Obama Awarded 2009 Nobel Peace Prize breaking news

[room2593 0]

@serverphOkay, cool. It's just . . . I have very political friends and I get all reared up and goin' . . .It's a good thing that you're not American. I'd rather be a Canadian, personally, but that's just me.And agreed on the peace prize being premature for anyone. It's too big. Nobody has ever made complete peace. It's just Obama is less applicable than most people.And I'm not willing to stand behind George as a good example of a president. Nor Obama. The last truly good president we had was Ford, and only because he pardoned Nixon. The last one before that was Lincoln.Let's clarify: Stalin vs. Fidel Castro. They're both Communist dictators, so I'm no longer comparing apples and crab apples. My Chinese isn't what it should be.Stalin killed twenty million people. Castro did jack squat in the face of that, maybe 100 thousand. Nothing. So with an intensely negative connotation, I'm saying that just because Castro isn't as bad as Stalin doesn't mean he's good like Obama not having done anything negative doesn't make him better than those who have screwed up. Just because it's a relief to have a change from constant negative doesn't mean he's positive.Just because -2 is more than -5 doesn't mean -2 is a good amount of money to have.We have to take Obama on his own merits, without looking at the past or the future. And I'd say he's one of the do-nothing presidents. Like Taylor, or Garfield. People about whom you never ever hear not in a million years.

[webishqiptar 0]

Do you think, this awarding has a political backstage. I guess yes. I think they're trying to make changes, due to previous Bush politics about war and open conflicts in certain areas with great economic interests to USA. And now they are trying to make USA look like a peaceful country, and the best way to do this is to give it's president a nobel prize, right??