As ridiculous as that may sound, based upon some past recipients and based upon the current qualifications which made President Obama worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, it is not all that far fetched.
The announcement made in Norway today was a surprise and rightfully so. Although I believe Osama bin Laden’s chances of winning a Nobel Peace Prize are about as good as his chances of having Alex Tribec congratulating him for selecting the double jeopardy answer, awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to a man who has done nothing to deserve it is almost as logical as is it would be for Bin Laden to win it.
One must ask why President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. Was it won for any accomplishments? Was it won because of bold decisions that advanced the cause of freedom? Did the life in which the President live up to now demonstrate an extraordinary sacrifice for peace? Did he make sacrifices similar to French-Colombian hostage Ingrid Betancourt and Chinese dissident Hu Jia?
After being schooled in the Philippines and Hawaii, he came to the U.S. mainland and ultimately earned a Harvard Law Degree. This is hardly a life of leadership and sacrifice but after taking this path he threw himself into Chicago politics and came to office after throwing his Democrat opponent odd the ballot in primary for a Southside Chicago state senate seat. It was a district where winning the Democrat nomination was tantamount to victory in the general election. After a few years in the Illinois State Senate and a slew of “present” votes that enabled him to avoid a record of votes that could be used against him, Barack Obama won the Democrat nomination for the United States from Illinois. Circumstances of corruption enabled Obama to glide to victory in an election which he had only token opposition. None of this is exactly an inspirational story. It is also not an example of extraordinary leadership or sacrifice.
Then, after just a few thousand days in the United States Senate, with a media clamoring over him and pushing for him, Senator Obama became President Obama. He won his election based upon a wave of anti-Republican sentiment and in a race against a horribly week Republican opponent in John McCain.
Before the newly elected President could actually do anything more than place his ink blotter on his Oval office desk, just 12 days after being sworn in, the Nobel Peace Price Committee nominated Barack Obama for what was once one of the world’s most distinguished honors. Now after less than three hundred days in office, he wins that honor.
Is there any merit in it? None whatsoever. Does President Obama deserve the Nobel Peace Prize? Absolutely not! Not if the award means anything.
What possible reasons could warrant the President’s Peace Prize? This is a man who, not long ago was deemed unworthy of an honorary degree from Arizona University. Does he deserve it because he has been printing so much money that the dollar has been devalued as much as 12% in just nine months? Could the prize be presented to President Obama because he has devalued the American dollar so much that the international community is considering the creation of a new world currency, one that is worth something? Does President Obama actions concerning Poland warrant the Peace prize? Could his abandonment of Poland’s defense which required that we renege on a non-offensive missile defense system qualify him as a promoter of peace?
Up to now all President Obama has really done is negotiate the logistics for having two men from Massachusetts join him for a beer and most recently, in a most appropriate tribute to peace, President Obama avoided a meeting with the Dalai Lama. Few people embody the promise and concept of peace more than the Dalai Lama, but not wanting to offend the leaders of Communist China, who the President will soon be visiting and disdain the Dalai Lama, President Obama would not meet with him during his recent visit to the states. Was this the act of a brave man dedicated to peace? The record would indicate that there is in fact not any reason why the President should be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. None. So the fact that he did, is hard to understand, but it is actually easy to see why the leaders of socialist societies like Sweden feel that after nine months in office, President Obama deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.
From their perspective, the President has done so much . By giving in and selling out, President Obama has satisfied those who are apprehensive about freedom. From their perspective, less people in the world live in fear of American leadership today than they did yesterday. The religious extremists running Iran are less afraid of doing as they wish. Hence the test firing of missiles and an increased level of activity in their hobby of nuclear weapons capabilities. North Korea was so pleased with the transformative role of President Barack Obama that they celebrated with a string of their own long range ballistic missile tests.
After President Obama’s string of apologies for America on foreign soil, many came to believe that America will no longer be so harsh in its defense of freedom and democracy. After standing before a crowd of European leaders in Strasbourg, France during July, the President declared that “America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” On June 4th before an assembled audience at Cairo University in Egypt, President Obama stated “So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, those who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. And this cycle of suspicion and discord must end”.
These are indeed humble words from the leader of the nation that saved Europe and is responsible for keeping nation’s like Norway, sovereign states, but dothose words really offer a path to peace? Do they really make people with bombs purchased by rogue regimes and strapped to their waists stop and say, “Hey, why light the fuse. President Obama wants to sit down and talk”. Differences of opinion are not at issue here. People’s rights and lives are at issue. The future of a peace loving, free world is at stake here. The defining differences that exist in the world community are not differences regarding ones favorite flavor of ice cream. They are the differences between freedom and oppression, they are the differences between right and wrong, life and death.
President Obama has made it clear that he does not understand this and his policies reflect this lack of understanding. It is a lack of understanding that many socialist societies and rogue regimes share. And there in lies one of the main reasons for President Obama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The international community wants America emasculated. They want America made less influential. For these reasons, the Nobel Committee awarded the Peace Prize based simply on the fact that President Obama is inclined to have the same view.
The international community did not like President’s Bush’ ability to lead without taking his cue from the United Nations. They do not want the United States making its own decisions. President Obama’s overt appeals for international complacency have signaled that he will not lead but that he would rather go along to get along.
President Obama’s clear departure from President George W. Bush was the sole reason for President Obama being awarded the Nobel Prize. It was certainly not given to Barack Obama because of his accomplishments. There are no accomplishments! They have awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize simply because he is not George W. Bush and because terrorists and international aggressors no longer feel threatened. Not being George W. Bush was the reason why Jimmy Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize a year after George Bush became President. It was also the reason why George Bush’s opponent for President, Al Gore, won it in 2007. Can anyone actual claim that the production of a movie on global warming exaggerations make one a deserving recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize?
One must even question if the Nobel Peace Prize really is an honor worth having anymore. After once awarding it to Yasir Arafat, its meaning was devalued even faster and even more than the dollar under the administration of Barack Obama. So prior to today’s announcement, the Peace Prize had already lost much of its meaning. Now, it has simply become about as meaningful as those colorful little stickers that teachers hand out to grade school students for being well behaved for 10 minutes or for not spelling cat with a “k“.
In accepting the honor, President Obama signaled that he is not sure if he is worthy of the prize and stated that he is not sure if he deserves to be in the company of other previous winners. This is a sentiment shared by many, including 1983 Nobel Peace prize winner, and former President of Poland, Nobel laureate Lech Walesa, agrees. According to him it is “Too early” for the honor to be bestowed on such an unaccomplished individual. This is a sentiment with popular support. It is also one that President Obama should have held. President Obama should have rejected this undeserved honor in the name of people like Dr. Martin Luther King, a man who, with peace in his heart, sacrificed his life experience for a cause that benefited our nation. In fact Dr King’s efforts were so profound that it he helped enlighten our nation to the point where it is possible for a person of President Obama’s skin color to become President, something which was unheard of during Dr King‘s lifetime.
President Obama should have declined the Peace Prize in the name of a past winner like Mother Theresa, a candidate for sainthood for Christ’s sakes.
But as one liberal fan of President Obama put it on radio, when asked for his reaction to announcement, “President Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize because he was being himself”. Its statements like that and the President’s actual acceptance of an honor he does not deserve which account for the often referred to, tongue-in-cheek, description of the President as a “messiah” comes from. There truly is a perception held by the President and his admirers that he is a political messiah and that he speaks the only word of truth there is.
Others with more realistic assessments realize that the emperor has no clothes. We understand that the magical aura around our President is total hype based on absolutely no accomplishments. This opinion is echoed by many as they use words like “joke“ and “you can’t be serious” are spoken in unbridled reactions of shock and awe.
So exactly how and why did such a joke occur?
A look at the facts involving who and how the Nobel Peace Prize runs demonstrates some very telling tales.
Let us look first at who, by statute, has he right to submit proposals for the Nobel Peace Prize :
Members of national assemblies and governments of states;
Members of international courts;
University rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes;
Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
Board members of organizations who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize;
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
Former advisers appointed by the Norwegian Nobel Institute.
Except for the exclusion of the New York Times editorial board, this list is a perfect description of the political class’s liberal elite, a group that Barack Obama is not just a member of. He should be their President.
After the nominations for the Peace Prize were made from among those who meet the above qualifications, a committee of five, appointed by the Norwegian parliament, determine, by vote, who is awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. A look at who sits on that committee reveals why Barack Obama won this years honor. Along with Geir Lundestad, Kaci Kullmann, Sissel Rønbeck, Inger-Marie Ytterhorn and Ågot Valle, the committee is chaired by Thorbjørn Jagland.
Thorbjørn Jagland is a devout socialist who has, since 1999, been a vice presidents of Socialist International, a group he persistently accuses the left wing in Norway of not using enough.
In 1996 Jagland was the leader of the Norwegian Labour Party. At that time an abrupt resignation allowed Jagland to inherit the job of Prime Minister. A string of controversies and a lower than expected percentage of the popular vote forced Jagland to resign in 1998. As time went by he was elected to parliament and after being reelected 4 times , members elected him President of the Storting (the Norwegian parliament). In 2008 he stepped down from that post to become Secretary-General of the Council of Europe an in February of 2009 he was elected Chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee.
Clearly, President Obama’s propensity for socialism and his support of sweeping measures at breakneck pace to adopt the principles and policies of socialism earned him the favor of the socialist elite politicians who determine who should receive the Nobel Peace Prize. Throw in President Obama’s apologetic approach to foreign policy and his willingness to have American policies determined by the global community and it is quite obvious why he has won the Nobel Peace Prize. It has nothing to do with accomplishments and everything to do with America relinquishing its power and sphere of influence. That is exactly why President Obama, who has not accomplished a thing other than downgrade everything from American security to its dollar won the Nobel Peace Prize. It is for those very reasons that we, as Americans, should look carefully at the direction that our President is taking our nation in.
The meaning and value of the Nobel Peace Prize had been significantly downgraded ever since they placed the honor in the blood stained hands of terrorists like Yasir Arafat. Ever since then, with the lack of relevance or reason displayed in awarding it to the failed presidency of Jimmy Carter and for the Hollywood productions of Al Gore, the Peace Prize has had very little meaning. It has obviously become a symbol of wishes rather than accomplishments. The Nobel committees decisions and judgment of late offer sad insight into a world filled with hapless dreamers who are willing to trust without verifying and to act on fiction rather than fact.
After President Obama’s recent trip to Copenhagen to win over the International Olympic Committee selection of Chicago for the 2016 Olympic games, I was disappointed that we failed to bring the games to the United States. I had been among the few Republicans who supported the President’s pitch for Chicago. Upon hearing that we did not get the games, I was not only disappointed, I was surprised. I felt for sure that the international could never turn down the American messiah President. But upon reflection I felt that maybe some good come out of the loss. Perhaps the rejection of the President’s pitch for the Olympics would provide a much needed reality check for the President. I thought that maybe this would bring his head from out of the clouds and realize that he needed to add some substance to his style and not rely on winning the world over just because he is who he is.
I had hoped that.
Then this morning I lost that hope. I lost it when what once was one of the world’s most distinguished honors was awarded to Barack Obama simply because he is Barack Obama and because he is not George Bush, and simply because he agrees with other socialists who have come to believe that the real problem in the world today is not a lack of freedom but rather too much freedom. So, yes, this morning I lost hope. It was replaced by fear. Fear of just how much President Obama will give away in an attempt to please those who bestowed the Peace Prize upon him before he earned it. I fear that his head will swell to such large proportions that the satin ribbon which have the Peace Prize medal hanging from it from will not stretch wide enough to fit over his head.
I fear that like the Nobel Peace prize committee, we have made a mistake in choosing President Barack H. Obama.