Sample Blog Header

Has President Obama lived up to his Nobel Peace Prize?

Posted at 5:00 AM on October 8, 2010 by Eric Ringham (34 Comments)
Filed under: International affairs, Politics/Government

When President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize a year ago, he said he would accept it as "a call to action" on the world's problems. Today's Question: Has President Obama lived up to his Nobel Peace Prize?


Comments (34)

Getting there.
Legalize Cannabis/Hemp and he's got it.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9077214414651731007&ei=COkfS7jaDoeqqAKgve0e&q=the+union#

Posted by DNA | October 13, 2010 11:31 AM


Steve: I do give you my assurance. We would never do that. As to motive? Beats me.

Posted by Eric Ringham | October 11, 2010 10:01 AM


Thank you, Eric. So, are you assuring us that MPR hasn't created any fictitious participants to stir the pot? If so, we're still left to speculate: was "Dancer Annette" trying to discredit MPR, or other participants?

I still agree with Lily Tomlin. "No matter how cynical I get, I can never seem to keep up."

Posted by Steve the Cynic | October 11, 2010 8:01 AM


To Steve: It was disinformation. I deleted it.

Posted by Eric Ringham | October 10, 2010 11:32 PM


Hey, what happened to the posts from "Dancer Annette" and the apparent revelation that MPR had created a couple of fictitious contributors to Today's Question? The cat's out of the bag. How about an explanation, MPR folks?

Posted by Steve the Cynic | October 10, 2010 8:46 PM


No. The Nobel Peace Prize is becoming a joke, similar to MPR.

Posted by Tommy | October 9, 2010 2:26 PM


I agree there could have been a better question.

The award is for work done.
Although its expected to be carried on still, I would expect he will be a force for peace over time still yet to come.

Some comment on ending the wars we are in, a better plan is NEVER get in them. Who was it, one of my favorite president, Teddy Roosevelt (R): Speak Softly, but carry a big stick. (To bad there are few conservative like him anymore.)

Posted by Kevin VC | October 9, 2010 2:21 AM


Looks like MPR has run out of relevant questions.

Posted by Kevin | October 8, 2010 8:12 PM


nullquestion.

Posted by Greg d'Roseville | October 8, 2010 5:45 PM


If you really needed fireworks couldn't you have asked about the Tea Party? How much fireworks are there to be had on a story where even the recipent of the award seemed confused and ambivelent?

Posted by Khatti | October 8, 2010 4:39 PM


Here we go again. Yet another slam of President Obama. I bet a lot of Americans are just waiting for an opportunity to impeach him well before 2012 gets here.

Posted by lawrence | October 8, 2010 2:42 PM


Khatti, Thank You!
I would also like to keep this forum legitimate.

DTOM

Posted by James | October 8, 2010 12:21 PM


No. The Nobel Peace Prize and other prizes have become political agendas by those giving the awards, rewards, and media time. This is the same with the Academy Awards. Instead of letting money talk, the politicians try to bully the group think of others to effect agendas. To promote peace America should cut off all subsidies to the racist terrorist failed state regime of Israel.

Obama's job is not to lead the world or nation. Obama is a bureaucratic administrator leading the Federal Government bureaucracy. Obama borrowed more money than the entire personal US income taxes in 2009 instead of firing federal employees which is needed.

Obama is a failure but he is still in charge as many failed government employees are. The peace prize was a sham, a bribe. He did get the money and he took it.

Posted by Jack goldman | October 8, 2010 12:11 PM


What an interesting conversation! Nothing seems to get people fighting like asking them to talk about peace.

Posted by Steve the Cynic | October 8, 2010 11:55 AM


I think a better question to ask is: "Why the hell did the Norwegians give the peace prize to a sitting president who has two wars on his plate?"

Posted by Khatti | October 8, 2010 11:51 AM


In reply to this comment, I do get a kick out of how everyone completely flips out if they see the word "socialist.": I don't exactly get a "kick" out of it, but I find it interesting. Some folks seem to think socialist is a synonym for evil. The truth is, we need enough socialism to keep captialism from destroying itself, but not so much that it kills the economy. And, now that I think about it, it really is an issue related to the quest for peace. The modicum of socialism that FDR introduced probably prevented the Bolshevik revolution from taking hold in the US and preserved what's good about the free market. It's not that Obama's modicum of socialism is undermining the quest for peace, but the irrational fear of that socialism. Without some moderation in our free-market extremism, the have-nots will eventually resort to violence to get what they need from the haves.

Posted by Sue de Nim | October 8, 2010 11:42 AM


I think he has lived up to his un-asked for prize. He has used his available tools to forge a new relationship with Russia, disperse some of North Korea's agression, worked with Europe's leaders to help solve the global market meltdown, worked with world leaders on ecology issues, is working currently with Palistine and Isralie leaders to forge a peace between them. I could go on and on. This question doen't relate to our country and it's problems, it asks about his call to action for the world leaders.

Posted by Mary | October 8, 2010 11:33 AM


Unfortunately, No.
But we can always have HOPE, right?
haha.

Posted by Julie | October 8, 2010 11:17 AM


Obama is a joke and clueless. Economy is in ruins, our enemies know he is clueless. This is the result of electing a "communiuty organizer" for president.

Sorry obama, great speaches don't fix anything.

Look forward to repiblican sweep so that old hag pelisi is gone and obama is a one termer.

Posted by Clark | October 8, 2010 11:06 AM


This is the real DTOM James this time, I don't know who those other posts are from, but it would be nice if you'd grow up.

I do get a kick out of how everyone completely flips out if they see the word "socialist."
DTOM

Posted by James | October 8, 2010 11:04 AM


To whoever posted this:

"And just because he didn't force socialized medicine on us doesn't mean that isn't his secret plan."

Likewise, just because they haven't revealed themselves doesn't mean space aliens aren't secretly calling all the shots in Washington. Don't you read the headlines in the check-out line?

Posted by Steve the Cynic | October 8, 2010 10:29 AM


You're joking with the Obama peace prize question, right? And while we're fortunate to get the wise comments of these local Nobel laureates in economics who are unmasking Obama as a socialist - he's a socialist like Roosevelt was a socialist. They both did enough to avert the total collapse of capitalism, while ultimately propping up the system of corporate expansion. Morons.

Posted by Jim Shapiro | October 8, 2010 9:42 AM


You've got to be joking.

Posted by Jim Shapiro | October 8, 2010 9:20 AM


Not even close.

And I support Obama.

Posted by Chris | October 8, 2010 9:18 AM


Cool,, This happens to be the real DTOM James. Thanks for stealing my identity... not sure why you would do this??? I'm just a dorky engineer from the Range. Now I feel somewhat violated. Please do not degrade this discussion board. Get your own tag line.

DTOM --The real one.
PS.. I will not post anymore replies today Any posts with DTOM James are fake.

Posted by James | October 8, 2010 9:18 AM



No. But, I will say that almost no one else on this list has lived up to the efforts put forth by Gandhi, who was never awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. This should be an outrage.

Posted by Michelle | October 8, 2010 9:12 AM


Ask the people killed by drone attacks.

Ask the people in Gitmo.

Ask the people of Israel.

Posted by Gary F | October 8, 2010 9:07 AM


Sue de Nim, that wasn't me. Someone else stole my tagline.

The fact that Obama is a socialist has everything to do with how he measures up to the Nobel Peace Prize. Socialists use the image of peace to cover up their real agenda, which is to control everyone in the world. One of the tools they use to control people is war. See Orwell, George. 1984.

And just because he didn't force socialized medicine on us doesn't mean that isn't his secret plan.

DTOM

Posted by James | October 8, 2010 8:27 AM


After reading this rather inflammatory question, I went through some of the past winners. Some were clearly deserving, Lech Walesa for example, but I also ran across some strange ones, Woodrow Wilson ... then I hit 1973 .. huh? Henry Kissinger? The blood-thirsty bomber of Cambodia? I think that sometimes the prize is awarded less for previous accomplishments than in an attempt to try to push certain people in a certain direction. I also ran into this quote "The prize money for 1972 was allocated to the Main Fund." Did that mean the prize was not awarded?

Posted by J | October 8, 2010 7:54 AM


Dropping the inflamatory rhetoric is not enough. Obama has also dropped his own very helpful conciliatory rhetoric when right-wingers complained that he was "apologizing for America."

(BTW, Jamed DTOM, if he's a socialist, why did he insist that single-payer health care be put off the table? He's clearly not a socialist, and even if he is, what does that have to do with the Nobel Peace Prize?)

Posted by Sue de Nim | October 8, 2010 7:47 AM


Yasser Arafat won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994 (together with Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres) for participating in the Oslo talks in 1993. In 2000 he balked at the best peace deal he could realistically get for his people, derailed the process, and plunged Israel and Palestine back into the conflict. As with an investment prospectus, past performance is no guarantee of future performance.

Obama has largely dropped the inflamatory rhetoric of his predecessor, which is good, but his use of CIA drone attacks still appears to be making enemies faster than we're killing them.

Posted by Steve the Cynic | October 8, 2010 7:32 AM


No, because he's a socialist.

DTOM

Posted by James | October 8, 2010 7:30 AM


He has already been awarded and has received the prize "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".
He already "lived up to" the standards that are in place for such an award.

Would he be awarded the Nobel now? Well, that's an entirely different question.

Posted by Miss Anthrope | October 8, 2010 6:47 AM


No. A deserving Nobel Peace Prize winner would have found a way out of the war in Afghanistan.

Posted by Al | October 8, 2010 5:37 AM


Post a comment

The following HTML tags are allowed in your comments:
+ Bold: <b>Text</b>
+ Italic: <i>Text</i>
+ Link: <a href="http://url" target="_blank">Link</a>
Fields marked with * are required.


Comment Preview appears above this form upon pressing the "preview" button. Edit your comment and press "preview" again, until you are satisfied with your comment.

Your comment may not appear on the blog until several minutes after it was submitted.

October 2010
S M T W T F S
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            


Master Archive

Public Insight Network

The Public Insight Network draws upon your experiences to help shape our coverage.
More

MPR News
Radio

Listen Now

On Air

On Being

Other Radio Streams from MPR

Classical MPR
Radio Heartland

Services