Friday, October 09, 2009

Libertarian Party Suggests Announcements for Nobel Prize Should Be Moved to April Fool's Day

WASHINGTON - The Libertarian Party today suggested that, in the future, the announcement date every year for Nobel Prizes be moved to April 1.

"Unlike the gullible people who listened to The War of the Worlds radio broadcast in 1938 and thought Martians really were attacking the United States, when I heard this morning that Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize, I changed the channel in disbelief. But, the same thing was being said in multiple places," Libertarian National Committee Chairman William Redpath said.

"The gravity of the Nobel awards has not been augmented by some of their recent selections, including today's announcement, last year's award of the Economics prize [
posthumously] to Paul Krugman, or the 2007 Peace Prize to Al Gore, whose global warming theories he will not defend in open debate. Maybe an early Springtime announcement date would be more appropriate."

Redpath continued, "I didn't know that it was the role of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to be handicapping the future performance of individuals and organizations. Nonetheless, we congratulate President Obama on his award and hope that three-and-a-quarter or seven-and-a-quarter years from now the Nobel Peace Prize Committee will be seen as prescient."

28 Comments:

At 10/09/2009 9:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Bush had received the Nobel peace prize, and liberals would have criticized it, conservatives would call them Unamerican.

The Nobel committee has given the United States a gift of soft power.

We can lose it through comments like this.

While it may make you feel good, think about how this power could be used: Can Armandinajad claim that a Nobel peace prize recipient is the devil to his people?

Sometimes politics is fun; sometimes it is pathetic.

 
At 10/09/2009 10:21 PM, Blogger QT said...

Anon.,

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (please note spelling) couldn't give a flying fig. This is a man who by all accounts rigged an election and brutally suppressed dissent. He's been spinning out these negotiations for years to allow Iran time to develop a nuclear weapon.

It's like imagining that Stalin or Hitler would care about Mr. Chamberlain waving his little white paper claiming "Peace in our time". That's just not the way totalitarian dictators operate.

This is actually disasterous for President Obama because it ties his hands. Instead of making decisions in Afghanistan based upon the best military advice, he is likely to be constrained by this award resulting in the very worst of policy being driven by political considerations.

 
At 10/09/2009 10:25 PM, Blogger QT said...

The people of Iran will likely never hear about the award given that Iran has one of the
strictest censorship codes.

 
At 10/09/2009 10:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

QT,

Soft power does not speak to Ahmadinejad, it speaks to the Iranian people. You missed the point. You can attack our President all you want, and if you want to weaken our country with your comments, well, I can't change your mind.

Ahmadinijad thanks you.

 
At 10/09/2009 10:45 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Note that NY Times points out that the selection of the Peace Prize was set out from day one to be political. The committee is drawn from the membership of the Norwegian Parliament in roughly the party arrangement present in the Parliament.
So the prize represents the view of the Political class in Norway since the vote in the committee was unanimous.
It has been clear that GW Bush and his policies were extremely unpopular in Europe for good or ill.

 
At 10/09/2009 11:07 PM, Blogger VH said...

In following the Norwegian committee's twisted logic in awarding the Prize, next year's Nobel Peace Prize will be awarded to Osama Bin Laden, in absentia, for promoting peace.

So let's be clear about something else.

The "Nobel Peace Prize" is not awarded by sober, objective specialists the way that the scientific Nobels are.

It's basically just a popularity contest among left-wing Norwegian parliamentarians, who dominate the Peace Prize committee.

That same committee gave the Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, for warning about the horrible dangers of fossil fuels.

But the largest single export sector of Norway's economy, by far, is the extraction and sale of... fossil fuels.

Wouldn't it have been simpler, and more consistent, if the Norwegian parliament had said, "We shall stop contributing to this awful problem," capped their oil and gas wells, and announced a moratorium on future drilling?

Instead, they continue to privately profit by what they publicly denounce.

By their acts ye shall know them.

 
At 10/09/2009 11:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Much as I like some things about the Libertarian Party, global warming is scientific question, evidence for or against is weighed across scientific journals. A lot of the science is settled, and it's moved on now an issue of policy. Still, if Liberarians have something against the science, there's nothing stopping them from having it published it in a peer reviewed journal. If they can't, it's probably because there's nothing they really have to add on the issue.

 
At 10/09/2009 11:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

> Wouldn't it have been simpler, and more consistent, if the Norwegian parliament had said, "We shall stop contributing to this awful problem," capped their oil and gas wells, and announced a moratorium on future drilling?

I hear what you're saying but it's the basic problem of the Tragedy of the Commons. Any individual country by itself making sacrifices won't solve the problem. It's a global problem, requiring a treaty and concerted effort on the part of all of the major economies.

 
At 10/10/2009 12:05 AM, Blogger VH said...

"I hear what you're saying but it's the basic problem of the Tragedy of the Commons. Any individual country by itself making sacrifices won't solve the problem. It's a global problem, requiring a treaty and concerted effort on the part of all of the major economies."

Yeah, and if they feel the "truth to power" to give political prizes to candidates that they feel they are politically aligned with then they can go the extra step. Otherwise, it's all a bunch of bulls**t.

"...global warming is scientific question, evidence for or against is weighed across scientific journals. A lot of the science is settled, and it's moved on now an issue of policy."

No it's not--Global Warming is a propaganda campaign--cold and reasoned empirical science left the room long ago. Your use of "settled science" proves my point. Global Warming/Climate change is ECONOMIC policy packaged in a neat little green propaganda box with a lot of apocalyptic warnings on it.

Science is best when it arrives at conclusions without political coercion or pressure: Al Gore and the IPCC receiving a Peace Prize is very telling that there is politics at play. And as the NYT points out, the Prize is a political instrument. Now, seemingly, more than ever.

 
At 10/10/2009 12:17 AM, Blogger OA said...

Anonymous said...
"The Nobel committee has given the United States a gift of soft power.

We can lose it through comments like this."


Oh please give us all a break. Who was it that gave some ham handed comments when Iranians were demonstrating and getting beaten and killed in the streets?

It was entirely possible to voice support for the people and electoral integrity without making any comments about the Iranian government. Instead he waited days to comment on a clearly rigged count and then basically said they were on their own.

So he blew the moment to support the people and now you're worried about satirical pieces taking away some soft power? He spoke volumes by his inaction and then words when he had the chance. You seem to think the people in Iran will just vote Ahmadinejad out next chance if only they knew Obama isn't the devil. Seems like they already did vote him out.

 
At 10/10/2009 4:10 AM, Blogger Richard Rider, Chair, San Diego Tax Fighters said...

Settled science?? At one time, it was "settled science" that the earth was flat.

"Settled science" -- especially in such a muddled field as climatology -- simply reeks of political agendas. What this statement says is that no further research is acceptable that questions global warming -- that any such research is by definition tainted and unacceptable.

Gosh, in the 1970's it was pretty much "settled science" that a new Ice Age was approaching. Oddly enough, some of today's most ardent proponents for "settled science" global warming were just as ardent about the Ice Age danger in the 1970's.

 
At 10/10/2009 7:21 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please send your comments about Obama's Peace Prize to Hugo Chavez; he can use it in his propaganda war in Latin America.

 
At 10/10/2009 8:28 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Note that Europe is generally classified as a social democratic region, while the us is more a 19th century style liberal state.
So one needs to qualify the left wing right wing issue with the point of reference for making the judgment.
Social democracy arose as a reaction to the perceived injustices of the 19th century liberal state in Europe, and came to power after the almost complete disruption of Europe in world wars 1 and 2.
Also WW 1 and then WW 2 doing such destruction to the societies of Europe led to the people of Europe selecting this style of government.

 
At 10/10/2009 10:10 AM, Blogger Ryan said...

Why did they include Krugman in the list of people. Yes he is very liberal, however he listed at the top of the most cited economists.

 
At 10/10/2009 12:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech

 
At 10/10/2009 12:23 PM, Blogger Chuck said...

I WAS HOPING THAT DICK CHANEY WOULD WIN THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE.

 
At 10/10/2009 1:06 PM, Blogger VH said...

YES, CHUCK, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

 
At 10/10/2009 1:28 PM, Blogger QT said...

Anonymous said...
"The Nobel committee has given the United States a gift of soft power.

We can lose it through comments like this."


How completely illogical.

If soft power is so fragile that it cannot withstand comment from unknown bloggers like me...is it really power? If your statement is correct, soft power amounts to no power whatever....don't we call that political spin?

 
At 10/10/2009 1:35 PM, Blogger QT said...

Chuck,

It's "Cheney"...get the spelling right. Probably a strong contender...he did shoot a republican out of season.

 
At 10/10/2009 1:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

QT,

Obviously, soft power or no soft power, nothing will change your mind.

I can't change your belief system that the Voice of America or Radio Free Europe, nor any of our public initiative items will work, or be assisted by this event.

I won't try.

Did you ever think you might just be wrong?

If you hold views that harm yourself, fine; if you want to deny the Voice of America or Radio Free Europe in their efforts, I stand to object to your rhetoric and defend the interests of my country.

 
At 10/10/2009 2:41 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What does it say that a mere few months ago, Arizona State University, a school known more for its hard-partying student body than academics refused to award Obama with a honorary degree while the Nobel Committee awarded Obama for nothing more than his ability to give a good speech?

Go Sundevils!!!

BTW, did anyone else find it telling that Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize the same week he undermined democracy in Honduras, de-funded US based Iranian human rights groups, and snubbed the Dalai Lama in an effort to appease the Chinese? Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold.

 
At 10/10/2009 9:13 PM, Anonymous Jim Egnor said...

Why is no one questioning the fact that the 2009 deadline for nomination was Feb 1, 2009 which was 10 days or so after Obama's inauguration. What the hell did he do in those 10 days to deserve this mythic honor???

 
At 10/10/2009 9:54 PM, Anonymous Lisa said...

I think the Nobel Prize is an honor for the President, he was very gracious about accepting it.

 
At 10/11/2009 8:25 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon,

Only fools and despots think that lies are the best way to move people. The Nobel peace prize given to Obama for 11 days is nothing more than meddling in US politics. It is more than a disgrace, it is a crime against reality.

The only good that is coming from it is that it shows that these people are nothing more than fools. The future value of the award is undermined. Americans are seeing it as a lie.

 
At 10/11/2009 2:08 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

> Science is best when it arrives at conclusions without political coercion or pressure.

I think we can agree on that. So where are the peer-review scientific articles from reputable journals refuting the science?

 
At 10/11/2009 3:28 PM, Blogger OA said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

> Science is best when it arrives at conclusions without political coercion or pressure.

I think we can agree on that. So where are the peer-review scientific articles from reputable journals refuting the science?


Refuting what science? You mean the climate models that have not had any predictive powers at all? Water vapor accounts for about 70% of the greenhouse effect. CO2 is about 6%. But they absorb the same wavelengths and like a window shade, adding more results in less marginal effect not more. Actually water covers more wavelengths. It'd be better to control water vapor but note those sources can't be taxed while CO2 sources can.

Global Warming is not science, it is speculation. It requires feedback loops happening to rocket the tiny incremental effect of CO2. Those feedback loops aren't happening.

If it's science, why did a politician win a Nobel for Global Warming "science" and not a scientist?

 
At 10/11/2009 10:26 PM, Anonymous Lisa said...

I think the Nobel Prize is an honor for the President and our country. Hopefully, this means we can end the war.

 
At 10/12/2009 10:33 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

OA,

It's a simple question. Where are the peer-reviewed journals articles refuting the science?

Perhaps you can take your obvious expertise in this area, summarize it, and submit it for publication.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home