Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (74820)	10/9/2009 2:01:17 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Respond to of 90947

Maybe If We Changed the Name . . . [Andy McCarthy] On this Nobel business, I'm gonna part company with my pal K-Lo Tevi. I'm not all for Americans winning international prizes, especially the Nobel Peace Prize. In fact, I'm vigorously against it. The transnational progressives who pass out these accolades believe America is the problem in the world, the main threat to peace, the impediment to "progress," etc. The award is a symbolic statement of opposition to American exceptionalism, American might, American capitalism, American self-determinism, and American pursuit of America's interests in the world. That is why Obama could win it based on only ten days in office — merely by capturing the White House and the levers of power, he stands to do more for the Left's "knock America off its pedestal" program than any figure in history. After a number of years, the NFL renamed its Super Bowl trophy after its most fitting recipient — it's now called the Vince Lombardi Trophy. I'd like to see the Nobel Foundation follow suit. If today's headlines said, "Barack Obama Wins Yasser Arafat Prize," that would be perfect. corner.nationalreview.com

To: TimF who wrote (74820)	10/10/2009 4:15:24 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

Axelrod cannot explain Obama's Nobel Prize By: David Freddoso Commentary Staff Writer beltway-confidential 10/09/09 8:37 AM EDT In 2007, a 97-year-old Polish woman named Irena Sendler was nominated to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. During World War II, she saved 2500 Jewish children from the Nazis through a network that hid them from the Nazis with Polish families and in Catholic churches and convents. For her activities, Sendler was arrested and tortured, her arms and legs broken. She would have been executed but for a well-placed bribe that won her release. After the war, she was also persecuted by the Polish Communists. That year's Nobel Peace prize went not to Sendler but to Al Gore, a serial self-promoter who personally contributes as much to global warming as many small American cities. This is why the award of this year's peace prize to President Obama -- who has accomplished even less than Gore -- is not as surprising as it might seem. Even if Obama turns out to be the greatest president since George Washington, he has so far done nothing in office worthy of such an honor. With 205 nominees this year, worthier candidates must have abounded. This award should come as an embarrassment to the White House -- you might even hear Republicans use the phrase "Nobel-prize-winner" when describing Obama's failures during next year's election campaign. If he's wise, President Obama will turn it down. This morning on MSNBC, presidential adviser David Axelrod was at pains to explain how his boss could possibly deserve this prize. "I think it's an affirmation by the Nobel committee that the things he's been working on and talking about around the world are important for humanity." Incredibly, "just words" appear to have been good enough to win the Nobel Peace Prize. washingtonexaminer.com