Friday, October 12, 2007

Will someone please explain to me...

...just what environmentalism has to do with peace?

Why couldn't they just make a special Nobel prize? Maybe call it the "Nobel Prize to Tweak the Bush Administration's Nose"? Finding an excuse to give the Peace Prize to Gore kinda cheapens the award, which had previously been reserved for noble peacemakers like Yasser Arafat.

15 comments:

Kevin said...

After Arafat, I thought the prerequisite for this was a respectable body count. Gore's got a little catch-up to do, but with the policies he's espousing, that shouldn't be a problem...

jimbob86 said...

....what peace has to do with environmentalism?


I'll bite. Both are ideals. They are great ideals, in a theoretical world. Who wouldn't want to live in a peaceful sylvan idyll, at least for a time? The problem for both The Peaceniks For Rope Hair and Mrs. Fauntelroy of The Unitarian Church's Society For The Preservation of Everything is that they think they live in that theoretical realm, when in fact they live in the real world, where peace exists only through available firepower, cows fart a lot, and cheeseburgers don't grow on trees..........

# 9 said...

If you had to choose one, would you choose Al or Hillary for President?

Which is the least harm?

Tam said...

Can't we just take off and nuke the site from orbit?

jesperskibbey said...

OK, here goes:

From the Washington Post:"...this year's prize focused on an issue not directly involving war and peace, but seen as critical to maintaining social stability. In highlighting the IPCC's science and Gore's advocacy, peace prize committee chairman Ole Danbolt Mjoes said the hope was to use the power of the prestigious award to focus on an issue of planetary importance."

Tam said...

Then shouldn't they have given him the perhaps even more prestigious Nobel for Science?

I'm aware of the excuses, though.

B&N said...

"Can't we just take off and nuke the site from orbit?"

It's the only way to be sure.

I wonder if the committee took Gore's ridiculously energy inefficient new mansion into consideration when weighing the evidence. My guess is no.

# 9 said...

Can't we just take off and nuke the site from orbit?

I knew you would have something pithy to say.

It is like the choice between dying from cancer or heart disease. Hobson's choice, on steroids.

The only fun would be to watch the true blue agonize over who to take to the prom.

BTW, check out SayUncle. The Recall Amendment is going full bore. I give some props to the Recall people.

LabRat said...

Giving him the prize for science would mean opening themselves up to a hell of a lot of firepower. Even a lot of climate scientists who agree with anthropogenic catastrophic global warming didn't care for how much fiction was in with the facts.

Essentially, he's being given a prize for "truthiness".

jesperskibbey said...

There is no Nobel Prize for "Science".

Physics, Chemistry, Economics, Literature, Medicine and Peace.

Nobel Prize Comittee: (In stuffy Norwegian Accentented English) Ahnd fohr the Chemistry prize, we pddddroudly announce..... Mr. Albert Gorrrrrr!

Al Gore: (Storming to the podium and sounding pissed as hell, with delivery of Dr. Bones from Star Trek) Dammit Sven, I'm a Politician, not a Chemist!

Nobel Prize Presenter: (Pensive and unemotional, as Mr. Spock) Hmmmm. Not a Chemist..... true, but rejection of this award on the basis of your occupation is highly illogical. Planetary Warming is at it's core a chemical phenomenon, and you have studied chemistry. Therefore you must accept this award for Chemistry. It is the only logical choice.


Gore: (Eyes bulging) Don't lecture me about logic you unfeeling green blooded Scandinavian robot! I'm a Democrat....FROM TENNESSEE! We don't obey logic.

Presenter: (still as Spock) As you wish. You will be awarded the Peace Prize instead.

LawDog said...

There isn't a Nobel prize for Economics.

There's a Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, but it was established in 1968 -- well after the death of Alfred Nobel -- and Nobel's will which sets and stipulates the conditions for the Nobel prizes never mentions economics.

Tam said...

Well, after all, the air does have chemicals in it because Evil Corporate America put them there, and chemicals are bad...

...and Al doesn't like chemicals, (or at least chemicals made by white people living north of the equator; those are the bad kind of chemicals)...

...so he's attacking chemicals...

...for peace...

...I get it now! It makes sense!

Lasse said...

This is a b¤#&¤y scandal.

As a Swede I'm not surprised that the Norwegian committee for the peace price once again has had a brain hemorrhage, but it still saddens me. I wish the Norwegian Storting (parliament) would take their responsibility and replace the idiots in the committee.

It’s also an insult to earlier, occasionally, better deserved price receivers.

Al Goore is a lying leftwing attention seeker on par with Michael Moore.

Its makes me want to puke. Arghh….

comatus said...

"to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses".

There you have it. No actual "Peace"(tm) required. When it comes to the old fraternity thing, the abolition of armies (ours, mostly), and the promotion of any or all congresses, he's your boy. The debate is over.

TBeck said...

If Peace is defined as the absence of opposition to environmentalism, then Algore has done more than anyone else to silence the dissenting opinions of those who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid. Therefore advancing the cause of whirled peas.