"Membership in the family of God is neither inconsequential or something to be casually ignored. The church is God's agenda for the world. Jesus said, "I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it." The church is indestructable and will exist for eternity. It will outlive this universe, and so will your role in it."
- Rick Warren
Friday, October 9, 2009
Yes, you read that right. He really did. I was surprised. Are you?
Well maybe I shouldn't be. The only Americans to have won the award in the past ten years were Barack Obama, Al Gore and Jimmy Carter. Ummmm, OK. Are we seeing a theme?
The Nobel Peace Prize needs to start being taken about as seriously as the Razzies. Notable for curiosity only. I mean, come on. The guy hasn't been president for even a year, and hasn't actually accomplished anything foreign policy wise...except for a bunch of speeches. And yes, I know, speeches can make a difference (Ronald Reagan, MLK Jr. and many more made a difference with words.) But still, how much peace has he accomplished?
Here is the text from the Prize Committee's report:
"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
In other words, accomplishment means nothing. Effort and vision mean everything. In that case, someone needs to give a prize to anyone who's been trying to figure out how to fuel automobiles with garbage. Or who's been spending 20 hours a week making youtube videos about world peace.
"Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
Translation: "We like the stuff you say."
"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.
Translation:We love Obama. His very presence gives us goosebumps. Every sunrise just seems brighter in every part of the world because Obama is president. And finally, we have a president like us. And more importantly, (chanting like the munchkins in Wizard of Oz), "Ding, Dong, Bush is Gone! Bush is Gone!"
"For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."
Translation: We can stop giving out these prizes now. We've finally found "the one" that this prize was created for. I guess, we'll have to keep giving out these silly peace prizes, but now that Obama is president, we probably won't need them anymore since World peace forever is right around the corner. I guess we'll just measure all future recipients based on this one. In fact, let's make a little "Oscar"-type statue that looks like Obama, and we'll give that out to all future winners.
Trackbacks:
Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/bloo.trackback.php/5616.
Comments on "Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize":
3. Wickle
- 10/09/2009 7:15 am CDT
You know, I'd like to write a book that will change the world. It will enlighten the human condition, and yet be engaging enough to excite reluctant readers of all ages.
Can I have a Nobel Prize in Literature, now?
4. Enkurio
- 10/09/2009 8:22 am CDT
I saw this news flash on TV this morning and I thought I was watching "The Onion" channel ;)
I wonder if the award is some kind of "preemptive strike" against anything he might've planned to do about Iran or Venezuela
Jared, I thought the same thing when I saw this. Is the world (or the Peace Price committee) trying to influence our president into making more "peaceful" decisions for the remainder of his presidency? Will he make a "peaceful" decision that would compromise our national security? Will the president be faced with a decision to declare war, but have second thoughts because of his award? Obama has already shown that he wants the United States to be loved more than do what is right. There should be a law that the president of the United States should not be allowed to accept any gift while in office.
5. Shrode
- 10/09/2009 8:46 am CDT
I thought I was watching "The Onion" channel ;)
I started to write LOL, but then realized that I didn't laugh out loud. In fact, I thought, "funny cuz it's true." Good one Enkurio. It sounds like a joke.
Hey speaking of funny, how come no one pointed out my "ding, dong, Bush is gone!" comment? I thought that was brilliant, funny and insightful, if I do say so myself. 
7. Evan
- 10/09/2009 9:51 am CDT
I'll cut Obama some slack on this. After all, he didn't campaign for the award and had no say in winning it. In fact, it really puts him in an awkward position no matter what he says or does in response to this.
As is often the case with overreach, the leftist elites in Norway who awarded him this prize likely damaged their cause and credibility. Not that the Nobel Peace prize had a whole lot of credibility left anyway.
8. Bob Sacamento
- 10/09/2009 10:22 am CDT
I don't care which end of the political spectrum you sit on, this is ridiculous. Even if he's the biggest saint in all of world politics, he simply hasn't had time to do anything.
Seriously, when I saw the heading to this post, I assumed there was going to be a link to The Onion or some undergrad's spoof on YouTube. ulp. Now I see Enkurio beat me to the punch on that one. Still, that's what I expected.
Jared,
Is it a consolation prize [for the Olympics]?
I found myself thinking the same thing in the back of my mind.
Wickle,
You know, I'd like to write a book that will change the world. ... Can I have a Nobel Prize in Literature, now?
Yeah, well I want to invent a perpetual energy machine that will solve all food and energy shortages all over the globe. So get in line! :)
Evan,
True enough. He didn't campaign and we should remember that. But I really can't see him feeling awkward right now.
This whole thing has a Twilight Zone feel to it.
9. Shrode
- 10/09/2009 10:28 am CDT
A column over at the New York Daily News argues that Obama should decline the award and insist that it go to someone who is worthy. I agree. But the White House is already saying that he will go to Oslo to accept the award.
As for motivation, look at this:
Nobel Committee Chairman Thorbjoern Jagland rejected suggestions from journalists that Obama was getting the prize too early, saying it recognized what he had already done over the past year.
"We hope this can contribute a little bit to enhance what he is trying to do," he told a news conference.
10. Scott
- 10/09/2009 10:42 am CDT
Might want to give this a read:http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j1_QF_M_HvZAOpRa9UGcm5CbA-1gD9B7HDR80
Particularly:
_ Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.
More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.
So while Obama getting it could be viewed as premature, and as big an Obama fan as I am even I quirked an eyebrow, it could also be viewed as the Nobel committee simply agreeing with Obama's worldview enough to nominate him in the hopes that he would get elected and then awarding it to him once he was elected and showed that he was pushing for something they agreed with.
As far as implying that winning this will somehow influence his later decisions or that this is somehow a consolation prize (pretty sure that was a joke?) well that just rings hollow. He won it, it can't be revoked, and I'm happy to have a president that holds an award also awarded to organizations like Doctor's Without Borders and people like Mother Teresa. Should he refuse it? I think that would be rude. Should he donate the money to a charity of some sort? Absolutely.
11. salguod
- 10/09/2009 11:30 am CDT
Scott beat me to the link about prize Myths (which is fair, since he pointed me to it). That tempers it a bit, but I still find it incredible.
Being nominated less that 2 weeks after inauguration, frankly could have been wishful thinking. Then again, one could argue that his receiving the award is wishful thinking too. The hope that he can follow through on what he wants to do.
A friend and Obama supporter on Twitter Tweeted this when he heard:
Nobel Prize for Obama after 10 months in office? I like the guy, but geez - why not just physically slap Bush in the face?
I think this says a lot more about the nominating committee's philosophy and their dislike of Bush than anything about Obama.
To me, this means that the Nobel Peace Prize has jumped the shark.
12. Lars Walker
- 10/09/2009 11:56 am CDT
I think I figured it out. They really, really love Pres. Obama in Oslo, and if they give him the prize he'll have to come to visit, and maybe they can get his autograph!
13. Bob Sacamento
- 10/09/2009 11:57 am CDT
Scott,
I'm happy to have a president that holds an award also awarded to organizations like Doctor's Without Borders and people like Mother Teresa.
This kind of gets right to the point. I mean, even if he eventually does some great things, at this point, can it be seriously argued that he is at this time in the same league as the people you mention here? And aren't there people out there who in fact are?
15. Bob Sacamento
- 10/09/2009 1:30 pm CDT
I will give props to former President Carter though. He DID get Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat to shake hands in the White House Rose Garden even if nothing did become of it.
bif,
You and I could hold a contest on who likes Carter least. But, to give credit where credit is due, Israel was attacked three times in its history by massive Middle Eastern coalitions, of which Egypt was a part every time. These weren't terrorist attacks, but full-scale war. The most recent happened in 1973, less than four years before Carter took office. He got Begin and Sadat to sit down and talk, and Israel hasn't been (immediately) threatened with all-out war since.
By and large, I still think he's a goober. But he did some good there.
18. Elizabeth
- 10/09/2009 7:40 pm CDT
The Nobel Peace Prize needs to start being taken about as seriously as the Razzies.
Yes, I agree completely. They've awarded some deserving people over the years (Elie Wiesel & Mother Teresa come to mind), but this announcement pretty much destroyed the last of any credibility they had with me.
19. Bird
- 10/09/2009 10:38 pm CDT
Obama said:
Let me be clear. I do not view it as recognition of my own accomplishments but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations.
What the heck does that even mean? At least he wasn't arrogant enough to claim he received the prize for something he's actually done.
21. Cara
- 10/10/2009 2:53 pm CDT
LOL @ Evan - that would be REALLY funny.
Here in Canada our mainstream news outlets are reporting this as having more to do with the fact that Obama is NOT Bush - the one main story I watched took the view that this was aimed more as a "thank you for not being George Bush" than anything regarding his accomplishments (which aside from being elected aren't all that many at this point)
I think it is sad Bush is so reviled. I can't say that I'm a huge fan, but I do not think he deserves to be as demonized as he has become.
22. Shrode
- 10/11/2009 6:53 am CDT
It's scary when even Castro can see it clearly:
Former Cuban leader Fidel Castro called the Nobel award a "positive step," although he said it was more a repudiation of former President George W. Bush than a recognition of anything concrete Obama has done.
23. salguod
- 10/11/2009 8:59 pm CDT
I think it is sad Bush is so reviled. I can't say that I'm a huge fan, but I do not think he deserves to be as demonized as he has become.
I agree. But I'd also say the same for Obama. I'm much, much less of a fan of Obama, but the way some on the right have demonized him makes the left's hatred of Bush look tame.
24. salguod
- 10/12/2009 11:56 am CDT
My point wasn't to say that the Bush hatred was tame, but to compare it to some of the Obama hatred. Some on the right, who likely complained about the anti-Bush statements, are now treating Obama the same way, in some cases worse.
Pot, meet kettle.
It's shameful. It was shameful it was done to Bush and after calling them on it, I think it's more shameful that some on the right are doing just as bad or worse to Obama.
The intensity of the Obama hatred has made be ashamed to be conservative and made the things done to Bush seem tame, by comparison, in my opinion.
25. Bob Sacamento
- 10/13/2009 9:00 am CDT
Kayne West jumps up and interrupts Obama during his acceptance speech
Evan, that was brilliant. If you can come up with material like this on a weekly basis, you should be writing for SNL yourself.
salguod,
Some on the right ... are now treating Obama the same way, in some cases worse.
Pot, meet kettle.
As far as your statement goes, it is correct. But, I would say that the worst of the right is now doing what most of the left had been doing. Case in point: If the surveys are accurate, 10% of Republicans are "birthers." But 30% of Democrats are "9/11 truthers."
26. Andrew
- 10/13/2009 11:24 am CDT
Bob, what poll did you use?
Pollster showed it at something like 28% of Republicans believed Obama was born somewhere else, and another 30% were unsure.
I don't put much stock in polls for about 1,000,000 different reasons, and the discrepancy between the poll you cited and the one I did is a good illustration of one of them. Just wondering, which poll were you citing?
Personally, I believe Bob's numbers are probably closer to actuality. But still, both sides have got their fair share of idiots.
27. Wickle
- 10/13/2009 6:09 pm CDT
It's bad on both sides. I'm a little confused about your assertion of the tameness of Bush-hatred, though. People compared him to a monkey, fantasized about his assassination (and wrote acclaimed books and plays about it), screamed that he was Hitler ad nauseum, etc.
Wait ... was that Obama or Bush about whom you're talking? That same garbage was done about both (maybe not books and plays re: Obama yet).
The fact that death threats are up 400%, though, does put Obama into the slightly-more-picked-on category, methinks. It outweighs the fact that there's no equivalent to "That's My Bush!" at this time.
28. Bill
- 10/13/2009 8:00 pm CDT
Wait ... was that Obama or Bush about whom you're talking? That same garbage was done about both (maybe not books and plays re: Obama yet).
I cannot express how much I regret entering into this completely fruitless debate. I've deleted my original comments . . .
29. Bob Sacamento
- 10/14/2009 10:26 am CDT
Bob, what poll did you use?
You are right about the Republicans. 28% according to Pollster. It had been too long since I looked at the numbers. According to Rasmussen back in March, 35% of Dems thought Bush knew about 9/11 beforehand and 26% are not sure. So there are still a few more moonbats on the left than on the right. But my case is not quite as strong as I thought it was. I'll try to be more careful.
31. bif
- 10/15/2009 10:31 am CDT
I've elected to have Bill delete my comments on this post. I really want to keep in mind that the kingdom I live for is the Kingdom of God, not man.
All of this is dross and will fade away like the grass. In all probability this won't matter in a year, if it even matters now.
Leave a Comment:
I wonder if the award is some kind of "preemptive strike" against anything he might've planned to do about Iran or Venezuela, or related to the war in Afghanistan. Will it shake whatever confidence he had about, for instance, sending 40,000 more troops overseas? Will he be gunshy about pulling the trigger on nuclear threats in the Middle East?
And of course he should be. But not because somebody gave him the Peace Prize and he doesn't want to disappoint them.