October 9. 2009
Barak Obama has been announced the winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize for accomplishments in his, so far short, tenure as the President of the United States. Many great men and women have won this prestigious award. The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded 89 times to 119 Nobel Laureates between 1901 and 2008 – 96 times to individuals and 23 times to organizations. Individuals like Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela were awarded the Prize in response to their immense work to end racism and fight for the equality of all men. Incidentally, Mandela spent 27 years in prison for his part in the fight to end Apartheid in South Africa and then won the Presidency in South Africa’s first multi-racial elections in 1994. Mother Theresa, for her humanitarian outreach in third world nations, won the Nobel in 1979 and Desmond Tutu won the same Prize in 1984 for his religious work to end slavery and Apartheid in South Africa.
Because it is such a great honor to win a Nobel Peace Prize and is only awarded to the greatest of individuals for the greatest of accomplishments, I wanted to list the highlights of Barak Obama’s feats for you to peruse. They are many so dig in.
- Lowered the value of the dollar through monetizing the national debt and printing trillions of dollars in currency
- Slowed the economy through poor economic policy and inaction
- Caused the highest unemployment in 35 years
- Traveled the world apologizing for America being a terrible country
- Made the United States even more of a laughing stock than it already was
- Nationalized 60% of our private industry and banking system
- Brought the most radically left, Marxist individuals he could find in power under him with no Congressional vetting
- Further dividing Congress
- Appeased our enemies, Russia
- Angered China, who happens to be the financial backer of over 50% of our National Debt
- Flew the Chinese flag on the White House lawn. The Chinese government is one of the biggest human rights violators in the world and is directly responsible for the deaths of over 20,000,000 political dissidents over the last 40 years.
- Snubbed our NATO allies, Poland and The Czech Republic by backing out of the missile defense shield to appease Russia, our enemy, on the anniversary of the Russian invasion of Poland
- Allowed Iran to further it’s nuclear weapons program through inaction and dropping our support for Israel
- Traveling to Germany to make a bid for the Olympics to be in Chicago so his buddy and real estate criminal, Tony Rezsco, could make millions. Incidentally, while he was in Germany, 46 Americans died in Afghanistan and he still refuses to make a decision on General McKrystal’s request for 40,000 more troops in the theater.
This is just the short list of Barak Obama’s many and illustrious accomplishments that more than qualify him for the Nobel Peace Prize.
According to Alfred Nobel’s last will and testament, the Prize should be awarded “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
I’m ashamed to be Scandinavian… This is a Crock and a Fraud and Nobel is turning over in his grave. The really funny thing here is the fact that the members of the Nobel commission vote every year in February and then award the Prize in October or November. This means Barak Obama was only in office for approximately 11+ days when they made the decision to give it to him. Something stinks in Denmark, thats for sure.
excuse me, I have to go take some Immodium now. This has made me sick…
(Edit)
Thanks be to David for pointing out my mis-information on the voting process. Obama made the short list in February/March and was unanimously voted up in October. The details are in the comments. This still does NOT change the level of accomplishment of the winner OR change my mind on the fact that he didn’t even come close to achieving the same level of public service or work for peace as the many deserving individuals who won the Nobel before him. Mother Theresa, he is NOT.
But nevertheless, I am always willing to admit when I was indeed wrong and I was in this case.
October 9th, 2009 at 4:39 PM
You write that “members of the Nobel commision vote every year in February and then award the Prize in October or November. This means Barak Obama was only in office for approximately 11+ days when they made the decision to give it to him.”
You’re completely wrong, of course. The cut-off for nominations is Feb. 1. That has NOTHING to do with when the decision is reached. In truth, the decision on the Peace Prize for 2009 was made just last Monday, according to remarks by Nobel Committee Chairman Thorbjorn Jagland.
Last Monday. Not exactly last February, is it? Beyond that, the decision was unanimous. Even the two members (out of the five) who represent the conservative and far right political parties in the Norwegian Parliament were in favor of Obama’s selection.
And based on old Alfred’s description of the award in his will, Obama is the perfect choice for 2009.
So get your facts straight.
October 9th, 2009 at 4:57 PM
Could you enlighten me then? What has he done to deserve the Nobel? How does he fit into Nobel’s wishes on how the prize should be awarded?
October 10th, 2009 at 5:50 AM
You were correct and I will admit that I should have looked at that aspect closer. It still doesn’t change the fact that he made the “short list” at the very begining of his tenure and, to this day, not accomplished anything worthy of the prize.
Below is the process for awarding the prize taken directly off the Nobel website.
Process of Nomination and Selection
The Norwegian Nobel Committee is responsible for the selection of eligible candidates and the choice of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates. The Committee is composed of five members appointed by the Storting (Norwegian parliament). The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded in Oslo, Norway, not in Stockholm, Sweden, where the Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry, Physiology or Medicine, Literature and the Economics Prize are awarded.
Who is eligible for the Prize
The candidates eligible for the Nobel Peace Prize are those nominated by qualified individuals. See Qualified Nominators. » No one can nominate him- or herself.
How are the Nobel Laureates selected?
Below is a brief description of the process involved in selecting the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates.
September – Invitation letters are sent out. The Nobel Committee sends out invitation letters to individuals qualified to nominate – members of national assemblies, governments, and international courts of law; university chancellors, professors of social science, history, philosophy, law and theology; leaders of peace research institutes and institutes of foreign affairs; previous Nobel Peace Prize Laureates; board members of organizations that have received the Nobel Peace Prize; present and past members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; and former advisers of the Norwegian Nobel Institute.
February – Deadline for submission. The Committee bases its assessment on nominations that must be postmarked no later than 1 February each year. Nominations postmarked and received after this date are included in the following year’s discussions. In recent years, the Committee has received close to 200 different nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize. The number of nominating letters is much higher, as many are for the same candidates.
February-March – Short list. The Committee assesses the candidates’ work and prepares a short list.
March-August – Adviser review. The short list is reviewed by permanent advisers and advisers specially recruited for their knowledge of specific candidates. The advisers do not directly evaluate nominations nor give explicit recommendations.
October – Nobel Laureates are chosen. At the beginning of October, the Nobel Committee chooses the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates through a majority vote. The decision is final and without appeal. The names of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates are then announced.
December – Nobel Laureates receive their prize. The Nobel Peace Prize Award Ceremony takes place on 10 December in Oslo, Norway, where the Nobel Laureates receive their Nobel Prize, which consists of a Nobel Medal and Diploma, and a document confirming the prize amount.
Are the nominations made public?
The statutes of the Nobel Foundation restrict disclosure of information about the nominations, whether publicly or privately, for 50 years. The restriction concerns the nominees and nominators, as well as investigations and opinions related to the award of a prize.
So in the end, I would still love to hear your reasoning for why he won deservingly.
October 10th, 2009 at 1:35 PM
My understanding is that the committee actually admitted that the prize was not awarded for anything that he had already done.
October 11th, 2009 at 6:43 AM
According to the Washington Post there is now two versions of the prize. One that is given for past accomplishments and one that is given for future accomplishments. This is the first I have heard of such a thing. I have a feeling it is the first the Washington Post has heard of it as well. At least until they made it up.
Total farse is what I call it.
October 11th, 2009 at 6:44 AM
Still waiting on your answer, David.
October 13th, 2009 at 10:11 PM
It’s not some “Lifetime Achievement Award” for God’s sake. It’s annual. Um, that means “every year” for those of you up in the cheap seats.
Alfred Nobel wrote in his 1895 will that the Peace Prize should go “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
Sure, there may be some years where someone who’s been in the trenches for decades gets honored, but often enough it’s for the past 12 months. As such, Obama fits perfectly within the firmament of many past recipients.
Let’s face it: Obama’s campaign for the presidency had removing the bluster of the Bush years as a centerpiece. He’s already delivered a major address in Arab Cairo, he’s sent a former president to meet with Kim Jong-il in North Korea, and he’s pursuing long overdue negotiations with the regime in Iran. He’s also winding down the mess in Iraq and searching for a serious solution in Afghanistan, something his predecessor didn’t give a damn about.
All of these things are still very much “in progress,” but one can easily argue that nobody else on the world’s stage has been such a game changer over the past 12 months.
Thomas Carothers of the Carnegie Endowment notes in last Saturday’s NY Times that Kofi Annan’s prize in 2001 “came in the first half of his tenure as secretary general of the United Nations, possibly aiming to fortify him for what the Nobel committee expected would be hard times ahead for international peace in the aftermath of September 11.” That’s a modern comparable.
Here’s an older one: In 1935, Carl von Ossietzky won for opposition journalism aimed at Hitler. The Führer became Chancellor just two years earlier, in ‘33, and his worst evil was yet to come, yet the 45 year-old Ossietzky won. Here’s Nobel Chairman Fredrik Stang in the presentation speech:
“But, many people ask, has Ossietzky really contributed so much to peace? Has he not become a symbol of the struggle for peace rather than its champion? In my opinion this is not so. But even if it were, how great is the significance of the symbol in our life! In religion, in politics, in public affairs, in peace and war, we rally round symbols. We understand the power they hold over us.”
Other examples abound. MLK won in ‘64, at age 35, when the struggle for civil rights was “in progress.” At that time he was mainly famous, at least internationally, for the speech at the March On Washington the year before, in ‘63.
Rightwingers thought the MLK award was a worthless Peace Prize, too, so that’s the company you’re in today, Jay. Proud of that, are ya?
I could go on, but I’m busy.
October 14th, 2009 at 6:47 PM
I find your comparisons quite interesting but let me help you with your revisionist history. Out of your three examples, only one was awarded for possible contributions, Kofi Annan.
Although Kofi Annan did win the prize, it was awarded as a multi-recipient award. The other recipient was the United Nations as a whole. Kofi Annan was with the United Nations, starting in 1987 and was elected to Secretary General in 1997. The Nobel was awarded to the United Nations and him 4 years later. His accomplishments though tend to read like an indictment. While in charge of the UN’s Peace Keepers, he stood by and did nothing during the genocidal events in Rwanda which led to 800,000 deaths in 1993 and 1994. During and before these events, he ignored many pleas for help and even refused the existing in country force fighting the genocidal warlords from access to weapons. He himself later said that he wished he had done more.
When his personal friend and then UN High Commissioner for Refugees was charged with sexual harassment and resulting retaliation, Annan proclaimed the man innocent in a bid to circumvent the subsequent investigation that ended up finding him guilty anyway. Lubbers did not lose his job as a result of the guilty verdict.
The 2004 Oil-For-Food program scandal found both Kofi Annan and his son Kojo accused of fraud and embezzlement. At first Annan denied his involvement and then later recanted and admitted to involvement in the scandal. But, as with the scandal before involving Lubbers, nothing happened to Annan or his son because a convenient fall guy was found and the issue was swept under the rug.
While I disagree with your assessment that Kofi deserved the award, I do agree that him receiving the Nobel falls right inline with Obama receiving the award. Neither were, are now and never will be deserving.
As for your other two examples, Obama pales in comparison with Ossietzky and King. Both of these men accomplished great things BEFORE the award and both sacrificed MUCH for the sake of their fellow man BEFORE the award.
Ossietzky was an outspoken critic of government corruption during the course of the Weimar Republic and was one of the only individuals willing to risk their lives to spread truthful and honest assessments of what was really going on behind the scenes. He lived in constant fear for his life. For this reason, in 1933 when Hitlers National Socialist German Workers’ Party, the Nazi party if you will, came to power, the first thing Hitler did was round up those dissenting voices and kill them or throw them into concentration camps. Ossietzky spent the better part of three years languishing in Spandau prison and later in Esterwegen and other concentration camps before the Noble Commission nominated and then awarded him the Nobel. It is clear here, if you pay attention to the real events that lead up to the award, that it was not awarded for any future accomplishments he would attain. He was also afflicted with tuberculosis which killed him a few year later in 1936. It was widely known that he suffered from it and it was also very clear he had no future in any sense of the word, no time or ability to attain anything further to earn the Nobel Commission’s attention.
Martin Luther King Jr, having a long history of acting in the name of equality in the public eye, accomplished quite a bit before he was awarded the Nobel Prize.
He organized and led march after march in the name of civil rights and gave speech after speech in the public in the name of equality and the brotherhood of all races. All while facing violence and threats at every turn. Once he even was hit in the head with a brick during a march and just kept on going. Every where he went, he was greeted with threats of assassination and bombing. He stood up to those in power who would have subjugated him when no one else would for fear of life and limb. He was a symbol but also an edifice and catalyst that saw the beginning of real change. All done BEFORE he was awarded the Nobel.
in 1955 he championed the Great Bus Boycott after Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her seat to a white man as current law required. The following year, because he brought it out into the light, the Supreme Court ruled bus segregation illegal and unconstitutional.
In 1957, King founded the Southern Christian Leadership Conference to fight segregation and achieve civil rights. And then spoke to a crowd of thousands, bringing attention to the situation and the following year in 1958, the U.S. Congress passed the first Civil Rights Act since reconstruction and he met with President Eisenhower, along with Roy Wilkins, A. Philip Randolph, and Lester Grange on problems affecting black Americans. Incidentally, in the same year, King was almost killed in a failed assassination attempt.
In 1960, he was arrested while attending one of the many sit-in protests he organized and was sentenced to 120 days of jail time that was later commuted by John and Robert Kennedy.
In 1961, the Interstate Commerce Commission banned segregation in interstate travel due directly to the work of King and the Freedom Riders.
In 1962, King was once again arrested and jailed in Georgia as a result of his civil disobedience in protest of inequality and segregation.
In April of 1963, the Birmingham campaign was launched. This proved to be the turning point in the war to end segregation in the South. By May 10, the Birmingham Agreement was announced and the stores, restaurants, and schools were desegregated, hiring of blacks was implemented, and charges against King from a previous arrest the month before were dropped. The next month, King led a freedom walk with 125,000 people in attendance and then later the march on Washington D.C. that you referenced above with over 250,000 people attending. This is where he gave his “I have a dream” speech.
All these things happened BEFORE he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and for you to say it was not awarded for his past achievements, you do nothing but cheapen his great contributions to this society that you live in.
I understand how easy it is to twist history to say what you need to make your point but revisionist history is false and so, therefore, are your points and comparisons.
I don’t begrudge Barak Obama(peace be with him) because he won the Nobel Peace Prize but instead I indict The Commission who awarded the Prize. It has become a meaningless political ploy.
I do, however, hold Barak Obama’s actions and words against him and he seems to supply me with a never ending supply of material.
October 14th, 2009 at 6:58 PM
Oh and thanks for playing the race card. It just shows how much I am right to afford you zero credibility.
BTW, Richard Nixon, arguably one of Americas most conservative and republican presidents, supported King in everything he did including endorsing and urging him to march when even King didn’t desire to. The “right wing” has always been the champion of civil rights and equality. They freed the slaves and authored almost every piece of civil rights legislation that went through the house up until the 70’s.
It was your party, the Democrats, that fought to prolong slavery in the civil war and used so called “social justice” as a smoke screen to control the minorities in this country with welfare and eugenics. They orchestrated the destruction of the black family unit and the black father with welfare policies that saw black men being told that they would receive no help for their families unless they either quit their jobs or moved out of the home. 75% of all planned parenthood locations are in major urban minority centers and 50% of all babies aborted today are by black women. Your party has single handedly kept the minorities of this country under their thumb and placated.
Once again, David, revisionist history will always betray you and show you as the ignorant person you really are. Learn real history and you will find things become so much clearer.
I like the company I keep. They respect my liberty and freedom. How about yours?