Rush Limbaugh Nominated For Nobel Peace Prize!

[Nathyn]

http://www.radioink.com/HeadlineEntry.asp?hid=136717&pt=todaysnews

Limbaugh was nominated for the award for his "nearly two decades of tireless efforts to promote liberty, equality and opportunity for all humankind, regardless of race, creed, economic stratum or national origin. These are the only real cornerstones of just and lasting peace throughout the world," said Landmark President Mark R. Levin.

“Rush Limbaugh is the foremost advocate for freedom and democracy in the world today," explained Levin. "Everyday he gives voice to the values of democratic governance, individual opportunity and the just, equal application of the rule of law – and it is fitting that the Nobel Committee recognize the power of these ideals to build a truly peaceful world for future generations."

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/02/02/nobel-nominations-left-and-right/

The Nobel Institute did expand its rules in 2003, allowing for a wider array of nominators. From the Institute’s Web Site:

Any one of the following persons is entitled to submit proposals:

* members of national assemblies and governments;
* members of international courts of law;
* university chancellors; university professors of social science, history, philosophy, law and theology;
* leaders of peace research institutes and institutes of foreign affairs;
* former Nobel Peace Prize laureates;
* board members of organizations that have received the Nobel Peace Prize;
* present and past members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; (committee members must present their nomination at the latest at the first committee meeting after February 1);
* former advisers at the Norwegian Nobel Institute.

We’re not sure which of these categories encompasses the Landmark Legal Foundation, but we’ll assume that Mr. Levin knows what he’s doing. It’s worth noting, however, that the Nobel Institute adds this suggestion at the same Web site:

“The nominators are strongly requested not to publish their proposals.”

Oh, but wait!!!

Don't Rush to Conclusions

What the release--from PR Newswire--failed to mention was that the nomination was unsolicited. A spokesman said they had not found any rule against unsolicited nominations.

Through some keen detective work--clicking on the official Nobel prize Web site--we found one: "Can I nominate someone for the Nobel Prize? If you are not invited you cannot nominate." Had they been invited. No, said the spokesman.

And then:

Conservative Group Withdraws Limbaugh's Nobel Nomination

Sources inside the foundation say the Titanic-sized talker believed he was being nominated for the Nobel Pizza Prize, which comes with a cash award of $100 Norwegian Kroner (approximately US$16) and a year's free supply of Domino's. When Limbaugh realized he was being nominated for his efforts to promote peace, understanding, and fraternity between nations, the porcine provocateur declined the honor, calling it “something communists like Al Gore would probably get behind.”

The claim that Rush Limbaugh heard "peace prize" from "pizza price" seems dubious. I can't follow how he could confuse the two.

From the information above, I conclude:

#1. Limbaugh's mammoth-sized ego made him think, "Hey, now that the nobel nomination rules are so broad, this year, maybe I could get nominated. Al Gore got nominated. Even if I don't win, at least I can say I was nominated."

#2. Limbaugh asks his buddies at Landmark Legal Firm to nominate him. They do, posting a nomination letter on their website and putting out a press release of the nomination. Their boss, Mark Levin, and other spokesmen even speak to the media about the announcement, claiming it's not a hoax.

#3. Within 24-hours, it's clear that this is going to end up humiliating Limbaugh rather than improve his reputation. He asks them to withdraw the nomination and Limbaugh tells the media that he thought they were talking about the "pizza prize," and then remarks how the nobel peace prize is for Marxists. Take that, Mother Theresa, you pinko commie.

Even if I'm wrong, the sheer incompetence of the situation is still hilarious.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Rush appears to be following Oscar Wilde's old dictum: the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.

IIRC, Landmark President Mark R. Levin is a neocon mouthpiece, who used to be a frequent guest on Sean Hannity's talk radio show.

Or is this another Mark R. Levin?

DR

 

[HarryKeogh]

I'm hoping You will add a Peace Prize to their Time Person of the Year award.

I hope Rush does win it. Whenever he refers to Obama as an Halfrican-American it just warms my heart.

 

[shemp]

The only Nobel Prize Rush deserves is the Nobel Piss Prize, which is a year's supply of all he can drink.

 

[Tony]

The only Nobel Prize Rush deserves is the Nobel Piss Prize, which is a year's supply of all he can drink.

Children's piss perhaps?

 

[fuelair]

Rush Limbaugh Nominated For Nobel Peace Prize!





But not by anyone who matters.

 

[BPSCG]

I'm hoping You will add a Peace Prize to their Time Person of the Year award.

The Nobel Peace Prize lost the last shreds of its credibility in 1994, so "You" doesn't need to win to trivialize it any further. It's been nearly thirty years since anyone won it for actually ending a war.

Previous winners included:

• Woodrow Wilson, in 1919, for his work in promoting the League of Nations. The U.S. never ratified the League of Nations treaty, and the League proved utterly inept at dealing with the rise of fascism in the 1930's.
• U.S. Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg, in 1929, for his work in co-authoring the Kellogg-Briand Pact (his French counterpart, Aristide Briand, won it in 1926 for his work on the Locarno Treaties). The Kellogg-Briand Pact, as we all know, outlawed war, ruining Adolf Hitler's plans for world domination, and he lived out the rest of his days quietly as a minor painter who would occasionally send letters to Deutsche Aussenpolitik outlining some of his quaint views on world affairs.
• Ralph Bunche, in 1950, "for mediating in Palestine." The peaceful fruits of that labor can be seen to this day.
• The United Nations Peace-Keeping forces, in 1988, "For participation in numerous conflicts since 1956." Seriously. By that measure, the French Foreign Legion should be a finalist every year.
• Mikhail Gorbachev won it in 1990 "for his leading role in the peace process which today characterizes important parts of the international community." More on that below.
• In 1994, Yassir Arafat won. 'Nuff said.
• The United Nations and Secretary-General Kofi Annan won it in 2001, "for their work for a better organized and more peaceful world." Some things are just beyond satire.
• Jimmy Carter, in 2002, so the Nobel Committee could let George W. Bush know just what it thought of him.

In over a hundred years, only four people have won it for actually stopping a war: Theodore Roosevelt won it in 1906, for drawing up the treaty ending the Russo-Japanese war, Carlos Saavedra of Argentina won it in 1936 for drawing up the agreement ending a war between Bolivia and Paraguay, and Egypt's Anwar Sadat and Israel's Menachem Begin won it in 1978 for negotiating an end to their countries' war.

One wonders why Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill never won it, seeing as how they did more to end war than all of the worthies on the bulleted list above combined. One also wonders why the Nobel Committee decided to honor Mikhail S. Gorbachev "for his leading role in the peace process" but decided Ronald W. Reagan, who forced Gorbachev into that peace process, which resulted in the collapse of the Soviet nuclear threat without a shot being fired, was unworthy.

 

[steverino]

One also wonders why the Nobel Committee decided to honor Mikhail S. Gorbachev "for his leading role in the peace process" but decided Ronald W. Reagan, who forced Gorbachev into that peace process, which resulted in the collapse of the Soviet nuclear threat without a shot being fired, was unworthy.

Wow. You sure are putting a scar on the face value of Gorby's prize.

 

[ConspiRaider]

If the Norwegian Nobel Committee does in fact award the Peace Prize to Rush Limbaugh:

I am going to ask Al Gore to aim all the deleterious effects of Global Warming directly at Norway until such time as the Prize is yanked out of Rush's chubby, chili-stained fingers and re-awarded to anyone else.

Except dittoheads.

Okay, not The Decider either.

Oh hell, not Quick-Draw Dick Cheney no-how.

Maybe: Brangelina?

 

[Tony]

One wonders why Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill never won it, seeing as how they did more to end war than all of the worthies on the bulleted list above combined.

Good question. Why didn't they win it? Here is a list of all the peace prize laureates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_peace_prize#Laureates

It was awarded to George Marshall of the Marshall plan so that punches a hole in your proto-conspiracy theory (they even gave one to Kissinger!!!), but I'd still like to know why FDR and Churchill didn't win one.

One also wonders why the Nobel Committee decided to honor Mikhail S. Gorbachev "for his leading role in the peace process" but decided Ronald W. Reagan, who forced Gorbachev into that peace process, which resulted in the collapse of the Soviet nuclear threat without a shot being fired, was unworthy.

Perhaps because your version of events is the fabrication of American right-wing revisionists.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

IIRC, Landmark President Mark R. Levin is a neocon mouthpiece, who used to be a frequent guest on Sean Hannity's talk radio show.

Or is this another Mark R. Levin?

I did some digging and he's the guy who is on ABC radio along with Hannity and Rush.
{posted by me elsewhere}

Does Landmark Legal Foundation fit the criteria for being able to nominate someone? This sounds to me like a crass WABC publicity stunt.

I'm half tempted to report the OP for not sticking to the rules of N&CE since this clearly is nothing but a bogus publicity stunk by Rush's fellow ABC ranter Mark Levin.

I do guess there's some irony in it though since Levin is trying (though according to the nomination protocols, he cannot actually nominate Rush) to allude to world peace when he himself sounds like one of the Martians in Mars Attacks.

"Ack. Ack! Ack!!! Chucky Schumky! Ack! Ack..." It's not really all that different than the nonsence the Martians spewed in Tim Burton's movie.

 

[Skeptic]

No need to get excited. Quite apart from the fact that the Nobel peace prize was won by Yasser Arafat in 1994, which is the equivalent of giving the Nobel prize in Medicine to Dr. Mengele, anybody can "nominate" anyone to the Nobel prize in anything. There is no official nomination list, and the prize committee doesn't accept or consider nominations.

 

[shemp]

Children's piss perhaps?

Whatever floats his boat.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Whatever floats his boat.

Screw the lot of them, I nominate Shemp for the Nobel Peace Prize for 2006.

"Humor soothes the savage beasts."

DR

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

...anybody can "nominate" anyone to the Nobel prize in anything. There is no official nomination list, and the prize committee doesn't accept or consider nominations.

No, that's not true at all. In fact the committe solicits nominations.
http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html

September – Nomination forms are sent out. The Nobel Committee sends out invitation letters containing confidential forms to individuals qualified to nominate – members of national assemblies, governments, and international courts of law; university chancellors, professors of social science, history, philosophy, law and theology; leaders of peace research institutes and institutes of foreign affairs; Nobel Peace Prize Laureates of previous years; board members of organizations that have received the Nobel Peace Prize; present and past members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; and former advisers of the Norwegian Nobel Institute.

The formal process doesn't stop Mar(s Attacks)k Levin from shrieking a publicity stunt for his co-gadfly Rush though. "Ack! Ack! Ruck Noback Rack!!!"

 

[Kerberos]

Good question. Why didn't they win it? Here is a list of all the peace prize laureates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_peace_prize#Laureates

It was awarded to George Marshall of the Marshall plan so that punches a hole in your proto-conspiracy theory (they even gave one to Kissinger!!!), but I'd still like to know why FDR and Churchill didn't win one.

I'm pretty sure the Peace prize is supposed to be given to people who promote peace by nonviolent means. While using force to stop Hitler was clearly perfectly justified, it still doesn't fit the bill.

 

[BPSCG]

I'm pretty sure the Peace prize is supposed to be given to people who promote peace by nonviolent means. While using force to stop Hitler was clearly perfectly justified, it still doesn't fit the bill.

FDR and Churchill did more than all the pre-war treaties combined to stop Hitler, and more than all the non-violent people who died in ovens at his hands.

Here's a modest proposal, then:

Amend the nominating and award rules to specify that nobody may be nominated or selected until more than ten years have elapsed since the year in which the that person did whatever it was that was supposed to get him considered.

That way, the committee would be able to evaluate whether the work was at all successful. And if it they still wanted, in, say 2004, to award Arafat the prize for all he did to bring peace to Palestine, it could do so.

Nobody got the Nobel Prize in Physics for their work in the "discovery" of cold fusion. The physics prize is awarded not for work, but for achievement. Why should the peace prize be any different?

Nobel specified that the Peace Prize should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." So I guess the committee will continue to give it to people who sign pieces of paper.

FWIW, based on the committee's past selections, I estimate that Al Gore has to be the overwhelming front-runner this year.

 

[Timble]

There's the possibly apocryphal story that Tom Leher said that politcal satire was obselete after Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973.

 

[Nathyn]

FDR and Churchill did more than all the pre-war treaties combined to stop Hitler, and more than all the non-violent people who died in ovens at his hands.

Here's a modest proposal, then:

Amend the nominating and award rules to specify that nobody may be nominated or selected until more than ten years have elapsed since the year in which the that person did whatever it was that was supposed to get him considered.

That way, the committee would be able to evaluate whether the work was at all successful. And if it they still wanted, in, say 2004, to award Arafat the prize for all he did to bring peace to Palestine, it could do so.

Nobody got the Nobel Prize in Physics for their work in the "discovery" of cold fusion. The physics prize is awarded not for work, but for achievement. Why should the peace prize be any different?

Nobel specified that the Peace Prize should be awarded "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." So I guess the committee will continue to give it to people who sign pieces of paper.

FWIW, based on the committee's past selections, I estimate that Al Gore has to be the overwhelming front-runner this year.

I don't follow how you're going to argue that the leaders of the west during WORLD WAR 2 should actually be honored on par with Gandhi. I agree that the award should recognize achievement, not work. Upon that basis, it doesn't take any real work to order thousands of men to die. Bush and Blair do it every day and neither of them break a sweat. I hear Bush doesn't even read the newspaper and likes to take afternoon naps. Even if the end results of war are desirable, the achievement rests upon the soldiers who are dead, wounded, and traumatized, not the bureaucrats at the top.

And really, not to sound sympathetic to Hitler, but regarding the west's involvement in World War 2 and its relation to peace, a relevant quote for you:

"The quickest way to end a war is to lose it."
-George Orwell

Not to say that I would've preferred a global Nazi empire, but we would've achieved peace far more quickly if the Allies had just surrendered completely. It would've been an uneasy and extremely oppressive peace, but peace nonetheless.

Not to mention, if we're going to bring up FDR and Winston Churchill, I think FDR's internment of thousands of Japanese-Americans and Churchill's racist campaign to remove the "dogs" in Palestine, so that a "fitter race" of Jews could replace them -- these things are certainly relevant.

Hey, I've got an idea: Why don't you get someone to nominate Bush, for establishing "democracy and freedom" in Iraq?

 

[BPSCG]

There's the possibly apocryphal story that Tom Leher said that politcal satire was obselete after Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973.

Secretary of State Kissinger and his North Vietnamese counterpart, Le Duc Tho (which is French for, "The Duck, Though"), won it for their work in the Vietnam peace accord. The peace accord provided for a cease-fire in place (i.e., North Vietnamese troops would remain in South Vietnam), the withdrawal of U.S. troops from South Vietnam, and free elections to follow. Soon after the agreements were signed, the USSR and Communist China resumed and escalated their support for North Vietnam, in violation of the treaty. In December 1974, the Democratic majority in Congress passed the Foreign Assistance Act of 1974, which cut off all military funding to the South Vietnamese government.* The war continued unabated, ending in 1975 when South Vietnam finally collapsed.

Kissinger and Le Duc Tho did not negotiate an end to the war. They negotiated a treaty that gave North Vietnam an overwhelming advantage in prosecuting the war. For this they deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. They certainly did as much or more to promote the cause of peace as Yassir Arafat.

*Hmmm, do we see history repeating itself today?