Barack Obama couldn't convince the IOC to award Chicago the 2016 Olympics but somehow managed to sway the Nobel Committee to declare our freshman president deserving of the most distinguished peace prize in the world. Wow.
After catching the news on my Blackberry, and my breath, I popped out of bed to see how it was playing on the morning news shows. I was expecting FOX News to be lambasting Barry and blaming the French. A properly coiffed Olberman singing nanynanybooboo to Bush. Chris Matthew barking in disbelief, trying to help us digest the significance. And that was the second surprise of the morning.
The Nobel prize story riding back seat to the war in Afghanistan (no mention of the other biggie in Iraq), a healthcare debate that won't quit, oh and the NASA moon bombing live. And I'm still not over how Obama could dash off to Copenhagen for Chicago's bid but not come home to restore the peace in our schools and on our streets.
My girlfriend thinks Obama taking Indiana (but barely), is tantamount to parting the seas, but what could he possibly deserve if he manages to end the wars and bring our troops home? Or if he manages to heal the partisan divide to get something done in Congress? Another peace prize?
What do you think? Was it his speechifying on breaking bread with the Muslim world? Or As John Kass would say, spreading "hopium." I'm shocked and while I like Obama and hope he brings the change he promised, I'd like to see some actual results instead of his "efforts" before we make it hard to reward his future accomplishments. If and when they get here. And I'm kind of glad we didn't get the Olympics now. I could see new Haterade factories popping up all over the globe.
Filed under: Politics
Tags: chicago 2016, nobel, nobel peace prize, nobel peace prize 2009, Obama, obama nobel, obama peace, Olympics, violence
This year's Nobel Prize competition was the opposite of the Olympic City competition. With the Olympics, there were lots of strong contenders, but with Nobel, who else was there in contention? With a weak field for the Nobel, the only strong candidate won.
Give it again to the Dalai Lami, who won it in 1989. Oh yea, that's the guy the president refused to meet with recently in Washington, D.C. until (maybe) he meets with the nice guys in China.
Washington, DC, USA, 7 October 2009 (By Foster Klug, AP) - Lawmakers honored the Dalai Lama with a human rights award Tuesday even as President Barack Obama faced harsh criticism for delaying a meeting with the exiled Tibetan Buddhist spiritual leader
Yep, this certainly is a big shock, though certainly not undeserved. Interesting idea that it's an Olympic sized consolation prize....
Sign a petition now - nobelpeace.eu ! Petition against the absurd decision to award B. Obama Nobel Peace Prize...
The award can have more impact now on what Obama may do for peace than if he won it at the end of his presidency.
I agree--yes he can!
Why castigate and accuse the man who got the award? He didn't create the standards for receipt of it! Why not criticize the Nobel committee for their standards? Wouldn't you like the award to go away now that Obama has won it--when he didn't even seek it? Why you people keep using him to divide the country is beyond me. And the Republican party? A public disgrace! All you guys seem to do (and I'm not a Democrat) is criticize the Democratic party. Do you actually think you can get reelected that way
At first blush, this would appear to be a "by virtue of not being G.W., you've advanced world peace" award, which is commentary on Bush's global reputation and might not have much to do with Obama one way or the other. Still, without having some idea who else was up for the award, I can't tell if it's goofy or not.
It was nothing he campaigned for, they simply awarded it to him. If they have their reasons, good for them. While it is true that his accomplishments don't seem to rate a Nobel Peace Prize, when you think about it he has extended his hand to nations that were only given a fist before. He has talked with the leaders of Cuba and Venezuela and has made offers to many other national leaders and has not refused to talk with anyone.
If people were to say he was the AntiChrist, I could see that, but bitching about this is stupidity
I agree--unfortunately a friend of mine described his winning of the peace prize as akin to receiving the award for making peace with someone who has a gun to your head. However I think he got the analogy backwards, because the U.S. has been holding the gun and nuclear weapons to the heads of the people of countless other countries--so it is more like saying sorry for suppressing democracy and backing the most undemocratic, extreme elements (including Mohammed Reza Shah in 1953 against the democratically elected Mosaddegh, Saddam Hussein, Taliban, bin Laden)--who by the way are no more representative of the religion for which they claim to speak than, say, Sun Myung Moon is representative of all Christians, Catholics, and even Jewish people...
All positive comments appear to point to his presidency and policiies as a primary reason. Here is the point why it is difficult to understand the prize for 2009. He went into office on Jan 20, 2009. The deadline (postmark) for the 2009 peace prize nominations (check their website) was Feb 1, 2009, just a few days later. So it's impossible to judge anything on that timeframe. At least one should give him a year to do something that would justify this prize.
Ahh, the power of beer.
Sorry, dudes, the deadline for the 2009 Peace Prize nominations was Feb 1, 2009, just 12 days in office. The beer party was much later and does not qualify. :)