Pakistan seems to be kicking some serious fucking ass lately. Looks like our troops will be thanking them, not our waffling pansy of a President for future victories. He's afraid to do what needs to be done, but he'll take the prize, won't he?
Just makes me ill. Our chief panty-waist doesn't have any definitive character available to protect our men and women over there and make the tough decisions he was elected to make. He's too busy playing grab-ass on Leno.
Someone outta staple his ass to that chair he seems so fond of taking pictures in. Make him sit there until he makes a decision on this. Really, really not cool what he is doing to our troops over there, they've got their asses on the line - dammit!
Feebie at October 9, 2009 3:53 PM
====================
Robert Taft
from Wikipedia:
"...from his vigorous and outspoken opposition to U.S. involvement in the Second World War. A staunch non-interventionist, Taft believed that America should avoid any involvement in European or Asian wars and concentrate instead on solving its domestic problems. He believed that a strong U.S. military, combined with the natural geographic protection of the broad Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, would be adequate to protect America even if the Nazis overran all of Europe."
"Although Taft fully supported the American war effort after Pearl Harbor, he continued to harbor a deep suspicion of American involvement in postwar military alliances with other nations, including NATO."
"Taft condemned the postwar Nuremberg Trials as victor's justice in which the people who won the war were the prosecutors, the judges and the alleged victims, all at the same time. Taft condemned the trials as a violation of the most basic principles of American justice and internationally accepted standards of justice. Although his opposition to the trials was strongly criticized by many prominent politicians and journalists, other observers, such as Senator John F. Kennedy in his bestselling Profiles in Courage, applauded Taft's principled stand even in the face of great criticism."
"In 1957, a Senate committee chaired by John F. Kennedy named Taft as one of the five greatest senators in American history."
====================
Prescott Bush (grandfather of George W. Bush)
From the Straight Dope:
"The central charge against Prescott Bush has a basis in fact. In 1942, under the Trading With the Enemy Act, the U.S. government seized several companies in which he had an interest. Prescott at the time was an investment banker with Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), which had funneled U.S. capital into Germany during the 1920s and '30s. Among the seized companies was the Union Banking Corporation (UBC) of New York, which was controlled by German industrialist Fritz Thyssen. Thyssen had been an early financier of the Nazi party--in fact, in 1941 he published a book entitled I Paid Hitler. Ergo, Prescott helped finance the Nazis."
"Prescott's involvement with Nazi finance is more complicated. Though Thyssen had been an ardent backer of the Nazis in the early days, he broke with them in 1938 after the Kristallnacht pogrom against the Jews. He fled to Switzerland the following year, and Hitler confiscated his fortune and stripped him of his citizenship. In I Paid Hitler Thyssen confessed his role in financing the Nazis and denounced the Führer. Arrested in Vichy France, he spent the balance of the war as an Axis prisoner. Prescott Bush, for his part, owned a single share of stock (of 4,000) in UBC, the Thyssen bank. According to a 2001 Boston Globe piece, the New York Herald Tribune ran a story in July 1942 headlined "Hitler's Angel Has 3 Million in US Bank," in which Prescott and other BBH partners 'explain[ed] to government regulators that their position [as directors of UBC] was merely an unpaid courtesy for a client.'"
"So, did Bush and his firm finance the Nazis and enable Germany to rearm? Indirectly, yes. But they had a lot of company. Some of the most distinguished names in American business had investments or subsidiaries in prewar Germany, including Standard Oil and General Motors. Critics have argued for years that without U.S. money, the Nazis could never have waged war. But American business has always invested in totalitarian regimes--witness our dealings with mainland China."
"[John]Loftus tells me there's more to it than that. He says that the value of German industrial assets in which Bush and friends invested increased during World War II, in part due to slave labor, and that Bush benefited from this increase when the assets were returned--supposedly he got $1.5 million when UBC was liquidated in 1951. I'll buy the claim that Bush got his share of UBC back--it was an American bank, after all--but the idea that his German holdings increased in value despite being obliterated by Allied bombs is ridiculous."
From Wikipedia:
In 2003, the Anti-Defamation League responded, saying:
====================
Conan the Grammarian at October 9, 2009 4:07 PM
Conan, I am SOOOO digging you right now, my man.
Feebie at October 9, 2009 4:10 PM
The Germanic sympathies were strong with many in the US before WWII.
Nearly forgotten now is that LBJ, when campaigning for Congress, gave many a speech in German, so strong with the German settlement in Texas (and much of the Midwest).
Yes, Taft opposed our entry into WWII until he could not longer, and then he defended the Nazis afterwards, He showed great and acute concern for the civil rights of Nazis after WWII, a little curious since he showed none to the Jews getting fried, or even American blacks (and this was before WWII).
The Bush family had extensive dealings with the Nazi regime. I give credit to the senior Bush, who actually served faithfully in WWII, but none to his son, who dodged real service in Vietnam, and let other young men take bullets instead. The later, he called himself a "war president" and wore flight uniforms. It gets better, but I gotta go....
butt-ever at October 9, 2009 4:59 PM
"Germanic sympathies"?
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 5:26 PM
So who lit the fuse for such dynamite news?
Jay J. Hector at October 9, 2009 5:54 PM
Actually, I think butt-rider's posts have proven the point of the post that started this thread.
Cousin Dave at October 9, 2009 6:01 PM
This award says nothing about Obama and everything about the Nobel selection committee.
Kirk at October 9, 2009 6:55 PM
Coulda been worse. He may have been squealing with delight on the inside, but on the outside he said:
"Let me be clear. I do not view it as recognition of my own accomplishments but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations."
That almost rhymes with GWB:
"The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity."
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 9, 2009 7:03 PM
I see the award as a huge sigh of relief on the part of European countries that were sick of the Bush regime. Think of it as regime change, Euro style.
In contrast, we think nothing of invading sovereign countries, and killing tens, of not hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and maiming who knows how many more, as well as four thousand of our own, and counting, not to mention many more thousands wounded, or mentally destroyed by a war intended to bring about regime change in Iraq.
The Europeans give an award, perhaps a bit too graciously, when a country as powerful and vital to the world's well-being as ours doesn't elect another dick head.
Maybe we have been living with the horrors of the previous administration for so long that we no longer have any idea what life looks like in civilized societies.
I dig you, Amy, for your often insightful and right-on-the-money take on life, but in this case I feel you lost your usual sagacious perspective. You, no doubt,deserve an award for your great column, but there are larger things afoot in the world at the moment.
If the award helps Obama make progress on any one of the several very serious threats to the world's future survival, then I say lay it him. He needs all the help he can get. The shit storm is not over by a long shot. There are many more after effects of eight years of the Bush regime yet to be worked through. We're just getting started. Obama made an excellent speech this morning. He has the right attitude, and knows he has his work cut out for him.
chris at October 9, 2009 8:45 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2009/10/09/global_narcissi.html#comment-1671829">comment from chrisIf the award helps Obama make progress on any one of the several very serious threats to the world's future survival, then I say lay it him.
Being President of the United States isn't enough?
I think he's shown, so far, that he doesn't know what he's doing and this is a lot harder than all those boy wonders thought it would be.
-Amy (No George Bush Fan) Alkon
Amy Alkon at October 9, 2009 9:35 PM
> If the award helps Obama make
> progress on any one of the several
> very serious threats to the world's
> future survival, then I say lay it
> him.
Political leaders will never, ever be the ones to defuse the threats you describe. That's just not how it works.
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 10, 2009 12:24 AM
"Think of it as regime change, Euro style."
We are. That's the problem. Why don't people who love Europe so much move there? Or are their several immigration rules too tight, unlike ours? Our country was founded on principles quite different from any you find in Europe. They are written into our COnstitution. And most of us would like to keep it that way.
I didn't vote for Bush either, although he's looking pretty good in hindsite. Why must one love Bush to hate Obama?
momof4 at October 10, 2009 4:40 AM
Wow Chris, I finally found one of the glue sniffers that think Obama is actually qualified to occupy the white house. I shudder to think how many millions more of you morons are out there.
ron at October 10, 2009 4:40 AM
"In contrast, we think nothing of invading sovereign countries, and killing tens, of not hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, and maiming who knows how many more, as well as four thousand of our own, and counting, not to mention many more thousands wounded, or mentally destroyed by a war intended to bring about regime change in Iraq."
Ahh, yes. Those who do what we find undesirable did so while "thinking nothing".
This is simply false, and your attempt to paint the previous President and the Congress authorizing him to act every 90 days as unthinking is nothing more than apologetics for the current officeholder - who is also acting with the approval of Congress.
It's also egotistical. You know better. You obviously have complete solutions to the current international political situation. Not.
When Americans kill someone overseas now, it's OK - with the people who voted for this President, because his "intentions" are somehow "good". This is exactly the same attitude that got us strip searches for wanting to fly on a plane, police in schools, hundreds of gun laws that don't work, the Luxury Tax... I can go on.
Show me how you're different.
Radwaste at October 10, 2009 4:55 AM
Personally, the Nobel Peace Prize lost all meaning for me when they awarded it to Yasser Arafathead.
Patrick at October 10, 2009 5:25 AM
In contrast, we think nothing of invading sovereign countries ...
Sorry. I'd stopped reading your comment after that piece of idiocy.
Maurice at October 10, 2009 7:11 AM
From The Weekly Standard, these are some of the people that were passed over to give Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. Be prepared to be disgusted.
Patrick at October 10, 2009 8:20 AM
Good short Welch
Crid [CridComment @ gmail] at October 10, 2009 9:34 AM
Maybe Kanye West will show up at the award ceremony in Oslo to tell us all who REALLY deserved the prize.
Martin (Ontario) at October 10, 2009 9:37 AM
What's funny is that all of the TB's have now started promoting the same line - that the award is actually to congratulate the US electorate for having reformed themselves by electing BO. That was the intended significance all along. Though of course there's no mention of that in the statement by the PP committee. Even they realize that the award makes BO look ridiculous. It only highlights his lack of accomplishments and confirms the perception that he is 'celebrity president' without gravity. The committee's decision has been met with scorn and derision across Europe. BO is coming to be seen as a somewhat comical character.
Moo at October 10, 2009 11:41 AM
Well lets look at these people who didnt win the nobel peace prize
Sima Samar, women's rights activist in Afghanistan: "With dogged persistence and at great personal risk, she kept her schools and clinics open in Afghanistan even during the most repressive days of the Taliban regime, whose laws prohibited the education of girls past the age of eight. When the Taliban fell, Samar returned to Kabul and accepted the post of Minister for Women's Affairs.
Trying to keep womens schools open in such an area actually causes violence
Ingrid Betancourt: French-Colombian ex-hostage held for six years.
So what did she do? Besides get rescued by other people I mean?
Dr. Denis Mukwege: Doctor, founder and head of Panzi Hospital in Bukavu, Democratic Republic of Congo. He has dedicated his life to helping Congolese women and girls who are victims of gang rape and brutal sexual violence.
By helping these women survive he is propogating the cycle, after all if all the victims would just have the decency to kill themselves then there wouldnt be any more victims and the war would end
Handicap International and Cluster Munition Coalition: "These organizations are recognized for their consistently serious efforts to clean up cluster bombs, also known as land mines. Innocent civilians are regularly killed worldwide because the unseen bombs explode when stepped upon.
They arent acctually doing anything to end conflict, they're just picking up the trash left after someoneelse stopped the war
Hu Jia, a human rights activist and an outspoken critic of the Chinese government, who was sentenced last year to a three-and-a-half-year prison term for 'inciting subversion of state power.'
This guy was trying to destabalize the world economy which would lead to more war
Wei Jingsheng, who spent 17 years in Chinese prisons for urging reforms of China's communist system. He now lives in the United States
Again trying to sow the seeds of chaos by interfering with chinees labor, therefore chineese exports, therefore the economic stabilty of the planet
I'm sure this is what the commitee was thinking. In contrast to these assholes, who in truth were promoting war, Obama who had held the office for 8.5 business days was bound to be a shoe in.
Come to think of it since the oath had to be readministered the next evening and the day of the 21st was spent at the "National Prayer Service" he was technically in office for 6 business days before being nominated.
lujlp at October 10, 2009 3:30 PM
Hi,thanks for your post and luckly to comment in your site!Bubba Watson, 32 years old, is making his mark as one of the best players of his generation. Born in Okerenko, south-west of Warri in 1969, Tompolo, of Nigeria's royal house of Okerenkoko, attended Okepopo Primary School, where he learned to speak Itsekiri, and later the Warri Comprehensive College, leaving in 1993. Properly managed, transparent elections can ease tensions and build accountable institutions. Hi guys, let me be frank! I do not dig the song. In Akwa Ibom state, Mr Jonathan was credited with winning 95% and in Anambra it was 99%. For everybody who's bought the album and is here complaining aboutt not getting a link, PLS CHECK YOUR EMAILS JUNK FOLDER!
Dre Beats at June 2, 2011 2:43 AM
Leave a comment