Give Obama His Due
As all who read this blog know full well, I loath and despise President Obama and consider him and his followers to be the greatest threat to America that we as a nation have faced since our inception. That being said, it is still correct to give even your enemy his just due when he behaves with a certain modicum of honor.
President Obama’s Nobel Acceptance Speech
I would have preferred it if President Obama had declined the Nobel Committee’s fatuous and ill-conceived awarding to him of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, but that would not have been a reasonable expectation. Political concerns, both foreign and domestic, would have made refusing the Peace Prize a dangerous and reckless gamble. I am, for the most part, well satisfied by tenor – and tacit reproval of the Nobel Committee – of President Obama’s acceptance speech.
I also think it’s surprisingly gutsy to inform the world and the Nobel Committee that you’re pushing ahead with a drawn-out war – Afghanistan in this case – during your Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech.
Tags: Nobel Prize | Obama | Peace | Politics | Society | War
October 10th, 2009 at 6:52 am
To be honest Jonolan, even though it is an honor for our country, I also think that Obama winning this award is a bit weird. Had this award been given at least 2 or 3 years from now, that might have been more appropriate. At least by then he would have either proved or disproved that he deserved it.
October 10th, 2009 at 7:05 am
Could you tell me what your basis is for believing this to be “an honor for our country?” Even if it had been a deserved reward, how would be an honor for the country as opposed to merely an honor for President Obama?
All, or most, of the recent talk by Obama’s followers has seemed to be centered around seeing him as the focus for the nation and I find that disturbing coming out of the mouths of people of purport to be Americans. It’s sounds too much like modern variations of the very old monarchistic view of, “The King is the Land.”
October 10th, 2009 at 9:00 am
All I meant that since he is the current President, and he was given a Nobel Peace Prize, that is not the worst thing that could happen to our country. I like Obama, but certainly think he has not lived up to the promises he made as of yet. Many of his actions I completely disagree with, but on the plus side, we don’t have a bunch of nutty Christians saying that whatever he is doing is the right thing. You know, like from the years 2000 to 2006.
And that President even espoused the view of “the imperial presidency.”
October 10th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Even were it deserved, it would be far from the best thing to happen to America as well, since it would – and likely will – goad President Obama into an even more conciliatory position in foreign matters.
Frankly, I’d prefer Bush’s “imperial presidency” over a sovereign nation than the growing possibility of Obama’s “UN regency” over a no-longer-sovereign pseudo-nation. Of course that’s not to say that I liked Bush’s executive power grab or the manner in which he chose to project American power.
October 12th, 2009 at 11:46 am
“… I loath and despise President Obama and consider him and his followers to be the greatest threat to America that we as a nation have faced since our inception…”
Wow Jonolan, I have never been considered a threat before. I guess likewise I could say the same for all of the right wingers, crazy GOPers, who throw fear-mongering propaganda about like beads from a mardi gras parade as well as all of their and limbaugh-beck extremists, I mean followers. But hey, what is life without a little motivation.
As for not living up to his promises, um… it’s been 9 months and he has inherited two foolish wars started by an even more foolish president, and a failing economy, again sent spiraling because of the guy before him, and yet he has managed to remain composed AND taken admirable and cautious steps in both areas.
to the comment of imperialism: I disagree with the imperialism of Bush and much prefer the Dialogue of Obama. Dialogue is not necessarily conciliatory, but it does open up the possibility of working together – where as the other is pompous, presumptuous and rude. The world is changing, imperialism didn’t work hundreds of years ok, it doesn’t work now.
Side note: ::hope you are having a good day Jonolan 🙂 ::
October 12th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Firstly, are you a believer in Obama? With his specific failure to help your special interests, I would find that disturbing in the extreme.
As to the “imperial presidency” – that had two meanings in recent history. The enacting of unilateral American actions and the consolidation of domestic power within the executive.
The first definition is patently absurd because not bow to the will of foreign governments does not equate to building an empire, and the US has not taken foreign territory as its own in over a century – except as needed to bury our dead.
The second definition is truer and more accurate; Bush did increase the powers of the Executive. Followers of Obama has no right to complain about that though, since Obama has continued, accelerated, and expanded that activity.
You say, “Dialogue is not necessarily conciliatory” and I agree with you. Sadly though, most of Obama’s dialogue to-date with foreign nations has<.em> been conciliatory – especially with our enemies.
October 14th, 2009 at 3:55 pm
I still believe in Obama, and more importantly I believe in the possiblity of change which he inspired. Numerous people have gotten in on the diaolgue, the more we talk, the more I think problems will get solved well.
But I know there is more to this picture than what can be seen in 9 months of a presidency… Obama is not alone in making these decisions. There are a slew of people who oppose him, some legitimately, some just out of spite or insanity. I did not fool myself to believe a miricle was going to happen the day after he went to the White House. What I did feel and I still feel, is the political landscape changing. And I would like to think for the better. But we shall see. There will come a time for me, when I move forward or change direction. 9 months is too short of a time with all that has gone on.
As far as my special interest. Gay Marriage is a touchy subject. It is probably, in all fairness, going as fast as its going to go. Though I wish dearly equal rights would come sooner, and I will definitely blog about it until my fingers bleed… I am also concerned with the economy and health care.
No one is super human. There are more factors at play than just one man. So while I am not happy with some of the timing, I have not lost hope in the change we all want to happen nor in the dialogue I see growing.
:: 🙂 ::
October 15th, 2009 at 11:22 am
J.D.F., you say,
Oh? what dialogue? Few people seem to be engaging in dialogue; most – on both sides – seem to be instead engaged at competing monologues, though I do not know who they’re speaking to / at or trying to convince.
And…
Again, oh? We must have different definitions of “political landscape.” I’ve seen little enough change in what I would describe as the “political landscape”, and what I have seen has all been an increase in polarization and a loss of looking at issues on a one-by-one basis as opposed to component parts of larger, adversarial ideologies.