I guess you found your answer to when he got nominated. Kind of sad really.

*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by blankfist.

We would be better off had Ron Paul won.

wow this completely insane fuckhead blamed obama for killing civilians in the first minute. 100.000 civilians have died in iraq since 2003. republicans have really short memories.

oh yea we would be better off if he won, uh , if you like living in the dark ages of course.

>> ^robdot:
wow this completely insane fuckhead blamed obama for killing civilians in the first minute. 100.000 civilians have died in iraq since 2003. republicans have really short memories.
oh yea we would be better off if he won, uh , if you like living in the dark ages of course.


He blamed Obama's foreign policy decision for resulting in the deaths of civilians.

He is well aware of the death toll in Iraq. He opposes the war.

Also note that he comments on the hypocrisy concerning Bush's campaign platform vs decisions made once in office.

Explain how we would be in the dark ages if Ron Paul had won?

>> ^robdot:
dark ages


hurrrrrr

>> ^robdot:
wow this completely insane fuckhead blamed obama for killing civilians in the first minute. 100.000 civilians have died in iraq since 2003. republicans have really short memories.
oh yea we would be better off if he won, uh , if you like living in the dark ages of course.


You must be a fan of the late Roman dictators like Nero instead of the early republic, that worked out well.

The anti-war left doesn't exist anymore? You haven't been in Washington in the last week or so have you Paul?

(I shouldn't say anti-war, thats a misnomer and a republican buzzword, like pro-abortion. More accurately its people who are simply 'against this war.')

I think that Obama will get us out of Afganistan, but he's not stupid, he knows that pulling out immediately does nothing for us. We are in this war BECAUSE we pulled out of a war there to fast last time. When Russia was at war with the country we backed the 'freedom fighters' there. They called themselves Taliban. We armed them, we put them in power and after we built a few bases there we left with hardly a word. This is something the US has done time and time again throughout US history. I once had a history teacher who said basically 'The US is great at fighting wars, but we are terrible at ending them and negotiating after the war has ended.' I disagreed with him then but I absolutely agree with him today.

Besides that I don't think America will ever be without some battle going on somewhere or bombing somewhere or some war (legal or not,) simply because for a solid portion of this country, being at war is a national past time. But largely because we have this 4th wing of government in this country called the Pentagon and US Military Industrial Complex.

*ahem*
CODEPINK DOES NOT SUPPORT OBAMA'S POSITION ON AFGHANISTAN.
codepink would like to work with obama in helping, listening to, and dealing with the women of afghanistan and promoting infrastructure and education.
codepink does not support his actual actions to date.
codepink does see the difference between his words and his actions.
infact we will be protesting these actions next saturday.

so *lies

Adding video to channels (Lies) - requested by peggedbea.

Upvote for wood paneling.

<3 u, Ron.

peggedbea if you are going to tag * lies, then you might want to provide a source for your claim. Not that I doubt you're right though.

Well what do you expect for an award in the name of an infamous explosives manufacturer.

Is Ron Paul well known because libertarians are just screaming excited to have a visible leader? Because that sounded like a wandering whiny speech about not liking the left and Obama.

Obama was given the award "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.". Obama has made it a very obvious priority from day one to re-establish and exceed prior diplomacy with the rest of the world which is the keystone to world peace. He deserves it. It's awfully fast but he is working his ass off promoting diplomacy. And that's after inheriting George Bush's policy of starting wars unilaterally and giving the finger to everyone else in the world he couldn't buy off.

And about the wars - He inherited 2 wars in the middle east, how could you do better without making it worse in the long run?
* We're well on the way to being out of Iraq (To quote him "Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end.".)
* And Afganistan... the Taliban (whom attacked us) controls a big chunk of the country and the recent national elections were tainted with fraud. It doesn't make you a hawk to say we might regret this if we don't fix this before we go home does it?

Ron Paul has no intellectually honest points, he's just pushing his agenda like the rest of them. He just does it in front of wood paneling and antique photos.

Right, the one with no honesty is the one who isn't doing what he said he was going to do on the time scale he said he was...how silly of Dr. Paul to think Obama would do what he said when he said it.

I wasn't aware that Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize just 12 days after he took office. That says it all, as far as I'm concerned.

As always, Rachel describes why the right is full of shit. This is particularly relevant as a counter to Ron's diatribe.

http://videosift.com/video/Rachel-Maddow-The-Nobel-Prize-Obama-Derangement-Syndrome

to quote alizarin:
"* And Afganistan... the Taliban (whom attacked us) controls a big chunk of the country and the recent national elections were tainted with fraud. It doesn't make you a hawk to say we might regret this if we don't fix this before we go home does it?"

this is false.the taliban did not attack us,nor do they have a global agenda,they are strictly vying for power in the afghanistan region.ironic that it is the US that put them in power.according to US intelligence it was al'qaeda that attacked the US and they are no longer representative in afghanistan.
http://www.videosift.com/video/re-think-afghanistan-security-brave-new-films

>> ^Xax:
I wasn't aware that Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize just 12 days after he took office. That says it all, as far as I'm concerned.


Why?

People aren't nominated and selected on the same day.

The nomination and selection process is complex and rigorous. There's what seems to be a 8-9 month gap in between when someone is nominated (which is generally thousands of people) and when the award winner is announced. This lag exists precisely because of the thorough process between all of the appropriate committees and institutions.

All the apologetics and relentless justification aside, he really did not deserve it.

>> ^volumptuous:
>> ^Xax:
I wasn't aware that Obama was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize just 12 days after he took office. That says it all, as far as I'm concerned.

Why?

Well if you love peace, why would you like Obama, who took Bush's plan for war in Iraq, and extended it, escalated Afghanistan, continued the rendition(kidnapping) program, continued the torture of detainees by sleep deprivation and sensory deprivation and continues to call for intervention in force in Iran. Only if you have been sleeping since the week Obama was inaugurated would you give Obama a peace prize.

Last week, we were debating in the news, how many more troops we would send to Afghanistan. Would there be a small increase, or a substantial increase? And this for a war against the taliban, who have never done anything against our homeland, except "not getting onboard with us invading their country." Afghanistan is a perfect example of a war for war's sake, and we have our new president cementing the conflict with more troops and bombs.
This week in the new war surge

Yeah the Nobel people want to encourage the president, but to some of us the prize just makes the song seem more awful.

Hey guys, take a look at the other nominees for the prize:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/and-the-other-nobel-peace-prize-nominees-were-1801350.html

>> ^EndAll:
All the apologetics and relentless justification aside, he really did not deserve it.


Well, it seems that the Norwegian Nobel Committee highly disagrees with you.


And marinara: They didn't give it to Obama for ending two wars. It was awarded "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons."

But what does the Norwegian Nobel Committee know? They're all a bunch of idiots, right?

>> ^volumptuous:
>> ^EndAll:
All the apologetics and relentless justification aside, he really did not deserve it.

Well, it seems that the Norwegian Nobel Committee highly disagrees with you.


Oh no! The highly prestigious committee that awarded the same prize to Henry fucking Kissinger back in '73?

Surely I must reconsider my views if they disagree.

Well, volumptuous, they ARE Norwegian.

Let's not lose track of the real story here: Ron Paul is a blathering idiot

>> ^enoch:
to quote alizarin:
" And Afganistan... the Taliban (whom attacked us) controls a big chunk of the country and the recent national elections were tainted with fraud. It doesn't make you a hawk to say we might regret this if we don't fix this before we go home does it?"
this is false.the taliban did not attack us,nor do they have a global agenda,they are strictly vying for power in the afghanistan region.ironic that it is the US that put them in power.according to US intelligence it was al'qaeda that attacked the US and they are no longer representative in afghanistan.
http://www.videosift.com/video/re-think-afghanistan-security-brave
-new-films


Indeed, WE put the Taliban in power. This fight isn't about the Taliban. They have their issues and those issues need to be delt with by the governments of Afganistan and Pakistan to be sure, not by us.

We are there for Al~Qaeda. Thats a very different organization with a world wide agenda. The simple fact that so many people mix those two up, or worse consider them the same exact thing, is another legacy of the failure that was the Bush administration.

Frankly no president in the last 80 years has come in to office having so many messes to fix. From multiple wars to the second worst economic crash in our nations history. As much as Faux 'News' likes to announce that Obama is a failure and hasn't done anything in his 10ish months, he has done a great deal and reversed a world view of America and our Government that took 8 years to build up. If thats not worth a Nobel Piece Prize I don't know what is.

>> ^EndAll:
Oh no! The highly prestigious committee that awarded the same prize to Henry fucking Kissinger back in '73?

So wait. You already have disdain for the committee, and you think it's so worthless that Kissinger won it, but you still don't think Obama deserves it?

What am I missing here, because this just doesn't make sense.

>> ^EndAll:
All the apologetics and relentless justification aside, he really did not deserve it.


Says you. Luckily, you're not in control of anything other than the contents of your intertube comments.

>> ^alizarin:
Let's not lose track of the real story here: Ron Paul is a blathering idiot


Idiot seems a bit of a weak goose, anyone who can finish off medical school would be unlikely to be a moron, an imbecile, or an idiot (all those terms are old school ways of referring to levels of mental retardation and are no longer really used).

When reading most of the commentary and looking over the list of other people that were also up for it, I can't help but be saddened and reminded of high school. Really, what it seems to come down to is popularity not accomplishment. If you look at the others and what they have ACTUALLY done, it is truly sad that they are passed over for the most visible candidate. In essence, that was the point of the NPP was to recognize those whos deeds would normally fade into obscurity even if they helped shape and change the lives of millions.

It saddens me tremendously to look at the list of humanitarians that might not live long enough to walk across that stage and get their 15 mins of fame.

>> ^alizarin:
Let's not lose track of the real story here: Ron Paul is a blathering idiot


Your two comments to this video only serve to prove his point.