Professor Mark J. Perry's Blog for Economics and Finance
Posted 4:57 PM Post Link
Links to this post
It is pathetic that the Nobel committee chose to give the Peace price to someone who has done nothing to deserve it. There are far more worthy candidates for the Peace PrizeSecondly, Barack Obama, who took office on the afternoon of January 20th, 2009, being awarded a Nobel prize in a category where nominations closed on February 1st, 2009? It just doesn't make sense.
Today, I am envious of every sentient being who happens to be dead including all previous recipients of any Nobel prize. What happy news that William Saffire is not alive to have to stomach this mendacity. That we should actually experience a day when a person with 2 weeks on the job gets nominated is beyond fathom. Bush derangement syndrom apparently is alive & well in Sweden.Only in Europe, could the world's greatest foreign policy neophyte win a Nobel prize and one thought that they could not sink lower than Al Gore, the fabulist.Hey, time we nominated Oprah, Madonna or better yet, Alicia Silverstone. At least, these gals have cleavage and good legs.
VH,Armando Valladares should also be on the short list. If you are just looking for a windbag, I guess you've got your heart's desire. I thought that the Nobel was awarded for some level of actual performance.
"mendacity"Great word QT.I had to look it up.This just goes to show that the peace prize means absolutely nothing.You might as well nominate the Obama's dog.
Bob,Obama's dog has already crapped on Airforce One...he may be overqualified.
Hey, well, at least you know now how it felt for the rest of the world to see Bremer and Tenent awarded the Medal of Freedom. Titanic didn't deserve the Oscar either!
Too funny. I can't believe he won the peace prize for just talking nice about peace and plans that will never happen.
NEW YORK, NEW YORK (AP): The successors to the Downtown Athletic Club announced today that the 2010 Heisman Memorial Trophy Award has been awarded to President Barack Obama.College football's most prestigious award is normally given prior to December bowl games to the best offensive player in college football. However, director Roger T. White, III said that making an exception to honor Obama, who never played college football, made "simple common sense.""The Heisman is given to game changers," White said. "The President is changing our game with the world, or at least with Germany, Russia, and France. Also, President Obama still hopes to be a great college football player or coach one day." White brushed aside criticism that the award could be seen as a partisan political statement: "Absolutely not, Barack crossed his fingers and hoped it."Commenting on the early award to a man who never actually played college football, White pointed out that "If Obama can be nominated for the far more prestigious Nobel Peace Prize two weeks after taking office, surely there can be no objection to our timely selection of this American hero for the Heisman."
From the viewpoint of an Obama hater (anyone who opposes Obama is defined by liberals as "haters" of Obama), this award is GREAT! It makes Obama the laughing stock of the nation, and further discredits the Nobel Peace Prize which has become a liberal propaganda award unrelated to efforts for peace. It's a "two fer"!
Post a Comment
Create a Link
Dr. Mark J. Perry is a professor of economics and finance in the School of Management at the Flint campus of the University of Michigan.
Perry holds two graduate degrees in economics (M.A. and Ph.D.) from George Mason University near Washington, D.C. In addition, he holds an MBA degree in finance from the Curtis L. Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota. In addition to a faculty appointment at the University of Michigan-Flint, Perry is also a visiting scholar at The American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C.
View my complete profile