Government health care is awful- see other countries
Global Warming is a natural occurance and many scientists say we are actually beginning to cool. We’ve been warming since the last ice age.
Going after news organizations who present your flaws, in addition to the good things you have done- beginning on censorship.

The list goes on…

Republicans have been publicly impugning Obama for a while now. They seem to be happy with the fact that they are temporarily chipping away at Obama’s approval numbers, while their own numbers are beyond dismal. This seems to be the Republican strategy as of late, drag the whole country down to their own sorry state of affairs. That would explain why many Republicans openly cheered when Chicago wasn’t selected to host the Olympics (as if Rio de Janiero and it’s leftist anti-government were in cahoots with the GOP), and why many Republican pundits are leading the charge against an American winning a Nobel Prize.

To the people on the far left and the right who want Obama to waive a magic wand and make all the troubles go away: get a brain.

I can’t comment on everyone’s posts here. Many of you raise good points. But there is a repeated attempt to claim that “Obama was only president for (insert small amount of time here) before the Nobel deadline.” This argument is sophistry. You do not have to be a president of a country to win this prize. Obama didn’t teleport himself in from an alternate dimension on inauguration day. Prior to winning the presidency, he was a U.S. Senator and an Illinois State Senator. Prior to that, he was an accomplished law professor. He did things prior to being elected, in other words. Not to mention, the symbolic ramifications of his election transcend many of his actions and words.

The other issue that is not being considered is how many are unconsciously analyzing his Nobel Prize through a narrow, American-centered perspective. Many on the left think that he hasn’t done enough to win the prize, many on the right feel the same way. And while many in the world feel that he shouldn’t have been given the prize, the Nobel Peace Prize Committee said that: “[Obama's] diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population.” In other words, the world, by and large, took a much deserved collective sigh of relief when Obama was elected. This has REAL WORLD political implications for peace and international cooperation. The Committee also specifically “mentioned Mr Obama’s work to strengthen international institutions and work towards a world free of nuclear arms.” Of course, they also mentioned how politics are involved: “It was because we would like to support what he is trying to achieve”.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8298580.stm

Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Top Quotes From This Year’s Nobel Peace Prize Winner …Updated With Video
Obama on his political opponents:
“They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”

Obama to his supporters:
“Get in Their Faces!”

Obama on ACORN mobs:
“I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”

Obama to his mercenary army:
“Hit Back Twice As Hard”

Obama on the killer Iranian regime murdering their own people in the street:
“The Iranians are having a robust debate.”

Obama on defending genocide (2007):
The United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn’t a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.

Obama justifying killing babies who survive an abortion:
“Essentially adding an additional doctor who then has to be called in an emergency situation to come in and make these assessments is really designed simply to burden the original decision.”

And now that he is President has not done anything yet to end the war. In fact, President Obama has increased U.S. troop deployment to Afghanistan. So no, he is not ‘abolishing or reducing standing armies.’
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/17/obama.troops/index.html

—
“This war has cost billions of dollars that the American taxpayer will never see again”

So did the president’s Economic Stimulus Package, which spent at once nearly as much as the war has over the span of years.

—
“[Obama] is for the reduction of nuclear weapons …”

So was President Bush, who, early in his presidency, sat down with Russian President Vladimir Putin to actively decrease both Russian and American stockpiles of nuclear warheads. Why is he not given such a prize?
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=44463

—
“These are issues that he has used his political power and clout to deal with.”

Except he has not yet DONE anything about nuclear weapons and gay rights other than make pretty speeches at black-tie fundraisers. And the only work he’s made toward combating potential climate change is cap and trade, the environmental benefits of which are likely to be negligible.

—
“Are these issues finished? No.”

Obama has done nothing but SPEAK about torture, nuclear weapons and gay rights, and has increased troop levels in the Middle East. These issues have not even BEGUN.

—
“The Peace Prize has historically been given to leaders who have overcome racist and segregated societies, such as Archbishop Desmund Tutu of South Africa”

The United States is a segregated society? And what does his race have to do with “strengthening international diplomacy,” which is the reasoning provided for his being awarded the Nobel?