Bono nominated for Nobel Peace Prize
 

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...nobel_peace_dc
Either this is the WORST JOKE EVER, or the Nobel Peace Prize no longer has any meaning.

Not that I would begrudge Bono... I think he certainly qualifies. That guy has done a lot for Peace, Human Rights and the general betterment of the world. Before you scoff have a look at what he has done...

That said, the article states:

You might also remember that George W Bush was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize either last year of the year previously... THAT was a joke.

Many are nominated but only one wins.

well, i have to politely disagree with you thinktank. Bono has done more work than most politicians to help solve the AIDS epidemic in Africa as well as the ongoing problems in Darfur. he also uses his prominent position in the music industry as a way to inform people about what is going on in the world, and telling them information that the mass media doesn't cover. personally, i feel that Bono is very deserving of this award, but i doubt he will recieve it.

I was drinking water as I read that and spit it all over my monitor as I burst out in laughter.

The sad thing is that it was true...


LINK

I think he should get it.


Why not? Eminem has an Oscar.

Let's not turn this into yet another anti-bush thread, hmm?

Not my intention.

I was just trying to underscore the fact that there are often contoversial nominations and that Bono is hardly controversial by comparison...

LOL, funny. And poignant.

He might have done a lot to deserve it, but if anything he should be denied it just because his ego is big enough as it is. I watched a few minutes of interview footage with him (from numerous interviews) and he's got to be one of the cockiest, most egotistical musicians I've ever seen.

...and from what I've read, he would be the first to tell you he's all that.

That said, you need to have the ego to do what he has done.

I can't imagine a shy, unassuming person would take leaders of the world to task... let alone stand on stage in front of thousands of people and rock out.

Bono is one of the few rock stars I have any respect for beyond their art. He doesn't just talk shit... he gets out there any *does* something about it. That is commendable for someone who could just sit on his ass and collect royalty checks between gigs.

Bahahaha.

I don't have a problem with it, he's done a lot of good things for Africa, but on the other hand he's so annoying.

Sic vis pacem para bellum.



as for bono, rock stars really need to realize they are entertainment, I for one personally don't care what they think, he certainly is entitled to an opinion, but because of a lot of what he has said, I'm not a U2 fan anymore.

Just curious... what did he say that specifically turned you off?

Well I don't mind someone with confidence, or even a bit of ego, so long as they keep it in check. Bono looks like he's constantly on the verge of trying to have sex with himself. I don't know; I do like U2 though, and I like the whole "helping the world" thing. Just he as a person kind of pisses me off.

Whoever rushes to make a saint out of Bono should check the comments of maddox first, regarding the song "Crumbs from your table". I think it says it all...

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=11worst

Now, I'm not saying that U2 or Bono are "bad". They're just pop icons FFS... not Nobel Prize Winners...

Sorry but what is that link but a big steaming pile of Sour Grapes...

I'm not saying one thing about Bono's music... they are pop icons... but if he wins a Nobel Peace Prize I'd say he's earned...

In effect, i put Bono on thinktank's "List of Capitalist Phonies" along with just about everybody in entertainment who tries to make a political statement, but still rakes in millions every year. It's a matter of having your cake and eating it too. Everything Bono does is one big publicity stunt to line his pocket. Great, he donates a small fraction of what he makes to chairty, but thats just not enough for me to consider him some great humanitarian. In the last century, let's look at some of the people who have won the Peace prize... Nelson Mandella, The Dalai Lama, Desmond Tutu, Mother Theresa... I just feel it would be an insult to put Bono on the top of a list of people who really did sacrifice a LOT. People who did a lot more than drop a couple pennies to the dollar while they snort coke off of the dash of their 62K car, or whatever Bono does when he's not trying to force people to pay attention to him. Sorry if i offended anyone, but i saw it as a pretty negative statement about the current state of affairs in our world.

Just so I understand you... someone who has a lot of money, made in via Capitalism is automatically off the list?

I don't disagree that Bono has a big ego, nor that he craves attention... he is brimming wiht mea culpa on these issues.

I don't get the idea that Bono is on that list of noms because he "drop a couple pennies to the dollar while they snort coke off of the dash of their 62K car" and a reading something like that just shows me you don't know what you are talking about...

The guy is rich, the guy is famous. Are you suggesting that just because he has this going for him, anything he does for the betterment of the world is tainted. Let's just say, for sake of arguement, that he managed to convince some world leader to spend an extra 100 million on the Aids crisis in Africa... would the fact that he has money and fame make those people less better off? Hell no.

As for your list of Nobel Laureates... you were a bit selective no? Where idoes it say you have to "suffer" to win this prize?

From the Nobel website:
Looking at their list, some other interesting winners: Jimmy Carter (Hey! he has money...), Yasser Arafat (isn't he a terrorist?), Lech Welesa (isn't he just the head of Union?), Henry Kissinger (the biggest joke on the list)...

My point isn't to belittle other members of this august list (except for Kissinger and Arafat... they really are bastards). I am pretty sure that in the year they won, they did something to further the cause of peace that was greater than anyone else in that year...

If Bono is deemed to have done something more that the other 165 people on that list, I say bully for him.

Agreed. I was thinking of something along those lines earlier but didn't quite know how to put it. Were Bono living a modest lifestyle due to the sacrifices that he made for something he felt strongly about it would be one thing. But I think a great deal of how people esteem this guy (as well as most other personalities) is simply due to the misplaced hero worship that they have for him being a pop music icon. Bringing attention to some of the things that he has felt the need to "bring to light" is much like stating the obvious. AIDS was a recognized problem long before anyone ever heard of U2 or Bono.

You're reading a lot more into what i'm saying than is there. But for the sake of argument, what exactly ARE Bono's great acheivements that make him a figurehead for peace this year?

Not being a huge fan or anything, I will have to look this up... give me a minute or so.

In 2000, he led the Drop the Debt campaign, which sought to forgive billions of dollars in Third World debt, in the spirit of biblical Jubilee.

In 2002, he founded the humanitarian organization, Debt, AIDS and Trade in Africa (DATA).

He has been recruiting American politicians and church leaders to join the fight against AIDS in Africa (President Bush has committed $2 billion to the cause and congress is considering a five-year, $15 billion global AIDS initiative... is this a direct result of his actions... hard to say... is he a big part of the growing awareness of these issues that have lead to change... I'd say yes)


The way I look at it is Bono is a good diplomat and statesman for many causes (causes that aren't always the most popular causes of the day -- let's have a raise of hands for those here who know that much about debt relief or give a damn). He has the power (of celebrity) that allows him to reach the ears of those in political power. To me, this is using his power wisely and effectively.

It is articles like this one in Time that convinced me there is more than meets the eye with Bono... http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020304/story.html

How is this using power wisely? Wouldn't the vote of the people be a more important measure of how an elected official does his duty than one man's agenda?

Sorry I don't follow you... please explain what you mean.

How is one person's view on something automatically wise? Why should an elected official devote any more concern to a matter because it was brought up by a celebrity? Should an entertainer really have any more power to influence political power than the common person who has no more say than what they can get by casting a ballot?

I didn't say Bono was wise. I said he is using his celebrity wisely. There is a difference.

Good questions all. Get back to me when the system works like that...

Your question would be better formed like this:

Whay makes *any* lobby group have any more power to influence political power than the common person who has no more say than what they can get by casting a ballot?



Ultimately, if Bono was doing what he is doing and wasn't a celebrity and was nominated for the Peace Prize would we be even having this conversation? No.


I agree, there are many celebrities who jump on causes of the day and parade around raising some money, etc. They give a little money, give a little PR to a cause and then go back to whatever they were doing...

From what I have read, and what I have seen I think Bono is the exception to this. He is actually making a difference (or pounding his head against the wall with there rest of the NGOs in an attempt to make a difference).



For the record, I am the last person to follow someone because of their celebrity status. I either like music or not. I either like a film or not. Etc. I am *very* tired of the whole cult of celebrity. It cheapens us all.

In terms of lobbying, you also have to remember that any group or individuals who work through Congress 'directly' rather than going through some sort of popular vote is lobbying. Whether it's a Union, a scientific organization, the mob... whomever.

This one man's agenda just happens to be a pretty damn good one, and if we as a nation are too stupid to pull something together to get the government to notice, why not the workings of a person who is actually trying to get something worthwhile done, where the man is not actually gaining anything from it. (ie, he doesn't have AIDS, nor lives in Africa.)

Note: This may not be the best case in a lot of situations, but for this one, it does seem to help out quite a bit.

I agree that it is a good cause, but caution should be used when we suggest that one person, be it a celebrity or not should be allowed to carry too much influence over any elected head of state.

One more thing... who says this *is* one man's cause? He may be the face of the cause but there are many more people behind the scenes who share this cause.

For example: was ending Apartheid one man's cause? Mandela largely became the face of that cause, but no one would argue it was one man's cause...

OK, it is not his cause, but why should he be recognized more for it than someone actually working for a cure but not finding the resources they need because they don't have celebrity status? What one concrete solution does Bono have that sets him atop the rest?

Do you really hate Bono *this* much?

Why can't you just accept that there are people who get shit done. Bono is one of these people.

Again, for sake of arguement, let's say Bono isn't a rock star or a celebrity and his the head of the same debt relief organization. He's just another lobbyist with a cause. Would you still ask the same thing you did above?

If no, you've answered your own question.

If yes, you are addressing a different subject than the one that is being addressed here... namely what is the purpose of *any* lobby group.

I don't hate him at all. I'm just having a discussion. Neither one of our views is going to have any bearing on the selection process if he is awarded the prize or not. I just don't see where he has really gotten any more done in this area than anyone else. He did not discover the AIDS problem and I don't see where he has us any closer to a cure.

I'm talking about his work on both AIDS, Debt relief and Africa... His organization -- DATA (Debt AIDS Trade Africa)
I would argue that he has done a lot to not only raise awareness on an issue that doesn't really play to the heart strings that most celebrity issues do (it's a policy thing rather than a, "how sad look at the dying and starving people" thing).

Let's face it... this is not a sexy cause.


In the US Bush has made commitments of 3.2 Billion dollars to African aid. I understand that much of the language he used to announce this was exactly the kind of language that Bono has been using... Congress ha apparently pledged a further 15 Billion...

Have a look at the DATA website... http://www.data.org/ To me it feels like the website of any dedicated NGO... The only difference is they have a spokesman in Bono that gives the a profile. The difference between Bono and other spokespeople, as I see it, is that he isn't just a pretty face... He apparently knows his shit.

This is a guy that sits down at the World Economic Forum and can argue policy... not just show up for a photo op...



Sorry about the "hate" thing... I'm just annoyed that I defending a celebrity... it goes against my nature. Anyone else and I'd be quiet. I just think Bono is sincere in his beliefs and *is* doing what he can to make a difference. Oddly enough, he seems to be making some headway.

No it wasn't. AIDS wasn't a seriously recognized problem until the mid '80s. I also don't see what this has to do with him trying to help against it. If I were to go out and start trying to raise money for cancer, am I just not worth any consideration because I happened to be born after cancer was discovered?

Anyway, as much as Bono pisses me off (and he does), the arguments you two are making do not make much sense to me. I mean no offense, but they have the appearance of being made out of jealousy rather than logic. You can't look at these things in terms of absolutes like "this is the living wage, this is what the average person makes, therefore this is all you need". If you think in absolute terms like that, one could attack nearly anyone on this forum for choosing to selfishly hoard all of their money instead of giving it to charity and living "modestly". Bono still does a lot of work with AIDS and other causes, and whether it is for publicity or not, he has put a lot of effort into it and has raised government awareness, money, and other things.

did anyone else notice...Hitler and Milosevich?!?!? ...the mind boggles :crazy: :eek:

Y'all are doing a fine job at attacking me and psycho dad... but none of you have answered my question. You want to argue against an opinion go for it, but let's have the facts to change my mind. Calling me jealous and inventing situations that are hanging by a thread of similarity really arent doing it.

I thought I did here...

...and I'm not attacking anyone. :icare:

Nothing to apologize about. You see him as a difference maker and I'm not convinced. And as far as if he is sincere or not, even the best intentions are often not the most useful.

I recall talking about AIDS when I was in Jr-high, well before the mid '80s. I know that there was quite a bit of concern about it then. And again, I have no problem with him trying to raise money for AIDS causes, but is it making a difference? AIDS awareness and education will only stem the spread of AIDS, not stop it. Is the money that is being raised getting into the right hands? Before anyone gets too fuzzy and warm about Bono, Elizabet Taylor ar any other AIDS activist we have to question if what is being done is the right thing.