Sunday, October 11, 2009

Premature Acclamation

OK, maybe Rocky hasn't yet amassed the resume of previous recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize, but to hear the nasty protestations of his deranged, right-wing detractors, you'd think they gave the prize to Yasser Arafat or something. I mean, let the man broker a treaty first. Even Obama seemed perplexed at having been chosen International Homecoming King, but there are worse things than having the U.S. President regarded as a peacemaker by the rest of the world. Obama's public statements regarding the prohibition of nuclear weapons, torture, the elevation of diplomacy, human rights, and an outstretched American hand to nations once our adversaries, stand in such stark contrast to his predecessor, that the Nobel Peace Prize is as much a rebuke of the former administration as an expression of approval in the country's change of direction. George W. Bush must have misread the Sermon on the Mount to think it said, "Blessed are the warmongers."

The Nobel awards have never been beyond politics, but Obama accepted with a humility that was nearly uncomfortable. It was as if he were awakened by Rahm Emmanuel and answered, "I won what?" John F. Kennedy got a Pulitzer Prize for "Profiles in Courage," a tome composed when he was still a junior senator from Massachusetts, with the uncredited assistance of a professional journalist. Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973 for his "Peace is at hand" speech, when in reality, he interfered with the Paris Peace Talks of 1968 in order to get his man Nixon elected. So, it is not uncommon that these awards are given to a mission in progress rather than the completed work. The last sitting American President to win the Peace Prize was Woodrow Wilson for authoring "The Fourteen Points," and configuring the Treaty of Versailles which ended "The War to End All Wars." But when Wilson attempted to establish the League of Nations, he was thwarted by an obstructionist Republican congress who wished no part of a world governing body. The result? World War Two. Obama rightfully noted that the prize was, "a means to give momentum to a set of causes," rather than for a new President with precious few political victories to brag about.

One would hope that the "loyal" opposition would be gracious enough, just for once, to say "way to go," and press on, but immediately, Fox News went into overdrive with indignity and condemnation and the wing-nut radio talkers exploded in revulsion. Fox's Brian Kilmeade speculated that Obama delayed sending more troops to Afghanistan in order to win the prize, and Rush Limbaugh brayed, "The Nobel gang just suicide bombed themselves," and, "Something has happened here that we all agree with the Taliban..about, and that is he doesn't deserve the award." RedState's Erick Erickson artfully said the Nobel committee must have been trying to fill an "affirmative action quota." The Obama-haters applaud and cheer when he loses the Olympics and grouse when he wins the Nobel Prize, and these are the self-described "patriots." Yet even a partisan like Bill O'Reilly said, in an unusual spasm of conscience, "Deserved or not, having a U.S. President honored with a peace prize is good for the country." The voodoo wing of the conservative movement remained mute.

All Republicans were not as typically obnoxious as the party's right wing. John McCain and Tim Pawlenty were gracious with their remarks, which puts them out of the mainstream these days. Pawlenty is running for President, and McCain is wise enough to realize that Obama is not the Anti-Christ, as suggested in the above mentioned RedState blog and other internet sites, just the Anti-Bush, who must be sitting in Dallas with the relief that no one is searching for the three sixes on him anymore. Had you told the conservatives in advance, omitting any physical description, that their new president was not only a family man with a beautiful wife and two adorable children, but also a constitutional scholar, lawyer, and college professor, who agreed to let his mother-in-law move in, they would have named him a Saint. And the thing is, Obama's not all that liberal. People see in him what they wish to see in him, including the Nobel Prize Committee, who awarded the honor for noble intentions and the desire for peace. It's like my mother says about eating chicken soup for a cold; "It couldn't hurt."

Depending on where Obama decides to go on Afghanistan will determine his mettle and mantel. A large part of the battle we are fighting, as General William Westmoreland used to say, is for the hearts and minds of the people we are trying to assist. It does us no harm for the Afghan civilian population to perceive that Obama has peaceful intentions for their country. He has already accepted the indigenous nature of the Taliban and recognizes that they are not the enemy; Al Qaeda is. Before we commit more troops to this struggle, it would be wise to remember that the Soviets lasted ten years fighting in Afghanistan before going broke. The U.S. is now into its' ninth year of conflict. The battle against the guerrilla insurgents that this country armed to fight the Russians would be better waged with special forces, spies, and bribes. Obama is walking a fine line between giving humanitarian aid to our friends and the Green Berets to our enemies, but if this bloody conflict is merely to prop up another corrupt dictatorship friendly to the U.S., then it's Vietnam redux. If the President can bring some semblance of normalcy to the Afghan people, and draw down the combat forces in Iraq, he may well deserve the recognition bestowed upon him by the Nobel Committee as "peacemaker." Until then, I can already hear the heathen rage, "Sometimes Satan comes as a man of peace."


ghg said...

Seemed premature to me, like most people, but I think I can understand the Committee's desire. I'll tell you, though, when I view the range of reaction from the sick mouthpieces of the right I'm beginning to become more and more nauseated. The Olympic loss cheers could be likened to a Hip Hip Hooray for the sinking of one of our aircraft carriers by the Japanese in WWII. These people are no longer attached to any tether whatsoever.

Maybe we should round them all up and put them in Internment Camps in California or maybe send them to the Caribbean to spend some time in eastern Cuba on one of our bases. I'd be very happy to see them all leave when the spaceships come to take their followers away to the Peaceful Kingdom just on the other side of Alpha Centauri. Been there. Very nice accomodations. Food not bad.

An opposition with something to say allows for Hegel to exist. An opposition with nothing but frustrated rage from their horrific childhoods needs to find a bottle of warm milk to suck on and to get away from the table where the adults are having a conversation.

Steve in DC said...

Don't look now, Randy, but the Nobel Committee has already bestowed this prestigious award on Yasser Arafat, in 1994.

The prize was awarded jointly to Arafat, to then-Israel Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, and then-Israel Foreign Minister Shimon Peres "for their efforts to create pease in the Middle East."

The decision to award Arafat the coveted Nobel Prize was based on the belief that he had renounced acts of terror and had become a sincere participant in a true peace process. The Oslo Accords and successor agreements in the Peace Process bound Arafat and his people to recognize Israel's right to exist, to guarantee Israel's safety and security within defensible borders, and to work by a peaceful series of negotiations toward resolution of remaining problems. Nonetheless, Nobel committee member Kaare Kristiansen quit rather than be party to a prize that included Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat.

Unfortunately, it was all premature, and in the case of Arafat, a fiction. Even in 1993 and 1994, with the ink fresh on the peace agreement papers, there was a high rate of terrorism against Israel; seventy-three Israeli soldiers and civilians were killed and more than 100 wounded in 1994, up slightly from 1993. In a preview of the pattern that still persists today, Israeli officials urged the Palestinian Authority to take tougher measures against terrorists and the PA claimed to be doing so even while the terrorism went on and on.

During the 1990's it became abundantly clear that Yasser Arafat was less than fully committed to the peace process, which ultimately failed at Camp David and resulted in the bloodshed of the al-Aqsa intifada starting in September 2000. Groups have come forward demanding that the Peace Prize be revoked, based on Arafat's bad faith, but revocation is unlikely.

Sputnik57 said...

Hey Steve,
Re: Arafat,
I know. The journalistic technique is called "irony."

Anonymous said...

How to win the Nobel Prize in 12 days.

Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize this morning. Over the last decade the only requirement to win the prize was that the nominee had to be critical of George W. Bush (see Al Gore, Mohamed El Baradei and Jimmy Carter).

President Obama has broken new ground here. Nominations for potential winners of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize ended on February 1. The president took office only 12 days earlier on January 20.

Let’s take a look at the president’s first 12 days in the White House according to his public schedule to see what he did to deserve a Nobel Peace Prize:

January 20: Sworn in as president. Went to a parade. Partied.

January 21: Asked bureaucrats to re-write guidelines for information requests. Held an “open house” party at the White House.

January 22: Signed Executive Orders: Executive Branch workers to take ethics pledge; re-affirmed Army Field Manual techniques for interrogations; expressed desire to close Gitmo (how’s that working out?)

January 23: Ordered the release of federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries. Lunch with Joe Biden; met with Tim Geithner.

January 24: Budget meeting with economic team

January 25: Skipped church.

January 26: Gave speech about jobs and energy Met with Hillary Clinton. Attended Geithner's swearing in ceremony.

January 27: Met with Republicans. Spoke at a clock tower in Ohio.

January 28: Economic meetings in the morning, met with Defense secretary in the afternoon.

January 29: Signed Ledbetter Bill overturning Supreme Court decision on lawsuits over wages. Party in the State Room. Met with Biden.

January 30: Met economic advisers. Gave speech on Middle Class Working Families Task Force. Met with senior enlisted military officials.

January 31: Took the day off.

February 1: Skipped church. Threw a Super Bowl party.

So there you have it. The short path to the Nobel Peace Prize: Party, go to meetings, skip church, release federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries, party some more.

Steve in DC said...

Hey, Randy!

I know that you know. And, I hope that you would know, that I know that you know.

Unfortunately, "irony", even as subtle as yours, is wasted upon those who do not read with comprehension. A rapier-like wit is ineffective for that audience--it requires, for them, a bludgeon hitting a cream pie.

I seriously doubt that many people know, or recall, that this happened. After all, it was fifteen years ago... ---> (irony!!!) <---

All respect to you, and this blog's readership, most of whom I expect will remember the occasion of the Nobel Peace award to Arafat. I'm nevertheless curious to see what the usual gang of detractors might have to say about it, while they're denouncing its going to Obama this year.

Ah, I see that it has already begun as I am writing this. Let's all enjoy the show!


Sputnik57 said...

Now I know that you know that I know. I just didn't initially know that it was you. Now I know.
Give 'em hell,

Anonymous said...

It wasn't that Obama was expressing humility over receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, it's that he was as shocked as anyone else that he received it and probably a little bit embarrassed, because he knows that he has done nothing (yet) to deserve such recognition. And, he probably doesn't deserve either as much credit or as much blame for what he does, because he is just a puppet for very powerful radical forces. The fine line that he has to walk is due to the fact that he is expected on the one hand to implement a radical agenda for the country and the world (think Agenda 21) and on the other hand, he must be subtle enough not to freak out the relatively few remaining patriots who still live here and vote. He has to perform in such a way that his cover is not blown until his agenda is far enough along that he doesn't have to be careful any more. Don't worry, the sinister liberal juggernaut won't be side-tracked. It is too powerful and entrenched. You will have your imagined socialistic Mecca before that much longer. After the right is completely vanquished and the totalitarian state is fully implemented you won't have any conservatives left to bash. I guess you can then begin to sing praises to your Fuhrer. That is, if you are amongst the fortunate who will be allowed to live. What!? You don't believe that there are de-population plans in store for humanity? Do a little research so that you won't be caught completely unaware when the day is upon us. Marx said that there would be a 'brief period of totalitarianism' before the promised Marxist utopia would be fully in place. Brief my ass. Totalitarianism isn't a phase. It is the end game of the whole ruse. If allowed to live, maybe they will make you the resident gulag blogger in charge of propaganda.

davethedog said...

Hey nimrods and Haters,

1. The nobel peace prize is for the person who they believe made the best "effort" to strengthen diplomacy & etc. between people". This means that Obama's general direction, which is totally different from any of his predecessors.

2. Nothwithstanding the "Glenn Beck's" of the world, people like or love Obama. It is similar to the Ronald Reagan thing. He had a personal attraction even if you disagreed with him on everything else.

3. This award is decided by a committee established by the Norwegian Parliament. Could it be that people in other countries see things differently than we do? They are the tail and we are the big dog. Maybe they are tired of us fucking things up for them. Forstår du?

Anonymous said...

I guess if you write a column, a blog, or anything where other "people" can see it, you've set out the welcome mat for every kind of person, whether thinker or whacko. I hate to think that there's so many whackos in this country, and judging by the percentage of responders to this blog, there would appear to be many, many, many of them. However, I'm reminded of the advice my Father gave me.... " Son there's not that many wackos in this country.... but they sure do get around a lot"! Nuff said. Ok right wing cretans, read em and weep!


Anonymous said...

At least Obama made an effort --- what the hell have ya'll done for peace?? Oh, nothing huh? Well there ya go.Nuff said

Father Farken said...

I have learned a lot from my fellow friends from The BAH Community! From Randy I have learned that our president is not the Anti-Christ but the Anti-Bush and That he received the NPP for just that reason and from BAH bloggers I have learned that our president is not only our first African-American president but also our first African-Un-American president. Like a lot of y'all I was baffled by the NPP! However I think Sputz iz on to something!
When I was a junior in high school our Religion teacher was talking about the differences between leaders & followers. He used one of our fine preppy boys as an example of a LEADER and pointed to me (a Frayser hoodlum) as an example of a follower. I was crushed! Two days later it was announced in school that our city champion seniors voted me as one of the football captains for the upcoming year! I was baffled! I was sitting on the steps outside the school contemplating all this when our senior captain/fullback came up to me and said,"Farken! Now don't get all big headed because this is no trophy we've handed you! It's just we think you're one hell of a player & we are handing you the baton because we think you can help rally the troops to another championship for the Brothers... and by the way...tell oi' Br. Charles too go boink himself!" I believe the Nobel Peace-nicks are telling our prez THIS IS NOT ABOUT ACCOMPLISHMENTS BUT WE SEE YOU AS ONE HELL OF A PEACEMAKER & WE BEG YOU TO LEAD AMERICA & THE WORLD IN THAT DIRECTION! AND BY THE WAY! GO TELL ERIC ERICKSON TO GO BOINK HIMSELF! But didn't the Sput meister just say all that! The Peace of the Lord! Fr. Farken

Anonymous said...

One of Obama's 'czars', Cass Sunstein wrote a book entitled 'Nudge'. It is about how to effect 'choice architecture'. This involves setting up circumstances to 'nudge' people into making 'correct' choices. Of course, these choices will be determined by the elites in government and imposed upon the serfs, I mean citizens. It is being passed off as innocuous, but one can easily see how that type of thinking borders on 'soft' tyranny. At what point does nudge become push? But, this is the type of thinking that you can expect from socialists. The Obama administration is ushering in an era of 'soft' tyranny. For a while this will be implemented by the use of taxes, fines, tax breaks, etc. to shape behavior. When this course is underway the natural question is, 'When does the soft tyranny turn into harder' forms of tyranny? I just learned something that points in that direction. I have beem thinking that goverment health care rationing only applies to the health plan referred to as the government option. The truth of the matter is that there will be government mandated health care rationing regardless of the nature of the final bill. There will be a formula for determining how many quality years of life a given patient can expect based upon his age. This will be factored in to the cost of every medical procedure that the person in question needs. If the formula doesn't work out for the person, that is if the procedure is determined to be too expensive based upon his remaining quality life years left, then the medical procedure is denied. He will be consigned to hospice care if the denial means that death is likely. For instance, after a health care bill is passed, everyone over a certain age, say 75, who needs a heart by-pass operation costing well over $100,000 will be denied. This will be a death sentence. The government will have instituted a de facto 'death sqad', not by actively inducing death, but by withholding vital medical services. I maintain that this situation constitutes a harder form of tyranny. In this country we have embarked on a course in which we can expect ever increasing tyranny from the government. At first it will be soft, but it WILL get harder with the passing of time. There is no telling how far the tyranny will go. Randy's much desired goverment health care program will do him in some day, along with the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

Gee, it's hard to keep some folks on topic. Now, back to the subject at hand. The Nobel Peace Prize would more aptly be called the Nobel Socialist Prize, because it is awarded by socialists to whomever has the most promise of furthering world socialism. That takes the mystery out of why Obama won the award. Many feel that America will be a full-blown socialist mecca by the end of his first term. That is if America is not destroyed by then. Obama has almost achieved the complete devaluation of the dollar and has forced the country to the brink of bankruptcy. It should be a cinch to finish the job after the economy is run off the proverbial cliff. I have to admit that it is a brilliant ploy. My only question is will he then take his place alongside Chavez, Castro, Quaddafi, Ahmadinejad, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Gengis Khan, et al? Man, will it be a hoot to live under an oppressive totalitarian regime. Then we can all say, 'Beat us, whip us, make us write bad checks!!'

Anonymous said...

Are you aware that you just gave us a partial who's who of the Democratic Party's most admired statesmen? Why did you leave out Marx and Lenin, though?

Anonymous said...

Add to the list Mao Tse Tung. Anita Dunn, one of Obama's right-hand spokespeople spoke to an audience of high school seniors this past June and told them that Mao is one of her favorite political philosophers. And he murdered over 70 million of his own people. Further, he said that he would sacrifice as many as 300 million of his own people for the sake of the revolution. Imagine revealing to teenagers That Mao is a personal hero. It looks like we are beginning to see a pattern with the radicals that Obama has associated with in the past and with whom he currently surrounds himself. It is a veritable who's who of communists and Marxists. Let's see, there is William Ayers and the Jones guy who were founders of the Weathermen, Van Jones, Valerie Jarret, Cass Susstein, John Holder, Mark Lloyd, Carol Browder who openly professes Marxism, his recently resigned school czar who wrote a forward to a book entitled 'Queering the Elementary Schools', and the list goes on. And you folks worship at Obama's altar. What in the world is wrong with you people. And just wait, the revelations are going to keep pouring in. However, I have a feeling that you people wouldn't be phased if the whole lot of them were found to be Satanists. Father Farken, you had better distance yourself from this bunch. In the end it could damage your credibility as a man of God. I hope that you are not a fan of the book 'Queering the Elemenatry Schools'. Obama wasn't bothered by that. Why would you want to be behind a Marxist overthrow of the world's last best hope...America. Unless of course you number yourselves amongst the America haters, which you in fact do by your worship of Obama.

Anonymous said...

You left out 'God damn America' Jeremiah Wright. That's the cloth from which Obama is cut. Of course he claims that he didn't know anything about Wright's radicalism even though he confessed that Wright was his 'spiritual' mentor for 20 years. So on top of everything else, Obama is a world class liar. There is LOTS of evidence of that. And just think, Satan is the spiritual father of all liars. You had better get away from this bunch Father Farken if you value your reputation.

Father Farken said...

To me fellow pilgrim Anon. I am called to be a minister of reconciliation not a minister of one upmanship or divisiveness. Though you may never tell by some of my brazing remarks... for that I am truly sorry. In Paul's 1st letter to Timothy(2:1-2) he sez, "I exhort therefor 1st of all, supplications, prayers, intercession & giving thanks, be made for all men (not some but all); for Kings (national leaders),& for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet & peaceable life in all godliness & honesty." We are not to worship at the altar of the Prez but we are called to supplicate & pray & intercede & give thanks for all people & our president. When Paul wrote this he wasn't drinking or toking but he was filled with the Spirit! And another thing! Like Jesus & that Anti-Hank Garth Brooks, I must confess...I'VE GOT FRIENDS IN LOW PLACES! The Peace of the Lord!
Father Farken (friend of sinners)

Anonymous said...

Touche! Well spoken. It's just that I have issues. I am an old street fighter and all that's left for me to fight with as an old man is a keyboard. I guess it is even a bit masturbatory on a level. I wish no serious discord...that is unless you attempt to take my freedom or my bullets away from me. Then, it is constitutionally unrelenting war. Tyranny has no place in a free country. If part of Obama's promised change is increasing control of the citizenry then he is a traitor to freedom.