(Won't that look especially great as a true albatross photographed around Obama's neck? Oh, will his portrait replace Nobel's on the medal, too? Or even have the award and the Committee renamed for Obama, the way to surpass this award?)

The only substantial claim that can be made for the award was that the US electorate chose a black American to be their President, so the award was mis-directed. (But, Time Lite still has the time to get it right at the end of this year, by making the “Person of the Year” the US Voter for so electing him.)

We've got to eliminate the “all the right” and “all the left” comments. It's partisan-hack spin and misdirection. Would you agree?

John 53 was wrong. With the exception of Al Gore, I can reasonably give reasons for their winning the prize.

I, for one, am proud to have a sitting President win the Prize.

One would think, right?
Nobel has set a precedence for just that.

Two words:
Al Gore.

I rest my case.

Are you even aware that the time frame for nominations for the Nobel Peace prize closed 12 days after Obama's inauguration?

Can you say with a straight face that in the first twelve days of the Obama administration he had done enough to be considered worthy of the Nobel Peace prize?

* * *

“Initial reaction in the Arab world”

Gee, what a surprise. In addition to the starry-eyed naive nature of “nuclear-arms-free world,” we have the uglier side of that “movement,” which included in the past the anti-US-and-Western “peace” and anti-nuclear movement (the “freeze” and “disarmament” campaigners after Ronald Reagan was elected), and which has long also included the general phrase “nuclear-free Middle East” used when actually seeking the nuclear disarmament and deliberate weakening of Israel (not its enemies as well; the anti-nuclear Western protests never sought the weakening of the USSR as well, either).

To quote Shimon Peres this morning:

“Very few leaders if at all were able to change the mood of the entire world in such a short while with such profound impact. You provided the entire humanity with fresh hope, with intellectual determination, and a feeling that there is a Lord in heaven and believers on earth,” Peres, himself a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, wrote to Obama.

To quote AustinRoth now:

So, you are part of the 'he gives me a warm feeling in my tummy, and that is certainly worthy of the Nobel Peace prize' contingency, huh?

No surprise there.

a simple change of attitude has improved world opinion of the United States

So, you are part of the 'he gives me a warm feeling in my tummy, and that is certainly worthy of the Nobel Peace prize' contingency, huh?

No surprise there.

Next year, Obama wins the Nobel Prize for Literature, sharing it of course with Bill Ayers.

PC pacifism, that is, and idealistic (at least) rhetoric; action (results, especially success) is not required.

That's part of what the lefty Political Statement of the year (what the Prize is about) is, this year.

f e e l

about their selection and their award.

2009 Barrack Obama (Anti-American Politician)

Proof positive… the right has no honor or shame.

This is a collection of Leftist doofuses, unknown bureaucrats, petty dictators, terrorists, conmen, and crooks. What distinguished company, Mister President “No Clue”. The continuing journey to mental retardation is firmly imbedded in our society; this is not all that different from giving an Oscar to a pedophile.

I agree it is premature and undeserved on merit. I also disagree with the Administration's lack of transparency on many issues (but not all… secrecy is sometimes an unfortunate reality). I am also sure none of this done with the speed or to the degree that some would like.

However, to fail to notice the differences with President Bush can only be done with blinders on.

From Marc Ambinder: …Obama, on executive power, on transparency, on state secrets, is just like President Bush, and so an award that rewards him, or the country, for sin expiation is premature, at best, and moronic, at worst.

You can go over and read a pretty scathing piece from Glenn Greenwald in full, if you want to find out what a historian might write about the first 9 months of Obama's presidency, where many of the Bush admin policies were continued. I never though you could get a “Peace” prize prior to escalating a war in Afghanistan, continuing one in Iraq, possibly gearing up for one with Iran, and continuing to detain captives indefinitely. The more I think about it, GWB might have been just as eligible for this prize.

A terrible setback to those who have spent Obama's entire Presidency (eight months) trying to destroy him with false spin and innuendo… Somebody call a Waaahmbulance.

Of course, the anti-everything Obama people will blame him for winning an award he didn't nominate himself for and had nothing to do with receiving. What I hope they realize is that this is not a curse, but an opportunity.

Personally, I think he should (and will) accept gracefully, acknowledge how little has been done and how much still needs to be done to improve conditions for peace, and then use the global platform to U.S. leadership in the promotion peace and human rights and continue to re-position our nation as a admirable world leader. I also hope he takes Sima Samar (who is a more deserved winner, IMHO) and moved the discussion of human rights in Afghanistan to a more prominent place (and perhaps stirring greater international support for the U.S. effort there).

I may not have agreed with Carter's Nobel either, but the man did help negotiate real, tangible peace accords, whether they held up or not.

What tangible accomplishments can be listed for Obama to have won this Nobel at this time?

Is the Nobel Peace prize to now be reduced to nothing more than a flavor of the moment award for pacifism?