McCain: Gore Should Not Have Gotten Nobel Prize
John McCain has become the first candidate for president to comment on Al Gore's Nobel Peace Prize in a negative way, telling an Iowa crowd that there were more worthy people out there to whom the prize could have been awarded.
"I would have liked to see that prize go to the Buddhist monks who are suffering and dying in Burma," McCain said.
Comments (73)
luneylegume wrote on October 12, 2007 4:46 PM:I think what he meant to say was Clinton did either first or too , I was little mixed up when I was reading his mind when he was reading the room .
stemper wrote on October 12, 2007 4:49 PM:Oh John, give it up, already!
Pandering to the 2% that think there is no such thing as global warming is not going to win you the general, even if you do get past Rude Boy. So much for straight talk.
Somebody put a fork in him (figuratively that is).
brandon pass wrote on October 12, 2007 4:49 PM:IDIOT! that is not unlike someone saying "McCain should have not received the silver star". and not to take anything away from the monks, but if a people is being exploited and disenfranchised, one does typically not receive the award for NOT successfully achieving peace, but when that conflict has been overcome by strong strides and innovative proposals/solutions.
What happened to McCain? there was once a point when I thought he would be a uniter and begin to get some work done across the aisle. Also what is up with that debate comment stating at the bare minimum he would consult the congress? WHAT THE HELL? that is required by our Constitution! He has slowly been converted to a NeoCon after he got his ass handed to him by them. what a political sissy. will do anything for appeal.
Richard wrote on October 12, 2007 4:54 PM:Well remember this folks..
Mr. Straight Talk would like to see the Prize go to someone other than an American.
He has little understanding of the selection process, or thinks his audience does, and suggests the impossible as what he would like.
Now...lets get it right this time: IF THE WILL LIE when they campaign..they will lie when the get elected. IF THEY GET FACTS WRONG when they campaign they will get facts wrong when they are elected. IF THEY CANNOT DIFFERENTIATE FANTACY FROM REALITY when they campaign..they will not be able to do so when elected.
PS: Mr. McCain, it is not possible to perform an act and get a Nobel Prize for it 3 weeks later. You can get a blue ribbon at a county fair that way but not the most coveted award on earth. Also, Mr. McCain..you will never get a Nobel Prize..unless its a turkey award for that photo of you hugging a man that called your daughter the illegitimate result of an affair you had with a prostitute..remember that?
Does the fool not realize the His Holiness The Dalai Lama (a buddhist monk) won the Nobel Peace Prize for all he has done to further the cause of world peace and human dignity...but, silly me, human dignity doesn't enters these guys heads does it. At least he is aware of the plight of the monks (at last)...China has been doing to Tibet for years what has been going on in Burma and is only now hitting the news.
Good for you Johnny boy...go run another campaign.
Aung Sun Suu Kyi, the dissident leader in Burma, has also won a Nobel Peace Prize.
John McCain is just a douchebag.
scavok wrote on October 12, 2007 5:05 PM:From a practical perspective, the Nobel committee didn't even have time to consider what is currently going on in Burma when deciding the prize.
But a shiny object is a shiny object and must be dangled in front of people to distract them from reality.
markg8 wrote on October 12, 2007 5:08 PM:My letter to McCain's Senate website:
I'm writing in reference to Senator's McCain's wish out loud today in IA that the Nobel Peace Prize had gone to someone other than Al Gore and his hope that Gore will now support nuclear power and his cap and trade proposal.
Since Vice President Gore isn't likely to respond to a fading second tier presidential candidate looking for headlines like McCain I thought I'd take a little time to make my wishes known. The first thing that came to mind when I read the Des Moines Register story is John McCain can go f*ck himself. Having given it some more thought John McCain can go f*ck himself with a used nuclear powerplant fuel rod.
markg8 wrote on October 12, 2007 5:09 PM:You too can write the fast fading McCain here:
http://mccain.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm?ID=64
The Bobs wrote on October 12, 2007 5:13 PM:Nominations for the prize were closed after February 1st. What an idiot.
Jim wrote on October 12, 2007 5:14 PM:I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that John McCain doesn't know that the nominees for the Nobel Peace prize are generally done quite a ways in advance of the actual award. I believe the noms are in February. So while it would be nice that the monks get a nobel peace prize, what has gone on in Burma recently would put them as noms for next year. I really liked him back in 2000 when he didn't care to bash other politicians.
lestatdelc wrote on October 12, 2007 5:14 PM:Wow, more proof that McCain has lost all grips with reality (if he has ever had it at all that is). As noted up thread, Aung San Suu Kyi, the driving force behind the Burmese struggle for democratic reforms has already won the Nobel Peace Prize for her peaceful and non-violent struggle for human rights under a military dictatorship, back in 1991.
anon wrote on October 12, 2007 5:15 PM:How about the Iraqi's who are suffering and dying because of Bush's war McCain so ardently supports?
stemper wrote on October 12, 2007 5:18 PM:Matt Taibbi has an excellent article on the McCain campain in the current Rolling Stone. Heartily recommended.
TheraP wrote on October 12, 2007 5:20 PM:Perhaps it's already been said, but:
McCain had ample time to suggest the Burmese monks for the Peace Prize. Why didn't he foresee their demonstrations and do that?
This is so sad. What a laughing-stock we look like to the world! A great honor and they have tarnish this moment!
Well, if they can go after a 12 year old kid, they will go after the Nobel Peace Prize selection process too! What's next?
P J Evans wrote on October 12, 2007 5:22 PM:It's so hard to keep track of the differences between the world you want and the world you actually have, especially when you're a fading GOoPer politician. Someone on his staff should have pointed out, loudly, that the nominations went in *last winter*, not last week. (That's assuming he still has staff members.)
Gabe wrote on October 12, 2007 5:27 PM:Hey John-boy, what have you ever done for humanity? Nothing? Right, that's what I thought.
James Hassinger wrote on October 12, 2007 5:35 PM:Gawd, what a rusted hulk McCain has become. Once telling the truth about Falwell, et. al., but now, apparently, so hungry for the presidency that he will kiss any thug, and betray any friend, to get there. And of course, he's not getting there.
Ferruge wrote on October 12, 2007 5:38 PM:Aw, come on, John, why not suggest that Rush Limbaugh should have won? I mean, you go to the effort to insinuate that the whole thing is a partisan affair, why not go whole hog?
Gideon Ross wrote on October 12, 2007 5:43 PM:I really appreciate getting a lecture about who deserves a peace prize from someone who used to bomb schools.
MB wrote on October 12, 2007 5:43 PM:The Burmese monks, really? I'd have thought they were all "gooks" to him.
Patrick wrote on October 12, 2007 5:47 PM:If they awarded a Nobel Prize for being a senile warmonger, McCain would win hands down.
Hey, he's just jealous. Gore's presidential campaign is in better shape than his.
Michael Rissman wrote on October 12, 2007 5:48 PM:Actually John McCain should have won the Peace Prize for his groveling hug of Bush at the 2004 convention, a hug tat reminds me of Jane Fonda crawling back to her pimp in Klute.
That's the same Bush who called him brainwashed, his wife a doper, and his kid a love child of a tumble with a whore of color. Blessed are the grovelers for they...
CalD wrote on October 12, 2007 5:51 PM:Do you suppose John McCain believes there exist large numbers of Republican primary voters who honestly given a damn about how many Buddhist monks (with no oil) are killed or displaced in "Burma" or anywhere else? Or is he just being a curmudgeon?
Daniel wrote on October 12, 2007 5:52 PM:With the Religious Right moving towards Romney and pouncing Giuliani, this is probably McCain's way of staying relevant in the extremist GOP.
oleeb wrote on October 12, 2007 5:55 PM:Mccain is a piece of excrement. I hope Ron Paul kicks his sorry as in the primaries BAD!
fafner1 wrote on October 12, 2007 6:03 PM:You don't get the Noble peace prize for suffering and dying. If the Monks are successful (and I pray they are though I remain pessimistic) in establishing a peaceful democracy in Burma than they will deserve the prize (and a hell of a lot more). People just don't get it that the prize is for some accomplishment that promotes the cause of peace, not for being a good person, not for suffering, not for dying.
Anonymous wrote on October 12, 2007 6:05 PM:And just exactly what is it that Craven McCain is doing to help the monks, other than offering rhetorical nonsense to the dwindling few who still fail to appreciate Al Gore? Nothing, I suspect.
Carl Nyberg wrote on October 12, 2007 6:07 PM:Here's my follow-up questions for McCain.
"As a member of Congress you are among the people eligible to nominate candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize. Who have you nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize since being elected to Congress? Did you nominate the Burmese monks you wanted to have recognized?"
See Wikipedia for background on nominations.
namvetted wrote on October 12, 2007 6:14 PM:I almost feel sorry for the old fart after his remark about Gore. He's like the boxer who took too many punches in too many fights. It's time to pack it in, senator. Go home and lick your wounds.
CalD wrote on October 12, 2007 6:28 PM:Or maybe it's just the ethanol talking. (Before breakfast, Senator? Really.)
Susan Kitchens wrote on October 12, 2007 6:30 PM:That John McCain.
He just wants to see Americans lose in the world.
How unpatriotic. He hates our citizens.
Nell wrote on October 12, 2007 6:41 PM:I don't believe that's what McCain said, and I bet the DMR ends up retracting their report.
The New York Times political blog, the Caucus, reporting from Davenport, reported him as saying that the monks should win a Nobel Peace prize as well.
They reported that McCain earlier, in Crawfordsville, congratulated Gore and challenged him to join McCain in advocating for nuclear power as part of anti-warming policy.
We'll see which version the McCain campaign wants to go with. I concede it's possible that right-wing reaction to the prize may have sent him over to the mean-spirited version, but until I see proof (video) or clarification, I'm going to give McCain the benefit of the doubt on this.
Joe Monster wrote on October 12, 2007 6:46 PM:I disagree with McCain's reasoning, and suspect this is something else he just doesn't understand.
If the monks are deserving, then so likely is Gore. Their situations are largely the same on paper.
The monks were pulled away from the world-improving thing to stand up to the Thai government, whose incompetence and conservatism has led to unbearable inflation, centralization of power and isolation from the world community. But we get the sense they'll go right back to monking when things settle down, and this is news, happening right now.
Gore was also pulled away from his previous career in government by the same sort of junta, which (BushCo) jacked up the price of gas and everything else with their incompetence here after the 2000, our currency is on par with Canada's, and we're isolated. I think that's the end of the analogy. Gore is said to be done with politics, if not government.
But the academy award and the years of lecture tours happened over the past several years, while McCain was busy trying to rape the Constitution. The Nobel Committe deliberated about it and returned a result based on the history, and it would be inappropriate to snap a judgement on the monks as it's happening.
FOX types like Mr. McCain may be more likely to confuse history with events. This is him being reactionary.
Nell is right, he does say a lot of things he either didn't mean or didn't say right.
Brian M wrote on October 12, 2007 7:18 PM:Nell suggested that Mr McCain's statement is not as represented in the
i Register.
That being the case, I must say that it's nice to see the other side getting that treatment form the press.
Tempest wrote on October 12, 2007 7:20 PM:I enjoy Senator McCain's comments and encourage him to make more on this and other subjects on the domestic and international political scene.
Clown.
Am I alone here? Is this the first time the recipient of a Nobel has been trashed? I seriously can't recall this happening before.
gil wrote on October 12, 2007 8:22 PM:How patriotic not to support an American receiving this prestigious price...The republican party all together has become an insult to the human race...
Sarah wrote on October 12, 2007 9:17 PM:I am extremely liberal. That's why I DISLIKE Gore (privileged, affluent, wasteful, hypocrite) I'm obviously no fan of McCain. But I can't believe how everyone's going on about criticisms of Gore, many of which I believe are valid. I'm sorry, but someone who spends an average of $2400 a month on their gas and electric bills for their HOME isn't a great friend of the environment.
http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/main/article.php?article_id=367&loc=interstitialskip
Is this prize really because of "An Inconvenient Truth"?! There are far better advocate filmmakers out there, many of whom practice what they preach to a better degree than Gore; he's being rewarded for his notoriety, not his consistency, his saintliness nor his talent.
You can't begin to call yourself a progressive and claim that Gore stands in the ranks of Mother Theresa, Ghandi, MLK, the Dalai Lama, Aung San Suu Kyi and the like.
jeffreydj wrote on October 12, 2007 9:23 PM:To vandrop, they trashed Guatemala's Mendes when she won some years ago, "they" being the scummiest clowns Wingnutland could present.
's funny how the once presumably presentable McCain could join those ranks today. The man has just rendered himself the moral equal of Limbaugh and Savage. If you were wondering how low he could sink, you're finding out fast.
Marc wrote on October 12, 2007 9:31 PM:Uh huh Sarah. Suuure you're liberal. And I'm a movie star. He has adopted a carbon-neutral approach, which one would think would appeal to free market types. But wingers just hate folks like Gore, regardless of what he does.
And actual liberals can spot a republican spouting talk radio "facts" a mile away.
kozmik wrote on October 12, 2007 11:12 PM:Could McCain be any more bitter?
One of the few things GWBush and Rove ever got right: McCain IS mentally unbalanced and prone to fits.
g wrote on October 12, 2007 11:44 PM:I know this website has certain political leanings, and thus isn't the biggest fan of McCain, but this article is clearly very misleading if not outright false.
According to the AP, McCain said Gore's win was "well-deserved", which directly contradicts the headline.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hCuXplELUPgj1nUTnuA74w0rLmQQD8S83A881
g wrote on October 12, 2007 11:44 PM:I know this website has certain political leanings, and thus isn't the biggest fan of McCain, but this article is clearly very misleading if not outright false.
According to the AP, McCain said Gore's win was "well-deserved", which directly contradicts the headline.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hCuXplELUPgj1nUTnuA74w0rLmQQD8S83A881
vivek wrote on October 13, 2007 1:24 AM:johny boy, losing to dimwit george doesn't necessarily make one insane (like you are now ) it can also make one a nobel laureate like Al is. atleast learn how real men treat defeat and low point in their life and still don't give up their values which your groupies constantly talk.
this man was and is constantly attacked like you were once attacked. but he still remains calm. truly amazing person. Al is indeed a smart individual.
thanks for commenters pointing out that aung sang suu kyi won nobel prize and also buddhist monk Dalai Lama. McCain has gone so much nuts for the presidency he would even forget his name.
1st Republic 14th Star wrote on October 13, 2007 8:23 AM:g, Apparently McCain has made conflicting statements about Gore's Nobel Prize. If McCain was a Democrat, he'd be accused of "flip flopping." BIOKIYAR, so the "liberal" media will doubtless find a way to make these diametrically opposed quotes sound like "straight talk" from a "maverick."
Republican presidential candidate John McCain congratulated Al Gore on winning the Nobel Peace Prize on today, but he pointedly noted he was pulling for someone else.
“I would have liked to have seen that prize go to the monks who are suffering and dying on behalf of freedom in Burma,” McCain told reporters in Davenport. “That would have been my choice if I had been voting.”
http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2007/10/12/news/local/doc470fc74992453364831142.txt
"It's well-deserved. ... I hope that the new Nobel Peace Prize winner will engage in serious activities with me and others" to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through use of nuclear power and carbon credits for industry.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hCuXplELUPgj1nUTnuA74w0rLmQQD8S83A881
Ferruge wrote on October 13, 2007 9:18 AM:I am extremely liberal.
Apparently in the same way that Larry Craig IS NOT GAY, and NEVER HAS BEEN GAY.
What a weird and frankly unbelievable thing to say.
David Bannish wrote on October 13, 2007 10:39 AM:McCain should have also said that there were more deserving people to win the Presidency in 2000 than the person who did win.
NastyDiaper wrote on October 13, 2007 10:41 AM:This truly confuses me.
It indicates that McCain does not even understand the prize. It outcasts the TDR conservationist republicans. Which, if my math is correct, is all that remained to support him.
Tom Fox wrote on October 13, 2007 10:48 AM:McCain's comment says more about him than about Gore. It's seems to me a good measure of his generosity of spirit, but maybe he simply didn't understand how much it would reveal.
nuQlerOstrich wrote on October 13, 2007 11:51 AM:Wow. An American won the Nobel Peace Prize. And John McCain isn't proud to be an American.
What happened John? Lose your lapel pin?
JimBob wrote on October 13, 2007 12:06 PM:Even though McCain is funny on the Daily Show, he's always struck me as a bit creepy. Now I'm done with him. What a crumb-bum thing to say. And stupid, too. The Nobel prize never goes to anyone while they're in the midst of whatever it is they're doing that's Prizeworthy. What a jerk.
kevin wrote on October 13, 2007 12:43 PM:Hmmm....Burma, err, Myanmar.
McCain sounds like one of those guys who insists on still using Constantinople, Yugoslavia, or Soviet Union. Perhaps he didn't hear on the Dumont that they've made some changes.
Thomas Williams wrote on October 13, 2007 2:18 PM:Piiiityful JUST piiiiityful, Let me try to get this: Dont support the monks in burma with a military intervention, just give them $750,000?
OH John, just how are those MONKS sussposed to get that money?
do you think the military leaders will let them travel abroad to claim the money?
or allow them to bring the money into burma to use to support their good work?
Yep McCain has become the 'perfected' delusionalist, did Coulter suggest this to him or was it some oil company executives hoping to claim the money was just compensation for the enforced slave labor they directed with help from the military thug leaders that benifited the campaign coffers of the REPUGTHUGS?
Just go quietly into the night, and SHUT UP John cause you aint ever never gonna get an award like this, You drank the KOOL AID now you get to pay for it.
B wrote on October 13, 2007 2:59 PM:Anyone else think now would be a good time for Al to throw his hat in the ring?
As far as McCain goes...the guy's washed up, spent, kaput, (insert appropriate verbage here). He might as well use whatever money he has left to help finance those struggling in Burma, rather than seeking to exploit their struggle for a sound byte. Typical Republican BS, and simply pathetic. Happy trails, John Boy. Don't let the door hit you in the @$$ on the way out.
Badger wrote on October 13, 2007 4:16 PM:FWIW, it's perfectly possible to congratulate someone and not believe they were the best possible choice.
For example, let's say McCain achieves a miracle and wins the Republican nomination. I'm sure he'd get a lot of congratulations. But that doesn't mean that some of those sending well wishes wouldn't be thinking "But damn, name your candidate here would have been a much better choice.!"
But how dumb not to know that the Burma (BTW, isn't there a new name for this country now?) monks were not eligible for the award this year. I can't imagine they won't be nominated for next year's prize, however.
left coaster wrote on October 13, 2007 4:52 PM:What an ugly comment. Not even a few gracious words for a former fellow senator. It's time for McCain to end his campaign and his US Senate career, senility is taking hold of him.
biff diggerence wrote on October 14, 2007 10:03 AM:Senator McCain:
Aren't there already enough forks stuck in you ?
Doc Rock wrote on October 14, 2007 2:15 PM:McCain has sold out any shred of values he may have had, and, now, he shows himself to be so petty and venal as to be worthy only of our collective disregard.
Matt wrote on October 14, 2007 2:47 PM:This type partisanship is pathetic.
I agree with the "extreme liberal" above. Al Gore has done a lot of great things and is 100% correct on environmental issues (if not underestimating them), but what has he really done for world peace? Hopefully someone in here can explain that to those of us "phony-liberals."
You'd think that McCain would have been proud that an American, any American, had won the Nobel Peace Prize.
cal1942 wrote on October 14, 2007 3:43 PM:Matt wrote:
"but what has he really done for world peace? Hopefully someone in here can explain that to those of us "phony-liberals."
Al Gore brought the issue of man caused global warming to an audience in those very nations which use the most fossil fuels.
It's a service to world peace because rapid man-induced climate change would cause significant problems with, for example, food supply. Shortages caused by climate change could well trigger conflict that would engulf the globe.
greg wrote on October 14, 2007 3:57 PM:The irony is I've heard Gore compliment McCain for minor, but at least existent, past efforts to address global warming. But a sense of graciousness or any kind of human decency will call your credentials into question in today's GOP.
It's comical watching these candidates stampede each other chasing their rapidly shrinking base. Who's more pro-war, pro-torture, pro-tax cuts for millionaires? The more disastrous and unpopular the policy, the more they're for it. I'm waiting for one of them to say we need to bring back Brownie.
I can't tell you how many lifelong Republicans I know who now can barely speak the word. Running for President by going after the GOP base right now is like trying to catch a 100-lb. tuna in a backyard wading pool. Hell, even Hillary's negatives are shrinking among the leaners. I'd really be enjoying this march of the lemmings, except for my fears that they're going to shake up the equation, and that means widening the war. What else can they do?
Matt wrote on October 14, 2007 4:30 PM:cal: That's been the argument pitched by the NYT. I agree that bringing awareness to the issue of global warming is a noble deed. I'd question whether he has really done that, particularly in nations which use the most fossil fuels (are you talking about the US or developing nations?), but it's really not relevant. I also agree that environmental problems (as do most social problems) have the potential to lead to social conflict. But, he has not (yet) led the charge that actually gets us on a path to better address global warming. Remember, we are not even close to solving global warming. A devil's advocate argument could be made that Gore's smugness has actually set the movement back--although I probably wouldn't subscribe to that reasoning.
Criticizing McCain's comment that the Burmese monks are more deserving of the award (which he didn't actually say), one of the above posters says:
"one does typically not receive the award for NOT successfully achieving peace, but when that conflict has been overcome by strong strides and innovative proposals/solutions."
Indeed, it is ironic, then, that the poster uses this logic to defend Gore.
Hmmm I finally learned this is the guy who took money from the Keating. Now he is trying to act like he has an ounce of credibility when it comes to judging Mr. Gore. Sour grapes for sure, I guess if he would ever get the Presidency we could expect him to stand by while the remainder of this world is mucked to the nth degree. Where are the type of Republicans like Teddy Roosevelt who actually had a heart for preserving our country for the generations to come. I actually wrote in Mr. McCain in the 2000 election but since then,. I have seen so graphically why McCain would have been the wrong choice. Not that I would have voted for Bush, but I should have done more research about Mr. Gore. Shame on your sour grapes, Mr. McCain.
Lasthorseman wrote on October 14, 2007 8:37 PM:I'm going to try once again the reasons why I will forever condemn this global warming concept. My objections lie in the totalitarianism of it all. We are just replacing the war on terra meme with a war on the enviornment meme. A war is still a war.
The same people who rally on about the neo-cons and their war on terra also tell me with the very same dedication of Faux News viewers that my conversion from $600 every ten days for oil to a pellet stove is just not good enough? WTF? I was told wood pellets rely on machinery?
For most this is the only green solution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States
Big Al Gore with his massive compassion for humanity could have rallied himself with thousands of other completely worthwile causes. Depleted uranium is one of them. Perhaps a real investigation solving the questions more and more people have about 911. How about why media has supressed information about a simple drug that kills multiple versions of cancer.
Simply not, the establishment must remain the establishment and carbon trading as the new Wall Street will be justification for the massive repossetion of the western world's modern lifesyle.
Blow me Big Al!
I'm going to try once again the reasons why I will forever condemn this global warming concept. My objections lie in the totalitarianism of it all. We are just replacing the war on terra meme with a war on the enviornment meme. A war is still a war.
The same people who rally on about the neo-cons and their war on terra also tell me with the very same dedication of Faux News viewers that my conversion from $600 every ten days for oil to a pellet stove is just not good enough? WTF? I was told wood pellets rely on machinery?
For most this is the only green solution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States
Big Al Gore with his massive compassion for humanity could have rallied himself with thousands of other completely worthwile causes. Depleted uranium is one of them. Perhaps a real investigation solving the questions more and more people have about 911. How about why media has supressed information about a simple drug that kills multiple versions of cancer.
Simply not, the establishment must remain the establishment and carbon trading as the new Wall Street will be justification for the massive repossetion of the western world's modern lifesyle.
Blow me Big Al!
Happily, this will be the last campaign for John McCain. He will spend his last days on this planet raging against his own irrelevance.
Frank wrote on October 15, 2007 9:25 AM:McCains ad hominem and totally irrelevant comments on Gore winning the Nobel peace price reveals he still has not worn out his knee pads. A gentleman he is not.
Anything to assuage Bush's gotta be jealousy feelings about Gore is McCain's aim...He still harbors the desire to replace Cheney before the end of Bush's reign.
JNagarya wrote on October 15, 2007 5:48 PM:brandon pass wrote on October 12, 2007 4:49 PM:
IDIOT! that is not unlike someone saying "McCain should have not received the silver star". and not to take anything away from the monks, but if a people is being exploited and disenfranchised, one does typically not receive the award for NOT successfully achieving peace, but when that conflict has been overcome by strong strides and innovative proposals/solutions.
One can win the peace prize for effort -- as is the fact with the democratic activist in Burma/Myanmar Aung Sung Su Kyi. (I may not have her entire name correct.)
McCain should have been asked: Should Martin Luther King, Jr. won the peace prize? How about Henry Kissinger?
How about Jimmy Carter?
"Richard wrote on October 12, 2007 4:54 PM:
"Well remember this folks..
"Mr. Straight Talk would like to see the Prize go to someone other than an American. . . ."
Yes. But you've have to understand: he is pandering to the lunatic fringe "nuke 'em all!" "Christians" who hate and oppose peace, because they so through-and-through love Jesus.
