October Fools: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize
By drredeye • Oct 14th, 2009 • Category: Lead Story
I honestly had to think twice about what date it was because I thought maybe it was April 1st.
On Friday, October 9th, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to President Barack Obama.
Maybe it was consolation for helping make his hometown city a stunning first round loser in the 2016 Olympics bid.
As with many things associated with Obama, this one was a head-scratcher.
There are still anti-war demonstrators in front of the White House, even though George W. Bush is long gone. And with good reason too, as Obama has launched missile strikes and bombing missions in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Somalia while still maintaining a force in Iraq. As I stated prior to Obama’s election, he is not going to bring about peace but actually perpetuate war. And Al-Qaeda hasn’t exactly offered any olive branches to the U.S. since Obama became president.
To his credit, Obama himself recognized his lack of credentials in the peace-making department. “Let me be clear,” he said. “I do not view it as recognition of my own accomplishments.”
Well, that’s an understatement.
The Nobel Peace Prize committee members apparently anticipated the collective “Huh?” heard across the nation because they pre-emptively defended the award by saying the award was to encourage, not to reward. So they contend that the award was not for Obama’s accomplishments but to encourage support for his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease U.S. conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen its role in combating climate change.
Logic must not be necessary in this award because that makes as much sense as saying Major League Baseball will give the National League MVP award to me, not because of any accomplishments but “to encourage support” for my pledges to hit lots of home runs and have a high batting average. Or giving a Best Actor award to my co-worker to encourage support for his goals to be an outstanding actor. Awards, by definition, are always given to reward, not to encourage. (You could, by the way, give a Best Actor award to Obama, but I digress.)
The Nobel committee also cited the change in global mood brought by Obama’s calls for peace and cooperation. But that too doesn’t jive with reality. The global mood is that despite Obama reaching out to North Korea, the North Koreans are still launching missiles as recently as one business day after Obama won the Nobel, and despite Obama reaching out to Iran, many Iranians are actually upset with Obama for reaching out to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
The shocking, irrational and insane Nobel announcement caused gasps and cries of “too much, too soon” so the Nobel committee folks today made a rare public defense of their selection, backtracking on their previous statements of giving the award to encourage and now saying they gave the award to reward.
“We simply disagree … He got the prize for what he has done,” committee chairman Thorbjorn Jagland told The Associated Press by telephone from Strasbourg, France. “Alfred Nobel wrote that the prize should go to the person who has contributed most to the development of peace in the previous year. Who has done more for that than Barack Obama?”
Let’s see. The nomination deadline was only 12 days after he took office. Not only did Obama have no peace-furthering accomplishments in those first 12 days in office (even by his own admission), but also, anyone who watched Obama’s presidential election race against Sen. John McCain “in the previous year” knows that there was nothing peaceful in that either. In fact, it was one of the most heated, contentious elections in recent history.
Ultimately, the decision to give the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama finally reveals the award for what it really is. Underneath all the Nobel jury’s comments in defense of Obama are backhanded jabs at the Bush administration. The award is more of a political statement than an honest and independent gesture. Sure, many awards are political (Oscars, anyone?) but that doesn’t make it right. It is sad to see the prestigious award get hijacked so it can be reduced to a mere marketing promotion for left-wingers.
drredeye is a former fetus and former pro-choice advocate. He was raised essentially by a single mother in a lower-class, crime-infested neighborhood in the city of Chicago and later survived the dot-com bust under Bill Clinton's watch. That background helped hone his brutally honest style that colors his conservative opinions. Due to a combination of that provocative style and his often unique perspective on the issues of our day, his writings have been published by a major Chicago newspaper, a Christian magazine and other web sites. You may not always agree with the Doctor, but he'll always make you go hmmm. Yep, satisfaction guaranteed or your money back.
Email this author | All posts by drredeye
