No Bull–The Noble Nobel Peace Prize Belongs to Obama

When I heard that President Barack Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009, my first reaction brought up the image of two cowboys in old Tombstone strolling down the boardwalks to the saloon. When spying a cowboy riding his horse in the street, one of the walkers raises two fingers in a “V” sign. One cowboy asks the other: “Why did you give him the victory sign?” The other said, “That wasn’t the victory sign. One big finger was for him and the other one was for his horse.”

I thought immediately that the Nobel prize was for anybody but George W. Bush. The Nobel Committee had captured the mood of the world by giving a world-wide, industrial-sized finger to Lurch, a final goodbye to him and his cowboy policies. Obama had been president about three weeks when nominations were due for the 2009 prize. But we must remember that the Nobel Committee examines what all of the nominees, some 205, have done up to about October. Then the decision is made.

Alfred Nobel, the inventor of dynamite, specifically stated in his 1895 will that the prize should go to the person who has contributed most to the development of peace in the previous year. He added: “The award should go to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.” Since the prize was established in 1901, 17 institutions and 84 individuals have been awarded the prize. Among the 84 individuals are statesmen, humanitarians, lawyers, champions of human rights, and religious leaders.

There has been a great “to-do” about the fact that Mahatma Gandhi was never awarded the prize for his work in India and the world. He was one of the top people considered for the award in 1948—until he was assassinated. The Norwegian selection committee of five, elected by the Norwegian Parliament, then indicated there would be no award in 1948 “because there was no suitable living candidate.”

Obama’s Critics Had a Field Day in Their Ignorance and Stupidity

Naturally the anti-Obama “birthers,” Tea Party patriots, right-wing talkshow hosts, and the Republicans went IED-berserk over his award. Trash Limbo said: “Our president is a laughingstock” and is “the darling of European leftist elites.” The editor of Rupert Murdoch’s Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol (Dan Quayle’s brain), stated on the Republican network Fox News that Obama should have turned down the prize because it was awarded by an “anti-American committee.”

The Chairman of the Republican National Committee Michael Steele tried to use the selection within hours as a fundraiser with this line: “Democrats and their international leftist allies (Trash would have loved this) want America made subservient to the agenda of global redistribution and control.” He wrote that “up to a $1,000 from each partisan” would help to redistribute money to Republican control. Even the Taliban, Hamas and President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela agreed that Obama didn’t deserve the award.

Of course, the Cheneys will never go away. Liz Cheney evidently spoke for Daddy and Mommy when she said that Obama’s prize was an absolute “farce” and that Obama “should send the mother of a fallen American soldier to accept the prize on behalf of the U.S. military.” I wonder if Dick Cheney is mad because Obama beat him out of the award. Those Cheneys are tough. Liz described Obama as a “radical, callow, golf-playing appeaser whose foreign policy will make us weaker.” There’s no doubt that when Dick Cheney was co-president in Lurch’s first term it was his foreign policies that eventually made our position weak in the world. The world is simply giving the Bush administration a huge finger so we can move on.

A few Republicans paid tribute to Obama. Senator John McCain said: “Americans are always pleased when their president is recognized by something on this order.” Henry Kissinger, the 1973 recipient, offered his congratulations and said “the award, beyond the tribute to your person, honors America and the cause of peace.” Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina added: “If he can successfully turn around Afghanistan, deter Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, I will build a bookcase for him to put it in.”

What Has Obama Done to Earn the Award?

In a unanimous decision made by three liberals and two conservatives elected to the Nobel Committee, the five agreed on the reasons for the award to Obama. His main commendation states: “ For his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people.” George W. Bush and Dick Cheney routinely violated the Geneva Convention rules and numerous treaties on treatment of prisoners.

Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, and Bagram in Afghanistan were constant reminders to the world that the U.S. had gone rogue among law-abiding nations. We had descended into lawlessness by using rendition flights and “black sites” in countries that used torture as national policy. Lurch’s statement that “We don’t torture” was an outright lie.

The Nobel Committee noted the following Obama policies and pledges in making the award:

(1) London, April 2: “We are committed to growth and job creation…. Together, we must put an end to the bubble-and-bust economy that has stood in the way of sustained growth and enabled abusive risk-taking that endangers our prosperity.”

(2) Strasbourg, France, April 4: “The United States has recommitted itself to a clear and focused goal – to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al-Queda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.”

(3) Prague, April 5: “Today, I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.”

(4) Ankara, April 6: “The United States strongly supports the goals of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. That is a goal ... shared by people of goodwill around the world. That is a goal I will actively pursue.”

(5) Baghdad, April 7: “We have committed ourselves to a strategy that ensures an orderly, responsible transition from U.S. and coalition security forces to Iraqi security forces… the drawdown that will take place will ultimately result in the removal of all U.S. troops by 2011.”

(6) Cairo, June 4 (Muslim relations) : “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 achieve justice and prosperity. And this cycle of suspicion and discord must end.”

(7) Moscow, July 7: “I have called for a ‘reset’ between the United States and Russia…. It must be a sustained effort among the American and Russian people to identify mutual interests, and expand dialogue and cooperation that can pave the way to progress.”

(8) Italy, July 9 (on climate change): “In the past the U.S. has sometimes fallen short of meeting our responsibilities…. Those days are over. One of my highest priorities as president is to drive a clean-energy transformation of our economy.”

(9) Iran, Sept. 25: “We have offered Iran a clear path toward greater international integration if it lives up to its obligations, and that offer stands. But the Iranian government must now demonstrate through deeds its peaceful intentions or be held accountable.”

In addition to the above policies, Obama has increased diplomatic contact with Cuba, something that ten other presidents have failed to do (It has always been my contention that if we had backed Fidel Castro in the beginning instead of the dictator Fulgencio Batista, Cuba would now be our 51st state!). Lurch always wanted to put anti-missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic to allegedly protect us from Iranian missiles. Russia objected to this placing of our missiles in its backyard. Obama has cancelled this program and relations with Russia have improved.

There’s no doubt that Europe welcomed the election of Obama. The Nobel Committee chastised Lurch by praising Obama: “Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position… dialogue and negotiations are preferred… the U.S.A. is now playing a more constructive role.” Take another finger, George.

Perhaps We Should All Get a Chance to Read Our Obituaries Before We Kick the Bucket

We have the Nobel Peace Prize and the other Nobel prizes in economics, medicine, literature, physics, and chemistry. We wouldn’t have any Nobel prizes if Alfred had not had an opportunity to read his own obituary. Stunned by the emphasis on the destructive power of dynamite which he had invented, Nobel immediately established the Nobel Peace Prize to counteract the publicity from his fortune created by dynamite.

In his will Nobel outlined the philosophy and the processes for the awards. In any mention of the Peace Prize he always noted that it be given “to the person who, during the preceding year, shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations….” Although he was a Swedish inventor and industrialist, he decreed that the Peace Prize be handled by the Norwegian government and presented to the winner in Oslo because Sweden was “too militaristic.” The prize money is based on the amount of interest earned on the principal. Each winner this year will receive $1.4 million.

Besides his interest in explosives, Nobel also created an armaments company out of an iron company he purchased. World War II vets will remember the Bofors 40 mm. multiple-barreled anti-aircraft guns that were employed on aircraft carriers and larger ships.

Nominations, Selections – and Controversies

Each year the Nobel Committee invites “qualified” people to submit nominations for the Peace Prize. By Norwegian statute, information relating to nominations, considerations, or investigations cannot be revealed for 50 years. When the nominations for 1939 were exposed in 1989, people were fascinated by the fact that Adolf Hitler had been nominated for the Peace Prize by Erik Brandt, a member of the Swedish Parliament! Brandt did withdraw the nomination after a few days. Joseph Stalin and Benito Mussolini were also nominated but neither made the final cut.

I thought it was interesting that the most disputed awards, according to various Nobel committees, were given to Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin, Yasser Arafat, Le Duc Tho (North Vietnam), Henry Kissinger, Mikhail Gorbachev, Jimmy Carter — and Barak Obama. The award to Henry Kissinger and his opponent Duc Tho for negotiating the end of the Vietnam War resulted in the resignation of two committee members. Among notables who did not win the Peace Prize are Pope John Paul II, Dorothy Day, and Eleanore Roosevelt. Franklin Delano didn’t make it either.

I do get a kick out of the Obama haters who claim he isn’t qualified for the award because he hasn’t solved the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Iran march to nuclear weapons, the North Korean nuclear problem, hasn’t brought peace to a defeated Iraq and Afghanistan, and hasn’t convinced the Muslims to lay off. Hell, folks, give him until the end of his first year at least!

Questions and comments: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)