Kotaku 
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 8:23 AM
Sat Nov 21
50 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us: tips@kotaku.com
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
Email | AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
Email | AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
Email | AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
Email | AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/11/09
Obama seems to be the first president since I've been on the planet (1981) that is willing to talk without being spineless and isnt mindless when it comes to using force.
That being said I do think its a bit preemtive, I mean, I don't cram toilet paper up my ass because I know I have the potential to take a shit.
10/12/09
Stop the madness
Jade in San Francisco
[www.youtube.com]
10/12/09
Even people within his own party (and even himself) wonders why he deserves it -- As noted in a recent speech.
The skepticism towards the validity of selection is warranted.
10/11/09
Stop the madness
Jade in San Francisco
10/11/09
That thing you just said is more racist than me saying Obama doesn't deserve the prize.
The ignorance in that statement is just staggering.
10/11/09
Oh boy, he made a great speech in Prague. Let us give him another Nobel Peace Prize for that one.
I guarantee you, a lot less people can give to shits about the color of his skin, then you like to think. White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, or whatever, it doesn't matter. Only people it truly matters to are the same ignorant people that said, "look a black man is running for President, I am voting for him." Damn people are 30 years old and never voted before in their life. Out of the wood works to vote for him, because he was black.
I know there are plenty of people that award should have gone to, that truly deserved it for their efforts at peace. And I bet none of them stood in front of a camera making some speech about world peace. A speech does not earn you the right to be awarded one of those. And someone who had held a position for basically a week, does not either.
10/12/09
10/12/09
The vitriol is spewed from both sides of the spectrum, while REAL SKEPTICISM is also casted from people on both sides and the moderate voting constituencies.
Playing the "race card" will do no good anymore, since his worth is measured on the effectiveness as a leader, and not the color of his skin.
While I understand that there are ancillary reasons why some would want to keep the "race issue" alive, it is far less an issue in comparison to what (if any) accomplishments B-HO can done.
10/11/09
10/12/09
Kojima , He deserved Novel Prize.
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/12/09
10/11/09
10/12/09
I would have liked to have read about someone who is far lesser known (non-political) that were doing something towards peace in the "diamond trade route" of Africa, or someone far lesser known that were trying to win back kids from being soldiers that are aged 6 on up.
There are people in this world that are lesser known that also don't do it for the grandstanding. They are truly "unsung heroes" to me, since they do it with no recognition, terrible pay and only a hopeful cause committed with their actions.
THOSE PEOPLE... THOSE LESSER KNOWN THAT ARE COMMITTING TOA GREATER GOOD... THEY DESERVE THE NOBEL PRIZE for PEACE.
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
Aside from Obama's joint-sponsored bill to secure caches of weapons around the world, there isn't really that much he'd done by that time that really DESERVED the nomination, not really anything that one could point to and say "Ok here, see, this is a guy who has devoted his life to world peace."
I think it's great that the world seems to adore our president right now, but until he is actually *doing* things, outside of running up gigantic debts on top of our already gigantic debt, I don't know how anybody can say he deserves all the adoration.
10/10/09
If he had 100% power to do whatever he wanted and he completed even HALF of what he promised, Sure, give the the prize, Hell, give him next year's prize too!
I guess it's not his fault they nominated him, but damn if it isn't a political liability.
10/11/09
Intentions != results however, if that were the case, every peace bumper sticker should get a prize.
10/11/09
From "Common Misconceptions About the Nobel Peace Prize" ( [www.google.com] ) --
Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.
More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.
I see it as them basically telling Obama to keep going the way he is and not quit. (And as one last international middle finger to Bush.)
10/11/09
Where did all of these Reaganites come from? I thought this post was about how much of an opportunistic dick Kojima is for using the Nobel Peace Prize as an platform for shameless the self promotion of a videogame that encourages violence.
And mouth breathers? Listen to STG7 or at least click a damn link. The NPP is awarded almost exclusively in a political fashion, and is not based on merit but potential. Do some research before you start flapping your gums, people. Not coming off like a jackass is usually just a mouse click away... it's called Google. Use it.
10/10/09
So, why didn't he get a Nobel Peace Prize?
Reagan actually accomplished some things.
Obama has yet to accomplish anything.
10/10/09
10/10/09
Ronald Reagan was a terrorist, a murderer and if there was really any justice in this world, he would have been cut down by his attempted assasins bullet.
Ronald Reagan accomplished nothing but putting people in the crosshairs of lasers and nuclear weapons. He terrorised millions of people, watched them die from a horiffic disease, and destabilised all of Asia and Europe to progress his campaign of imperialism.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
However, I do think that Obama should not have received that Nobel prize.
Personally I categorize both Presidents as overrated, although one still has a chance to turn things around.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
I'm not saying Obama necessarily deserved the prize (it was a confusing and insulting shock to myself) but I certainly feel he was more deserving than Reagan, a man who by many definitions was a war criminal. Yes, he "Dreamed of a world without nuclear weapons" But when Obama says it he doesn't announce a deadly space laser program the next month. You need to read into you politicians deeper than their speeches. If every politician was who he said he was, we would be covered in gold and unemployment would be 0 and the schools would have money and the world would be pleasant ville.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
10/11/09
Reagan had Iran-Contra, which to me was so utterly despicable for someone to oversee that it tars my entire perception of the guy.
10/12/09
//ORIGINALIKNOWOMGZ!!!!
10/10/09
Why has this turned into an inquiry of Obama's worth instead of (what it should be) an inquiry into the rationality of the Nobel Peace Prize committee?
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
If you mean, peace as in no wars, then I'd say you'd have to get rid of religion and government all over the world, and kings and queens and lazy asses. Because until those things are gone, there will always be wars.
(You ask, how could a lazy ass possible cause any problems. There too lazy to do anything productive for themselves so they take from others, through force or threat of force)
Of course with those entity's gone, then there would be just smaller skirmishes that happened every now and then, but they would not be a world scale, they would all be local and for the most part probably die out pretty quickly.
Yeah I am just rambling...And honestly just my opinion. (stuffing all the stuff together I have read this is the conclusion I came up with)
P.s. This is a very simplified explanation...
Anyways interesting plug by Mr. Kojima.
10/10/09
10/10/09
10/11/09
10/10/09
10/10/09
It looks more or less like a popularity contest now. Years from now, it would not surprise me if this move tarnishes the reputation of the Nobel Prize.
10/10/09
10/10/09
Oh wait...I don't get a prize for that.
10/10/09
As the saying goes "Actions speak louder than words."
All Ive seen so far is someone blowing smoke up everyone's asses.
Then again to be fair that's what all politicians do so cant really blame the guy... He just was better at it than most others.
!
10/10/09
From what I have seen, it's already starting.
Which, I to am a skeptic.
So maybe we will get some type of explanation down the road.
10/10/09
To be fair, the 2 other presidents that have also received the Peace Prize while in office faced a similar level of skepticism when they revived their awards.
Then again awards have been handed out for worse reasons other than "bringing hope". Hell one guy revived a Nobel award in the late 50's after he claimed he found a cure for a deadly disease only to be proven false a year later. He still got to keep his award. And money.
A few others winners have been jailed for less than noble intentions.
10/11/09
How much work could he have done in less than a year in these matters?
How much has he accomplished? In, you know, concrete results?
The Nobel Peace Prize is a really prestigious award that awards people who have (in some cases) suffered so much for their goal that it would sadden me to see it reduce to a popularity contest.
10/11/09
The motives behind it were very similar to Obama's winning the prize: Arafat had taken some steps towards an unthinkable peace process at the time, and the Nobel people wanted to encourage him to see it through. Of course, he ceased to keep cooperating soon after, but that's besides the point.
10/12/09
There is the difference between Arafat and B-HO. At least Arafat got it done with Prime Minister Sharon and Pres. Clinton. B-HO just read what were off the teleprompters.
10/10/09
10/10/09
It is one thing if he accomplished something, let alone accomplish peace, while running two wars at the same time (regardless of who started it.) Putting 40k more troops into a war zone does not constitute peace.
10/10/09
10/10/09
Hence why I avoided the comments section like the Plague. That and its the weekend. :D
10/10/09
@Michael Dukakis: No its Internet + Politics = lulz
10/11/09
10/12/09
In a "politically correct" environment in real-time America, this is one of the fewer remaining actual 1st Amendment mediums that one can fully participate in with the least amount of stifling.
10/10/09
10/10/09
republican or not, its ridiculous that he gets a nobel PEACE prize when he refuses to investigate the crimes of the previous administration, close guantanamo, or stop the war in iraq
10/10/09
You're a fucking tool.
10/10/09
This... That's why American Politics are so funny
10/10/09
10/10/09
Sometimes, I wonder what good it does someone to be apologetic for EITHER side.
10/10/09
10/10/09
Thats why people pick a side.
10/10/09
What he did except that stupid health care plan.
10/10/09
10/10/09
Still incomplete. Granted, it's as it should be. Good healthy debate should occur instead of the hastilly passed stimulus package, which did all but nothing effective.
Still, I hope that "Healthcare reform" takes the shape of something from "The Great Contribution", and not "The Great Society".
Also: Don't put healthcare on B-HO's belt notches just yet. Like most everything else, it is not accomplished.
10/10/09
You've been doing so well in this thread until you said this, because as this stimulus goes (with most of the money yet to be allocated) it's next to impossible to determine whether it has had an effect or not. Especially when it's so soon.
Also, I'd love to point out the hypocrisy of how when he gets something done fast it's "rushed" and when he takes his time he "gets nothing done".
Make up your fucking mind, and don't just spew the same rhetoric for which you're skewering others.
10/11/09
The stimulus, to be frank, were unnecessary, since the darwin effect would've strengthened the remaining groups and remind everyone that the weaker companies fell because of bad practice/policy.
An effective leader in his position would be gaged by small chops at the tree and not overreaching swings that miss the arboretum all together.
I have made up my mind, and my position still stands.
OBAMA HAS ACCOMPLISHED LITTLE TO NOTHING WORTHY OF PRAISE IN HIS FIRST YEAR (THUS FAR). IN FACT, HE IS A DISAPPOINTMENT, MUCH LIKE THE OTHER PRESIDENT BUT IN THE OTHER DIRECTION.
Neither corporate nor social welfare will progress this nation.
10/11/09
I'm glad that you think so highly of yourself. However, I will continue to trust the experts of this field, and not just people who invest (of which I am also a part of) to truly gage the effect of the package. Many, if not most experts (not politicians), will agree on that such a large plan is hard and next to impossible to assess on its impact, especially within one year. You may like to believe that you know how to effect the entire country's economy, but I choose to be much more humble in my assessment. I'm sorry if you find that naive.
"The stimulus, to be frank, were unnecessary, since the darwin effect would've strengthened the remaining groups and remind everyone that the weaker companies fell because of bad practice/policy."
It'd be nice, if I could believe in such simple minded ideals, but the truth of the matter is that such companies were allowed to grow too large (capitalism in its ideal state) and thus would have brought down more than just itself. At least, that is my opinion, which I do not dare try and state as fact or predict, as I am not omniscient.
"An effective leader in his position would be gaged by small chops at the tree and not overreaching swings that miss the arboretum all together."
What you may gage large, I would gage too small. See, such terms are relative, and I believe that we may have not spent enough in trying to help our economy. Truly, the countries seeing the most stable, and fastest recoveries are the ones who invested in a large, focused stimulus. One needs only look at China and many European countries to see this. Although, I'm sure I'll be scoffed at for even mentioning such countries, due to their obvious political standing. However, as I stated before, we can never be too sure if this is a result of its stimulus or something else entirely. Perhaps we should reflect on why such socialist/communist countries recover faster than our obviously superior capitalist one?
Naaaaaaaaaaah.
"OBAMA HAS ACCOMPLISHED LITTLE TO NOTHING WORTHY OF PRAISE IN HIS FIRST YEAR (THUS FAR). IN FACT, HE IS A DISAPPOINTMENT, MUCH LIKE THE OTHER PRESIDENT BUT IN THE OTHER DIRECTION."
I'm sorry that you feel that way and it's quite obvious that I can not dissuade of this opinion as you appear quite zealous in your conviction. However, please do no try and hide under the guise of pure intentions as it is quite obvious that your opinions are a manufacturing of the beliefs of the right and the holiness of capitalism. Be up front with your beliefs! At least then we could have a frank discussion that can later be dismissed as we futilely push further in trying to convince each other and the world of our ideals.
10/11/09
1a. Yes, I do think highly of myself. I'd rather think highly of myself than with disdain. Your "appeal to flattery" will get you nowhere with me on here.
1b. Those "experts" seem to be siding with me on the analyses, part of why I am delaying any investing in this month, as well as doing so conservatively on 1st QTR '10. The "experts" also proponderently agree that while there is some signs of potential growth, that the economy is still in dire straits, noting the unemployment percentages, and the lack of effective turnaround.
2. Your "appeal to ridicule" will also get you nowhere with me either, since you see my assessment as "simple minded", yet failed to reasonably approach what the end result entailed (Marketalism), which also failed prior to our capitalist society. From your apparent ridicule of capitalism ("the truth of the matter is that such companies were allowed to grow too large (capitalism in its ideal state) and thus would have brought down more than just itself") tells me that you would not want those markets (and other weaker ones ancillary to them) to eliminate themselves. However, the other side to Capitalism is to let the weak fade away, rather than have them funded in futility (as the markets have shown.)
3. The measure that I am looking at are within the progression of success within the promises made by the politician-turned-official, and the failure to (thus far) deliver. Now, do I hope he succeeds on at least some of the items? YES. DO I want him to succeed in all of it? NO, but like others, I have my reasons. The grade card for the presidency is clear and concise when it comes to watching a person and the agenda to progress the United States forward, regardless of their party.
4. I AM UPFRONT WITH MY BELIEFS! I were a couple of years back when I called Bush a failure on here, as I am calling B-HO's first year (thus far) a failure, as well.
As a Moderate Independent, I am confortable saying what I like and dislike about a President.
This one is no different.
But since you want a concrete belief past what I've said, I'll give it: The last good President were Clinton, and I'd wish that Obama were more like him.
10/11/09
10/11/09
That said, I also believe that much more discussion and planning should occur before implementing the changes.
The adage "measure twice, cut once" could never be more correct in this instance.