Never before have we seen a Nobel prize given out for "potential". This was the million-dollar equivalent of participation award. They negated the historical relevance of this heretofore prestigious award with a single poor choice.
-
-
-
Let's not forget they already made it a joke much earlier. Yasser Arafat 1994 !
-
I'll never forget it. The biggest terrorist of the '80's got a Nobel after the first Gulf War.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Nobel Participation Trophy lost all its prestige that year.
-
I agree 100%!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I didnt know the prize was meant to "achieve" anything. I thought it was meant to award achievement. Cart. Horse. Can i hv a Grammy in the hopes that I may write a song??
-
The exact thing I just said to my son
-
Yeah, many of us in Norway was embarrassed about this at the time and still is when reminded. And it's awful to read that the prize in such a degree was meant to be a catalyst. It's not unusual to give prizes on the final leg of a process, but unheard to give for some speaches
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
that is what happens when you give everyone a trophy for showing up
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Why was the committees intent to make Barry stronger? What did they hope to achieve? Socialism? Globalism?
-
It was that whole
#fundamental_transformation to a banana republic thing.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Arizona State University refused Mr Obama an honorary Doctorate. Maybe the Sun Devils knew something others are just figuring out?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Very enlightening. He admitted the award was not given to Obama for any achievement but because the committee was trying to manipulate the American population. This makes the Nobel prize even more tarnished. Who knew their job was social engineering?
-
Where is the investigation for this
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
They gave him the Nobel Peace prize before he had the chance to do anything. Almost a foreshadowing of Obamacare which they passed based on the notion that it too like its namesake, would do wonderful things. Whoever bet on Obama lost, bigly.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Saddest part about this is knowing there were others that dedicated decades of their lives to their work that were so much more deserving. They got slapped in the face.
-
And that’s the fault of the committee.
-
And then BHO accepted the prize knowing full well he’d done nothing to deserve it. Such integrity.
-
I did not trust him after that. The Nobel Prize award for doing nothing did not serve him well. It made him appear to be a Manchurian Candidate and he lost credibility with some, like myself.
-
The fact that he had so little legislative history as a Senator and was specifically chosen so he had few political negatives was a warning signal. Unproven as a Senator, undeserving Nobel Laureate. Nothing added up.
-
Connecting dots, I think he WAS a Manchurian Candidate, via his mother’s connections. There was a CIA history there. Shady. He was installed.
-
Really? A little extreme doncha think? Can you please explain? What CIA history? I take a broader view, I supported Obama on a number of issues but I did not understand why the committee gave him a Nobel.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.