Did Obama Snub the Nobel Prize Committee?

[Josquius]

Are you trolling here or what?
I'm just confused.
I've already rationally responded to and refuted  your silly argument.

Ah, that's absolutely outstanding! 

You add to the ad homs and personal insults a pre-emptive declaration of victory!  

So...yes?
Good to know.

[DGuller]

Just for the record, grumbler, how are you supposed to rationally respond to an argument that's just completely out there?  If someone makes an argument that leaves you thinking "Wow, that was just bizarrely idiotic, can that guy even read?", how are you supposed to let that be known without being judged to engage in "ad homs"?

[Grey Fox]

Not everything is a fucking ad homs.

Also, stop using latin.

[jimmy olsen]

Are you trolling here or what?
I'm just confused.
I've already rationally responded to and refuted  your silly argument.

Ah, that's absolutely outstanding! 

You add to the ad homs and personal insults a pre-emptive declaration of victory!   

So...yes?
Good to know.

You didn't do anything to refute his argument, you just laughed at it.

Why, I'm not sure, it's a reasonable position. Surely the committee should be faulted for nominating Obama, not Obama himself.

[Josquius]

You didn't do anything to refute his argument, you just laughed at it.

Why, I'm not sure, it's a reasonable position. Surely the committee should be faulted for nominating Obama, not Obama himself.

See my 3rd and 4th posts. What he said was so silly I didn't realise he was being serious at first.
The very idea that Obama could be the one at fault here is just silly. The only way I could possibly see to make a argument there is from a conspiracy theorist angle 'the American influence is everywhere and all controlling ' or 'Obama is the antichrist'. Which of course is just dumb.

[Viking]

Obama

so, norway is not going to do anything about it.... right now there is a torchlight demonstration in front of the parliament by the campaign for unilateral nuclear disarmament along with other groups (including iranian exile groups) protesting FOR the US President.

I think Norway should unilaterally disarms its nuclear weapons.

Our Nukes are your Nukes.

[Ed Anger]

Also, stop using latin.

No. Ad absurdum

[grumbler]

Just for the record, grumbler, how are you supposed to rationally respond to an argument that's just completely out there?  If someone makes an argument that leaves you thinking "Wow, that was just bizarrely idiotic, can that guy even read?", how are you supposed to let that be known without being judged to engage in "ad homs"?

Just for the record, I have no problem responding rationally to arguments, even wacko ones.  Just for the record, though, I am not going to say how I make it so easy for myself, because I don't want to discourage the flamers from flaming me (or each other).  Seeing people get so worked up is the chief form of entertainment that this forum offers.

[Josquius]

Except I'm not worked up.
I'm the cat outside looking at the crazy yappy dog in the window and casually wondering 'err..wtf?' 

[grumbler]

You didn't do anything to refute his argument, you just laughed at it.

Why, I'm not sure, it's a reasonable position. Surely the committee should be faulted for nominating Obama, not Obama himself.

See my 3rd and 4th posts. What he said was so silly I didn't realise he was being serious at first.
The very idea that Obama could be the one at fault here is just silly. The only way I could possibly see to make a argument there is from a conspiracy theorist angle 'the American influence is everywhere and all controlling ' or 'Obama is the antichrist'. Which of course is just dumb.

See your first post:

Hopefully he felt like the fake he was and hence it wouldn't be right for him to act like a real nobel peace prize winner.

"Remember that "he" in this statement refers to Obama.  The claim made in this absurd statement, as I noted, that obama is somehow at fault and that he is "the fake he was."  Of course, all of us know (and Tyr has subsequently admitted) that Obama is not the fake.  He is the genuine recipient of the award.

The very idea that Obama could be the one at fault here is just silly. The only way I could possibly see to make a argument there is from a conspiracy theorist angle 'the American influence is everywhere and all controlling ' or 'Obama is the antichrist'. Which of course is just dumb.  Nevertheless, that is the tack Tyr took with "Hopefully he felt like the fake he was" and the argument that he wasn't "a real nobel peace prize winner." 

I am glad to see that you have abandoned such an "dumb" (to use your phrase) position, but am even more glad you didn't just man up and admit that you were either wrong, or else had expressed your sentiments in a way that clearly led every reader to believe that they were the opposite of what you now claim.  I much prefer that, rather than admitting you were wrong, you claim you never said what you said and personally attack those who point out the truth.  For the latter is the Languish Way(tm) and the harbinger of the much-hoped-for This Thread Delivers posts. 

[Caliga]

[grumbler]

Except I'm not worked up.
I'm the cat outside looking at the crazy yappy dog in the window and casually wondering 'err..wtf?' 

  You are continuing to deliver the personal insults, while claiming you are the calm and collected one!  I have delivered no controversial statements and no insults, and yet you think that someone will buy the "yappy dog" label?  Good luck with that.

Grumbler is the one saying out there things.

Love this one!  I am only pointing out that you have abandoned rational arguments for insults and ad homs (sprinkled with unilateral declarations of victory).  These are hardly "out there things." 

[grumbler]

Yes!


Hey!  Wait a minute!

[Josquius]

You didn't do anything to refute his argument, you just laughed at it.

Why, I'm not sure, it's a reasonable position. Surely the committee should be faulted for nominating Obama, not Obama himself.

See my 3rd and 4th posts. What he said was so silly I didn't realise he was being serious at first.
The very idea that Obama could be the one at fault here is just silly. The only way I could possibly see to make a argument there is from a conspiracy theorist angle 'the American influence is everywhere and all controlling ' or 'Obama is the antichrist'. Which of course is just dumb.

See your first post:

Hopefully he felt like the fake he was and hence it wouldn't be right for him to act like a real nobel peace prize winner.

"Remember that "he" in this statement refers to Obama.  The claim made in this absurd statement, as I noted, that obama is somehow at fault and that he is "the fake he was."  Of course, all of us know (and Tyr has subsequently admitted) that Obama is not the fake.  He is the genuine recipient of the award.

The very idea that Obama could be the one at fault here is just silly. The only way I could possibly see to make a argument there is from a conspiracy theorist angle 'the American influence is everywhere and all controlling ' or 'Obama is the antichrist'. Which of course is just dumb.  Nevertheless, that is the tack Tyr took with "Hopefully he felt like the fake he was" and the argument that he wasn't "a real nobel peace prize winner." 

I am glad to see that you have abandoned such an "dumb" (to use your phrase) position, but am even more glad you didn't just man up and admit that you were either wrong, or else had expressed your sentiments in a way that clearly led every reader to believe that they were the opposite of what you now claim.  I much prefer that, rather than admitting you were wrong, you claim you never said what you said and personally attack those who point out the truth.  For the latter is the Languish Way(tm) and the harbinger of the much-hoped-for This Thread Delivers posts. 

How could Obama possibly be at fault though?
How on earth would you suggest he 'made' the nobel prize commitee vote for him?
As I said its just crazy. No one could possibly believe that.

What you did was you saw my post and you thought 'I know a fun way to totally misinterprate this to fit a easy argument I want to set myself against and thus make myself look good!'

That I said I think Obama to be a bit of a fake NPP winner and not at all deserving says nothing at all about whose fault it is that he is in that position, merely that he is.
YOU are the only one who suggested it was Obama's fault.
I felt it to be pretty damn 'well fucking duh' that it was the NPC's doing.

Love this one!  I am only pointing out that you have abandoned rational arguments for insults and ad homs (sprinkled with unilateral declarations of victory).  These are hardly "out there things."  :c

Yep.
That pretty much proves you aren't trying to be rational but just looking for some sort of easy 'contest'.

[Neil]

He probably didn't express himself very well.  He's from northern England.  He's lucky to be literate.