Barack Obama wins the Nobel Peace Prize
In a stunner, the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to President Barack Obama. He is the third sitting president - and the first in 90 years - to win the award. (Theodore Roosevelt in 1906 and Woodrow Wilson in 1919 were the others.)
According to the Washington Post:
The committee praised Obama for his "extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples" during his nine months in office and singled out for special recognition Obama's call for a world free of nuclear weapons, which he first made in an April speech in Prague.Heralding Obama as a transformative figure in U.S. and international diplomacy, the committee said: "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."
It does seem a bit premature - given that he's in the first year of his presidency, and the deadline for nominations was twelve days into his presidency.
To me, the explanation is this:
First, understand that the Nobel committee sometimes awards the Peace Prize as a way of noting something they want to encourage.
Second, it's crystal clear to me that it was the Nobel committee's way of issuing a rebuke to the previous administration; a giant F#%! YOU to George W. Bush.
Update: One of the few hard accomplishments made by President Obama in his first 12 days was putting an end to the practice of torturing people. That, along with shifting American foreign policy to a collaborative and diplomatic approach, rather than the outlaw cowboy style of George Bush, is clearly what won it for Obama.
A bit premature, but understanding the Nobel committee's goals, reasonable enough.
Your thoughts?
|
October 9, 2009 |
Kari Chisholm | Comments (86 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: Not going to say | Oct 9, 2009 6:55:32 AM
Huge white gloved, back hand to Bushco! Grandpa Prescott Bush actually helped finance the Natzis when no other bank would help them. IN YO' FACE EVIL!!!!
Posted by: RM | Oct 9, 2009 7:05:45 AM
The manner in which Obama has continually snubbed our European allies, has only helped to create a new tension and coldness in international affairs. Obama has done NOTHING to promote peace in this world. It appears that the only requirement for winning this prize is to be anti-Semitic, ala Jimmy Carter.
The Norwegians just can't help but love a good Socialist/Marxist. I bet that they can tell you how many pimples Obama's got on his azz.
Posted by: Throowrocks | Oct 9, 2009 7:08:41 AM
Oh can't you see he earned this.
Posted by: Dan | Oct 9, 2009 7:24:40 AM
The funny thing is...the NOMINATIIONS were due on February 12th. That is less than ONE MONTH in office.
And He was still able to win the most coveted prize on earth. Maybe He really is the embodiment of Jesus Christ. I can think of no other possible explanation for winning a prize without doing a goddamn thing.
All hail The One!
Posted by: Not going to say | Oct 9, 2009 7:28:48 AM
Dan: This “The One” business that I keep hearing about Obama – what are ya’ll trying to say? Speak up. Ya’ll seem to be good accusers.
Posted by: Kurt Chapman | Oct 9, 2009 7:39:13 AM
I like many of the things that Obama has accomplished in his 9 months in office. However, I fail to see TODAY what he has attempted, or done, to garner the nomination or award.
Perhaps this time next year would have been more appropriate?
Posted by: pacnwjay | Oct 9, 2009 7:40:44 AM
I think you're right, Kari.
In fact, they've probably done Obama a major disservice... giving the right wing another big rock to throw.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Oct 9, 2009 7:43:54 AM
FYI, I just extended my post a bit. The above comments predated my final paragraph.
Posted by: Sal Peralta | Oct 9, 2009 8:00:49 AM
A couple of points...
If the only thing Obama has done is to reverse a doctrine of preemption by the world's dominant military power, then this award is well-deserved.
Regarding "The One"... have a look at this and this and this then try to explain how the national GOP has not tried to tie theology and idolatry to the office of President (so long as the President is a Republican) at a level that is unprecedented in American history.
Posted by: Jack Roberts | Oct 9, 2009 8:00:54 AM
I think the use of "the One" started with Oprah Winfrey, who used that term in explaining why she was breaking with her usual avoidance of political endorsements and backing Obama.
When I first heard that Obama won the Nobel Prize, I couldn't figure out if it was for bringing peace to Iraq, bringing Peace to Afghanistan or bringing the Olmpics to Chicago. Then I thought maybe it was for closing Gitmo. I hadn't considered it might be for ending the torture that had already ended several years ago.
Now it looks like its just another way to bash Bush. So now I wonder, when does John Kerry get his Nobel Prize?
Posted by: BOHICA | Oct 9, 2009 8:09:32 AM
Big deal, I've got a Peace Prize too.
Posted by: James P | Oct 9, 2009 8:10:37 AM
For the Nobel committee, this is just another chapter in the long term narrative of making their Peace Prize a complete joke.
Obama joins Yassir Arafat in the long list of ridiculous choices, which say far more about the Nobel committee's political leanings than anything else.
The Nobel Prize is no longer even coveted, so political it has become. To give it to Obama is actually funny. It exposes the Nobel committee in a way that no one else could have.
Posted by: Scott Jorgensen | Oct 9, 2009 8:11:41 AM
I could see giving him that award if he got us out of Iraq and Afghanistan in a couple of years, but the prize committee is going to look awfully stupid if Obama continues to escalate the conflict in Afghanistan.
Posted by: Sal Peralta | Oct 9, 2009 8:12:02 AM
Gotta say, Jake, that is one of the best on-topic astroturfs for a product I've ever seen.
Jack - How can one explain this award without discussing the context in which it was given -- namely the military posture, policies favoring rendition, and rationalizations of torture that were sanctioned by the previous administration?
Obama's election theoretically repudiates that approach, and in a certain sense, this award was not given to the President of the United States so much as to the people of this country who elected someone who pledged to reverse the policies of the previous administration.
Posted by: BOHICA | Oct 9, 2009 8:15:26 AM
"One of the few hard accomplishments made by President Obama in his first 12 days was putting an end to the practice of torturing people."
Hard as in solid or hard as in a hard decision? Yet we still are sending "detainees" to Bagram Air Base, AKA Torture central.
Posted by: Buckman Res | Oct 9, 2009 8:19:22 AM
Apparently the committee didn’t see last week’s Saturday Night Live opening sketch.
Posted by: Carl | Oct 9, 2009 8:19:34 AM
Obama should be "Given" the INDY 500 championship next, followed by an Oscar. What a guy!
I think the Pope should kiss his ring finger.
Posted by: Richard | Oct 9, 2009 8:32:41 AM
What perfet timing to go along with his blue BS policies for cap and trade, universal health care, amnesty and fiscal insanity.
What a wonderful blue world you're building.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Oct 9, 2009 8:44:27 AM
Sal, that comment was spam and it's gone now. Welcome to the latest spam tactic - grabbing actual comments and spamming them everywhere along with their spam link.
Posted by: Jamaicafest | Oct 9, 2009 8:48:32 AM
@Kari - Very interesting ideas about the motivations of the Nobel Committee. Agree with you that giving President Obama the award is premature.
Posted by: Not going to say | Oct 9, 2009 8:54:58 AM
Jack Roberts:
I don't know if you are the real Jack Roberts, but you sure are funny! We don't agree all the time on these posts but I respect your humor.
Posted by: Jim H | Oct 9, 2009 8:55:45 AM
Sal:
and in a certain sense, this award was not given to the President of the United States so much as to the people of this country who elected someone who pledged to reverse the policies of the previous administration.
I think you're on to something. This was one of my first thoughts when I heard the news.
Posted by: Chris #12 | Oct 9, 2009 9:00:19 AM
I think it's a prank by the Yes Men to point out the huge gap between those Obama peace sign bumper stickers and reality. There's really no other way to explain it.
Posted by: paulie | Oct 9, 2009 9:05:58 AM
A committment to harmony in international relations will be celebrated at Bo's birthday party this weekend.
Posted by: Scott in Damascus | Oct 9, 2009 9:06:00 AM
Jack:
1. Who authorized the invasion and occupation of Iraq?
2. Who authorized the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan?
3. Who authorized the capture and illegal rendition of thousands of innocent civilians and housed them at Gitmo?
4. Who authorized the use of torture during the above mentioned occupations?
5. In what world do you live in where this torture was stopped two years ago?
Oh, one last question - what vintage of champagne did you open to celebrate the awarding of the "Olmpics" to another country?
Posted by: Not going to say | Oct 9, 2009 9:12:42 AM
If I were advising the president on this, I would say have the committee hold the prize until your last day in office, and say you will decide then if you can accept it. This is an award that needs to be earned by the whole country. Let it serve as a reminder to the American People the whole time you are in office that you have a goal to reach (the highest award for peace in the world).
You can be focused on earning that award everyday you are in office, or not and deciding to decline it out of honor for the office and the award if we don’t get as far as a country past the last administration as we should in one presidency.
Posted by: Jamais Vu | Oct 9, 2009 9:14:28 AM
Maybe this means Obama actually will meet fellow-prize winner, the Dalai Lama. Sure, the Dalai isn't welcome at the White House, but maybe there's a Nobel alumni chapter house where they could hang?
All in all, this makes the Nobel prize committee seem more like star-struck tweens at a Jonas Brothers show than a serious force in international politics. I can only assume Obama is somewhat at a loss, probably a little embarrassed, and no doubt hoping none of the egg on the Nobel committee's face drips onto him.
The oddest thing is that the Nobel committee somehow thought this would actually help the president forward his agenda--Europe continues their love-hate fascination with America, never quite getting it.
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Oct 9, 2009 9:22:26 AM
I admit to having my eyebrow raised when I heard the news on NPR this morning. That said...I do think the reactions are interesting. Especially the viscerally hateful stuff coming out of the right-wing.
Posted by: Not going to say | Oct 9, 2009 9:23:16 AM
Oops, looks like he already accepted.
Posted by: Chris R | Oct 9, 2009 9:29:36 AM
An interesting turn of events.
He has done a lot to promote world peace, rid the world of nuclear weapons and to combat global warming. I for one, am happy for news. Now if he would only end Bush's wars.
Posted by: Chris #12 | Oct 9, 2009 9:30:39 AM
I forgot that they also gave this thing to Henry Kissinger and Yitzak Rabin, which proves that just like the folks that gave flute-wielding Jethro Tull the Grammy for Heavy Metal, the Nobel committee is on crack.
Woulda been better if it was the Yes Men...
Posted by: Jack Roberts | Oct 9, 2009 9:36:14 AM
Jack - How can one explain this award without discussing the context in which it was given -- namely the military posture, policies favoring rendition, and rationalizations of torture that were sanctioned by the previous administration?
The problem with this logic, Sal, is that it seems to imply those things are normal and simply repudiating them is worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize. This isn't Obama bashing, by the way; I just agree with those who think this is premature.
If he actually does end the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, what are they going to do, rename it the Obama Peace Prize?
I don't know if you are the real Jack Roberts, but you sure are funny! We don't agree all the time on these posts but I respect your humor..
You mean there is a real Jack Roberts?
Posted by: mp97303 | Oct 9, 2009 9:38:52 AM
Especially the viscerally hateful stuff coming out of the right-wing.
Why should that surprise you, they have nothing left but hate. The right is contributing nothing but hate.
Posted by: Marvin McConoughey | Oct 9, 2009 9:52:53 AM
One, this year's peace prize award may reflect, in part, the dearth of major peace accomplishments on the global stage. Two, this peace prize award might be viewed as a preemptive award given to a presumed major achiever of peace. The wisdom of the award should be better defined in a few years. Given how little genuine world peace progress there is, the Nobel committee had a tough job to do.
Posted by: Sal Peralta | Oct 9, 2009 10:02:12 AM
Jack - All fair points. Thanks for that.
Regarding my comments on idolatry and the Presidency, it's worth mentioning that the first person I'm aware of to raise concerns about the "deification" of the Presidency was an evangelical Christian by the name of Mark Hatfield, who was talking about this during the Nixon era.
Posted by: Bill R. | Oct 9, 2009 10:15:23 AM
The award is a way of sending a message to the world by repudiating utterly the Bush era, and pointing the direction towards reconciliation and peace, especially between the Muslim world and the West. I think the speech in Cairo and the renewed initiative for negotiations with Iran, and Middle East peace are the reason for the award. More than anything the award is to the American people for electing President Barack Obama and the direction he is setting for the world.
As for the tea-bagger haters, and the Naderite cynics, go suck on eggs and stew in your own pot of self-created resentment!
Posted by: Miles | Oct 9, 2009 10:24:59 AM
I think Kari and others aren't giving Obama enough credit for the things he actually has done such as the Cairo speech, the reengagement with Iran, and his positions on nuclear disarmament. Those are major events, the lack of US press coverage notwithstanding. The things we get worked up about almost always involve domestic policy issues, whereas most of the world gets far more worked up about international issues. I love listening to the BBC broadcast on OPB at midnight; they talk about issues and conflicts that I hardly even know about since the US media doesn't cover them.
As for the nominations due on Feb 12th, it seems clear from the committee's statement that they are taking into account things that happened after that. I have no idea if that's normal or not.
Posted by: Carl Fisher | Oct 9, 2009 10:32:00 AM
WHAT YOU MEAN THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE IS A POLITICAL AWARD??? OMG! hahahaha
Posted by: lestatdelc | Oct 9, 2009 10:37:08 AM
Did you hear about the new Obama t-shirt?
“I went to Scandinavia to win the Olympics for Chicago, and all I got was this lousy Nobel Peace Prize!” ;-)
Posted by: John Silvertooth | Oct 9, 2009 10:37:14 AM
Jack Roberts "I think the use of "the One" started with Oprah Winfrey..."
Oprah Winfrey ought to br your heroine Jack- a real Horatio Alger- not some one who inherited their money- a real capitalist not a pencil pushing lawyer waiting for their PERS to kick in.
And don't you remember: "NIXON IS THE ONE"
John Kerry actually wouldn't be a bad candidate for a peace Prize for his work with Vietnam Veterans Against the War and for thre reconcilliation efforts in later years with Vietnam. But we forget you are stuck in Swiftboat mode...
Posted by: John Silvertooth | Oct 9, 2009 10:49:57 AM
What did Obama do?
He put America back in Number 1- Most admired nation in the world -to start with- standing tall- It's morning in America!
What many Americans fail to take account of is any international perspective- internationally his dialogue has turned public sentiment is our favor- his appointment of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State puts diplomacy back in action- his refusal to place Bush's missle "shield" in Europe cause Russia to descalate the weapons build up- this is huge in Europe.
No America news media would rather report on when Levi Johnston is going to strip and who ghost wrote the Palin fairy tales...
Posted by: Jack Roberts | Oct 9, 2009 11:12:32 AM
. . . the first person I'm aware of to raise concerns about the "deification" of the Presidency was an evangelical Christian by the name of Mark Hatfield, who was talking about this during the Nixon era.
Right, and he was against it.
Oprah Winfrey ought to be your heroine Jack- a real Horatio Alger- not some one who inherited their money- a real capitalist not a pencil pushing lawyer waiting for their PERS to kick in.
I like Oprah Winfrey. I was simply citing the source for "the One" not criticizing her.
John Kerry actually wouldn't be a bad candidate for a peace Prize for his work with Vietnam Veterans Against the War and for three reconciliation efforts in later years with Vietnam. But we forget you are stuck in Swiftboat mode...
I wasn't criticizing John Kerry, either. I was simply implying that, if bashing Bush is the purpose behind giving Nobel prizes to Carter, Gore and Obama, then Kerry should get one, too.
I actually think a joint Peace Prize award to Kerry and McCain would have been legitimate back in the 1990s when we they helped lead the way toward reconciliation with North Vietnam.
I admit enjoy provoking the paranoid reactions of the lunatic fringe of the BlueOregon readership, but sometimes it is just too easy. It does point out, however, how important it is that pharmaceutical drugs be included in any universal health care plan.
Posted by: Todd Wynn | Oct 9, 2009 11:30:16 AM
Where is Kanye West when you actually want him to show up?
Posted by: bradley | Oct 9, 2009 11:33:49 AM
I love Jack, fyi. I disagree with you a whole lot, Mr. Roberts, but you are very effective at punching us in our soft underbelly. We need punching, too.
The silver lining here is that Obama now knows that his future actions will all be weighed against the hope expressed in this prize. If he is continuing flawed and immoral foreign and defense policy, the whole world will never let him forget that he is letting us down.
No pressure, Mr. President!
Posted by: Bill McDonald | Oct 9, 2009 11:35:35 AM
I thought the conservative response to the Olympic bid was overblown and ridiculous. They went out of their way to make a big deal out of it with headlines like, "The Ego Has Landed" on Drudge.
So after just being in Olympic hype-overload, they have to throw themselves into hyper-downplay mode for this. Hilarious. Careful, your little spaceship might explode like a missile slamming into the Moon. Hey, we're still at peace with the Moon. Maybe that's it.
I happened to be up at 5 a.m. and saw the Drudge Headline this morning and they were so upset they were repeating words before citing some reaction from Pakistan calling it an "embarrassing joke."
I tell you what's an embarrassing joke: The conservative movement.
Posted by: Not going to say | Oct 9, 2009 11:36:16 AM
Oh, there you go Mr. Roberts, dipping into the gutter. Attacking the mental state of your opponents? Strait out of Rove’s playbook; come on? Geez, and I just said you were funny and there you go and embarrass us with compliments.
When G.W. Bush said that God told him to go to war in Iraq, what do you think he really meant by that? Further, do you really think that was God he was listening to?
Posted by: lestatdelc | Oct 9, 2009 11:37:24 AM
I see this as a proxy award to America as a whole for rejecting the neo-conservative posture of the United States by electing Barack Obama as our President, combined with the valid things he has done internationally, from re-engagement in diplomacy, to an honest rapprochement with the Muslim world, to actually gaveling in the UN Security council and then talking about nuclear DISARMAMENT (not non-proliferation, but disarmament), the shift in policy of deploying the ill-advises and provocative "missile shield" in eastern Europe, etc. etc.
He (because we did it) replaced a nuclear armed "with us or against us" cowboy who had his finger on the trigger and launched two wars... with a calm, reasonable, smart and empathic president who is reengaging the world and seeks ending of nuclear weapons.
Given the way American posture impacts the entire globe planet (a Goliath astride the globe), I think that is more than enough to warrant the prize.
Posted by: obeyme | Oct 9, 2009 11:45:51 AM
Anybody who thinks the Nobel prize to Obama was premature, is a RACIST who don't like black people.
Posted by: Jack Roberts | Oct 9, 2009 11:48:53 AM
Oh, there you go Mr. Roberts, dipping into the gutter. Attacking the mental state of your opponents? Strait out of Rove’s playbook; come on? Geez, and I just said you were funny and there you go and embarrass us with compliments.
You're right. I was out of line. I apologize to you and your invisible friends.
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Post a comment
Posted by: Dave Porter | Oct 9, 2009 6:50:53 AM
Kari, I agree with you. It’s premature, and, perhaps, a bit silly and somewhat devaluing to previous recipients.
The Norwegian, of course, are free to do what they want. And I think your speculations are probably right. But just not being the previous bad guy should not really be enough, IMHO.
Better if they had waited a little longer, until Obama had announced his new Afghanistan strategy. If he goes for more US troops matched by Chinese troops or pulls US troops out I would feel he had earned the award. (see my post here on Chinese troops).
I’d also feel he had earned the award if he had implemented a national version of a Go Global High School Study Abroad Program (here) to send tens of thousands of US high school students abroad.