This article - Nobel Prize for Obama Backfires - points out that if the Nobel Committee thought it was helping Obama's image and prestige in the world, that it made a mistake.
The Times of London:
"Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisant intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel Committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush administration. The prize risks looking prerposterous in its claims, patronizing in its intentions, and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun the period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace."
Time Magazine:
"Barack Obama's critics have long accused him of being a man of 'just words,' rather than concrete actions and accomplishments. The stunning decision to award him the Nobel Peace Prize, for, basically his rhetoric, will almost certainly infuriate his detractors in America more than it will delight his supporters."
Huffington Post:
"Whatever happened to awarding for deeds actually done?"
Washington Post:
“It’s an odd Nobel Peace Prize that almost makes you embarrassed for the honoree. In blessing President Obama, the Nobel Committee intended to boost what it called his ‘extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.’ A more suitable time for the prize would have been after those efforts had borne some fruit.”
Wall Street Journal:
“This is an award for not being George W. Bush."
The article (with link above) asks, "And what did Bush do to deserve the enmity of the Nobel Committee?"
And it answers:
He toppled a man who had killed 300,000 people and liberated 50 million people.
It mentions that because of Bush, Saddam's regime no longer inflicts torture on Iraqis, and the article mentions what some of those tortures were.
It mentions that because of Bush, Afghan women can attend school, go out in public without a man, and hold jobs.
And it mentions the $15 billion Bush sent to help combat AIDS, and that because of that Bush's approval rating in African countries stands at 80 percent+.
Quoting from the article above: "Those are real accomplishments worthy of a Nobel Prize. In giving the award to Obama, the Nobel Committee’s effort at burnishing the president’s image backfired by highlighting the fact that he has accomplished nothing beyond delivering oratory."
It still amazes me that people think that Obama has "done so much" and that Bush "did so little".
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 18
Obama gets one for doing nothing, nada, zilch, zero. He gets one for being a great orator. Hell, if that's the case, we should just start passing the awards out in cereal boxes.
In less than a year, President Obama has restored the international community's faith in America. President Obama readily admits that the prize is a bit premature. He pledges to operate with the knowledge that "to whom much is given much is expected." I respect his approach to this prize. And, I even agree that the Nobel Committee acted out of political expedience rather than merit. It isn't the first time that the Nobel Committee awarded the Peace Prize due to political and geopolitical concerns, however. So, this criticism is nothing more than sour grapes.
The praises of Bush's activities in Iraq and Afghanistan are nothing more than great political spin to explain away two very troubled countries that have not been made better with American intervention. There are many Republican leaders in the party who recognize the folly of these dishonest assessments of President Bush. They are retreating from this worn out tactic and redefining what it means to be a Republican. I would suggest that you, Marilyn, and a few others need to do some research about what is happening in conservative thought. The same old players rush in to defend rather outrageous foreign policy. Thankfully, there are more rational people who understand that higher order thinking is what is needed. I don't expect the Republican Party to become less pro-business above all other concerns. But, I do think that the nonsense is going to be toned down in the future. The Republican leadership failed the country with the mindless assistance of President Bush. The facts are staring America in the face.
I have to say right now that I also think there were political reasons behind it as well, so that O. would not send more troops into afghanistan. Someone is going to Lord it over him that he won this prize and should act like he is a 'man of peace.'
Basically saying; You're a man of peace . . . right?
Not saying that's the only possibility, but it does draw attention to the approach of this Administration, and places it in the context of "war and peace", and not just "policing the bad guys".
"Whatever happened to awarding for deeds actually done?"
Indeed. It's almost like the constant need parents and teachers have to reward children/students just to make them feel "good about themselves" instead of what they've actually accomplished.
Ealier this year the DOW was down and the way the DOW performed on a given day was in the mind of the extreme right wing a direct result of confidence in presidential economic policies but now the DOW is up and is now longer an indicator in the minds of the right wing. They're so confused and mixed up I'm having a ball seeing them flip flop and try to explain when they stick foot in their mouths.
That pretty much sums it up.