Absurd decision makes mockery of the Nobel peace prize
Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.
Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronizing in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.
Barack Obama Wins Yasser Arafat Peace Prize
Posted by Gregory of Yardale - October 9, 2009
The Nobel Committee has truly beclowned itself this time. The Peace Prize has meant nothing since 1994 when it was awarded to Yasser Arafat to reward his lifelong pursuit of Jew-killing. In times since, it has been awarded to Jimmy Carter and Al Gore for their lifelong pursuit of not being George W. Bush. Now, it's been awarded to Barack Hussein Obama for his lifelong pursuit of being Barack Hussein Obama.
A Step Too Far
Jennifer Rubin - 10.09.2009
(Winning the Nobel) is a bad thing, a very bad thing, because he got it ( as one must to snag a Nobel Peace Prize) — by denigrating American values and exceptionialism, demonstrating an aversion to moral clarity, refusing to call out despotic regimes (the Iranian students will be thrilled to know that they give prizes to leaders who think of them as an annoyance), disarming America, repeatedly distorting history to fit false narratives, refusing to stand up to international bullies (excuse me, members in good standing in the international community), and spinning a great deal of hooey about global wealth-sharing and environmental extremism.
And here’s the thing: these regimes don’t like America any more than they used to. They love a U.S. president who shares their disdain for America’s role in the world. So they gave him a prize. “America Isn’t Great” Man of the Year.
Eye-opening is the level of embarrassment — cringing, really — among those sympathetic to Obama. Take a look through the Washington Post’s Post-Partisan Blog. Yes, the conservatives are somewhere between appalled and bemused. But so are Richard Cohen, Ruth Marcus, and David Ignatius.
Cohen: Some cynics suggested that Obama’s award was a bit premature since, among other things, a Middle East peace was as far away as ever and the world had yet to fully disarm. Nonetheless, the president seemed humbled by the news and the Norwegian committee packed for its trip to the United States, where it will appear on Dancing with the Stars.
Marcus: This is ridiculous — embarrassing, even. I admire President Obama. I like President Obama. I voted for President Obama. But the peace prize? This is supposed to be for doing, not being — and it’s no disrespect to the president to suggest he hasn’t done much yet. Certainly not enough to justify the peace prize.
Ignatius: The Nobel Peace Prize award to Barack Obama seems so goofy — even if you’re a fan, you have to admit that he hasn’t really done much yet as a peacemaker. But there’s an aspect of this prize that is real and important — and that validates Obama’s strategy from the day he took office.
Mickey Kaus is cringing also. And AP’s Jennifer Loven is stumped, verging on incredulous. Even the Huffington Post is somewhat mortified. The liberals seem more upset than conservatives. I think because the Left takes this award seriously. Conservatives stopped doing that around the time Yasir Arafat got his PP.
