Streams

Nobel Peace Prize

Friday, October 09, 2009

Michael Shear, White House correspondent for The Washington Post and Alex Counts president and CEO of the Grameen Foundation, partner to the Grameen Bank, winner of the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize, talks about President Obama being awarded the international honor nine months into his presidency. Plus, George Packer of the New Yorker explains why he think the prize is premature, and the President may want to turn it down.

Guests:

Alex Counts, George Packer and Michael Shear

Comments [171]

Ivy Ng from South Harlem

There are many challenges facing our world today and many of these need gobal efforts and true co-operation among countries to overcome. Obama with his speech making talent, personal charms and intellect, can be the leader in such efforts. With such big jobs ahead of him, the world should give him support and encouragement if we want him to succeed.

Winning the prize is a sign that the world's citizens show of support.

One major problem we face is global warming. Obama is in the position to call upon the global community to make changes that are necessary for the planet's survival.

Oct. 13 2009 11:43 AM
anna from new york

Obama smiles a lot and I think he deserves all awards in the world. I am grateful to these four Norwegian ladies who made such a wise decision. I also think that past mistakes should be corrected and awards given to Martin Luther King, Andrei Sakharov and Nelson Mandela, for example, should be revoked and given to those who really deserve them, e.g. Oprah and other "inspirational" celebrities.

Oct. 12 2009 10:53 AM
Ron Raphaelc from 16th Street-NYC

Obama should have been given a "conditional"Noebel Peace prize. This encompasses the big word IF. If he had taken the troops out of Afghanistan; if he had taken the
troops, all of them, out of Iraq; if he gets Iran to stop producing nuclear weapons; if he gets North Korea to stop making nuclear weapons;if he makes a headway towards peace in the Israeli-Palestine feud. if he gets a meaningful bill banning global warming passed, if he puts forth a meaningful bill that sees to the rites of gay people in this country. When he sees to these thing (or most of them), then I can support Obama's Noebel prize.

Oct. 09 2009 11:11 PM
Rebecca Zilenziger from Old San Juan, PR


Endowing the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama is much like crowning the head of a child. I see it as global, parental expectation and warning laced with speculation, wrapped beautifully within the disguise of an honor and title.

Let's not sit back and passively observe what theP does with it but actively watch and support the commendable, berate the unforgivable.

Oct. 09 2009 08:22 PM
Judy from Centerport, NY

I am a big Obama supporter and think he is visionary, however I was as supprised as anyone to hear that he won the Nobel Peace Prize. I think it is too early to assess his success and too early to know whether the awarding of the Peace Prize will enhance or hinder his efforts to move toward a peaceful resolution of some of the world's most perplexing conflicts.

Oct. 09 2009 07:15 PM
el from new york, ny

I initially thought this must be some sort of spoof. Then I thought....it's rigged..it must be....and I am basically a supporter of Obama. It just seems so absurd and unwarranted.

My brother pointed out, though, that in the U.S., we perhaps do not realize the full extent of Obama's impact on the rest of the world. Not just what he has done (or failed to do, or not yet had the chance to do) in office, but in having run the campaign he did and for being elected to office at all. Do I think the Nobel Peace Prize should be awarded as a sort of symbol, or to give more credibility to someone the world Hopes might take the U.S. in a direction that will be more positive for the int'l community? Not really, no...but I was never much for prizes, either.

It is perhaps worth giving more thought to the reasons for Obama's selection (did they run out of candidates? Do they see something we don't see?) rather than criticizing what seems a rather off choice to much of the American public.

As for the implications for Obama...maybe this will help him...but I can see it hurting him..perhaps it would make sense for him to reject the prize. I'm not sure. Back in July, John Tantillo, a marketing guy who is an occasional guest on Fox News (I know, I know) had a piece on his blog about how Obama was at risk for overexposure. http://blog.marketingdoctor.tv/2009/07/27/john-tantillos-brand-winner-and-loser-hillary-clinton-and-barack-obama.aspx

"My concern is that the image might be that of an idealistic, professorial type who talks about leading rather than actually leading. Woodrow Wilson, not Roosevelt. . . . Instead of being impressed by Obama’s eloquence at the podium, people will connect it to inaction and lack of results. They will call him the professor and be unable to get the connection out of their minds."

Being awarded the Nobel Prize has definitely just made it Harder for Obama to avoid being categorized in this way.

Oct. 09 2009 03:40 PM
Lois Waldron from Phoenix, AZ

Only in America can an award for peace be ridiculed. I believe it was a good award, his speech humble and warm. He has brought the temperature of animosity down in the world, it's not his fault there are so many lunatics on the right.

The right will never be happy for him, yet claim to be christian. The only thing they know is hate. Loving your enemy is in their bible, but I bet they can't find it.

This award represents peace and love.

People that say he doesn't deserve it, well; too bad, you are not on the committee and it isn't your money.

The suggestion he turn it down would be a wonderful slap in the face to the Nobel committee. Totally absurd.

Oct. 09 2009 03:00 PM
kerry from new york city

Yes!
A call to Americans to join the world and the 21st century!

Oct. 09 2009 02:50 PM
Maya Toitova from New York City

I see the Red Cross won the prize (the Peace Prize) at least twice... Everyone runs around in circles about this thing -- every year! -- but aside from the amount of the prize, it's no more relevant than an honorary degree from U. Montana... It's a bunch of people who give themselves very nice dinners and take themselves very seriously, but so what? Some people say, does he DESERVE this? When it comes to having 1.4 million dollars plunked onto your plate: does ANYONE deserve that? Isn't that why we are so disgusted by the Wall Street bonus system? I guess the Red Cross might deserve it (although I remember a lot of WWII veterans who told me they HATED the Red Cross...)

Oct. 09 2009 02:43 PM
eva

I don't think he's yet earned it, but I think he might live up to it.
We can't just sit back and expect him to do it all - we also have to be involved.
I'm kind of stunned that the GOP is so freaked out over this.
Maggie Mahar just spoke with our group on Wednesday, and she said that the GOP can read the writing on the wall in the demographic shift seen in the last election. So do the lobbyists. So they are fighting tooth and nail.
I threw my lot in with Obama, and so I'm happy that he gets a little more leverage with which to work. OTOH, no matter how great a man is, it can be a terrible burden to be given so much so quickly. So... here's wishing him strength.

Oct. 09 2009 02:16 PM
Jose Claudio Santiago from Brazil

I am a Physics Teacher from Brazil.
U.S president Barack Obama has been a great teacher who has been inspiring peoples. Maybe some Americans should review this notion of 'action'.
The president´s history have waked lots of poor black youths especialy in the third world countries. Thanks US president for a lot of teachable moments".

Oct. 09 2009 02:12 PM
Lucille Gordon from Manhattan

"a prophet in his own country..."

I am so proud as an American to think that the highly respected Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to our democratically elected President.

And President Obama has achieved something remarkable -- he has opened the door wide to US policy changes that may may just eventually lead to a safe, peaceful, healthy future for the world.

Now, let's stop parsing and help him achieve those goals we all had in mind when we elected him.

Oct. 09 2009 02:11 PM
Maria Archimandritou from now: Thessaloniki, Greece


Obama represents what is best in America in a pure, simple yet determined way. He made the American Dream a dream even of the powerless all over the world. He gave back hope and its tremendous power to those who could not aspire to see a better world. If each one of all these people gains the strengh to make just one step further, a positive step, the whole world will be a better place to live.
Big congratulations for this prize which represents also a huge challenge! What next?

Oct. 09 2009 02:05 PM
uos from queens

FU Arizona State!

Oct. 09 2009 01:44 PM
Chuck Renaud from Brooklyn

What is wrong with the spiteful, ignorant and arrogant Americans on this board?

Your President just won an amazing award and you are blaming him?

You people are beyond belief. You would cut off your nose to spite your own face.

It's as if you want your own country to fail.

Oct. 09 2009 01:19 PM
Bill from South Plainfield from 117 East Nassau Ave South Plainfield, NJ 07080

Since the President has chosen to accept this honor here is what he should do next. His left flank is covered. Now is the time to fight the wars with the only template that lead to victory in the 20th century that is of WWII. Forget 40,000 more troops 100,000 to 200,000 more are needed not only to secure Afghanistan but to put in place a worldwide effort of reconstruction of that battered land with the addition of hundreds of thousands more workers rebuilding and building for the first time the necessary infrastructure that is decades overdue. The reconstruction of Afghanistan and the neceswsary development aid to both Afghanistan alnd Pakistan. Making children studying a secular curriculum and not terrorism. Will there be casualties? Of course. This is a war there will be losses. Pakistan will also have to be more engaged. If Pakistan attacks the safe havens in the mountains of the north along the Afghan border and the NATO forces seal the Afghan border where are the Taliban and Al Quada forces going to go. If this effort takes two or three years but has the effect of destroying the Islamic extremists in a large area of South Asia and maybe the death and/or capture of Osama bin Laden and his cohorts. I submit that President Obama will in the end be seen as no less a man of peace than FDR if he followed such a plan. After all Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and FDR are his templates for success not Mahatma Gandhi or Martin Luther King.

Oct. 09 2009 01:14 PM
Robert Sanborn from Hastings-on-Huson, NY

My initial thought the award was premature, but as I reflected upon the honor bestowed to President Obama, I realized the aspirations of the global community is what this award is about. Not only has President Obama challenged our the nations of world to rid the itself of poverty, war, nuclear weapons and many other intractable problems but also we must create opportunies that give people hope. While some say the President should gracefully turn down the award, I say he should embrace the honor as a statement that the world community expects more from our leaders.

Oct. 09 2009 12:53 PM
Doug from NYC

Mr. Obama needs to think long and hard about accepting this award. The vapidity of the criteria used for his selection could ratify in the public mind the vapidity of his prior and current achievements

Oct. 09 2009 12:37 PM
Ian Webster from Manhattan

This is a wartime president that has inherited two wars and is currently trying to figure out how to stop the runaway train he took control of from going off a cliff. I see this prize as encouraging him in his attempts, letting him know that the world community supports him, as opposed to those in this country that would see him fail. And would see us all go over the edge.

Oct. 09 2009 12:17 PM
Michael

I agree with Frank in Morristown; he has nothing to have this honor awarded and with two simultaneous wars, it is a bit premature.

Oct. 09 2009 12:16 PM
Patty Pignatello from Wayne, New Jersey

I think it is a very dangerous precedent to give the Nobel Peace Prize to a standing U.S. President for actions yet to be carried out. It smells of trying to pigeon hole President Obama in order to sway his decision making ability regarding future world events. The President should have turned down this award and remain beholden to none.

Oct. 09 2009 11:42 AM
John Powers from Brooklyn

I think when the RNC complains about the President’s “star power” it’s a coded expression of resentment that Obama’s success is a matter of identity politics.

For centuries the identity politics of this country favored old white men at the expense of all others. I for one am not concerned with the broadening scope of American identity politics, and am a tired with rightwing whining.

The Right’s outrage reeks of stymied entitlement. Bolton, Beck, and (add fat pink face here) sound like a spoiled little boys griping because they can’t have their way.

Oct. 09 2009 11:37 AM
Carey from New Jersey

We should all be proud of our president. This is a proud day for America, and could the critics just take a brake for just a second and be proud.
After all, it's just a prize, it doesn't mean anything, but hopefully it will be just the right instrument to kick Obama into high gear and give him the courage to do as he has promised to the American people and to the world.

Oct. 09 2009 11:36 AM
hjs from 11211

look at that calls'em said something kind about BHO. i guess peace does have a chance!

Oct. 09 2009 11:34 AM
Anne Ricci

In terms of concrete action he's taken, aside from international efforts, I think it's important to note his and his campaign's incredible efforts during the campaign to open up the dialogue about race in this country among different generations and across the country, especially in places where race is still a very volatile issue. That success marks an incredible shift in our psychology as a nation.

Oct. 09 2009 11:34 AM
Calls'em As I Sees'em from "McLean, VA"

The President made a good speech. He appeared to be truly humbled as opposed to his usually insecure braggadocio posturing. I truly hope that this honor wakes him up to his real responsibilities and helps him separate himself from naive class room radical policies and politics.

Oct. 09 2009 11:29 AM
LadyPolitik from Bay Ridge

I am surprised most not by the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to President Obama, but the vitriol and ignorance being displayed in reaction to an event that we should be celebrating.

To all those thinking he hasn't done anything or enough, you are not paying attention. Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the Presidential Directive to close Guantanamo Bay, cutting back our Defense Spending are just a few accomplishments. Further, success is not a requirement for being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Arguably, many of the environmentalists (of which there have been many) who have won Noble Peace Prizes have not been successful because we (as a planet) have not made significant changes in our environmental policy.

As to the reasons the Nobel Peace Prize Committee listed, has he not repaired America's image abroad? Has he not set a completely different tone for conducting foreign policy? He is participating in international institutions (all over the world in every continent - Asia this November) in a mutually respectful way honoring their importance and their function; but also taking a moral lead to inspire action abroad. And that is an extraordinary accomplishment indeed.

Oct. 09 2009 11:21 AM
a moinsen from East Harlem

One may recommend Silvio Berlusconi for economics now.

Oct. 09 2009 11:21 AM
Mike from Aberdeen, New Jersey

The Nobel commitee is trying to promote world peace by influencing Obama regarding American policy with Iran.

"How could the winner of the Nobel peace prize unilaterally attack another nation?"

Oct. 09 2009 11:18 AM
Nick Lento from NJ

Obama should turn it down.

This is simply a way for the Nobel committee to push him....and, on one level, I WANT to see him pushed to be more active....but this has the potential to give the right all manner of cynical "ammunition" to fire away at Obama.

The INTENTIONS of this ploy are wonderful....but the results may be catostrophic.

One of your guestd used the term, "poisoned chalice" and that's what this amounts to.

Sadly, I doubt that Obama will refuse the prize outright........but let's hope he's at least extremely wary and extremely humble and extremely lowers expectations in his remarks in the next hour.

And I say all this as someone who believes we should be reducing our military occupation operation in Afghanistan......this "prize" is way premature......and little more than a well meaning (but ill conceived) ploy on the part of the Nobel committee to influence Obama.

Oct. 09 2009 11:17 AM
Nick Lento from NJ

Obama should turn it down.

This is simply a way for the Nobel committee to push him....and, on one level, I WANT to see him pushed to be more active....but this has the potential to give the right all manner of cynical "ammunition" to fire away at Obama.

The INTENTIONS of this ploy are wonderful....but the results may be catastrophic.

One of your guests used the term, "poisoned chalice" and that's what this amounts to.

Sadly, I doubt that Obama will refuse the prize outright........but let's hope he's at least extremely wary and extremely humble and extremely lowers expectations in his remarks in the next hour.

And I say all this as someone who believes we should be reducing our military occupation operation in Afghanistan......this "prize" is way premature......and little more than a well meaning (but ill conceived) ploy on the part of the Nobel committee to influence Obama.

Oct. 09 2009 11:16 AM
Sam from New York

He has decided to meet The Dalai Lama only after his visit to China in November of this year and I hope I can count on his strategy. The Dalai Lama was the recepient of the Nobel peace prize in 1989 and I hope the President can bring together Mr. Hu Jintao, prime minister wen jiabao and The Dalai Lama for a dialogue and a lasting peace in Tibet. It will be a message from one Nobel laureate carried by another nobel peace prize winner.

Oct. 09 2009 11:16 AM
Liz Calvin from Brooklyn, NY

THe question itself presupposes our President hasn't done anything to deserve this Peace award. Why can't we as a nation support someone who is bringing us back into diplomacy with the global community,strengthening cooperation between people,promoting nuclear disarmament and re-engaging with the United Nations. The Nobel Committee should be respected for its decision on the grounds which they have stated. President Obama's unique abilities for these times is recognized by the world at large. Let us not hold him to a higher standard than others have been held who have won in the past.

Oct. 09 2009 11:16 AM
Jim Pharo from NYC

FIrst, I think Obama deserves to win this prize. By capturing first the nomination, then the Presidency, and then turning so quickly to repair the US' reputation, he has lead a country that was headed for disaster back to being a world leader for peace. To me, that's more than adequate grounds.

More importantly, it's adequate for the Nobel committee. It is absolutely beyond me that the decision of this committee has any reflection on what kind of leader Barack Obama is. One can legitimately quarrel with the committee's decision; but it's silly to think that Barack is somehow either responsible for the committee's decision or is somehow tainted by it.

In keeping with Brian's "karma" theory of universal balance, this nicely reconciles the IOC's decision to NOT award Obama the games (which also somehow reflected poorly on Obama). By my karmic count, we're 1-1.

Oct. 09 2009 11:16 AM
Yvonne from Brooklyn, New York

The Nobel Prize Committee was quite clear about why they have given the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama: taking steps towards a nuclear free world, identifying a new and more dominant role for the United Nations, opening up dialogue between nations and, in general, setting a new tone for international relations. Either he did these things or he did not and either they are of significant global importance or they are not. This is independent of Afghanistan, continued unemployment or how long he has been president. The criticisms that I have heard so far do not address the actual basis for the decision but, instead bring in irrelevant side issues.

Oct. 09 2009 11:15 AM
jtt from jackson heights

While everyone's distracted, he should get together with the democratic wing of the Democratic Party and ram through some of that change. When Americans see quality of life here improve, they'll stop listing to the wing nuts.

Congratulations President Obama!

Oct. 09 2009 11:15 AM
Anne Hussey from Norwalk, CT

I am thrilled about Obama's winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Somehow it was profoundly comforting to me.I am a registered Independent voter, was originally for Hillary Clinton but when Obama was made our president was so proud of the United States.

There has been so much negativity about him in the past month that I find it difficult to listen to the radio or watch television anymore. I've had to even turn off WNYC today for the same reason, which makes me sad.

Oct. 09 2009 11:14 AM
Marjorie Pugliese from Staten Island, New York

I an delighted that President Obama has been recognized for reaching out to so many countries promoting unity which effects peace. World peace is a global effort and he has made it collaborative. The Nobel Peace Prize committee explicity states that it gives this award for "efforts made to promote peace". Before President Obama took office, most of the people of the world had turned against the United States. We had allowed a negative approach to unity among nations. Under President Obama, we have completely changed that and now the rest of the world looks to our country with hope and faith. Under the President's leadership, we have shown the world in a very short time that even the most forgotten of nations, Sudan, for example, is worthy of our attention and our action. Finally, our people can travel to Cuba. We listen to Iran; we listen to North Korea. We listen to Palestine. We listen to Guinea. We listen to Russia. These countries seek respect and under President Obama, we seek mutual respect We listen and we expect to be listened to. Together, we are using peaceful means of diplomatic communcation to attain goals worthy of humanity. I am thrilled that we now are actively moving toward unity with all other nations. This is what peace is all about! You are making peace every day, President Obama, in the spirit of Edward Kennedy, speaking for those who have noone to speak for them. Congratulations! Accept the award, President Obama and make your country proud!

Oct. 09 2009 11:12 AM
Marta from Forest Hills, NY

I have no doubt that in time President Obama, like President Carter and Vice-President Gore, would have quelified to win such a prestigious prize. I agree with many, this is premature. That being said, the Nobel Peace Prize has become nothing more than a consolation prize for Chicago not hosting the 2016 Olympics.

Oct. 09 2009 11:10 AM
stefano from 11206

as much it is award to Obama it also seems a rebuke against the years and politics of George Bush.

Obama has been basically awarded for reversing his predecessor policies.

He probably would have not won the Nobel so early if Bush policies would have not been so confrontational to the rest of the world.

Somehow it is not a premature prize because it is for a fast change after 8 long years of military wars, trade wars, policy wars, environment wars carried on by the Bush - Cheney oligarchy.

Oct. 09 2009 11:08 AM
Claudia Fogelin from Manhattan

At first I was shocked and thought the Nobel Committee had really jumped the gun. Then I realized that they were trying to shape the future by recognizing and rewarding the radical change between the Bush and Obama administrations. Obama should accept the award and ask the world to join him in engaging in diplomacy. If anyone wants to complain, which they undoubtedly will, their criticism should be aimed at the Nobel Committee, not Obama.

Oct. 09 2009 11:08 AM
amy from PLG

I think Obama should accept the award on behalf of the American people. I think he should 'share' the award with the rest of the country not only to reflect our democratic principals, but to raise awareness that he alone can not carry through his vision. He needs the American people to rise to their best altruistic selves to fulfill his goals for reducing global warming, closing weapons factories, and to promote peace and understanding around the world. Further, I think it would be a good message to remind Americans of their leadership role in the world and their potential to create a positive change. I think that's the best political move he could make.

Oct. 09 2009 11:06 AM
William from UES

The Nobel committee must lack a basic understanding of United States domestic politics. Awarding the Peace Prize to President Obama may impede his ability to pursue many of the policies that the committee most favors. The President already suffers from a reputation for devoting too much attention to problems abroad and for courting foreign opinion when his attention should be focused on domestic affairs. The spectacle of him being feted by Europeans in evening clothes will only chum the water for the rabid right.

Oct. 09 2009 11:06 AM
dorothy freeman from croton-on-hudson my

This country operates like a sports event: what's the score, did he win or lose, it's not Democrats versus Republicans but shirts against the skins! Why can't someone be recognized for efforts, not just intentions, and everyone should support and work with him!

Oct. 09 2009 11:05 AM
ramatu from Brooklyn

I would love to know what timetable people think change happens on. These comments about well, "Its been 9 months and there's still war.." or "We still don't have jobs" or "We still can't get married...". He has been in office less than the term of a pregnancy and yet all of the ills of the last eight years should have been resolved. Lets forget the world response to his election. I can list the fact that the world is talking to us again-- Russia actually is cooperative on the Iran issue. We have begun to withdraw from Iraq. We may get some sort of health care within the year.

Again, I wonder how often this man is going to have to affirm his legitimacy and in the same breath save us all.

Oct. 09 2009 11:04 AM
Linda Lopez from Upper West Side

What Obama should do to live up to the Nobel Peace Prize he has been awarded is exactly the wrong question to be asking. What we should ask is, Should he give it back? I think he should. Your reporter earlier today was correct -- although far too understated -- in characterizing the award as an "incentive". I see it as steering American foreign policy, and it's chilling to think how ready we are to fall into the trap. Obama should say, Thank you but no thank you for now; get back to me when I'm no longer president.

Oct. 09 2009 11:04 AM
Donna Campbell from Manhattan

In suggesting that President Obama reject the Nobel Peace Prize, your listeners show how parochial, self-centered, and ignornant Americans can be. If President Obama turned down the Peace Prize, he would be insulting the committee as well as the millions of people around the world who are inspired by his integrity and courage. He would not be diplaying humility, but arrogance, in saying, "I know better than the committee who is qualified to receive the Peace Prize."

Oct. 09 2009 11:01 AM
Burton C. Bell from Lewisburg, PA

This is a decision made by the Nobel committee. It is evident that this is a representation on how the civilized world views this man who was elected by a landslide. It is for the hope that he has generated in the American people and other countries. Why should he give it back? No, one thinks Taylor Swift should give her VMA back.
It is largely conservative republicans in an uproar over this, acting like jealous children at a playground.

Oct. 09 2009 11:00 AM
Dr. Jim from Jersey City

It's not about Obama the man, its about the President of the United States. We elected someone who was different and demonstrated to the world that the prior 8 years had convinced us that we needed to change. We the people of the United States changed the entire landscape of the world by electing this particular guy. The award is for us and the President is accepting it on our behalf. The message that the committee is sending is for We the people. The message is, don't get bogged down in the politics as usual, there is still work to do.

Oct. 09 2009 11:00 AM
Ken Levis from Manhattan

I think it's GREAT! Hopefully it will buck him up to really take on the obstructionist morons in the GOP.

Oct. 09 2009 10:59 AM
Ashton from Chelsea, Manhattan

Oh, I forgot. And winning it!!!!!

Oct. 09 2009 10:59 AM
J. Leon from East Village

the President should accept the Peace Prize in the name of all of the U.S. population. He should then use that to encourage us to all do what we can to work towards peace in our communities and to make our efforts as far reaching as possible.

Oct. 09 2009 10:59 AM
Ashton from Chelsea, Manhattan

Pressure? You're talking about the pressure the Prize will put on our glorious president? What sort of pressure do you think he was under as a black man running for the presidency of this United States??!!!

Oct. 09 2009 10:59 AM
jean from new york

Brian's show did not mention 2 very important points.

Obama winning the Nobel peace prize will cause so much debate that the media will be flooded and he won't be able to make change. In his words, it will be a colossal “distraction” from his agenda.

Also, even though world leaders seem to be taking this graciously- I think it will actually work against him with future international negotiations. Who wants to talk to the "spoiled kid” in the room who has gotten "unjustified" accolades? I don't think this is true. I think Obama deserves this award for all of the disarmament work he did before he became president and for all the hope he has instilled in me and in the world. But I doubt that leaders in the Middle East will agree. He is after all a wartime president getting a peace prize. Yes, he inherited these wars- but he did not end them immediately. Oddly, this might be the best thing to do because leaving might cause more war. But all of this is much too complicated and the Nobel Peace Prize needs to be given to a clearly deserving candidate.

I also am annoyed because I think some of this has to do with the fact that he is a black man. Yes, he is amazing. I’m absolutely in love with the man but it’s not fair to him to have superhuman expectations just because he is a black man. And giving him this award pre-maturely is backing him into a corner. Now he has to live-up to it and he is not in control of his own policy. I find the "encouragement" of the Peace Board to be a little manipulative and also I think it could backfire greatly for the above reasons.

Oct. 09 2009 10:57 AM
Mike

This is just fuel for the Republicans to label Obama a Liberal, now endorsed by those socialists Swedes who, as if Republlicans need reminding, also gave this to Gore.

I expect, as is clearly evident on these boards, that the Republicans will use this decision by the Nobel Committee to make Obama look like a socialist.

Oct. 09 2009 10:56 AM
dannyiselin from woodbridge, nj

As much as I support Obama, I think this award is tantamount to giving an undergrad a diploma, even though the course work and achievement has not been completed-- so much for the European mindset and ours here. They are clearly co-opting him.

Oct. 09 2009 10:56 AM
michelle rogers from Rome ,Italy

I think like many people from outside america we are delighted to have a president who represents a new future for all of us and it is such a relief after the disastrous reign of Bush that just brought war and bankruptcy .We wish him the very best ....

Oct. 09 2009 10:55 AM
Timothy Gura from Forest Hills

The Nobel simply reinforces the "West-Wing-ing" of the White House. After all, Jed Bartlett had a Nobel in economics, didn't he? Why shouldn't President Obama be similarly equipped?

Oct. 09 2009 10:55 AM
michelle rogers from Rome ,Italy

I think like many people from outside america we are delighted to have a president who represents a new future for all of us and it is such a relief after the disastrous reign of Bush that just brought war and bankruptcy .We wish him the best ....

Oct. 09 2009 10:54 AM
whoindatgarden from Brooklyn

YES WE CAN, just with speeches and no execution.Dilutes the whole value of what it means to be a Nobel price winner.

Oct. 09 2009 10:54 AM
hjs from 11211

doesn't ending the recession help the cause of peace?

Oct. 09 2009 10:54 AM
David from Great Neck

Yes we can! I told my family Thursday I thought he would win. Of course he deserves it: look how he has changed the tone in the past 9+ months. Relations with everyone are better. We have taken steps to reduce nuclear arms, end the Iraq War, deal with Israel/Palestine, etc.

We should encourage people like President Obama. After 8 years of Bush Jr., all I can say is "Yes we can!"

Oct. 09 2009 10:53 AM
Dale from Brooklyn

Maybe the Nobel committee is just trying to steer Obama into a particular course of action.

Oct. 09 2009 10:53 AM
Diana Morse from Heading East on 287.

I am wondering why anyone is asking the question "what can he do to fulfill " when clearly, according to those responsible for selecting the winner, he already has fulfilled the prize's requirements.

In other countries, I suspect a president would be celebrated for getting the world's attention for such an international honor.

Oct. 09 2009 10:52 AM
Matt from Brooklyn

The Nobel Committee has presented a very solid argument why Mr. Obama should win this year's price: “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” and “We are not awarding the prize for what may happen in the future, but for what he has done in the previous year,” “The question we have to ask is who has done the most in the previous year to enhance peace in the world,” “And who has done more than Barack Obama?” Is diplomacy not a tool for peace? Has Mr. Obama not emphasized diplomacy more than any other world leader in generations? The only appropriate response is: congratulations!

Oct. 09 2009 10:51 AM
Sandra from Astoria, Queens

I have my own conflicted feelings about his win....but I have to doubt the patriotism of the right. Can't they be proud that a sitting American president won such a prestigious honor? Instead, they are playing politics with it, saying "it's a gift to the right."

Oct. 09 2009 10:50 AM
Julia from Harlem

He's already accomplished a lot (of course with the help and votes of others):.to whom he always gives credit. Even with less than a year in office, his current policies are aimed at helping the common man: affordable health care detached from the volatile workplace, economic stimulus focused on jobs and housing, green/sustainable energy initiatives. And that's just here at home! I applaud the judges for recognizing how tirelessly he works on behalf of others, since his early days as a community organizer. Say….come to think of it, he’s been at this a long, long time.

Oct. 09 2009 10:47 AM
hjs from 11211

74] Jay
even if true that," Nominations for the prize had to be postmarked by February 1" that doesnot mean the prize winner was picked on feb 1

89] Jim the real prize is that we pick a great man to lead us.

Oct. 09 2009 10:47 AM
Michael Berk

In order to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, President Obama needs to accomplish as much as Yasser Arafat did in bringing peace to the Middle East.

Oct. 09 2009 10:44 AM
Tyler from Newark, NJ

Whether he deserves it or not; I'm just happy to hear a world wide debate over a United States President receiving a Nobel Peace Prize and not one centered on sending him to a War Crimes Tribunal. That's the kind of "Change" we were all promised...

Tyler

Oct. 09 2009 10:43 AM
O. from Brooklyn

People keep casting him as a war time president. He inherited two wars. He didn't start them.

Oct. 09 2009 10:43 AM
mc from Brooklyn

The Nobel committee seems to have been thinking about Obama putting nuclear disarmament on top of the world agenda as a reason for the prize.

To deserve the prize, I would like to see him show more ability to take real risks than he has so far to really push this agenda--even when it is uncomfortable for him.

Oct. 09 2009 10:42 AM
a woman from inwood

When Obama passed the Lily Ledbetter Equal Pay law, I thought, hey, if he does nothing else, he'll already have done more than most.
What is with you people who think he hasn't done enough? He isn't Santa Claus. He isn't your bad father. He's doing what he can with what he's been handed. You think it's easy to stop a war midway? He didn't start these wars. He didn't sink the economy.
Enough with the mean-spiritedness already. He's already done more than Bush could have done. Meaning Bush would have us up to our necks in debt and blood and hate. We're doing well, considering.

Oct. 09 2009 10:42 AM
joyce munkacsi from Metuchen, new jersey

I am breathless. President Obama inspires by his words, his actions and his life. the whole world recognizes it. to heck with the naysayers.

Oct. 09 2009 10:42 AM
Carolyn from Park Slope

Hearing the news, it hit me that the American work ethic requires us to achieve before we are praised. I understand this prize to be for the "hope" that spread like wildfire across the world with Obama's election to the presidency. I think he should accept the prize as a powerful cry for progress for peace from the world, perhaps also, as a kiss of gratitude for showing that the American melting pot was not completely destroyed by the previous administration.

Oct. 09 2009 10:41 AM
Daniel Fiege from Beacon, NY

If Obama's stimulus package doesn't allow jobs to be created in the near future, doesn't stop the wave of foreclosures upon us, doesn't save the farmland of America... you wouldn't say he was "keeping the peace," now would you.

Oct. 09 2009 10:40 AM
Jennifer Hickey from Bayside, Queens

I am an Obama supporter but have been disappointed by his lack of courage when it comes to pushing for the public option in health care reform. This is an issue that requires courage in politics. Rather than trying to cater to the Republicans (who are determined to oppose any/all administration policies), he should have made health care a human rights issue.If he had done that then maybe he would have been worthy of the Nobel prize.

Oct. 09 2009 10:40 AM
joyce munkacsi from Metuchen, new jersey

I am breathless. What an honor for our country. President Obama inspires by his words, his actions and his life. the whole world recognizes it. to heck with the naysayers.

Oct. 09 2009 10:39 AM
Ashton from Chelsea, Manhattan

I have been a supporter and fan of our glorious president since his Iowa victory and speech. I am a supporter because I think he is a very bright young man with noble goals. I am a fan because, with his eloquence making him one of the most distinguished statesmen in recent memory, he simply makes my heart sing. What will he have to do to gain the respect of his detractors? Walk on water!

Oct. 09 2009 10:39 AM
Calls'em As I Sees'em from "McLean, VA"

The Committee clearly broke their own rules - with nominations being solicited in September and closing only days after his inauguration. There are people in Asia, Africa and South America that have put their lives on the line for years if not decades for peace and justice. Giving Obama this award is condescending at best.

HERE'S WHAT TR DID BY COMPARISON: In 1902 President Roosevelt took the initiative in opening the international Court of Arbitration at The Hague, which, though founded in 1899, had not been called upon by any power in its first three years of existence. The United States and Mexico agreed to lay an old difference of theirs, concerning the Pious Foundations of California, before the Hague Tribunal. When this example was followed by other powers, the arbitration machinery created in 1899 was finally called into operation. Roosevelt also played a prominent part in extending the use of arbitration to international problems in the Western Hemisphere, concluding several arbitration treaties with European powers too, although the Senate refused to ratify them.

In 1904 the Inter-parliamentary Union, meeting in St. Louis, Missouri, requested Roosevelt to call another international conference to continue the work begun at The Hague in 1899. Roosevelt responded immediately, and in the autumn of 1904 Secretary of State John Hay invited the powers to meet at The Hague. Russia, however, refused to participate in a conference while engaged in hostilities with Japan. After the peace of 1905, the matter was placed in the hands of the Russian government, which had taken the initiative in convening the first Hague Conference.

In June, 1905, President Roosevelt offered his good offices as mediator between Russia and Japan, asking the belligerents to nominate plenipotentiaries to negotiate on the conditions of peace. In August they met at Portsmouth, New Hampshire, and after some weeks of difficult negotiations concluded a peace treaty in September, 1905.

Oct. 09 2009 10:39 AM
Denise F from Stony Brook

Yes, if Kissinger can win the Nobel Peace Prize, then I guess it's a bit like the Academy Awards. The Titanic?? Really?

Oct. 09 2009 10:38 AM
Sarah from Rego Park

To deserve the Nobel Peace Prize, President Obama should break the cycle of the U.S. supporting dictatorships while claiming to be the beacon of democracy worldwide. He should start in Afghanistan, by insisting on a new election. We should not have troops supporting an illegitimate government. Then he can move on to even more complicated states like Pakistan. I realize this could be truly messy, however it is our support of dictatorships and oligarchies that has in large part led to the scourges of terrorism, drug trafficking and intense poverty plaguing the world today.

Oct. 09 2009 10:37 AM
joyce munkacsi from Metuchen, new jersey

what an honor for the whole country. we have selected a president who with his whole being inspires us and the whole world to made this a better place. the heck with the naysayers.

Oct. 09 2009 10:35 AM
Jim from Queens, NY

I suppose, if we weren't so caught up in political squabbling, we might consider the award of the Nobel Prize an honor to the country.

Oct. 09 2009 10:35 AM
the truth from bkny

Check yourself! Why are you blaming the President for the acknowledgement? Why aren't you all on the phone to the committee?

Oct. 09 2009 10:34 AM
ED from NYC

Hi Brian,
Good for President Obama. Not sure why he would need to give back his Nobel Prize. He did not go looking for it. He is offered the prize. Freaking Republicans/ conservatives should shut the f... up and let him at least enjoy the moment.

I feel its valid to ask/question the effective ness of the award, but judging from the comments you see on "Fixed News" web site or other conservative opinion outlets, that this is somehow President Obama's fault, that he is offered the prize. Not sure how that makes any sense.

thanks,

ps Your show rocks, I listen to it everyday!!!!

Oct. 09 2009 10:34 AM
Tom from Upper West Side

I am delighted that the Nobel Committee has recognized President Obama's potential as a world leader towards peace.

Realizing that a U.S. president has little power without the backing of Congress, Mr. Obama would best justify the Committee's faith in him by using the mandate of his and his Democratic colleagues' election and moving his agenda forward by twisting some Congressional arms. This would seem to be the surest way of accomplishing his national and international priorities.

Oct. 09 2009 10:34 AM
bk from nyc

I agree with the second commenter here & couldn't add to it.

Oct. 09 2009 10:33 AM
Zak from Morningside Heights

While I think this is absolutely premature, I hope President Obama realizes that, at 48, he has nothing else he could possibly accomplish on a personal level. As a result of this, may he set any semblance of ego aside, and truly dedicate himself to being worthy of this prize going forward. May this prize be the impetus for him to give up any notion of appeasing his critics and to go forward with his ambitious plans of nuclear disarmament, improved domestic education and health care accessibility, and to a dignified and reasonable US foreign policy that works toward diplomacy over aggression. I hope winning this award leads him to really EARN it after the fact. I am and have been cautious but very optimistic about this administration; I can only hope this pushes him further.

Oct. 09 2009 10:33 AM
Katherine from Yonkers

I think the whole thing is a little bizarre. But while I think a lot of the award must have been a subconscious (and maybe not so subconscious) desire to kind of smack down the previous Administration, I don't think President Obama can really turn down the Nobel Peace Prize. How could one do that, no matter how gracefully, without making it seem like a snub?

Oct. 09 2009 10:32 AM
John from Brooklyn

There's no question but that Obama himself has mixed feelings about winning the Nobel Peace Prize. But to all those who are grousing and sniping from the sidelines, there IS precedent for awarding the prize to leaders who have set out peaceful visions that have yet to bear much fruit.

West German Chancellor Willy Brandt won in 1971 for his "Ostpolitik" policy of rapprochement with East Germany -- a policy that wasn't fully consummated until the Berlin Wall came down in 1989.

Mikhail Gorbachev won in 1990 for perestroika, which he'd launched only in 1987.

Oct. 09 2009 10:31 AM
SuzanneNYC from Upper West Side

Rarely have I heard so much nonsense from so many people in such a short time. The result of opining before thinking. Read the Nobel Committee's statement -- it explains completely why they awarded the Peace Prize to Obama. It was for promise -- not for accomplishment.

Oct. 09 2009 10:31 AM
John Hamilton from Yonkers, NY

We need to hear the message that this award choice sends.

The world was afraid of the tone they heard coming from American, and now just changing the tone of the conversation has brought such relief that they want to award the peace prize.

Wake up America!

Oct. 09 2009 10:31 AM
Peg Kennedy from Willseyville NY

Obama’s nomination reflects that humanity is embracing a new mode of thinking that looks forward as well as in the present and behind. More and more we accept that we can predict and sometimes influence what will happen in the future. Sophisticated weather predictions are now expected as part of our daily (sometimes hourly) news. We expect to know where hurricanes and tsunamis are heading. Predicting severity of flu and other pathogens are part of our common expectations. Predictions of our influence on climate and natural resources are also common news items. Thinking ahead is News these days and Obama’s influence on Possibility and Human Potential pushes this type of thinking further into our consciousness.

Oct. 09 2009 10:31 AM
Mike from Aberdeen, New Jersey

By giving President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize, the unstated message to Mr. Obama is to discourage any attack, by either the United States or by Israel, upon Iran.

The coercive message to the President being, How can you, after winning the Nobel Peace prize, initiate an attack against another nation.

Oct. 09 2009 10:31 AM
Robert from NYC

Well they all make the promises to the gay community and then put them on the back burner and it's not their fault but the gay community's fault for falling for that crap doled out to us and voting for them. Well as of this very moment I would not vote for him again even if Sarah Palin ran against him. I just wouldn't vote and it's time folks got to realize just how powerful the non-vote is. Never settle.

Oct. 09 2009 10:29 AM
Rob Katz from Riverdale, NY

How cynical to have the pundits analyze President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize as if it were a sporting event. Let's state the obvious: this is a win for America, a win for an American President who speaks of peace, hope and change. The mere fact that such conversation comes from the same White House where for the last 8 years those aspirations were not even on the table is the reason for applauds. Congrats to us all.

Oct. 09 2009 10:29 AM
the truth from bkny

Tell it to Nobel Committee!

Oct. 09 2009 10:29 AM
Jay F. from manhattan

AGAIN:

"...Nominations for the prize had to be postmarked by February 1 -- only 12 days after Obama took office.
The committee sent out its solicitation for nominations last September -- two months before Obama was elected president..."

He was given the "Prize" before he was President... THINK ABOUT THAT!

Oct. 09 2009 10:28 AM
Aaron from Harlem

Perfectly earned. Great choice. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. He has done more for the US globally than any US president since Kennedy.

His speech in Cairo was groundbreaking. His attach on race relations precious. Helping the world get out of the great recession is still work in process but it is being to materialize.

Oct. 09 2009 10:28 AM
fauxgrass from Brooklyn

With all due respect to George Packer, turning down the Nobel to try to avoid a backlash would be the height of foolishness.

Imagine the backlash if he were to turn it down -- those shrieking about the prematurity of the award today would glibly pivot to shrieking about his timorousness, his arrogance at turning down the Nobel!

Oct. 09 2009 10:27 AM
the truth from bkny

You people WOW!

Oct. 09 2009 10:27 AM
Janet Godner from Tribeca

I think it is hard for Americans to understand how much of a change in the world the simple fact of our election of Obama has caused. I spend alot of time in Mali in West Africa and it was truely fun to be American again when I was there for 3 months this year. Pictures, stickers, tshirts and painting of Obama everywhere. Obama gives the world a new hope. It is very positive. Even I forget now that I am back in NYC.

Oct. 09 2009 10:27 AM
Todd from Brooklyn

Maybe the White House can see if Kanye's available to interrupt his acceptance speech and award it to someone else.

Oct. 09 2009 10:27 AM
Jen from Brooklyn

In other news, Fox News had a collective aneurysm this morning.

Oct. 09 2009 10:27 AM
hjs from 11211

brian
some amerikans think just as fondly of obama as do europeans.

Oct. 09 2009 10:26 AM
seth

George Packer supported the Iraq War. He has zero credibility in my book. I don't think Obama deserved the Prize, but rejecting it now would be just plain stupid.

Oct. 09 2009 10:26 AM
Spook Handy from New Brunswick, NJ

PEACE isn't an accomplishment. It's a process. After all, what did the so called "Prince of Peace" accomplish?

When you look at Obama's style - especially how he turns the other cheek to the Republicans who do everything they can to make him fail - you see that he is teaching future adults a non-confrontational approach to conflict resolution.

Oct. 09 2009 10:25 AM
Mireille Liong from Brooklyn,NY

This is so unrealistic. You don't say no to a prize. Think about it. He should be grateful no matter what. Makes me think about Don Cheadle, actor, when he received a BET award for his work in Rwanda. He humbly accepted it.

True. Europe sees Obama as Obama. US takes him for granted. Makes me think about the university who didn't want to award him their title. He clearly doesn't need it.

Oct. 09 2009 10:25 AM
John Costa from Manhattan

There was less fuss when the peace prize was awarded to Kissinger, one of the 20th century's most confirmed and enthusiastio warmongers, responsible for more deaths than have ever been calculated. All bull.

Oct. 09 2009 10:25 AM
Niall Heffernan from Sunnyside

F**k the begrudgers. He didn't ask for this, he was awarded it. Can't we be pleased for him and hope he lives up to the honor.

Oct. 09 2009 10:24 AM
the truth from bkny

@#22 Chuck is SPOT ON! alas a voice of reason.

Oct. 09 2009 10:24 AM
Nora Rocket from Queens, NY

I want Obama to tell them to "hold it" for him. That he's honored, that he's humbled, that he feels it is a great vote of global confidence not just in him but in the American people, as he's being recognized for how he moved us. He needs not to refuse the honor, but to underscore that it working towards peace is a process, is a path, is a wheel to which we must all put our shoulders. He could use it as a call to action for all Americans: let us work together to deserve this honor, shared among us all, a recognition of OUR hard work, not the hard work of one man.

That's the speech I would write.

Oct. 09 2009 10:24 AM
the truth from bkny

HJS - you know as well as I do WHY he is the current the "war time " President...BUSH!

Oct. 09 2009 10:24 AM
Derek from 42nd & Lex.

he's done nothing to win this except be a senator for two years. oh that was the presidency.

Oct. 09 2009 10:23 AM
Caroline Risman from Manhattan

I am a firm supporter of Obama, I volunteered on his campaign and think he is doing a good job and that what he wants to do is fantastic. However, he hasn't done much to merit this and I do agree with the statement that he is getting this award because he is not George Bush. I feel like the Nobel committee is trying to award America for voting in a good, smart person with vision and understanding of other people and nations BUT I'm a little offended - we had one bad president and we re-elected him. Obviously, we're really sorry. But we're not a country of morons and I feel a little like the Nobel committee is saying good on you, dumb Americans, for getting with the program. He should gracefully decline the prize.

Oct. 09 2009 10:23 AM
the truth from bkny

Who is this guy George? Why is he the authority on who should accept or turn down a acknowledgment? So what go and make enemies of the Norwegians now?

Be quiet!

Oct. 09 2009 10:23 AM
Vinny_G from The Upper West Side Of Manhattan

After 8 Years of GWBush, the committee could have nominated Ghengis Kahn to thunderous applause

Oct. 09 2009 10:22 AM
elizabeth from east village

Let's consider not how WE have been seeing our president, but how the rest of the world has: contrast how the Bush terms looked to how Obama's admin looks — they are quite different, no? I think that we should at least take a moment to take our perspective out of our country & view Obama from the outside. He is much more friendly, & peaceable than what we have had in the last eight years.

That said, I'm totally surprised about it!
Perhaps it is a provocation for him to start really getting it done (we've heard all of the things that you want to do, no do them!).

Oct. 09 2009 10:22 AM
Derek from 42nd & Lex.

he's done nothing to win this except be a senator for two years. oh, that was the presidency.

Oct. 09 2009 10:22 AM
David from Bronx

for George Packer:

Can President Obama now decide to send 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan within weeks of winning the Nobel Peace Prize?

Oct. 09 2009 10:21 AM
ivan from nyc

TO ALL OF YOU
IF YOU HAVE ANY COMPLAINTS ABOUT PRESIDENT'S OBAMA PEACE PRIZE,YOU SHOULD NOT GO AFTER HIM, HE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. HE WAS AS SURPRISED AS ANYONE OF US...GO,AND DIRECT YOUR COMMENTS AND NEGATIVE ATTITUDES TO THE BOARD OF COMMITTEE IN NORWAY..

Oct. 09 2009 10:21 AM
sara from Brooklyn

Leave it to American politics to turn the nobel peace prize into a bad thing...

Oct. 09 2009 10:20 AM
Billy Gray from Greenpoint

I didn't know you could give the prize to people who are currently bombing other countries. Learn something new everyday.

Oct. 09 2009 10:20 AM
Marie Warshofsky from Brooklyn, NY

I am convinced that if somehow President Obama discovered the cure for cancer, his opponents would find something to criticize.
Why can't we all congratulate him and hope that he lives up to this honor by continuing his efforts to bring peoples together and to work for peace.

Oct. 09 2009 10:20 AM
Robert from NYC

I can't believe they considered Hitler and then, AND THEN to weigh him against GANDHI, oh my god! Oh my god!!! I think Goering held a gun to the committee's collective head, or I HOPE they did. What were they thinking!

Oct. 09 2009 10:20 AM
Ron Matteson

There is no way he should give anything back to appease the Repubs. The Republicans have done nothing, I repeat nothing to promote peace in this world. They are just coming to the realization that the world lacked leadership for 8 years. This is a vote of confidence and encouragement to get things done. Let's get to work.

Oct. 09 2009 10:19 AM
Charles from Harlem

Could it be that the Nobel committee is inserting itself into Obama's decision-making with regard to troop levels in Afghanistan? How can Obama escalate a war after winning the Nobel Peace Prize!?

Oct. 09 2009 10:19 AM
hjs from 11211

Aaron
only some americans

Oct. 09 2009 10:19 AM
Andrew Clarke from New York

No one wins the prize for achieving world peace. It is the contribution that is made. Obama has made a huge contribution by creating a shift in thinking. Countries feel that they have an equal say in the policies of the world.

America is not the only voice of reason. What a huge, and positive mind shift. One step closer to peace.

Oct. 09 2009 10:19 AM
Robert from NYC

Yes, he can inspire people but let's wait and see if he does it before he gets the Nobel Peace Prize for it. I can't think of a more prestigious award globally and it should not be given on good intentions.

Oct. 09 2009 10:18 AM
Sean Bailey from Maplewood, NJ

Congrats to President Obama. He should accept the prize on behalf of all community organizers worldwide...

Oct. 09 2009 10:18 AM
Jay F. from manhattan

From CNN:
"...Nominations for the prize had to be postmarked by February 1 -- only 12 days after Obama took office. The committee sent out its solicitation for nominations last September -- two months before Obama was elected president."

Oct. 09 2009 10:17 AM
danny from harlem

The irony is that President Obama is in the throws of an important Afghanistan policy decision. This award puts more pressure that decision. And is likely designed to influence rather than reward his actions.

Oct. 09 2009 10:17 AM
JIRO YASUZAWA from Manhattan

Barak Obama deserves Nobel Prize for SPEECH rather than PEACE.

Oct. 09 2009 10:17 AM
Aaron

I think this shows just how differently Europeans perceive BO than Americans do. After nearly a year in office, Americans think of him as a politician first of all, while Europeans are still star-struck and continue to think of him in idealistic terms.

Oct. 09 2009 10:16 AM
Lewis Novod from Manhattan

About the Nobel Peace Prize

Can it be that the prize is intended to influence Obama's international policies and if so, can Obama accept the prize without dedicating himself to advance peace even in Afganistan and vis a vis Iran and North Korea and their nuculear ambitions?

Oct. 09 2009 10:15 AM
Jay F. from manhattan

What a crock... I'm speechless. Alfred Nobel is turning in his grave.

Oct. 09 2009 10:15 AM
Konstantin Doren from Boiceville, NY

This is essentially a $1.4 million speaking fee for a speech in Cairo.

Oct. 09 2009 10:15 AM
the truth from bkny

ARE YOU SERIOUS??? You people are sooo envious! The President should absolutely not reject the award. CONGRATULATION PRESIDENT OBAMA!

Oct. 09 2009 10:14 AM
Danny from Brooklyn

If Obama gets the peace prize we will have a lot of chaos here in the U.S. As most winners get the prize after around a decade

Oct. 09 2009 10:14 AM
anthony from brooklyn

The Nobel committee has missed a big opportunity to highlight the achievement of the MDC and Morgan Tsangarai in Zimbabwe.

Here is someone who has risked very real personal harm and even death for the sake of democracy in his country! That very shaky power sharing agreement could really use some attention about now as they struggle to keep the government together (not to mention the country).

My first thought this morning was, refuse!

Oct. 09 2009 10:14 AM
Steven Mark from Manhattan UES

Definitely global warming in Oslo. Or just hot air from googly eyed polyannas.

Oct. 09 2009 10:14 AM
Jeff Pappas from Ct.

Perhaps the Nobel prize people have gazed into the Future thru some parallel universe scenario and saw Obama dismantling our Nuclear Bombs

Oct. 09 2009 10:13 AM
Kevin Mac from NYC

They couldn't find anyone else among the 205 nominees? Bit of a joke. hHis was voted on in Feb. before he had time to unpack his bags in the White House. I'm a supporter but feeding his ego in these times of turmoil is the last thing we (the USA) need.

Oct. 09 2009 10:13 AM
Brian from Bronxville, NY

My favorite comment so far came from Presidential Historian Robert Dallek saying, "[This] clearly is a kind of poke in the eye to the George W. Bush administration, because what it is saying is America is back on the scene after eight years of Bush, back on the scene as a nation that is on the forefront of promoting world peace,"

Oct. 09 2009 10:12 AM
ramatu from Brooklyn

and could it possibly be a statement of encouraging the direction the President is moving in?

Oct. 09 2009 10:12 AM
Liz Fanning from Upper East Side

Obama should take this prize and run with it! The republican strategy is to put the administration on the defensive - turning down the prize plays right into that strategy - stay offensive and run with this prize! We're all behind you - good luck!!!

Oct. 09 2009 10:11 AM
Frank from Queens

One word: Afghanistan. As the White House debates what to do there, with stepping up military action still on the table, perhaps the Nobel Committee is looking to not-to-subtly put pressure on the President to focus on diplomatic avenues and not military.

Oct. 09 2009 10:11 AM
Benjamin Running from Brooklyn

I support Obama, but he should absolutely refuse or return the Nobel prize.

The Nobel committee's suggestions that the prize is not only about accomplishments, but expectations and encouragement don't convince me.

Obama already has high enough expectations from the American people, and ample encouragement from the people of the world. Adding this pressure to make peace in and de-nuclearize the Middle East, Russia, Iran, North Korea, or wherever else is not what we need now. Let's get domestic issues straightened out, figure out our current wars, then move on.

The prize's added pressure solve those problems will only be used as fodder by his opponents who say he's already bitten off more than he can chew (like his efforts to secure the Olympic games), and will use it to further the image of Obama as a European-minded peace-monger who travels the world apologizing for the perceived mistakes of the last administration.

Wait eight years for the award. The real _noble_ move now will be refusing the prize.

Oct. 09 2009 10:10 AM
Chuck Renaud from Brooklyn

We have a winner on our hands.

If we can't see it at least the world can.

Oct. 09 2009 10:09 AM
hjs from 11211

seems an odd thing for a war time president to win

Oct. 09 2009 10:09 AM
Rita & Austin from NYC

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html

Oct. 09 2009 10:08 AM
Rita & Austin from NYC

Obama is not the first young, innovative leader to win a Nobel. See link to Nobel web site re MLK, who won the award in 1964 based on his efforts to lead a peaceful civil right revolution. MLK was a leader who inspired hope and a visionary who foresaw a new era in race relations. Obama has led a national movement that elected him the first black president, and has already won the respect and admiration of world leaders for his intelligence and diplomacy.

Well deserved, and not unique.

Oct. 09 2009 10:08 AM
Robert from NYC

This really is too soon. He hasn't really established a "peace" program or whatever it's called yet. He talks about it but has not done anything about peace. He only recently did a turn around or back-off on the Palestinian-Israeli "peace" talks even influencing the Palestinian president to betray his own people. And there is that war in Afghanistan! Not yet Mr.Obama. My initial reply was excitement but that got toned down upon rethinking the whole thing.
Doesn't matter what the Nobel President said it will be seen in the light of someone who had worked on bringing peace somewhere at least.

Oct. 09 2009 10:08 AM
Claire Lea from Tipp City Ohio

I think the president probably wishes this hadn't happened---at least not now. It puts him under even more pressure for results.

I believe the committee was probably also sending a message to his predecessor.

Oct. 09 2009 10:07 AM
ramatu from Brooklyn

You can argue that you think someone else should have won it. But I also can't help but wonder if people would be this amazed at Obama winning if he was white. The Times article said that the West German chancellor got it in 1989 or something after being in office just a few months. Did people react to his award this way?

Oct. 09 2009 10:07 AM
Mariel Mota from Morris county, NJ

What all of the critics are forgetting is that Obama is a WORLD figure and a cultural icon, not just an American President. This Prize is not based around what he has done thus far, but what he ideologically represent: diplomacy, and responsibility within a global community.

Oct. 09 2009 10:01 AM
seth

The one saving grace of giving the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama is that it's driving Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sean Hannity crazy. Hopefully, it's driving John McCain crazy as well.

Oct. 09 2009 09:56 AM
Bobby G from East Village

Very interesting: The Taliban condemns it as does John Bolton.

Oct. 09 2009 09:55 AM
Calls'em As I Sees'em from "McLean, VA"

And finally - this stunt by the Noble Prize Committee is just another exhibit in support of the proposition that America and Britain should run the world because even well educated people in other countries are idiots. Remember Exhibit “A” - Germany was the best educated country in the world when it “elected” National Socialism in the 1930s.

I'm sure the President will be celebrated by the media and other idiots in all "57" states (Obama's assertion during the campaign).

Oct. 09 2009 09:52 AM
tammi from Brooklyn, NY

Sure he should have won. He is working to bring about peace in the world. He is working to disarm our "enemies" and rid the world of nuclear weapons. Not to mention his contribution to racial tolerance in this country. I think he deserves it.

Oct. 09 2009 09:46 AM
Calls'em As I Sees'em from "McLean, VA"

A FEW MORE THOUGHTS ON THIS ATROCITY:

Again, while he talks a good game for some, a least when his teleprompter is working, the world is a much more unstable place. In large part this is due to his policies including the profligate printing of money which is leaving the world without a stable currency to use. This alone has will cause great hardship around the world as well at home and many poor people will go without food and energy because of such.

As to actual peace, he has allowed Iran and North Korea to assert their nascent nuclear power. He has only pulled a few troops out of Iraq while setting the military up for disaster in Afghanistan by not deploying enough troops in contravention of our general’s recommendations for such. He has talked about closing Gitmo, but hasn’t. He is trying to force Israel into concessions that will destroy it; a policy that will probably lead to war, etc.

Unfortunately for the US and the world his narcissistic and yet non-committal personality combined with his radical policy objectives can only lead to trouble for everyone.

Oct. 09 2009 09:43 AM
Calls'em As I Sees'em from "McLean, VA"

JOKE OF THE DAY, WEEK, MONTH AND YEAR - OBAMA “WINS” THE NOBLE PEACE PRIZE!? Can an Oscar™, the Stanley Cup™, or Triple Crowd™ be far behind? Wow - what a fatal degradation of that award. If you think that this isn’t BS then you all should know that THE NOMINATION PROCESS FOR THE AWARD CLOSED TWO WEEKS AFTER THE BAMA WAS INAUGURATED. So everyone should be laughing out loud. Perhaps they were clairvoyant and this was for conquering the “Moon people” with only one bullet (this morning) and no casualties. Lol.

While Obama has raised international hopes and expectations “for peace” with a few pandering speeches on his “America Apology Tour” & then at the UN, he has DONE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING of substance for such. He did little as a corrupt community organizer. He did nothing as a state senator who holds the record for voting “present.” He did nothing as a US senator because he almost immediately started campaigning for president; and so it goes. He has destroyed decades of campaign finance reform as well as the American banking, credit and auto industries, but I don’t think they give prizes for that.

Oct. 09 2009 09:43 AM
Bobby G from East Village

This is a worldwide repudiation of the "I hope he fails" crowd.

At this moment the world and Americans at home are faced with immense challenges. Let us respect the results of the 2008 election, have an honest debate and support our president.

Oct. 09 2009 09:41 AM
seth

I supported Obama in the primary against Clinton, but this decision is moronic with a capital M. He hasn't accomplished anything worthy of this prize.

Good article in Foreign Policy magazine on 7 people who never won the Nobel Peace Prize

Mohandas Gandhi, Eleanor Roosevelt, Vaclav Havel, Ken Saro-Wiwa, Sari Nusseibeh, Corazon Aquino, and Liu Xiaobo

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/10/07/nobel_peace_prize_also_rans

Reading this article drives home the breathtaking foolishness of giving the prize to Obama. Each of these 7 people were infinitely more deserving recipients than Obama.

Oct. 09 2009 09:41 AM
MARTIN CHUZZLEWIT from MANHATAN

BREAKING NEWS ALERT !

President Barack Obama has just been awarded the Heisman Trophy as the best college football player in the USA.

Oct. 09 2009 09:39 AM
Aline Bernstein from Los Angeles, CA

In light of all the divisiveness in the U.S. that has accompanied the beginning of his first term, I think he should not have been awarded the prize. I can't believe there were not worthier candidates who have done more good without sparking so much animosity.

Oct. 09 2009 09:35 AM
Gary from UWS

This is preposterous! Obama has not only done nothing to facilitate peace, he’s engaged in two wars! The Nobel Foundation is the same “august” organization that awarded the terrorist Arafat a Nobel Peace Prize in 1994.

By the way, after ten months in office, Gitmo is still open for business, despite Obama’s campaign PROMISE to close it as soon as he entered office, and Iraq is still burning even though the media has moved on to the debacle in Afghanistan.

Oct. 09 2009 09:32 AM
FRANK SORIANO from MORRISTOWN, nj

President Obama should gracefully refuse the prize on the grounds that he and the world are still waiting to realize the fruits of his initiatives. As a thoughtful person, he must have understood the award was misguided in light of the prize's criteria. As a gifted speaker, he should be able to make that point without insulting the Nobel Prize itself.
Refusing it will only enhance his image around the world.

Oct. 09 2009 09:31 AM
Chi Town

Can we do an Olympic 2016 revote anytime later today?

Oct. 09 2009 08:43 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.