[removed on request]

Okay, i'll rephrase without degrading those that have died:

The world pre-Obama was one that sincerely resented the U.S. government and its actions. When
Obama was elected he bought change (new promises and, most importantly, a new image). In the
eyes of the world McCain would have been just an older version of Bush -- the ongoing belief would
have been that McCain was just a puppet (just like his predecessor).

This doesn't have to be true in the sense of McCains or his views because general beliefs are rarely
factual.

This would have provided even more ammunition to anti-American groups, and specifically terrorist
organisations, to recruit and stretch their influence even further. This would have also impacted
countries such as Australia, New Zealand and the U.K where growing resentment has been building
for quite some time.

Countries such as China and Russia would have had to take a tougher stance against McCains tougher
attitude -- a kind of ripple effect.

So yes -- Obama has actually contributed in some way to the global peace efforts. Probably why he
has been awarded a peace prize... He should have rejected the prize, but that wouldn't have been
the peaceful solution -- now would it? .

Ignorance Fail.

Actually read my post and you'll realise i covered the fact that:

A) Bush/McCain don't have to be puppets. Its all about public image.
B) Obama didn't have to explicitly do anything. Its all about public image.
C) I don't need to know Bush/McCain. Its all about public image.

Now i know you might not be able to comprehend that -- having a double digit IQ and
all -- but at the very least please try not to dribble on the keyboard!

> Morbo the Annihilator wrote:

> Ignorance Fail.

Actually read my post and you'll realise i covered the fact that:

A) Bush/McCain don't have to be puppets. Its all about public image.
B) Obama didn't have to explicitly do anything. Its all about public image.
C) I don't need to know Bush/McCain. Its all about public image.

Now i know you might not be able to comprehend that -- having a double digit IQ and
all -- but at the very least please try not to dribble on the keyboard!

/facepalm

your argument is that Obama does not need to explicity do anything to deserve a nobel prize...

public image is the product of the media. if anyone deserves a nobel prize for obama's image, it should be them. but then again, the nobel prize has lost its meaning and is just become another tool of the media, but giving it to themselves would just be masturbation. and people that change their respect for the US as a country because the media has made the image of their president more favorable, are just puppets of the media; and i have no respect for them. now whats so idiotic about that?

> Morbo the Annihilator wrote:

> > your argument is that Obama does not need to explicity do
> anything to deserve a nobel prize...

That's...Pretty much what i've repeated a few times now.

no, you've been claiming he has been doing things... "-- Obama has actually contributed in some way to the global peace efforts"

> now whats so idiotic about that?

Because how you feel in your idealistic world is irrelevant to the feelings of
those living outside the U.S.

i think with the military and economic power the US has, the feelings and ideals of its citizens are very relevant to many of those living outside the US... i think these forums and people's responses to how i feel is also proof that it is relevant to you, or else you would of never responded...

"*Obama has actually IMPLICITLY contributed in some way to the global peace efforts*"

in what way? he doesnt have the power to silence and or shape the media. the media alone is responsible for image they portray of him to populations...

"I'm not the average person. "

no one is the average person... my posts were not directed to the average person...

"
No, the media generally masks the feelings of another countries population. Which is probably
why you never realised the growing resentment towards the Bush administration and U.S.
government."

hmmm, i remember since before the election where Bush won against Gore, the media emphisizing the unpopularity of Bush in other countries. and i remember that message being repeated several times in the media. i also remember in the media many reports of the Bush administration and the US government's popularity throughout the world plummeting.  there were several studies showing the outlook towards the US being at historic lows... so, no, that was never masked to americans... just keep talking out your ass though, its amusing...

"He doesn't need power. A fresh image and new direction was all it took to turn
the media outlets all over the world."

any image other then Bush was a fresh image and a new direction as long as the media paints it as such, or are you inferring the guy had to be black?

"
Then you would have to agree with me. Or be a complete idiot. Which is it?"

agree with you on what? that Bush was internationally unpopular before he was ever elected? that it was because of negative media coverage? that the media could do that with anyone? the difference between Hitler being a Hero and a Tyrant by the masses is the difference in media coverage. it didnt take Obama becoming president to get another oppotunity to give the US a new image, it took simply the US following the normal law where a president is restricted to two terms...

"The only alternative to Obama was McCain, in which case he would have been cast the 'New Bush' or
Bush 2.0!"

first of all, McCain wasnt the only option, there was a large array of democrats and republicans that ran for president; with the media's assistance, any of them could of probably become president... also, McCain did not have to be cast as Bush 2.0; it was your media's decision to do so and it was your media's gamble of the security of the world to do so... I would say the person most responsible for Obama becoming president is probably Bush. because Bush created such a hostility towards his party by the moderates that enabled such a liberal to win. so if anyone deserves the nobel prize for the change in direction, its Bush

Your missing the point avo, its all about public image...

State the obvious...

yeah, i state the obvious, because the obvious is where you fail....