Nobel Peace Prize Now Officially A Joke After Obama Selection (Guest Voice)
Oct 10th, 2009 | 21 responses
Nobel Peace Prize now officially a joke after Obama selection
by Jon Wells
The Nobel Peace Prize was already flirting with irrelevance after recent selections like Al Gore, Yasser Arafat, and Jimmy Carter, but after the award was yesterday announced as going to President Barack Obama, in office for only nine months and for only 12 days when the nomination period expired, the award can officially be said to mean pretty much nothing these days. It’s a shame since so many in the past have legitimately deserved recognition for their efforts – Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, Lech Walesa, Nelson Mandela and our own Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.
Can anyone legitimately argue that Obama has accomplished anything of major substance period, let alone anything that puts him in the league of the likes of those people?
The Nobel Committee said Obama was given the award based on his “changing the international climate” and “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” Basically, Obama promised a bunch of stuff and we like him, so here ya go! Obama himself said he didn’t think the award reflected his own accomplishments and to his credit said he didn’t think he deserved to be mentioned with other past transformational winners. The most generous of observers are claiming the award is based on the hope and promise of an Obama administration, but that returns to the question, “Has any of that happened yet?”
It’s interesting to see Democratic pushback on skepticism over the merits of an Obama Nobel Peace Prize. The DNC accused Republicans of “throwing their lot in with the Taliban” after RNC Chairman Michael Steele made light of the Obama win. Sen. Barbara Boxer continued the meme by repeating the Taliban smear on MSNBC. The Taliban did indeed say that Obama didn’t deserve the award, so grade school logic apparently allows you to equate laughing at the merits of the Nobel Peace Prize with being murdering misogynistic terrorist-loving thugs.
The only problem is who else is “throwing their lot in with the Taliban”:
* Lech Walesa, whose response was “So soon? Too early. He has no contribution so far.”
* The UK Times Online
* Mainstream news outlets like the New York Times and the Washington Post, who have acted as stunned and skeptical as anyone else
* Matt Lauer: “There are no major foreign policy achievements to date … In some ways he wins this for not being George W. Bush.”
* Mark Halperin, who recently gave Obama an A- on the job he’s had so far and compared his win today to Marisa Tomei’s Oscar
* CBS News
So I’m not really concerned with all the grumbling of critics being “un-American” or “unpatriotic,” particularly by folks who spent the last 8 years grousing about such terms. It seems those offended by Bush’s “If you’re not with us, you’re against us” attitude are quick to use it themselves to demonize opinions they don’t care for. The fact is that the kindest thing you can say about the win is that it’s far too premature. You don’t give awards based on expectations, you give them on results.
All of this debate focuses attention on the reality of Obama’s accomplishments, attention that the White House surely does not want. He had little when he was elected President and he has little nine months into his Presidency. To those who believe he deserves this based on some vague notion of transformational hope sweeping the globe due solely to Obama’s good intentions, smooth speeches and his general existence, I seriously question their grip on reality. I’m not mad about the prize, just confused and amused as Obama is rewarded yet again for style over substance.
I have to say I’m amused at the justifications and rationalizations being employed to explain why Obama deserved this award more than anyone else in the world, explanations that strain the limits of credibility and logic. But here’s the reason the award bothers me and why critics are speaking out about it: Obama and his supporters can and will use the Nobel Peace Prize win as a political cudgel to silence critics and throw prestige toward whatever cause the administration desires. That such a politically powerful award (for those that will now recognize it anyway) was given for so little accomplishment in the real world shows how far the Nobel Peace Prize has fallen and underscores a continuing theme of Barack Obama’s political career: reward for rhetoric and style … and little else.
Jonathan Wells is a 28-year-old husband and father who lives in Ohio and has a day job in the microbiology field. He notes that he tends “be conservative in most of my views, but by no means do I bear blind allegiance to a political party.” He stresses that he is open-minded and encourages “any civil disagreement (or uncivil agreement) any of you would care to express.” He likes to make people think – and does so on his blog Wellsy’s World.
The cartoons by Eric Allie, Caglecartoons.com,, (top) and Frederick Deligne, Nice-Matin, France, (bottom) are copyrighted and licensed to appear on TMV. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited. All rights reserved.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
21 Responses to “Nobel Peace Prize Now Officially A Joke After Obama Selection (Guest Voice)”
After carefully reviewing only the trailer for this film we have decided to give the Academy Award to:
Obama, Maybe He Will Walk On Water. Second best trailer was for Taliban, He Only Needs One Hand To Eat Anyway.
Actually, all but the hard-core fringe is not bothering to defend this award. (The fringists are trying, albeit failing and disgracing themselves again, in trying to do this while they also exploit this to viciously attack the mainstreamers and by extension, their fellow lefties who also are embarrassed to actually angry about this silly award.) The normal public has redirected its attention already (had done so actually even before noon Eastern time Friday) back to important issues like health care and the warfare in Afghanistan. (That there is an excessive number of threads about this award on this liberal site isn't surprising.)
Even Obama agreed he didn't deserve it.
Note that the fringe idiocy we see among some on the far left (those who aren't joining the rest of us in viewing this award as strange and more shallow than usual this year) defending the award and attacking viciously, as usual, everyone else, especially the many critics, fail to grasp again the obvious — yes, even Obama was taken aback and handled this thing well, and that criticism of the award, even when referring to the fact that Obama has done nothing, and that this was a feel-good “future promise” (i.e., Hope and Change) award, have been (once again) directing their criticism essentially at the award itself.
“Even Obama agreed he didn't deserve it.”
Yes, but he also commented:
“This award — and the call to action that comes with it — does not belong simply to me or my administration; it belongs to all people around the world who have fought for justice and for peace. And most of all, it belongs to you, the men and women of America, who have dared to hope and have worked so hard to make our world a little better.”
The point is that nearly all the criticism (which the fringist fools miss) is that the criticism is directed at the award itself, not at Obama. The award (a routinely play-pen PC political statement, and in fact, stunt, committed annually) was especially shallow and pathetic this year — the award was more of a joke this year (“Hope and Change” anti-Bush award, awarded not for achievement but merely for wanting to do something, or more accurately, for making some people Feel Good about the possibility as well as about the recipient as a person) than usual, but more importantly still, this prize obviously has been a joke for many, many years already.
What will the most doltish fans (when they don't crazily attack the criticism) expect for an encore? It's too late to engrave “HOPE” and “CHANGE” on any medallion that is bestowed, and it's premature (or is it?) to replace Nobel's depiction with Obama's; perhaps in subsequent years the award can be changed to be named for Obama or just award multiple awards (years) to Obama in advance of any anything he may actually do in the future, in subsequent years, too?
If the Committee wanted to at least impart some substance to its act this year, it could have properly directed the award at the American people, the US electorate, for electing Obama to office (which is the only substantive thing that can possibly be attributed in this award's context). Don't worry, though, all of us, for Time Lite still has time to ensure it directs its “Person of the Year” award properly, to the U.S. Voter. [chuckle]
“Al Gore at least had to write a couple of books and make a documentary to win one-half of a Nobel Peace Prize. President Barack Obama has won the whole thing, apparently just for his intentions to do something about nuclear weapons, climate change, and international strife.” — Keith Johnson
“Think about it, it’s so post-modern: a leader can now win the peace prize for saying that he hopes to bring about peace at some point in the future. He doesn’t actually have to do it, he just has to have aspirations. Brilliant.” — Iain Martin
More than anything else, I got the impression that even Obama is not trying to defend it. He's not going to offend the committee by giving it back, but he seems a bit embarrassed about getting it so early in his term, so he's giving the money to charity and moving on. I've had a lot of fun with the story, but in reality, this is pretty much a non-event. And it's rather hard to “blame it on Obama” since he's not on the committee.
“this is pretty much a non-event”
Obama fielded this thing deftly, like a hot grounder in the current baseball post-season action.
The wackier stuff in Washington (and elsewhere) is just extra silliness for silliness's own sake.
This PC Prize was simply a bigger joke this year than usual.
Time Lite still has time to award its prize correctly, at least, to the US Voter for electing Obama (more honest than the anti-Bush and possible Obama-cultist Nobel Committee was).
Even on Friday, the day this prize award surprised everyone, normal people went back to important issues.
Completely agree… if you liked those comics, check out this video taking it all a step further:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVDWYAikpYo
Loved it, thank you.
The Presidents comment speaks of Social Justice. I cannot remember any elected Republicans that ever fought for Justice or Peace, except maybe Abraham Lincoln, but certainly not any twentieth, or twenty first century elected Republicans.
I like the Sarkozy comment about “accepted back into the hearts of the world”. However I would have to remind the French that only about half of our population harbors similar views of or President. The rest are Republicans and I suggest that the world should not drop their guard if they know what’s good for them.
[The Nobel Peace Prize was already flirting with irrelevance after recent selections like Al Gore, Yasser Arafat, and Jimmy Carter]-
Mr. Wells, where are the elected Republicans that have won a Nobel Peace Prize? You should consider that your party's political philosophy is not compatible with creating qualified Peace Prize nominees.
[Martin Luther King, Mother Theresa, Lech Walesa, Nelson Mandela and “our own” Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson].
Peace Prize winners Woodrow Wilson was a Democrat and Teddy Roosevelt quit the Republican party and became a Progressive Party member. So your comment “our own” means whom? What context are you calling “your own” if not also Peace Prize winners Obama, Carter and Gore? What “ownership” do you claim here?
There are no elected Republican Peace Prize winners. The only other associative context must mean “our own Americans“. Apparently you do not consider Obama, Carter, and, Gore Americans. I am offended!
You are a crapola propagandist Mr. Wells. I would be opposed to having you back to comment on TMV based upon your very amateur attempt at spin.
Mr. Wells,
Of course the committee didn't approach irrelevance when it awarded the peace prize to Henry Kissenger, who advised 2 different presidents (Nixon and Bush), on creating a favorable environment for their wildly unpopular war efforts!
But Gore, whose work on climate change is internationally renowned and Carter, who was the only president to achieve a Mideast peace accord, make the prize irrelevant in your view. Excuse me if I find your logic somewhat twisted.
My theory is that since the award hasn't been awarded to US conservatives, with the exception of Kissinger, the right finds it necessary to denigrate the committee, the award, the recipients and the entire decision-making process. Maybe Obama should hang his head in shame, because his name was selected!
[...] Nobel Peace Prize Now Officially A Joke After Obama Selection (Guest Voice) (themoderatevoice.com) [...]
[...] Nobel Peace Prize Now Officially A Joke After Obama Selection (Guest Voice) (themoderatevoice.com) [...]
I agree a lot with Obama's platitudes. I just don't think he and his advisers are practical.
Bronchitis
Father_Time
“I cannot remember any elected Republicans that ever fought for Justice or Peace, except maybe Abraham Lincoln, but certainly not any twentieth, or twenty first century elected Republicans.”
Oh, you're a real moderate.
Father Time- Eisenhower did.
“Gore, whose work on climate change is internationally renowned”
Irresponsible extremist politics and professional alarmism — making him a premier celebrity until after Super Tuesday last year.
” and Carter, who was the only president to achieve a Mideast peace accord”
The recent award of the Prize was a direct slap at Bush for launching a war against Iraq, nothing else.
The question about this year's Prize award is how much it also is anti-Bush, and how much it was due to Obama personality-cult hype or swooning (inasmuch as Obama was among those selected shortly after he was elected or took office, not because of anything he actually has done yet). The only people truthfully associated with actually doing anything related to Obama that merits honest approval by this left-wing Committee for its left-wing Prize are the US electorate, and as I wrote, it's too late for the Nobel Prize to be awarded to the right person (“the US Voter”) but not too late for Time Lite and its “Person of the Year” award for 2009 (even though the election was in 2008 — what do details like that matter to the media?).
Father_Time. If you had read more carefully (or perhaps you chose to twist it to suit you) you would notice that when he talked about Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson being 'our own' it was under a category of people who legitimately deserved the award. Perhaps he does not believe that Jimmy Carter and Al Gore legitimately deserved the award, and not that they are not Americans. Though, you probably knew this but decided to twist his words regardless to attempt to discredit.
Whether Jimmy Carter and Al Gore deserved the award is irrelevant to this line of comments, it should be debated elsewhere. However, I could not allow you to go on so ignorantly of what was being said. You're very welcome for the clarification and you are free to no longer be offended by that part!
The other fact is that Martin Luther King (Junior, by the way) is also American. I will label this as a mistake in Mr. Well's thinking. However because you analyzed that part so much, I will simply hope that this was overlooked by you as well by mistake and not because you consider him 'not an american'.
You are free to have your opinions about the awarding of the prize, but when making such a vehement reply you lose all credibility overlooking these two aspects.
To be honest, I do not buy the whole 'incentive to do more' or 'because of what he plans to do' as legitimate reasons for the award.
he SPEAKS of social justice…what does he do for it? This is simply a difference of opinion. You believe his words and what it may do are sufficient. I believe the award should require action with resulting peace.