<p>I guess we can add this to ever-growing “never mind” pile. So much histrionics, so little time.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200602\POL20[/url]”>http://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=\Politics\archive\200602\POL20</a></p>
<p>That’s a shame…I’ve just lost a lot of respect for Nobel Prizes.</p>
<p>Why would this guy be nominated? He’s not even an American.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.johnbolton.com/bolton/aliens/aliens01.html[/url]”>http://www.johnbolton.com/bolton/aliens/aliens01.html</a></p>
<p>Heard singer Michael Bolton was also nominated, and is actually getting better odds from Vegas :)</p>
<p>Michael has better hair.</p>
<p>There was a record 199 nominations in 2005</p>
<p>Don’t lose respect for the Nobel Prize, pretty much anyone can be nominated, and the people that are allowed to nominate is vast and varied</p>
<p>The Nobel Prize Committee usually keeps the nominations secret, but the nominators often share the information</p>
<p>Being Nominated, well, if I had the right pedigree, I could nominate anyone</p>
<p>The Nominations are often for political purposes, the winners are often in line with the orignal intentions</p>
<p>So this man who nominated Bolton does have an agenda- which one may or may not agree with, but nominations aren’t done in a vacuum and just the nomination itself can be for show, publicity and attention- rightly or wrongly</p>
<p>Somewhere pigs are flying.</p>
<p>It will be fun to watch the Dems trying to filibuster a Nobel Peace prize nominee when his recess appoinment is over later on this year.</p>
<p>Castro was nominated, Tookie Williams was, Kissinger, Carter, Martin Luther King Jr., Mother Theresa, Desmond Tutu, Hitler, Stalin, International Red Cross, Pope John Paul II, Cuban dissident Oswaldo Paya Sardinas and many groups from all over, representining all facits of politics, and human rights…</p>
<p>The NOMINATIONS are all over the map and often controversial, but often well deserved as well</p>
<p>Nominations are often warranted and often not- that is why there is a committe to decide</p>
<p>And, i think the discourse that will happen becuase of this very strange nomination will be useful, as well as the other nominations as they come to light</p>
<p>Even Voinovich stopped crying over his grandchildren long enough to acknowledge that Bolton is doing a fine job. So much histrionics, so little time.</p>
<p>browninfall- filibustering a nobel prize nominee not such a bad thing, </p>
<p>I guess since Castro was nominated as well, our government should open up relations (I think they should)- If we can work with China, we can deal with Castro</p>
<p>And bet you would say that Tookie should not have been put to death because he was also a Peace Prize Nominee (I am anti death penalty)</p>
<p>So, where do you stand on those two nominees, since you feel the just being nominated proves something</p>
<p>CGM–
There is a word called “irony” in the dictionary. You can look it up. Hence this thread. I should have started a betting pool via PM on who would be the first to disparage the Nobel Peace Prize and bring up Tookie. I would have won, big-time.</p>
<p>FWIW, the NPP lost any crediblilty when it was awarded to–and accepted by–Jimmy Carter.</p>
<p>This one’s different because conservative Republicans don’t get nominated. Of course people like Tookie and Castro were nominated. People who draw the fascination of the left get nominated all the time. The Nobel Peace Prize was set up for people like them. They’re PC - the John Boltons of the world aren’t, so they don’t get nominated. When one does, it certainly draws attention. bing121086 proves the point.</p>
<p>Irony, sure, gloating, more</p>
<p>and saying, well, can’t fillibuster him now cause he got nominated, and getting nominated makes him an a-okay guy…</p>
<p>but ignore the questions I asked, and why am I not suprised</p>
<p>well then there are people who win the award who think Hamas has the ability go govern peacefully.</p>