Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Soaring

Ioc Treatment Of (now) Nobelist Obama

Recommended Posts

- What are your views on this article?

Ignoble IOC Treatment of Nobelist Obama

October 9, 2009

By Philip Hersh

One thing came immediately to mind when I learned Friday morning that President Barack Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize.

Wonder what the petty pooh-bahs of the International Olympic Committee think now of embarrassing a Chicago bid endorsed by the Nobel Peace Prize winner?

It was one thing - and entirely justifiable - to award the 2016 Summer Games to Rio de Janeiro. It was another to eliminate Chicago in the first round and, in effect, reject all the overtures President Obama has made to the Olympic movement on behalf of the United States.

The President made several videos emphasizing a new U.S. commitment to re-engage the world and said a Chicago Olympics would be a wonderful vehicle for improving global relations and show that commitment. Then he showed his respect for the IOC and the Olympic movement by becoming the first U.S. President ever to appear in person on behalf of a bid.

After all that, some IOC members chose to avenge old grudges with the U.S. Olympic Committee rather than appreciate the efforts and pledges President Obama had made. Some even suggested they voted against Chicago because they had been inconvenienced by security arrangements for President Obama last Friday in Copenhagen.

For years, former IOC president Juan Antonio Samaranch had shamelessly lobbied to get the IOC a peace prize for its role in helping reintegrate a sports world segregated by race (South Africa) and politics (Soviet Bloc, the divided Koreas).

The IOC still is waiting for its Nobel. No surprise there. Its members are more skilled at the ignoble.

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/sports...list-obama.html

-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really simple: What does the IOC and OLYMPICS have to do with NOBEL PRIZES? One person can succeed one and fail the other and I'd have no problem with that (not that Obama really deserved that nobel but that's another subject...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dumb article. What about if Madrid went out first; would it be an ignoble snub to the King of Spain? They're taking it far too personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chicago Tribune is certainly full of completely rubbish information concerning the Olympics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Chicago needs to move on. I get the feeling that they really thought they had this in the bag, and they are still walking around in a daze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with your sentiment. But most of us have moved on from our loss, but remnants of bitterness still remain, this article being one of them. I also think it was too soon for Obama to receive the Nobel Peace Prize, and he might even agree with that himself (although he would not publicly say that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with your sentiment. But most of us have moved on from our loss, but remnants of bitterness still remain, this article being one of them. I also think it was too soon for Obama to receive the Nobel Peace Prize, and he might even agree with that himself (although he would not publicly say that).

Better he receive the prize with grace and not show any sincere sign of "what?? I won a nobel prize" on his face. We know there are dozens and dozens of people in front of him that deserved by far that award more than he did, but now that he got it, better he pretend he really excpected that so he'll preserve his image.

And Biotch better donate the 1,5 milllion dollar prize to some charity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with your sentiment. But most of us have moved on from our loss, but remnants of bitterness still remain, this article being one of them. I also think it was too soon for Obama to receive the Nobel Peace Prize, and he might even agree with that himself (although he would not publicly say that).

I totally agree with you. In reality we don't know who Obama is yet, it's been just a few months in power.

And Obama acutally said he did not deserve the prize this morning. I think he got this prize mainly because he's "the first black president".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, this article doesn't help improving the US image in the Olympic Movement: how arrogant to state "it's OK for Rio to win but not to humiliate Chicago in the first round"! What city should have been "humiliated"? Madrid, Tokyo for they have lesser world leader than Chicago??

I can understand the disappointment or even some bitterness from Chicago, but this article is way overreacting.

And WTF has the fact that Obama is now a Nobel Peace Price anything to do with the race for 2016??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think he got this prize mainly because he's "the first black president".

Nope. Nixon was the first 'black' president. He was 'black' Irish. ;)

No, Obama got the award because: (1) Obviously there isn't any one better in the Nobel Committee's eyes; and (2) His more conciliatory approach to international relations--for which he gets LOW marks from me), rather than a 'confrontational' stance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Obama can win the nobel prize, but it's too early for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Frankly, this article doesn't help improving the US image in the Olympic Movement: how arrogant to state "it's OK for Rio to win but not to humiliate Chicago in the first round"! What city should have been "humiliated"? Madrid, Tokyo for they have lesser world leader than Chicago??

I can understand the disappointment or even some bitterness from Chicago, but this article is way overreacting.

And WTF has the fact that Obama is now a Nobel Peace Price anything to do with the race for 2016??

You know, everyone on here was speculaing, since the 2016 short-list was announced last year, that either Madrid or Tokyo was going to be eliminated first for the obvious reasons; i.e. London 2012 & Beijing 2008.

And now, a lot of you on here are singing a different tune since the vote turned out differently. It was a surprise to EVERYONE that Chicago was eliminated first, unlike Moscow, which was expected to drop first for 2012. I think that's what the problem is with some in the media, because again of the OBVIOUS reasons, not because we're the "USA". But a lot of you aren't seeing that angle, all you guys are seeing is just "arrogant Americans". :rolleyes:

All this anti-American sentiments from a lot of you here is getting quite abrasive, & suprisingly from you Brits. If London had dropped first for 2012, I'm sure a lot of "you" would've been harping the same "arrogant" tunes. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These people need to grow up and stop hating on the President. Obama done nothing wrong. He was given this prize. He fits perfectly the tenements of a Nobel Prize Winner as given in their charter. Has anyone bothered to read that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, everyone on here was speculaing, since the 2016 short-list was announced last year, that either Madrid or Tokyo was going to be eliminated first for the obvious reasons; i.e. London 2012 & Beijing 2008.

And now, a lot of you on here are singing a different tune since the vote turned out differently. It was a surprise to EVERYONE that Chicago was eliminated first, unlike Moscow, which was expected to drop first for 2012. I think that's what the problem is with some in the media, because again of the OBVIOUS reasons, not because we're the "USA". But a lot of you aren't seeing that angle, all you guys are seeing is just "arrogant Americans". :rolleyes:

All this anti-American sentiments from a lot of you here is getting quite abrasive, & suprisingly from you Brits. If London had dropped first for 2012, I'm sure a lot of "you" would've been harping the same "arrogant" tunes. <_<

Stop it FYI. There's zero anti-Americanism in this thread. It's obvious to everyone that that article is stupid, and many Americans in this thread agree. Why is it a snub to Obama or ignoble when Chicago goes out first? The implication is very much that it wouldn't be a snub if any other city had gone out first, and that is arrogant (of Mr Hersh, not of Americans as a whole you understand).

I'm sure many Brits would have come out with similar lines if London had lost 2012, but such views would be equally arrogant and short-sighted coming from a British journalist as the words that have just flowed from Mr Hersh's pen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the final time, the IOC did not 'snub' Obama. Chicago lost. The broken USOC-IOC relationship and US government reluctance to write a blank cheque killed the bid. Deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, everyone on here was speculaing, since the 2016 short-list was announced last year, that either Madrid or Tokyo was going to be eliminated first for the obvious reasons; i.e. London 2012 & Beijing 2008.

And now, a lot of you on here are singing a different tune since the vote turned out differently. It was a surprise to EVERYONE that Chicago was eliminated first, unlike Moscow, which was expected to drop first for 2012. I think that's what the problem is with some in the media, because again of the OBVIOUS reasons, not because we're the "USA". But a lot of you aren't seeing that angle, all you guys are seeing is just "arrogant Americans". :rolleyes:

All this anti-American sentiments from a lot of you here is getting quite abrasive, & suprisingly from you Brits. If London had dropped first for 2012, I'm sure a lot of "you" would've been harping the same "arrogant" tunes. <_<

Chicago being eliminated in the first round was indeed surprising, disappointing (and I do feel sorry for they had an exciting innovative plan whose Chicago final presentation didn't do justice to).

But to keep calling it a "snub of Chicago and Obama" is just quite insulting to the other 3 candidate cities as it implies that they were not on the same league as Chicago and its leaders. Some of the Chicago backers always assumed that the 2016 race was just a matter of not giving the IOC a reason to by-pass Chicago while the race is all along about providing a compelling reason to select Chicago. Chicago's team and USOC failed to provide such a compelling reason (granted Rio had a much easier message to sale with the new-frontier card), failed to play by the IOC unwritten rules (I cannot believe that USOC apparently trusted IOC members when they told them that they would vote Chicago in the first round. If you add up all the first round promises made to the four candidates, you would come to the conclusion that the IOC has 150 members). I don't blame them, it's an easy mistake to make (just ask Paris 2012). But to be utterly incapable of recognising this failure and to blame anti-Americanism as this article is doing is showing ignorance and/or arrogance (just like the reaction of some Paris 2012 members was arrogant) and is certainly a sure way to prepare future defeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The world loves Obama... I don't think Obama lost anything in Copenhaguen...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And now, a lot of you on here are singing a different tune since the vote turned out differently. It was a surprise to EVERYONE that Chicago was eliminated first, unlike Moscow, which was expected to drop first for 2012. I think that's what the problem is with some in the media, because again of the OBVIOUS reasons, not because we're the "USA". But a lot of you aren't seeing that angle, all you guys are seeing is just "arrogant Americans". :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/

The Nobel Peace Prize 2009

"for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"

I do agree that this prize may be too soon for Obama, as I can see many people who deserves it too.

From what I remember, the Peace prize is the only one that they take into account "ongoing efforts", while the others are for finished works. So I would say that the Nobel Foundation took a risky step by appointing president Obama.

I don't like this article too, Hersh seems too bitter because Chicago "lost", he needs to move on. On the other hand the Nobel foundation risky decision for this prize, is just like IOC's decision: betting in the future actions, don't you guys think that too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ack. The IOC vote and the Nobel Prize having nothing to do with each other. Shouldn't even be discussed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would the result been different if the award was given to obama before the vote? that's a what if scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
would the result been different if the award was given to obama before the vote? that's a what if scenario.

No difference at all. Two totally unrelated things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the number of votes talk for themselves. This was not a Lula x Obama contest. There were four cities trying to be awarded the right of celebating the SOG. Nothing more. Lula did not come out of Denmark stronger than he already was, nor Obama weaker. His nomination as a Nobel proves this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it is very simple to think of this as a suck up to Obama for the Chicago 2016 loss. Frankly I don't see how Philip Hersh is getting tied up about this nobel peace prize thing and linking it to the Olympics. Few People seem to realize the USOC's overwhelming losing record.

I was as surprised as any one at Chicago 2016's first round Exit but it is not something that has happen to many USOC Candidates before.

The core thing I think brought down the bid was the local popularity numbers for Chicago 2016 staging the games . America is problematic with Ballot Initiatives that could topple a host city in Mid Construction . It is not without a prior Example in the US with Denver 1976. Los Angeles 1984 had the same issue with Ballot Intiatives cutting off public funding . The IOC was forced to a take it or leave it case with LA 84

As Far as Obama and this award it is much too soon and he even admitted that today. some of the Winners that makes one scratch ones head . Al Gore for Climate change ? Henry Kissenger . He certainly authorized secret bombing of Cambodia during the Nixon years .

Personally someone more deserving at this point would be Olusegun Obasanjo. The man has brokered a few Peace Deals in West Africa and is a UN envoy for peace talks for the Congo . I still think he would have to accomplished a resolution in that country before getting a Nobel Peace Prize but he has had hands in Liberia, Sierra Leone and even Dafur with different degrees of success and failure. Obama really had done Nothing and this Nobel Peace Prize will make a new Episode for Saturday Night Live to poke fun at Obama for doing nothing so far since he has been president . Like Jay Leno said Obama took 5 months to pick a puppy for his daughters.

I think this may be as much a prop up of Obama from admirers in Europe as anything. They see how the American public is becoming disenchanted with MR Yes We can . The slogan is rapidly becoming "no we can't as we are too broke to do anything"

Jim jones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...