Aspirations

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 05:11:25 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Robert Reich on the Nobel Committee's mistake:

[. . .] The Prize is really more of Booby Prize for Obama's predecessor. Had the world not suffered eight years of George W. Bush, Obama would not be receiving the Prize. He's prizeworthy and praiseworthy only by comparison.

[. . .] Giving the Peace Prize to the President [. . .] only underscores the paradox of Obama at this early stage of his presidency. He has demonstrated mastery in both delivering powerful rhetoric and providing the nation and the world with fresh and important ways of understanding current challenges. But he has not yet delivered. To the contrary, he often seems to hold back from the fight -- temporizing, delaying, or compromising so much that the rhetoric and insight he offers seem strangely disconnected from what he actually does. Yet there's time. He may yet prove to be one of the best presidents this nation has ever had -- worthy not only of the Peace Prize but of every global accolade he could possibly summon. Just not yet.

Well said by Reich.

Speaking for me only

< Saturday College Football Open Thread | Saturday Night Open Thread: Packing >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Aspirations | 59 comments (59 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Heck, BTD may prove (5.00 / 1) (#1)
by Cream City on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 05:27:43 PM EST

to be one of the best football prognosticators this nation has ever had -- worthy not only of the fantasy football prize but of every global accolade he could possibly summon.

Just not yet.

: BTD is .60 for the season and (none / 0) (#6)
by MO Blue on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 05:33:28 PM EST

it just started. Obama will have to hurry to catch up.

The Hopiness Prize. (5.00 / 2) (#7)
by Edger on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 05:50:20 PM EST

Huh? (5.00 / 2) (#8)
by lentinel on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 05:54:45 PM EST

Reich thinks that Obama has, "... demonstrated mastery in both delivering powerful rhetoric and providing the nation and the world with fresh and important ways of understanding current challenges".

Personally, I find Obama's rhetoric anything but powerful. Lackluster is more like it. But, hey, that's only my opinion. Go for it, Robert.

But I wish he had specified the ways in which he thinks Obama has provided "the nation and the world with fresh and important ways of understanding current challenges".

This sentence is gibberish, IMO.

Reich says that Obama could prove to be one of the best presidents we have ever had. Yeah? And?...

I was trying to think of one thing (5.00 / 2) (#24)
by ruffian on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 07:04:33 PM EST

that Obama has made me see in a

"fresh and important ways of understanding current challenges".

Really can't think of any. Maybe he will in the Best Nobel Acceptance Speech Ever.

I do not at all discount the value of having him represent the USA around the world, rather than Bush, Cheney, McCain, Palin, Huckabee, Romney, etc., for the simple fact that he is not batsh*t crazy. But there are plenty of people who aren't them.


: Sometimes (5.00 / 2) (#39)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 10:26:49 PM EST

I listen to him and then think, "uh, what did he say?"
He provides "fresh and important ways of understanding" absolutely nothing. In fact, he goes out of his way to turn policy into a convoluted, distorted inkblot, intended to confuse. His strategy is to PREVENT understanding of issues and solutions.
Reich is full of it, once again.

I actually really dislike that halting way (none / 0) (#10)
by tigercourse on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:00:43 PM EST

that Obama speaks so I've always felt fairly alone when people talk about his great rhetoric. In general though, I don't like to listen to any politicians, even the ones I support. I'm more likely to be stirred by a random song on the radio then any political figure.


: I agree (5.00 / 4) (#21)
by kempis on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:43:42 PM EST

Will.I.Am made Obama look like one of the all-time great speakers in that viral "Yes, We Can" video. And over and over and over the pundits have claimed that he is a fantastic orator, largely on the basis of "Yes, We Can" and his address to the 04 DNC convention.
But aside from a couple of very good speeches, he has not really wowed me. Sometimes, the rhetorical excesses ("now is when the planet began to heal...") are downright cringe-inducing to me.
This is what disturbs me most about Obama, always has: what we're told he is far exceeds what he seems to be--an ambitious, smart fellow. DC is full of them, but he has the gift of self-promotion.
And I would be fine with all of that if he seemed to be committed to...anything. I hope he matures into a pol who really does believe in some things that would actually benefit most Americans and not just the wealthy and the powerful--and is willing to dig in his heels, reach out to the American public and pressure the hell out of Congress to pass legislation that helps us have a healthier, better educated, more upwardly-mobile society.
I really worry that America is dying of stagnation--stagnation caused simply by corruption. Our representatives are bought and paid for, and so is the legislation they pass. The rest is just theatre.
Now that I'm thoroughly depressed....

Agreed ... (none / 0) (#45)
by FreakyBeaky on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 12:19:46 AM EST

Personally, I find Obama's rhetoric anything but powerful.

But we're clearly in the minority.


: I don't think that's the case (5.00 / 1) (#59)
by Inspector Gadget on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 07:57:39 PM EST

at all. A chorus of "huh?'s" just doesn't make as much noise as a burst of "yay's" even if the latter is only half as many voices.

Yeah, and weasels could fly out of my ... (none / 0) (#55)
by lambert on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 01:10:07 PM EST

family blog.


Bob Reich, (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by andgarden on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:03:18 PM EST

racist.

: Heh. (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by Fabian on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:39:48 PM EST

My reaction is less intellectual than his, but the sentiments are much the same.
(Oh no, not this again!)

: Oh, brother. (Oh, wait, . . .) (none / 0) (#16)
by oculus on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:07:41 PM EST

They should (5.00 / 7) (#19)
by Wile ECoyote on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:38:19 PM EST

hand out the Oscars ahead of time. Maybe it will inspire actors to act well in their upcoming films.

: They should hand out the Oscars ahead of time (none / 0) (#46)
by FreakyBeaky on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 12:20:41 AM EST

No one would care.
(At least I wouldn't).

We all aspire to more, don't we? (5.00 / 2) (#26)
by Anne on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 07:19:54 PM EST

I mean, we all strive to do better, to be better, to rise above our faults, to make a difference, even if it's as simple as just letting the little things go.

Peace is a hard thing to make happen when all of those involved in conflict believe they are right. Obama seems to have an affinity for validating all of the conflicting ideas and positions, which is a great feel-good kind of thing, but I don't know that that actually helps move things from conflict to resolution.

The timing of the award is pretty ironic, at least as far as I'm concerned. It isn't just that he's getting ready to escalate the war in Afghanistan; it's that he's done little to repudiate the Bush policies in so many ways. I was appalled to read that his administration used the odious Jeff Sessions to introduce amendments to the Patriot Act re-authorization that serve to prevent the restoration of the privacy protections that so badly need to be restored.

We all know about the plan to implement preventive detention, the decision to keep the facility at Bagram open, the invocation of the state secrets privilege that serves to protect what can only be described as the crimes of the Bush administration, the refusal to release the torture photos, the refusal to investigate the policies of the Bush administration. I guess my question is, how is one who is affirmatively acting in this way deserving of an award meant to honor the person who has done the most to advance the cause of peace?

I get that he is seen as inspirational, but what I don't get is how one values inspiration in the face of actions that are regressive and punitive?

I also get that maybe the Committee was looking to impose a standard on Obama that he would choose to live up to, but the dearth of evidence that Obama is much more than a man who can give a speech makes the whole thing just a big fat question mark for me.

It's too bad, really, that this year's award may have the effect of devaluing the awards that came before, and the ones that came after; when all is said and done, it just seems to have been a dud that has landed with a thud.

Obama is wowing the LGBT (5.00 / 2) (#28)
by oldpro on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 07:34:20 PM EST

meeting, live on C-SPAN right now.

Cheering and even on their feet...time after time. Another good speech. Campaign style...campaign delivery...selling it...belief, hope...

When will he deliver?

He knows what to say, (none / 0) (#29)
by Anne on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 07:47:45 PM EST

he just doesn't seem to be able to act.

How long can speeches substitute for action?


Speeches will substitute for action (5.00 / 1) (#33)
by MO Blue on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 09:48:49 PM EST

as long as they continue to quite the demand that he fulfills the promises he made.

IOW, if the LGBT community remained in their seats and demanded a specific time frame for actual legislation, Obama might actual have to take action to pacify them. As long as words do the trick, Obama can just continue to give the Greatest Speech Evah to whatever group who is requesting action.


Well, most of the people (none / 0) (#34)
by dk on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 09:54:00 PM EST

in that room have enough money to buy their way out of second class citizenship. There's a big disconnect between the A-list GLBTers in that room and most gay Americans, IMO.


Well I didn't mean to single out that (none / 0) (#36)
by MO Blue on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 10:18:02 PM EST

group. Basically what I was trying to say was that if any group, be it the GLBTers, women's rights groups, unions or whatever, told Obama that they would contribute and work and vote for the Dems in 2010 and 2012 when and if legislation was actually passed, they might get it. If they are willing to accept more promises that something will be done sometime, then Obama needs do nothing but continue to make promises.


: Oh, I agree with you. (5.00 / 2) (#38)
by dk on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 10:22:27 PM EST

My point could actually extend to the big movers and shakers in those other groups as well.
The big money doners in all those areas care a little too much about their precious access to power. Also, they are often those who suffer the least real world impact because they have money to buy what they wouldn't otherwise be entitled to.

Anne, hope this doesn't depress you but . . . (none / 0) (#32)
by prittfumes on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 09:44:28 PM EST

How long can speeches substitute for action?

Right through November 2012?


: I'm not sure I could be any more (none / 0) (#35)
by Anne on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 09:59:39 PM EST

depressed about how this is all turning out; on so many fronts, Obama just has failed to lead, failed to act, been content to stick with the status quo, and worse, worked to legitimize terrible policies we had hoped would be repudiated. There was nothing to stop him, he has a majority in Congress, and yet...he just goes from wallowing in indecision to taking the path of least resistance.
It doesn't surprise me; this is who I always thought he was, but this is one of those times when there just is no comfort or satisfaction in being right.

So when's he delivering? (none / 0) (#56)
by lambert on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 01:11:11 PM EST

2013?


HRCF is not the gay community (none / 0) (#57)
by mexboy on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 01:45:13 PM EST

They are a lobbyist group that not everyone in the LGBT community supports.


Nobel vote reminds me of the primary joke (5.00 / 1) (#31)
by diogenes on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 08:32:52 PM EST

The joke in early 2008 that the senator from New York was born in Illinois and the senator from Illinois was born in a manger.

Heh. Not to mention the joke (5.00 / 2) (#42)
by oldpro on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 10:59:42 PM EST

about the senator from Illinios stopping off at the senate to get directions to the White House.

Bad-a-bing...


The joke in mid 2008 (none / 0) (#44)
by Politalkix on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 11:18:31 PM EST

was that the Senator from Illinois may have been born in a manger but among her true belivers, the Senator from New York, had died on a cross and had to be resurrected during the Democratic convention! :-)


: Good grief...I hadn't heard that one. (none / 0) (#50)
by oldpro on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 12:35:57 AM EST

Well, I didn't agree with everything (2.00 / 0) (#15)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:06:31 PM EST

Bush did, just as I didn't disagree with everything Clinton did, and etc working backwards.

But if you say the not so noble Nobel prize was awarded because of the wrongs of Bush and since Obama has done nothing then we can say that Reich must believe that two wrongs make a right.

I think you will find that the hatred of the committee is not so much directed at Bush as it is America itself. Obama won because he accomplished multiple apologies and pandering in a record time.

I am sure he is just so proud.

They gave a noble peace prize to Al (none / 0) (#2)
by tigercourse on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 05:29:13 PM EST

Gore for efforts on climate change and one to Mother Teresa for giving people a place to die. Clearly the term "peace prize" is somewhat of a misnomer, it should be "people we think are great prize". While I think it's silly to give Obama a prize for being a better President then Bush (not that hard to do), their criteria don't seem to be too stringent.

In the long run, does it matter? (none / 0) (#3)
by oculus on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 05:31:09 PM EST

I'd also point out that when Reich endorsed (none / 0) (#4)
by tigercourse on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 05:31:30 PM EST

Obama, he did so largely based upon what Obama might do, not what he had done.

"Finally, he offers the best hope of transcending the boundaries of class, race, and nationality that have divided us. His life history exemplifies this, as do his writings and his record of public service. For these same reasons, he offers the best possibility of restoring America's moral authority in the world."

Oh, gag. Still pisses me off. (5.00 / 3) (#5)
by oculus on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 05:32:14 PM EST

That transcendent shtick again (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by Cream City on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:00:42 PM EST

It just reeks of religiosity to me. But hey, if it floats the fundies' boats to make fewer waves, fine.


As I think someone joked here yesterday, (none / 0) (#11)
by tigercourse on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:01:46 PM EST

Obama's deification is in the works.


Oops, I meant beatification. (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by tigercourse on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:03:25 PM EST

How many miracles must he perform? (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by oculus on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:05:41 PM EST

I'm sure if you just looked at his website (5.00 / 2) (#22)
by tigercourse on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:55:25 PM EST

you'd see that he already has performed the miracles.


Well, he did get Bill Clinton (5.00 / 8) (#25)
by ruffian on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 07:06:04 PM EST

pegged as a racist. I would have sworn that was impossible.


David B. (none / 0) (#40)
by David B on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 10:51:57 PM EST

Bill Clinton did himself no favors by lashing out.


And, (5.00 / 3) (#43)
by NYShooter on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 11:12:10 PM EST

The correct response to blood-libelous lies should be.....?


Are you referring (none / 0) (#52)
by David B on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 08:50:03 AM EST

to Bill Clinton's comment that Obama only won South Carolina because Obama was black? Insulting, yes, but blood libel, no.


: REALLY? (5.00 / 1) (#53)
by jbindc on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 10:18:25 AM EST

We're going to dig that half truth up again? It's so tiresome.
You know, Jesse Jackson won there in 1988. It was racist of BC to point that out. Oh wait...even Jesse Jackson said it wasn't.
Darn! I hate when reality doesn't comport with soundbites and clips from the Obama campaign.....

: Those who are insulted (5.00 / 2) (#54)
by Cream City on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 12:29:59 PM EST

by history don't want to know it.

heh (none / 0) (#23)
by andgarden on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 07:01:21 PM EST

If he can raise (none / 0) (#17)
by Edger on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:08:32 PM EST

dead votes out of ballot boxes in 2012 it'll certainly be a miracle.


: He can count on Gary, Indiana (none / 0) (#49)
by Cream City on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 12:34:59 AM EST

to do that again for him.

I read (1.00 / 0) (#37)
by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 10:21:27 PM EST

"Obama's defacation"....... which I'm sure is also worshipped by the "deIfiers/beautifiers".


Not only that, (none / 0) (#18)
by lentinel on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 06:29:46 PM EST

but he is up for a daytime Emmy.


old (none / 0) (#27)
by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 07:24:10 PM EST

The Prize is really more of Booby Prize for Obama's predecessor. Had the world not suffered eight years of George W. Bush, Obama would not be receiving the Prize.

Jeez Louise! Is there nothing that can't be blamed on Bush? This is getting old and thin.

Overall that's (none / 0) (#30)
by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 08:15:45 PM EST

a pretty good commentary until it comes to the last line. Obama has never shown much initiative towards anything other than himself and there's no evidence that has changed. Reich sounds just like the Bush apologists who say that in x number of years Bush will be shown to have been a prophetic leader because of Iraq.

On the one hand (none / 0) (#41)
by David B on Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 10:55:29 PM EST

He's already done a lot to put nuclear disarmament back on the table. On the other hand, presiding over the American Empire is about as incompatible with receiving the Nobel Peace Prize as being a Protestant is to being Pope. It's not that he hasn't done anything, though.

If Obama hasn't accomplished anything, doesn't that reflect poorly on Hillary? Y'all dropped North Carolina by 10. Deal with it.

: And to respond to your second question ... (5.00 / 1) (#48)
by FreakyBeaky on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 12:25:41 AM EST

... no, it doesn't.

: Look, they gave it to Kissinger ... (none / 0) (#47)
by FreakyBeaky on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 12:25:01 AM EST

... one of the greatest mass murderers this side of the Atlantic. Giving it to Obama isn't even CLOSE TO the previous ... errors ... of the Peace Prize (which is clearly the political one of the Nobel prizes).

: So winning NC by 10... (none / 0) (#58)
by lambert on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 01:55:45 PM EST

... and losing the popular mode gets a Nobel? Good to know.

One Recalls (none / 0) (#51)
by bob h on Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 07:13:55 AM EST

Joe Klein's suggestion that W. be put forward for the prize.

Aspirations

The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

Menu

Search

Login

Creator and Principal Author

TL Alumni

Contribute To TalkLeft

Sections

Site Credits

Legal

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment