The world honors our president with its most prestigious award — the Nobel Peace Prize. And, somehow, many Americans find a way to twist it into a negative. I’m perplexed. For a decade I’ve prayed that our country could retake its position as a leader among nations. Suddenly, we’re there. The ideals of our country are shining brightly, we have a leader who is credible and respected, and our country takes a giant leap in the listing of most admired nations. My work is so impacted by how America is perceived abroad, and my patriotism has had me lamenting how the brand of America was tarnished in the last decade. I’m not alone in this concern. I spent a day on Capitol Hill last year helping Bread for the World lobby for aid for hungry people. As they needed Republican votes, they basically found out which of those Members of Congress enjoyed European travel, and had me going from office to office talking travel and segueing from there to developmental aid.
During my visits on Capitol Hill, I kept hearing two concepts: the emerging importance of “soft power” and the need to polish the tarnished “brand of America.” Republicans I met were talking about how waging “soft power” (helping people with our brains and hearts) could actually be more cost-effective for our national interest than waging “hard power” (forcing things with our muscles). And they were lamenting how the sorry state of “the brand of America” was threatening our economy.
So now we have a man who, less than a year into his presidency, is doing all he can to wage soft power and polish the brand of America. And the world applauds us the best way it knows how, as it essentially says, “Lead us, and we will follow.” Yet our president practically needs to apologize for the honor of that award here at home. I was ready to collect my thoughts on this for a blog entry, and I stumbled on a great editorial in the New York Times by Bono dealing exactly with this topic from a European point of view. Much as I hate to give up my bully blog pulpit, I find Bono brilliant and must simply offer you his words on this timely topic. Here’s Bono:
Rebranding America (by Bono, from NY Times, Oct 18, 2009) A few years ago, I accepted a Golden Globe award by barking out an expletive. One imagines President Obama did the same when he heard about his Nobel, and not out of excitement.
When Mr. Obama takes the stage at Oslo City Hall this December, he won’t be the first sitting president to receive the peace prize, but he might be the most controversial. There’s a sense in some quarters of these not-so-United States that Norway, Europe and the World haven’t a clue about the real President Obama; instead, they fixate on a fantasy version of the president, a projection of what they hope and wish he is, and what they wish America to be.
Well, I happen to be European, and I can project with the best of them. So here’s why I think the virtual Obama is the real Obama, and why I think the man might deserve the hype. It starts with a quotation from a speech he gave at the United Nations last month: “We will support the Millennium Development Goals, and approach next year’s summit with a global plan to make them a reality. And we will set our sights on the eradication of extreme poverty in our time.” They’re not my words, they’re your president’s. If they’re not familiar, it’s because they didn’t make many headlines. But for me, these 36 words are why I believe Mr. Obama could well be a force for peace and prosperity — if the words signal action.
The millennium goals, for those of you who don’t know, are a persistent nag of a noble, global compact. They’re a set of commitments we all made nine years ago whose goal is to halve extreme poverty by 2015. Barack Obama wasn’t there in 2000, but he’s there now. Indeed he’s gone further — all the way, in fact. Halve it, he says, then end it.
Many have spoken about the need for a rebranding of America. Rebrand, restart, reboot. In my view these 36 words, alongside the administration’s approach to fighting nuclear proliferation and climate change, improving relations in the Middle East and, by the way, creating jobs and providing health care at home, are rebranding in action.
These new steps — and those 36 words — remind the world that America is not just a country but an idea, a great idea about opportunity for all and responsibility to your fellow man. All right … I don’t speak for the rest of the world. Sometimes I think I do — but as my bandmates will quickly (and loudly) point out, I don’t even speak for one small group of four musicians. But I will venture to say that in the farthest corners of the globe, the president’s words are more than a pop song people want to hear on the radio. They are lifelines.
In dangerous, clangorous times, the idea of America rings like a bell (see King, M. L., Jr., and Dylan, Bob). It hits a high note and sustains it without wearing on your nerves. (If only we all could.) This was the melody line of the Marshall Plan and it’s resonating again. Why? Because the world sees that America might just hold the keys to solving the three greatest threats we face on this planet: extreme poverty, extreme ideology and extreme climate change. The world senses that America, with renewed global support, might be better placed to defeat this axis of extremism with a new model of foreign policy.
It is a strangely unsettling feeling to realize that the largest Navy, the fastest Air Force, the fittest strike force, cannot fully protect us from the ghost that is terrorism …. Asymmetry is the key word from Kabul to Gaza …. Might is not right.
I think back to a phone call I got a couple of years ago from Gen. James Jones. At the time, he was retiring from the top job at NATO; the idea of a President Obama was a wild flight of the imagination.
General Jones was curious about the work many of us were doing in economic development, and how smarter aid — embodied in initiatives like President George W. Bush’s Emergency Program for AIDS Relief and the Millennium Challenge Corporation — was beginning to save lives and change the game for many countries. Remember, this was a moment when America couldn’t get its cigarette lighted in polite European nations like Norway; but even then, in the developing world, the United States was still seen as a positive, even transformative, presence.
In an asymmetrical war, he said, the emphasis had to be on making American foreign policy conform to that formula.
Enter Barack Obama.
If that last line still seems like a joke to you … it may not for long. Mr. Obama has put together a team of people who believe in this equation. That includes the general himself, now at the National Security Council; the vice president, a former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; the Republican defense secretary; and a secretary of state, someone with a long record of championing the cause of women and girls living in poverty, who is now determined to revolutionize health and agriculture for the world’s poor. And it looks like the bipartisan coalition in Congress that accomplished so much in global development over the past eight years is still holding amid rancor on pretty much everything else. From a development perspective, you couldn’t dream up a better dream team to pursue peace in this way, to rebrand America.
The president said that he considered the peace prize a call to action. And in the fight against extreme poverty, it’s action, not intentions, that counts. That stirring sentence he uttered last month will ring hollow unless he returns to next year’s United Nations summit meeting with a meaningful, inclusive plan, one that gets results for the billion or more people living on less than $1 a day. Difficult. Very difficult. But doable.
The Nobel Peace Prize is the rest of the world saying, “Don’t blow it.”
But that’s not just directed at Mr. Obama. It’s directed at all of us. What the president promised was a “global plan,” not an American plan. The same is true on all the other issues that the Nobel committee cited, from nuclear disarmament to climate change — none of these things will yield to unilateral approaches. They’ll take international cooperation and American leadership. The president has set himself, and the rest of us, no small task.
That’s why America shouldn’t turn up its national nose at popularity contests. In the same week that Mr. Obama won the Nobel, the United States was ranked as the most admired country in the world, leapfrogging from seventh to the top of the Nation Brands Index survey — the biggest jump any country has ever made. Like the Nobel, this can be written off as meaningless … a measure of Mr. Obama’s celebrity (and we know what people think of celebrities).
But an America that’s tired of being the world’s policeman, and is too pinched to be the world’s philanthropist, could still be the world’s partner. And you can’t do that without being, well, loved. Here come the letters to the editor, but let me just say it: Americans are like singers — we just a little bit, kind of like to be loved. The British want to be admired; the Russians, feared; the French, envied. (The Irish, we just want to be listened to.) But the idea of America, from the very start, was supposed to be contagious enough to sweep up and enthrall the world. And it is. The world wants to believe in America again because the world needs to believe in America again. We need your ideas — your idea — at a time when the rest of the world is running out of them.
(Bono is the lead singer of the band U2 and a co-founder of the advocacy group ONE.)
Rick…………I took the meaning of the Nobel prize to be to recognize President Obama’s approach, accomplishments to date and future accomplishments of himself and all Americans in forging a much better atmosphere to help the world move to peace…..sorely needed ………..and the award well deserved for the current plan and future CHANGE that he campaigned on….the entire world needs peace and good will towards men…
R?ck, r?ght you are, present?ng bono’s thoughtful, provocat?ve words. We need, we must, ?f better ?s to come, work together here at home and across the world. The po?nt ?s, the future ?s not just about the US economy, or the west vs east, or who uses force, covert or overt to ga?n a nat?onal/personal advantage. Th?s ?s, for better (we w?sh) or worse, (all too common now) our world opt?on. S?nce fly?ng away to other l?fe-susta?n?ng planets (ha,ha)?s l?m?ted, we must work here, together. Work?ng self?shly has ga?ned only the largely sad world we f?nd today. Thanks R?ck. Larry from spr?ngf?eld, who expects th?s blog to engender l?vely responses.
Wouldn’t this be more appropriate under the “Travel as a Political Act” designation? More to the point–since when are international prizes awarded for good intentions? That’s like giving me the lottery prize today because I might win it tomorrow. With all due respect to our president, he has accomplished nothing so far–no peace in Iraq or Afghanistan, no health care plan, no improvement in the job situation–O, wait-he has restored the brand of America, whatever that means. This will probably upset many who worship at the altar of Obama, but let’s be real folks.
Over the course of one week, Obama caught hell for his involvement with two of the most highly respected international organizations on the planet: First, they jeered him for traveling to Copenhagen to lobby for the good ol’ US of A to host the Olympics. Then, a week later, they were appalled when he was awarded the most prestigious international prize there is. OK, you can quibble with the UN’s policies. But in what other country (except perhaps a fringe theocracy) do people bash the Olympics and the Nobel Prize? The unbalanced few who make these attacks cause the rest of America to look truly foolish. The message from these critics is clear: If it’s not by, for, and of the USA, it’s worthless. This sort of jingoism has led to the fall of every empire in world history, and ours will be no different. If the US is to thrive in the future, it can only be in cooperation with those who share our planet. Obama has the vision to understand and respect this, in spite of his small-minded critics. I guess that’s why he won the award…if not the presidency.
If you are implying that the U.N. has anything to do with the Nobel Peace Prize, you’re wrong. It’s strictly the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize committee. It has been said that if Michelle and Barack Obama had talked a little less of themselves and a little more about the city of Chicago, there might have been a different outcome. To criticze the president equates with “bashing” the Olympics and the Nobel Peace Prize? I don’t think so.
As my Grandfather always says when there is any competition on a international level…”Did an American Win?” So, I will take it as a win.
Since when is an award valid for rewarding the “promise” of something? Do scientists receive a Nobel when they have a “theory” that has a chance of working, but they haven’t really done any research or experimentation yet? This Nobel Peace Prize was not “the world” recognizing the accomplishments of a great man, it is a small committee that voted ELEVEN DAYS AFTER HIS INAUGURATION, which means he was nominated even before that! Doesn’t that cheapen the award and make it stand for nothing? If I were Jimmy Carter, I would be wondering what the value of my Nobel Peace Prize actually is. Here’s a man who tirelessly and effectively works to bring about peace, and continues to do so today, having fomented actual positive change; how does Obama have any comparison to him? Even more, how do Obama’s “accomplishments” compare to Mother Theresa’s? Answer: they don’t, there is no comparison. A substantial portion of Americans see Pres. Obama’s Nobel award as a negative thing because it seems inherently unfair, and actually an embarrassment. It feels like some kind of royal patronage, or worse yet, another political scam. If I were on the committee, I’d be nominating Bono – seriously. This man has tirelessly worked for peace and accomplished a great deal with leaders and average people worldwide. Not a promise, REAL change. (And I’m not really a U2 fan! ;-) As a Christian, my faith compels me to pray for Obama and my government and its leaders, not to tear them down. I do not wish ill for my president; I wish there was something of substance that would have merited this once-prestigious award. Maybe in 4 years there will be. But no, this award is a politically motivated embarrassment that cheapens the Nobel committee and the efforts for peace that my president, military and leaders are undertaking.
He did more than promise……..his government has changed the tone of US-World relations….and more to come …..a MAJOR accomplishment…..compare to the last few years to see the difference…….
Bill27, you forget that the nomination for the prize was made before the inauguration and the decision to grant the prize was made 11 days into his term. Whatever anyone’s views, let’s keep the facts straight and the fact is that the prize was given for the promise of what Obama will accomplish, not for what he has done. It also was a well-considered slap at George W. Bush, who, as president, deserves the same respect that we all want for Obama.
Proud of Rick, his blog, proud of Obama and proud to be American. Long time reader – first time, eh? poster. But, I must comment. “let’s keep the facts straight and the fact is…” Be careful quoting anything you read from your fellow commenters as a fact before checking them out yourself. It is simple to look at the true process of how and when the prize is awarded and it was certainly not the 31st of January, 2009. Look for yourself. http://nobelprize.org/nomination/peace/process.html You want facts? Here’s three. Bush continually lost respect in the eyes of the world community. Fact. His unilateral “Your (grammar mistake intentional) either with us or against us” approach tarnished America’s brand – anyone who travelled outside the USA since 2001 can attest to this. Fact. America’s rebranding, rebooting and do-over began with the election of Obama. And that happened 13 months before this prize was awarded. Fact.
Could you please say where you are getting your information from? The news reports I have read say that the nomination was made about two weeks after Obama’s inauguration and the vote was taken in September, 2009 (last month). Some members of the committee said that they were influenced by Obama’s appearance before the UN in September to vote the way they did. Any of us who have traveled in Europe over the last 6 years certainly shouldn’t be surprised by the sentiments expressed by the Nobel Committee.
How has Obama’s government change the “tone of US-World relations”? Now, Achmadinejad in Iran thinks we’re fools, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela still hates us, Qadafi in Libya attempted to camp out in NYC last week before going in front of the UN to voice his displeasure with the US and the UN, and Vladimir Putin is dancing a jig to the tune of Obama shutting down our missile defense system in Eastern Europe, while Putin continues to supply Iran with nuclear weapons! Rick, I know this is your blog, but stick to what you do best (write about traveling in Europe) and try not to pontificate about politics and foreign policy.
Diane W expressed my views, asked the question I was going going to ask. I for some reason do not expect an answer to Diane’s question. Facts being an alien concept, or so it semms, to many of Obama’s detractors.
Rick — I like your blog and agree that Obama is an inspiration. I like President Obama. I hope; I pray that he will achieve success that merits Nobel peace prize. But, he just doesn’t have the points on the board. Let’s look at the 4 American Presidents who have won a Nobel Peace Prize. “Which one, is not like the other?” 1. Theodore Roosevelt: Led the negotiations resulting in the Treaty of Portsmouth leading to the end of the Russo-Japanese war 2. Woodrow Wilson: Negotiated the Treaty of Versailles ending WWI and instrumental in the establishment of the League of Nations 3. Jimmy Carter: Tirelessly worked to achieve the Camp David Peace Accords, leading to a peace treaty between the Israelis and Egyptians. Devoted his post-presidency to affordable housing for the poor and international mediation 4. Barack Obama: Inspired people?
I don’t agree with Obama getting the prize because he really hasn’t done much in the grand scheme of things. Give him time, give him his 4 (or 8) years then see if he is truly deserving. I’ve always felt that the prize is more powerful when given to someone that is not famous, someone who does what they do quietly with no hope of praise or glory. Seeing people who devote their lives to helping others with no reward inspires me. Giving the award to someone who is very much the flavor of the moment cheapens it. We say that actions speak louder than words; by giving Obama this award the Nobel committee seems to be saying just the opposite.
BTW: Cecil – I’ve traveled abroad almost every years since 2000, often several times a year and did not experience any more predjudice for being an American during W’s presidency than before. Often people would say “i like america, but not your president” but other than that nothing, not one thing to make me feel unwelcome or uncomfortable…and yes, I did travel to France during that time.
Americans often make the mistake of taking things too literally. (No. The world was not really created in 6 days. No. Eve was not really created from Adam’s rib. Those are allegories.) Similarly, the NPP was not given to Obama for anything concrete he has done. As much as anything else, the NPP was intended as a signal to Iranians and others to get in line with the new American approach to pursuing peace. It is a puff of white smoke indicating that Europe and the world supports Obama’s approach. See also the following news: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/19/iran-nuclear-talks-good-start
I believe President Obama is trying hard on many fronts but he may be too conciliatory. There are many factions trying to influence legislators and a good deal of truth in the aphorism that making legislation (and foreign policy)is like making sausage. But in trying to satisfy and appease everyone a leader cannot make great strides. Incrementalism is the watchword of politicians trying to become reelected. Our current president is trying to capitalize on popularity and goodwill to accomplish mammoth change. Being a pollyanna will not overcome the selfishness of special interests on the left or right. Leading is about trust and the president must reinforce trust by taking bold steps to: strengthen regulation of our financial institutions; produce a better health care system without pandering to insurance companies; help our poor; engage hostile governments; rein in Pentagon spending on non-essential weapons spending; overcome resistance to environmental efforts and not tax us into the poor house. I give him credit for not emulating his predecessors – but he also seems vulnerable to the blandishments of special interests. Maybe its the human condition? He just may have to pick his battles and win the most important ones. bill kester
I am amazed myself by all of this. Today I saw a bumper sticker that said Impeach Obabama my husband and I both said FOR WHAT. What do people want? We had eight years of total chaos, in my 53 years I have never felt like this country could be in any worse shape. We have a mess here. We fear what will happen world wide. We have practically taken down the rest of the world financialy with our greed and there are everyday Americans that can barely feed their own family. As far as health care I have great health care so I say let all those people with none that are so against any type of health care reform just live without it. I know I will get flack for this but I really feel that most Republicans are angry and negative people!Listen to Rush Limbaugh!
I am a Republican. I am not negative or angry at all. The previous poster seems to be much more angry and negative than I have ever been. I wish nothing but the best for President Obama, but when I listen to him, I keep seeing Neville Chamberlain claiming “peace in our time”. I really do hope I am proven wrong. From a positive and happy Republican.
R?ck, seldom does th?s responder wr?te tw?ce on one blog, yet follow?ng the l?vely responses currently above, I must restate my thoughts. A better world takes hard dec?s?on-mak?ng we agree, so dec?s?ons of our country do make a leadersh?p statement and po?nt at new d?rect?ons. We do not change th?s world for better by ourselves alone, however, much some m?ght w?sh ?t. But th?nk of how our dec?s?ons m?ght help others change the?r m?nds about what to do for a better world. Together we, and the world, can make change; d?v?ded, we choose to stay the same. So where from can change come? By each of us agree?ng that change ?s needed and start?ng to act?vely, promote ways for change. R?ck, your blogs often g?ve us examples of what can promote pos?t?ve change. Thank you. Larry from spr?ngf?eld, a traveler, who also seeks a better world.
As Mahatma Ghandi once said “Be the change you want to see in the world”. Amen Brother.
Hey, Joe–Comparing our president to the man who is widely blamed for opening the door to Hitler’s devastation of Europe is “positive and happy”? Come on! If you want to be all doom and gloom, at least be up-front about your agenda. I think you just proved Judy’s point.
I find it interesting when people like Judy ‘label’ those whom they disagree. How can anyone make a general statement about Republicans (or conservatives for that matter)that implies we are somehow ‘negative’ and ‘angry’? Has it ever occurred to them that perhaps some people have ‘strong’ feelings about the direction our leaders want to take this country and see their political agenda as leading to more government intervention in our lives and an erosion of our God given freedoms? Were those protesting the Iraq war when Bush was President being ‘negative’ and ‘angry’ or were they just expressing their First Amendment rights? Honest disagreement and debate is just that….. labeling people and name calling merely suggests that one can’t compete in the marketplace of ideas or that they have lost the intellectual debate and have no comeback other than to ridicule and demonize their opponents.
Hey, Give Me A Break–one can be happy and positive and still be a realist. My fear about Mr. Obama is that he is in over his head. Granted, he inherited serious problems, but as he has never run anything in his life, nor met a payroll, he seems unprepared for the job he has now. More than good will and peppy slogans are required to do well as president.
Perhaps you should stay in the travel business. We have enough differing socialistic/democratic opinions changing/tearing the United States apart as I write. Mr Obama is perfectly content having a civil war in the US.
Judy, do you remember those angry and negative Republicans–Colin Powell, Ronald Reagan (he was criticized for being too happy and cheerful!), George H.W. Bush, Dan Quayle, Bill Frist, Mitt Romney, Arnold Schwarzenegger, etc. And keep in mind that all sorts of people listen to Rush, some just for laughs.
No matter what happens with President Obama, whether he turns out to be the best president the US has ever had, or the worst (and I truly hope he is the best), I KNOW that our country will go on as the best thing on the face of God’s green earth. There is no country or time in the history of the world in which I would rather live, and that fact is not altered by the occupant of the oval office. How much more positive and happy can a Republican guy be? Now all the happy and positive liberals will tear me apart and tell me what a dreadful place the US is after eight years of that awful George W. Bush. Peace.
While Obama may help re-brand America, I lost a lot of respect for the NPP after the award. Obama has done nothing. You don’t win on hype or status. IF that was the case, let’s go ahead and declare the Yankees, Patriots, and Lakers champs as they meet all they hype. You have to deliver to win. When the NPP becomes a celebrity award based on status, hype, and hope, it just shows what matters in the world – image. It’s a sad state on the world and not just America for moving in that direction. I am a realist as well and there will ALWAYS be some sort of turmoil going on in the world. Whether it be war, starvation, or corrupt leaders, we are never going to live in a utopia. However, it seems utopia is the expectation and anyone with that image is hyped. This is not a slam on Obama but more on the fact that we have become more about style and image than substance.
Well said Jeremy!
I can’t write it any better than Bill27 did:-))
Very well put, Jeremy. And to those who say they have never seen this country in worse shape than under George W. Bush, they obviously were not around for WWII, when there was real danger to us and our way of life. I don’t remember any civil wars, month-long strikes, disruption of national and local services, riots in the streeets while W was president. He was a flawed human being as are we all, but not the devil as some Obama supporters try to paint him.
Let me follow up Alfran’s comment and clarify my own. I have tremendous respect and admiration for Bono and what he does. I think he does a better job of being a christian than most christians do. Hope is necessary to fight and do some good in the world. However, hope alone doesn’t accomplish anything without action. And then the NPP starts to award on the basis of hope rather than what people like Bono get out and do, then our perspectives are misguided. To make a difference we must take action. And for peace to happen, it must happen with action and not just hope.
I think that President Obama should accept the award for what it is. An acknowledgement of his potential to bring about a positive change in the “feelings” of the countries of the world with the USA and each other. Things got shook up after 9/11 and rightfully so. I would never apologize for anything we have done after that day. It was all neccessary and if you don’t agree you are nieve. President Bush did what he had to do. We were fortunate to have a strong Republican in the white house to do the dirty work. Get over it. President Obama was elected to bring a softer image to the white house and mend broken fences. That’s what Democrates are best at. Domestic policies and bringing a warm fuzzy feeling to the rest of the world. Conservatives need to get over that too. Both sides are “angry and negative” towards people that represent what they disagree with, so what. That’s human nature. That is how our country works. Democrates are being hypocrites if they say that this is one sided. Remember bumper stickers that said “GW Bush…Somewhere a village is missing its idiot”. How more disrepsectful and devisive can you get?
Why can’t we all just get along? SERIOUSLY!? Why the heck can’t we all just stop this ugly mud slinging, name calling, stereotyping, mean spirited hatred. How and why did we all become so bitter with each other. It’s okay to have different opinions, no? It’s not a personal insult to disagree. Regardless of your chosen side of the aisle, a person is not any less intelligent because they disagree with you or choose to affiliate with the opposite party. I love “Nothing stays the same’s comment”. Be the change….if you don’t like what is or was going on in our country, then start the change with yourself. It is very easy to complain about others. The challenge and character building moments occur when that energy is utilized to reflect on one’s self. What can you do to be the change? Are all Republican’s really unhappy and angry? Did someone seriously write that? Come on people, wake up. Stop hating. We need to stick together, dissenting opinions and all.
Alfran, I never said we were safer. I am not even sure how to measure that. I think both wars just took the fight elsewhere for now. I disagree with your insinuation that Iraq was not a threat to us though. Do you honestly believe that a disruption of middle east oil would not impact the US? Wasn’t that the big rallying cry against both Iraq wars? That it was just “A war for oil”. Considering the price I just paid yesterday for gas that didn’t work out too well, but at least we have gas. Someone had to take that lunatic out at some point. Iran and Kuwait couldn’t do it. Saudi Arabia was shaking in thier boots or whatever they wear. We should have done it in 1991 and saved the UN from writing a bunch of stern warnings that were ignored.
Rick—-why don’t you just stick to being a travel expert. I mean you are making a fool out of yourself. And you are on the verge of losing people who otherwise like your tours and products. Here is a newsflash for you about politics:IT IS NOT EVERYTHING. I could not care less whether that nothing body–called the noble peace prize—does anything with that stupid award. This nation and the world spends more time praising and obsessing over personalities than actually living their life. This is a democracy of self-governing people, not Stalin’s cult of personality Soviet Union. A President who is ” credible and respected”, please the guy law professor–that about it. And if the rest of the world loves him–that might be a good reason to give pause. But I understand Rick, you are somewhat part of the media—you have to distract people with your excessive chatter and sensationalism–beats having a real job. Reminds, me of that story of a kid that keeps interupting his parents complaining about his brother causing problems—well sooner or later you realize its the one that keeps interrupting the parents and complaining his brother who is the problem. Do not be apart of the problem Rick—just be a good travel consultant-your good at that. Do not become some pompous, self-annoited liberal trying to convince us govt/politics effects us more than it really does. And do not lead the charge to turn us into Europeans. I like Europeans but I would not want to be one. Do not abandon the American Revolution Rick. That revolution meant we are not Europeans—we are Americans. And you bash Bush, freeing millions of Iraqi people from a dictator and helping them build a democracy for themselves is bad. The world not liking us(supposably)over the last decade it was because we showed we were not like them or rather we could do something that they cannot do. Do not fall for it Rick–deep down they want to be us–that is why more people want to come here than anywhere.
Rick’s a bright guy, so I think he must be well aware that every time he speaks on a “political” subject, he risks losing business. In fact, I’m sure these kinds of posts do cost him a few customers. That’s the reason I like him best, because he obviously feels he has to do it anyway. Politics is not something separate from the rest of our lives, it is inextricably interwoven. (So, yes, over his last few years of speaking courageously and openly on such topics, his guidebooks have now slipped to #2 on the reasons I like Rick Steves.) And I’m guessing that Rick, like most world travellers, realizes that a statement like “deep down they want to be us,” when referring to “the world,” is, to be generous, outstandingly myopic, to be less generous, culturally arrogant, and mostly, it’s just plain, flat-out untrue.
Ahh, dprat….spoken like a true liberal. ” inextricably interwoven” ahh yes do you have any self-determination left? ” it’s just plain, flat-out untrue” really, then why so many of them want to come here then anywhere, and why such an interest in our elections? ” culturally arrogant” —-yes indeed, American exceptionalism–you have benefited from it. And if you like the rest of the world so much–then go live there.
Ooooh, a “true liberal.” Uh… ouch? Why not just go straight to socialist? After all, I support socialist programs like Medicare and Social Security, as do most of your countrymen. As to “so many of them want to come here,” see this: http://www.gallup.com/poll/124028/700-Million-Worldwide-Desire-Migrate-Permanently.aspx I’ll summarize: slightly less than 4% (24% of 16% = 3.84%) of the adult world population wants to move to the US permanently. And that percentage is mostly from the developing world, likely a far, far smaller percentage in Europe. So that leaves 96% plus of the rest of the world with no such desire. For most of that vast, vast majority, I suspect the bonds of family, friends, employment, and a love of their native land (if not always their neighbor) keeps them right where they are. Just like me. Take care, neighbor.
Yeah let us hope those programs dont bankrupt us. Having a social program and being a full tilt left winger who thinks politics is everything are two very different things. Your numbers are meaningless because the fact remains America is the top country people want to emigrate. Are you sure you do not want to move?LOL
The award was given for purely political reasons. It was a way to bolster President Obama’s policies in America. I thought the award was supposed to reward people who made major contributions towards peace. While the president has good intentions and I hope he succeeds in making the world a safer and friendlier place, I don’t believe he has done anything to merit a reward of this stature, and from his reaction, I think he knows it.
I gotta agree Rick… love love ur guidebooks… but im getting turned off by how political you’ve gotten. Granted, this is clearly something you hold dear…. but I just want to hear about your travel advice. Bono is brilliant? Really? i’m not a crazy right or left winger… i’m just not impressed with Obama yet. Seems to me he’s gotten in over his head KNOWING full well the mess he was taking on. I’d be happy if Obama won… but its just embarassing that he hasnt done anything yet to accomplish it and he won. It doesnt elevate America in fact some foreign friends of mine thing its typical american arrogance to celebrate a prize not earned.
The world honors our president with its most prestigious award — the Nobel Peace Prize. Not true. The world did not give our President this award. The Nobel Committee did this…a committe, not the world. The same committee gave the same award to Yasser Arafat in 1994 and Le Duc Tho in 1973 (along with many other notable and fine men and women). Bono stated “why I think the man might deserve the hype. It starts with a quotation from a speech he gave at the United Nations last month: “We will support the Millennium Development Goals, and approach next year’s summit with a global plan to make them a reality. And we will set our sights on the eradication of extreme poverty in our time.”” …these 36 words are why I believe Mr. Obama could well be a force for peace and prosperity — if the words signal action.” Let me pull out what I feel are the key phrases from this quote that, in Bono’s opinion, justified the award: “We will support”, “approach next year’s summit”, “we will set our sights” and finally from Bono’s conclusion: “But for me, these 36 words are why I believe Mr. Obama could well be a force for peace and prosperity — if the words signal action.”. Notice that ALL of these phrases represent future actions, not past accomplishments. Further, Bono states that “these 36 words” are the basis for Bono’s strong belief in the man. However,the key part of Bono’s words are “if the words signal action”. Ah, that, as always is the rub. Why don’t we wait to see if the words do signal actions? Then we can all celebrate. Every new leader speaks positively about what he wants to do, what he is going to do. But just as we do not give an Academy Award or an Olympic Gold Medal to someone for what he/she says that he/she will do, why be so impatient? We can wait. Then when the promise is an actual accomplishment, we can all rejoice!
HAte to break this too you guys, but Obama is no breathe of fresh air. He is not a better President than the man before him and he certainly is not a leader. He uses thug, Chicago style tactics, he bows to foriegn leaders and shakes hands with tyrants. That is not what we need. He also spends the money we don’t have in a time we need to be saving. As for his Nobel, this is a joke. I would normally be happy for a person receiving this award, but he was nominated when he had accomlished zero for the world. The award needs to go to someone who actually did something, no the promise of satsfying all liberal fantasies for the next four years.
Steve. Why are you perplexed that right wing Americans don’t like left wing foreigners using world wide venerated institutions such as the Nobel Prize as a propaganda tool to influence US and world politics? Honestly? Are you REALLY perplexed? I think you’re smarter then that. As a conservative, I not only wish my president the best, I sincerely like the man and his family. However, I disagree strongly with his more leftist policies and could never vote for him. I don’t blame him for accepting the prize because he had not real choice and I sensed he was properly embarrassed by it. But I do blame leftists like yourself who aren’t a little ashamed when institutional honors in our national and world culture (such as the nobel prize, academy awards, etc.) are controlled by political partisans and debased to mere tools of propaganda.
Rick: I was almost saddened by the comments regarding President Obama and Bono. I went on your ’95 BBB tour. My outlook on the world was so expanded, I have learned to look at all angles of a situation before issuing an opinon. I felt I had to say something here, as it seems traveling the world has done nothing to a few here but narrow an opinion that had little foundation in the first place. How this world is and will be is a responsibility we all must shoulder. Good, bad, or indifferent, WE are responsible for all of it. It is what it is and offering opinions doesn’t change it however, it can make it worse. The poison that is spread by both sides doesn’t result in anything but destruction. Are you all afraid to have a good, honest dialogue about what the real issues are? It is more basic than you make it and the power to make it less powerful than it is, is to name it. America is changing and the evidence is in the poison that is spreading across this country. We will get more ill before we get better and in order to heal, we have to recognize the symptoms. Or, have they been with us too long? Are these poisons our security blanket? Rick, I will be taking future tours with your company. I’m not afraid of being a citizen of the world, nor as an African-American am I afraid to be a citizen of America.
dprat wrote: “Rick’s a bright guy….I’m sure these kinds of posts do cost him a few customers.” Having taken 4 RS tours and planning for my 5th in 2010, I can say without hesitation that I would be delighted — thrilled even — if such customers WOULD travel with another company. I travel with ETBD because I respect Rick’s uncompromising honesty and ethics. If your closed mind can’t tolerate Rick’s candid exercise of his fundamental American right to freedom of speech, then travel with Rush Limbaugh Tours or Sarah Palin Tours, where you will hear only what you already blindly believe in.
Joanna posted ” Having taken 4 RS tours and planning for my 5th in 2010, I can say without hesitation that I would be delighted — thrilled even — if such customers WOULD travel with another company.”—– now that is love from you Joanna. You then state ” If your closed mind can’t tolerate Rick’s candid exercise of his fundamental American right to freedom of speech, then travel with Rush Limbaugh Tours or Sarah Palin Tours, where you will hear only what you already blindly believe in” As Ronald Reagan use to say, ” there you go again”.