The winner by virture of drawing oxygen.

Written by Bucherm on Friday, October 9, 2009 at 8:59 pm

In 1906 the sitting U.S. President, Theodore Roosevelt, was presented with the Nobel Peace Prize for successfully using the good offices of the President of the United States to mediate between Russia and Japan, bringing about the end to the Russo-Japanese War. The action gave both powers a chance to exit from a war that was growing too expensive and bloody for them. This gave an immediate reason with tangible results that allowed the Nobel Peace Prize Committee to present it. This is how one should present an allegedly apolitical award where an objective conclusion is arrived at.

Today the NPPC award President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. This was, to be frank, a completely moronic decision.

Some caveats: I voted for BHO, and barring some horrible incident happening between now and 2012, will likely vote for him again. In a lot of ways I’m conservative, but in more ways I am liberal. I think the shift of tone in his speechifying with our foreign partners is a good thing(compared to GWBs tone of talking down).

But. But. He absolutely should not have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He has done nothing in the past 9 months(of course he was nominated after being in office for 11 days) that puts him ahead of any dozen dissidents in third world oppressive locales, or even French President Sarkozy(who, if one believes, stopped Putin from rolling on to Tbilisi and “hanging Saakashvili by his balls”). Unless something spectacular and tangible happens, Obama should not get the Nobel Peace Prize while sitting in office. If at some point down the line, many years later, folks can look back and reach an objective conclusion that his foreign policy was on the whole furthering the interests of world peace…okay fine. After all, Jimmy Carter had to wait a few decades for his Peace Prize.

Oh wait, unlike this time around, when Carter was presented with the prize the committee specifically took swipes at GWB, thus watering it down to a circle-jerk.

I’m sure President Obama is pleased with receiving the award(who wouldn’t be?), but I bet it would have meant a lot to him if the Committee hadn’t already established a policy of “poking Republicans in the eye” as a main bullet point. In other words, him earning it on the basis of his accomplishments…not being “not-Bush.”

Categories: Oops, Plotholes

2 Comments on “The winner by virture of drawing oxygen.”

  1. I have to agree with you here. The Nobel Peace Prize should be at least awarded for tangible efforts — if Obama had achieved something tangible like convincing the North Korean regime to give up its arms and become part of the south slowly (with plenty of bribes included to Kim Jong Il so he can retire to the French Riveria); he’d deserve the NPP.

    As it is; it’s just too early in his administration — nothing of substantiative note has been achieved yet; and this is not a swipe at Obama — remember the Summer of 2001; and Bush’s achievements up to that point since taking office in January?

    Yep, you don’t, since Bush had none at that point.

  2. That’s why he should have graciously declined the prize, but he didn’t – while I voted for him, and probably will again barring something terrible, ever since becoming President he’s never met a speaking opportunity he doesn’t like, and the Nobel Prize ceremony seems like the type of thing that would be just to his liking (friendly crowd, non-specific speech, etc).

    As is, he’s started some things, and if he actually makes some concrete gains on any of them (particularly something between the Israelis and the Palestinians), then maybe he’ll deserve it. As of right now, arguably the person who just headed the negotiations leading to normalization between Armenia and Turkey deserves it more.

Post a Comment