Friday, October 9, 2009

Consolation prize?

I had to check my calendar when I saw the news that President Obama, whose achievements up to date have been nil apart from raising the deficit to $1.752 trillion for this year alone, has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. No it is not April 1 and the news is real. Woo-hoo!

Astonishingly enough, there are people out there who are upset and talk about this demeaning the Peace Prize. How can that ridiculous thing be demeaned? First of all, it has no purpose. Science prizes are awarded for achievements though scientists may dispute whether the recipients are those who really deserved them; economics and literature prizes tend to go according to the rule of Buggins's turn but some achievement has to be shown; the Peace Prize has no purpose or justification. None of the people who have received it in the past achieved peace and some, like the late unlamented Chairman Arafat, actively promoted war and terrorism.

This could be a consolation prize for not getting the Olympics for Chicago; it could be a reward for grovelling to every tyrant under the sun and surrendering to them on the subject of free speech; or it could be simply for being the first non-white President of the United States. Given that nominations allegedly closed 11 days after Obama's inauguration, one cannot help feeling that the last of those is true.

Meanwhile, what of the US Marine Corps, who really have brought peace and freedom to millions of people int he world?

19 comments:

  1. Could this in part explain the White House's reluctance to make an announcement on troop deployment in Aghanistan? I wouldn't put it past them if they had an inkling Obama was in line for this.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Once again I just want to make certain everyone understands that the Peace Prize is handed out by the Norwegian Parliament NOT by the Swedish Academy of Sciences.

    Just so you know....

    ;-)

    Mikgen

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mikgen,

    you know that ... I know that ... but someone really should tell CNN ... they have it wrong on their website

    Nick

    ReplyDelete
  4. Not Rocket ScienceOctober 9, 2009 at 3:43 PM

    It could have been worse. It could have be the Economics prize for Obama's contribution to making Al Gore even richer while impoverishing everyone else. Pass me a sick bag someone...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yeah Al Gore got it too! What next an Emmy for all the record amount of time this President is on TV? Oh this says it all. And I like the conspiracy theory regarding the waffling on the troop issue in Afghanistan!

    ReplyDelete
  6. BTW - one wonders who nominated Obama. The nominations had to be in early February according to the statutes, and if one remembers correctly Obama was inaugurated mid-January. So, given the short time as president, it had to be someone with intimate knowledge of Obama's policies.

    Let's see who can nominate prospective recipients of the Peace Prize:

    1. Members of national assemblies and governments of states;
    2. Members of international courts;
    3. University rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes;
    4. Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
    5. Board members of organizations who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
    6. Active and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; (proposals by members of the Committee to be submitted no later than at the first meeting of the Committee after February 1) and
    7. Former advisers appointed by the Norwegian Nobel Institute.

    Hmmm, #3... professors of social sciences? A special name seems to come to mind....

    Could it have been BILL AYERS???

    /Mikgen

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mikgen,
    Great suggestion. I keep forgetting that terrorist is a professor of social sciences. There is a whisper going round that ACORN campaigned.

    I ought to have mentioned that this is given by the Norwegian Nobel Committee and not by the Swedish one, as I did know, but I could not stop laughing long enough. Oh frabjous day!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Very good thinking, Mikgen...an unrepentant murderous lleftie thug as proposer. Well, he joins Begin & Arafat, Gore et al (no pun intended) If Nobel himself were handing out prizes to these scum they would be working examples of his most famous invention complete with lighted short-delay fuse.

    ReplyDelete
  9. In their defense, I have to say that most Norwegians (around 75%) disagree with the choice of Obama. In most forums it seems like it's only the diehard socialists that are defending the decision.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Helen wrote: "...President Obama, whose achievements up to date have been nil ..."

    He did nothing yet...
    ...just reset the collective madness and paranoia.
    Especially in the USA.
    It took a man, a real one.
    So that is why...

    (from a comment on the BBC Have Your Say website by a Tibor TK, Neuss)

    Nick

    and if you want something substantive: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/09/zakaria.obama.nobel/index.html

    ReplyDelete
  11. The Nobel Peace Prize is a nothing award given by socialists to other socialists for being socialists. I am still laughing, I thought thay had devalued it initially by giving it to Arafat, but the one that made it a laughing stock was Gore, this is in line with the Gore one for stupidity. The wonderful thing is that in their arrogance, they just made Obama a laughing stock in America and in Europe and have really dropped him in the muck, they made him a laughing stock way above his already noted incompetence level.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I heard this news while slowly waking from slumber this morning. I felt like I had entered the twighlight zone.

    The Canadian Prime minister said "...blah blah blah he has achieved an incredible amount blah blah blah ..."

    I think Stephen Harper, clever man that he is, was tongue in cheek in his congratulations to The One.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It definitely cannot be for anything recent: after all, it was given by a Leftist government and they are not given to doing anything quickly except thievery.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Billykwiz, I am delighted to hear it. I have always suspected that the people of Norway are considerably saner than their politicians and eminent prize givers. Well, all the ones I have ever met are.

    Robert, you are probably right. I mean how can Stephen Harper be doing anything but killing himself with laughter?

    Actually, I am rather pleased about this. Coming on top of the Copenhagen humiliation, caused entirely by Obama (there was no need for him to go) this is really dumping him into deep doo-doo, even with his own supporters. Laughter is ringing out all over the world. Arafat getting the Prize was not funny, this is. And yet, if the man were smart he could turn it round by a noble and manly acknowledgement that he is not yet worthy of it so please give it to somebody else until I have achieved what you think I will achieve. Think of the whoops of joy that would bring out of his loonytunes supporters. But no, it will not occur to him. As I said above: oh frabjous day.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Even the Soviets were rational.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "...for being the first non-white President of the United States. Given that nominations allegedly closed 11 days after Obama's inauguration, one cannot help feeling that the last of those is true." And also for spending huge amounts of money on legal fees to avoid having to show a truly authenticatable birth certificate to prove he was born in the USA (ie in Hawaii on 4 August 1961) to allow him under US law to become a US President, rather than in Kenya which would have disqualified him.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Nicholas --

    This morning, Michelle and I awoke to some surprising and humbling news. At 6 a.m., we received word that I'd been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.

    To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.

    But I also know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement; it's also been used as a means to give momentum to a set of causes.

    That is why I've said that I will accept this award as a call to action, a call for all nations and all peoples to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. These challenges won't all be met during my presidency, or even my lifetime. But I know these challenges can be met so long as it's recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone.

    This award -- and the call to action that comes with it -- does not belong simply to me or my administration; it belongs to all people around the world who have fought for justice and for peace. And most of all, it belongs to you, the men and women of America, who have dared to hope and have worked so hard to make our world a little better.

    So today we humbly recommit to the important work that we've begun together. I'm grateful that you've stood with me thus far, and I'm honored to continue our vital work in the years to come.

    Thank you,

    President Barack Obama

    ReplyDelete
  18. http://www.newmajority.com/some-prize

    >>Some Prize
    by David Frum

    That Nobel was not a gesture of Obama-worship by left-leaning Norwegians. It was the very opposite: It was a pre-emptive strike against Obama, an attempt to neutralize him. How can a Peace Nobelist strike Iranian nuclear plants? Or wage a protracted war in Afghanistan? Or tell the Palestinians, “Sorry, that’s the best offer, take it or leave it”? The hope of course is that he cannot.

    We’ve heard a lot over the past few years about radicals trying to achieve their aims through “lawfare.” Here’s a new concept in asymmetric conflict: “prizefare.” The Nobel Committee was not rewarding Obama. It was attempting to geld him.
    <<

    ReplyDelete
  19. I think it says it all about the group of self-congratulatory elites we have in power, you can imagine them sitting down together working out what meaningless awards they can give each other to make them look more intelligent and further their own positions. No matter how Obama spins it in a speach, that is how the Nobel Peace Prize is being looked at, giving it to Arafat was a mistake, Gore was a joke, but giving it to Obama was even more of a joke. If Obama had been sensible he should have refused to accept it, but he couldn't do that could he as his speach shows, a real spin on the joke, says it all about the man...

    ReplyDelete