I believe he will deserve it, but it is premature.

If he can follow through on his promise to close Guantanamo, if he can successfully engage Iran in meaningful diplomacy, if he can reduce the number of nukes in the world, if he can get Israel and Palestine back into negotiations. They are at the moment all if's.

If he can do any of those he will have earnt his award. I honestly believe he can and will do some of those but I think the award would have been better given in retrospect than in expectation.

The Nobel prize has always been given out for left wing political reasons.

That was actually the point of the award.   It's goal was to bring together all the nations of the world and stop all violence.

Just how dynamite was supposed to be a weapon so deadly and destructive that it forced everyone in the world to give up fighting.

Alfred Nobel was the original Peter Molyneux.

The point is... awards are meant to be given for doing stuff.  Not maybe doing stuff in the future.

And the Nobel folks have been wrong several times:

Alva Myrdal
Arafat
UN
IPCC/Al Gore

Iran I agree with... depending on what it accomplishes.

The rest I don't.  Guantamo really isn't big enough... espiecally considering what other applicants have done.

Nuclear Disarmerment is something that's largely been in the works for a long time already... Clinton would deserve more of an award here then Obama likely.

And Israel and Palsetine... more needs to be done then "Back in negotaitions."

I mean... at the moment the goal is to get them back to where Clinton had them... if he does this stuff he wouldn't be doing more then Clinton did.

They should reduce the nuclear arsenal of the world. Also, the middle east should make peace. And while I'm at it, I'm going to increase forces in Afghanistan while reducing forces in Iraq.

Can I have my Nobel Peace Prize now?

So, if giving a speech aimed at 1.5 billion muslims promoting peace, trying to smooth things over with the country of Russia, TALKING to Iran to give up their nukes, TALKING to north Korea to do the same, providing health care to 4 million US children, trying to get healthcare to the uninsured citizens of America, trying to motivate school children to get focused on education, and offering diplomacy rather than war isn't enough to get an award, who the hell is worthy exactly?

So... talking... with as of yet no actual results.... and some healthcare is your argument.

If that was worthy of winning the Nobel Prize Bill Clinton should have at least 3 Nobel Prizes.

Of course you were the guy who claimed MLK JR didn't accomplish anything before he won his Nobel Peace Prize.

No, Morgan Tsvangirai deserved it.

Or some of the other people who suffered and still stood up for what was right to inact positive change in he world... that has acually happened rather then hope will happen in the future.

I mean.  They are going to give out the award in 2010 too... it's not like this is done by the decade.

Why they were so impatient when there were so many worthy candidates this year... I can't fathom.

Tsvangirai is the standout favorite if you ask me though.  Hell everything points to Mugabe having killed his wife and trying to kill him... and yet he's willing to work with him for the good of his people.

I mean how many people could do that? 

no!!! it should be me... :)