With David Letterman somewhat distracted, I thought I’d solicit nominations for a top 10 list. Here’s a few to start off:
Consolation prize for losing the Olympics
Who gives a rat’s you-know-what about Afghanistan, anyway
The Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology were already taken
“We couldn’t give an ‘un-prize’ to George W. Bush, and this was the next best thing”
For extraordinary diplomacy at the Gates-Crowley “Beer Summit”
UPDATE: “Obama? I thought we were giving it to Osama”
The Norwegians wanted to honor one of their own, and the committee discovered that Obama was born in Oslo, Norway, the son of a Volvo factory worker.
ONE MORE: Norway needed to stimulate its prize industry, and Obama was willing to trade in an older, less efficient prize.
AND FROM THE COMMENTS: He was the 10th caller.
Case3L says:
He was the 10th caller.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:14 amBrett Bellmore says:
I keep looking at the calender to confirm it’s not April 1st. This is some kind of joke, right?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:21 amRyan Waxx says:
The un-prize joke would be funnier if it didn’t have such a high probability of being the literal reason for the award.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:21 amNatSecLawGuy says:
Al Gore had already won . . . ‘nough said
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:29 amObama wins Nobel Peace Prize in less than two weeks | Radio Vice Online says:
[...] Bernsein over at Volokh Conspiracy has already got a “Top 10 reasons Obama won” post and he’s soliciting the best of [...]
Arkady says:
I read about the prize in the Times this morning, and the absolute first thing that came to mind was, I can hear the right-wing pissants now.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:32 amRyan Waxx says:
Then I’m sure you’re willing to explain exactly what the man actually, you know, DID to deserve the prize? Or are you all snark, no substance?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:34 amSarcastro says:
It must be spite against Bush, cause Europeans never go for sentimentality!
Spite can help you get through this. Just imagine how the Hillary of Dick Moriss’ description feels about this! See, you feel better!
[I wonder if it would be even more of a coup if Obama gracefully didn’t accept the prize)
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:41 amsnark says:
because Michael Jackson was unavailable
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:41 amRyan Waxx says:
That’s right! Because it’s called the “Nobel Sentimentality Prize!” U R vewwy smrrt Sukastro!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:47 amDaniel Chapman says:
I almost literally laughed out loud alone with my cereal when I realized that this actually happened. And yet, not so much as a chuckle from the post that was intended to be funny.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:52 amGreg says:
The Committee didn’t count Bill Clinton’s write-in vote . . . for himself . . . again.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:53 amOrson says:
YPOU can email the Nobel people at
postmaster@nobel.no
Here’s mine:
Dear Nobel Peace Prize Committee–
Thank you for the continuing political satire! Brilliant to make our failed President your world hero! Take him-PLEASE.
I come from Norwegian-American stock in the heartland of the US. We used to tell about Norwegian stupidity through “Sven and Ole” jokes. Thank you, dear committee. Now there is no excuse not to set “Sven and Ole” in Oslo, Norway!
Our national political satire program on Saturday nights, called “Saturday Night Live” (giving the world stars like Bill Murray and Mike Myers), now has a new angle: a Peace Prize Award too funny to believe as comedy — but now made REAL. Uffda!
Only in Norway, now!
In the midst of a painful recession only He could prolong, you bring us the joy of an endless butt of humor!
–Orson Olson
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:55 amKevin P. says:
This is exactly what I did when I saw this headline on Drudge.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:57 amBT says:
Please forgive us Mr. President for not giving you the Olympics, as a token of our esteem please accept.....
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:59 amPatent Lawyer says:
For uniting a political party that was tearing itself apart, even though it wasn’t his own.
For demonstrating that the best national leader is one who does nothing, even if not by his own choice.
For giving the world a good laugh by saying hilarious, asinine things to foreign leaders (like the “recharge” button incident.)
For giving hope to all the mediocrities in the world who thought they could never become president without actually achieving anything.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:59 amVasco says:
Coming up next: Obama wins Nobel Prize for Physics for walking on water..
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:07 amProsecutorial Indiscretion says:
How can anyone doubt that the President’s unwavering efforts to deepen the economic catastrophe will promote anything but peace and goodwill amongst men and nations?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:09 amAri8 says:
“A ploy by the Swedes to encourage tourism from Kenyan-Americans”
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:11 amSam The Dog Trainer says:
Amazing. He won for doing absolutely nothing
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:12 amIchthyophagous says:
If Obama has any sense at all he will turn this thing down.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:12 amCDU says:
He is not George W. Bush.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:15 amRainerK says:
He’s in good company, LeDuc Tho, Arafat, et al.
Someone pointed out that nomination deadline was Feb 1, not two weeks after inauguration. Apparently the prize is like good behaviour rewards in some schools: Here’s your reward Johnny, now remember you only get it ’cause you promise to behave well.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:16 amJoe Gator says:
At least he’s responsible for less death than Yasser Arafat
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:19 amDiversityHire says:
@Prosecutorial Indiscretion, there’s still time for him to win the economics prize this year. He’s too old for the Fields medal or he may have won for his groundbreaking work with imaginary numbers, but that’s sort of health-care related so maybe he has a shot @ the medicine prize. And of course, he should share the chemistry prize with his lovely wife.
Nominations closed on the 1st of February! I’m not sure he’d even picked a dog by then.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:19 amRapid says:
#6 Dissing the rule of law in Honduras
#5 Dissing the Dali Lama
#4 Dissing Israel
#3 Embracing Dictators
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:20 amDan says:
In all seriousness, this is going to work against him in 2012. The more he becomes an icon, the less he becomes a serious leader.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:22 amUpend, Coming says:
It isn’t my writing, but the comedy genius of Web 2.0. This list was actually generated by ten different people, but is mostly in Letterman’s style and quite funny. I language filtered it for your benefit.
Reddit.com Comment thread about Letterman Admission
Top Ten Reasons Letterman Fu**ed His Staffers.
Number 10: His staffers asked him for a raise.
Number 9: Conan was unavailable due to injury.
Number 8: Looking for new Stupid Human Tricks.
Number 7: It’s called “Worldwide Pants” for a reason.
Number 6: Paul Shaffer was drunk and easy.
Number 5: You try and resist Alan “Big Red” Kalter.
Number 4: Staffers had Daddy issues.
Number 3: It was either that, or another interview with Joaquin Phoenix.
Number 2: He’s practicing for getting into politics.
And the number 1 reason Letterman fu**ed his staffers...
Because he likes having women on his staff.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:23 amrajagopal says:
You know, Obama did claim to be qualified to take the 3AM call (or in this case the 5 AM call), but you conservatives never believed him.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:29 amCato The Elder says:
And...the Nobel Peace Prize has officially lost all credibility.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:29 amSmooth, like a Rhapsody says:
The reason that the Peace committee gave Obama the prize was that they were tired of the Literature committee getting all the laughs.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:29 amDiversityHire says:
Please, by then he’ll have a superbowl ring, three NBA championships, a tiara, and two Eurovision songs.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:31 amHardly Surprised says:
Wow. Some people are bitter. When did it become a virtue to do eveything in your power to piss off the rest of the world, ala GW?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:34 amOrson says:
Joke round up (the last two from instapundit):
What do Vidkin Quisling and Barack Obama have in common?
Norway and they both bring fascism home.
Why won’t the US waste a nuke on Oslo? Obviously, its already radioactive.
Teddy Roosevelt wins Peace Prize for stopping a war. Carter wins Peace Prize for a lifetime of work. Obama wins Peace prize for breathing.
How can Obama win the Nobel Peace Prize on the same day that he’s becoming the first President of the United States to bomb the Moon?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:36 amDavid Bernstein says:
Funny Facebook entry:
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:36 amjbb says:
Is this honestly what passes for a post on VC nowadays? What happened? When did it become just another Malkin morass or NRO?
Sad.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:37 amDiversityHire says:
I bet one of them’s shuffling a zaftig young lady out the back door of his place in Chappaqua right now :)
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:40 amSarcastro says:
First, the Prize jumped the shark when they gave it to Arifat. I said I’d never pay attention to it again.
Then they gave it to Carter, and I said that THIS was the last straw and the Prize now meant nothing and I wasn’t going to pay it no mind from now on.
Then they gave it to Al Gore and I was all “this is IT! The Prize is meaningless” and I resolved to totally not care what those Swedes did.
Now they’re giving it to Obama. Clearly, this time it’s clear that the prize has lost all credibility. And I will totally ignore it. Right after I list the things Obama has done that I hate as reasons why he totally shouldn’t win this meaningless prize.
[Yes, I think this is silly. It seems to me Sweden agrees with Obama’s policy and is trying to promulgate them with this prize. Sill, the vitriol from the right is a bit over the top.]
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:41 amRyan Waxx says:
I’m sorry these posts aren’t up to your discerning standards
of political ideology. Please feel free to peruse other blogs that hold each and every one of their members to a standard you prefer.Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:42 amIchthyophagous says:
Perhaps the Nobel Committee awarded the prize with the intention of giving Obama prestige at a time when he is embattled and so many things are going wrong. That is certainly a misuse of the prize.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:43 amToday's Tom Sawyer says:
Top reason for awarding Obama the Nobel Prize:
The Nobel Prize committee is actually a cult dedicated to bringing about the end times as foretold in Revelations, to the exuberance of fundamentalists.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:43 amSarcastro says:
Oh, and also obligatory complaining about Bernstein posting something politically charged.
And this time he had the audacity to use humor!
Total hack! Ima gonna read every post and comment, but hate it as I do so!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:44 amDan says:
@jbb — this post isn’t really anti-Obama, but anti-NPP. It’s not Obama’s fault that the Nobel panel is made up of a bunch of transparent ideologues.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:44 amOrson says:
Last November, before the Mumbai terrorist mass murder last year, India’s PM Singh was in Washington, DC. He said that India admires President G. W. Bush “very, very much”.
I guess those ignorant one-billion Indians just don’t count...do they....
The primary reason “the world” hated Bush was the perception that the US was after Iraq’s oil. Did that happen? No. Case closed.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:44 amRyan Waxx says:
Yawn. ALL “vitriol from the right” is over the top when it’s your ox being gored, isn’t it? So why don’t you try and explain why “vitriol” like “He got the prize for breathing” isn’t totally apt? It’s not over the top if it’s literally true, is it?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:45 amPatent Lawyer says:
My post went missing, so let’s try again:
For uniting a political party in chaos and on the verge of collapse–and it wasn’t even his own!
For bravely finding a dog for his allergic daughters to own.
For helping to rid the world of explosives by detonating some on the Moon.
For proving that the greatest leaders are those that accomplish nothing.
For making the world laugh with his hilarious and asinine diplomatic errors — like the “recharge” button incident.
For bringing peace to the streets of Chicago...er, scratch that one.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:48 amSarcastro says:
The Swedes had better not use the prize to try to bring about any policies they like, that would be wrong! And it was totally not done with Arifat and Lê Ðức Thọ and Gorbachev and Sadat.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:48 amProsecutorial Indiscretion says:
You know, Obama did claim to be qualified to take the 3AM call (or in this case the 5 AM call), but you conservatives never believed him.
Neither, apparently, did the Europeans — they waited until 6 am to call the White House, for fear of waking him up.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:49 amjbb says:
I didn’t realize I had complained that it was anti-Obama. I couldn’t care less whether a post is “anti-Obama” or not, I care whether it has even an inkling of intellectual thought behind it. I’ve been reading VC for years as a font of intelligent conservative legal argumentation. If I wanted to read glib, fact-less, transparently stupid cruft like this, I have multitudes of other places on the Internet I can frequent. It devalues all of the rest of VC’s content and makes it seem ideological.
I don’t think “literally” means what you think it means.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:52 amJKB says:
He stopped supporting Israel
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:53 amHauk says:
This post is DB’s response to that guy yesterday who complained about how all of his posts are about judaism....
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:53 amWhadonna More says:
That’s where my head started, but I think the prize is evidence of just how firmly the Euros believed the necon right was determined to move from bellicose into belligerent in Iran, Korea (and then liberal-elitistan). From that perspective, BHO gets credit for pre-empting two pre-emptive wars.
Seriously, who can beat that this year?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:53 amSarcastro says:
Ryan Waxx makes a great point. I totally believe that the left never has any over the top vitriol. Certainly not about Bush. And I was definitely talking about Ryan’s breathing comment and not about his somehow crediting Bush or Orson’s showing.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:53 amJosh B says:
Rather than a top 10 list, perhaps even funnier would be an SNL Inspired “Really? Really!” Sketch. See http://joshblogs.wordpress.com/2009/10/09/obama-joins-arafat-carter-as-recipient-of-nobel-peace-prize-waiting-for-the-snl-really-sketch/?preview=true&preview_id=746&preview_nonce=8144e40ecf
So Obama won the peace prize for 2 weeks on the job? REALLY?
Two imperialistic wars raging. And they’re both getting worse under his watch? Really? Really?
And he promised to end these wars. Are they ended? No. REALLY OSLO? REALLY?
And he promised to Shut Down Guantanamo Bay. Still open for business. Really? Really?
And he thinks he can hold the Detainees at Gitmo indefinitely, just like Bush. Really? Really?
And he promised to stop unconstitutional government surveillance, but the PATRIOT Act is soon to be renewed? Really Nobel Peace Prize Committee? What part of Peace do you not get. Really?
And he gunned down a bunch of poor teenagers playing pirates in Somalia. Is this peaceful? Really? Really?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:58 amJohnny Canuck says:
first, this prize comes via Norway not Sweden (Sarcastro, I’ve never seen you be wrong before).
Second, for the rest of the world, to have a U.S. President who has devoted significant attention to reducing nuclear weapons in the world and to proposing the rest of the world should be treated with respect, and is such a seismic change from Bush, is genuinely the most important contribution to world peace this year.
The developed world’s view of the US has been seriously enhanced by your election of Obama. At last a president of whom you should be proud.
Sorry you can’t appreciate him.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:08 amSarcastro says:
[Wow. I totally thought it was Sweden.
Well, at least this isn’t as bad as the time I missed an obvious Siegel sock puppet joke and treated the poster as serious.
That was epic fail.]
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:16 amMartinned says:
When Sweden and Norway peacefully divorced in 1911 (?), the Norwegians got the Peace prize, and the Swedes got all the others. That is why the Nobel Peace prize is awarded by a five-man committee elected by the Norwegian parliament, and the person who actually gives the award is King Harald of Norway, not the King of Sweden who does all the others.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:17 ammegapotamus says:
Unprizing Bush comes the closest to the truth although they actually already did that once with Algore who is truly deserving of the unprize, delivering more human misery on a global scale with his marxist objections to heating, cooling, cooking, transportation and industry than any runner-up. I don’t understand though those who declare the Nobel is now corrupted. Did you sleep through Yasir Arafat’s turn on the catwalk? On the catwalk? Yeah? He’ll do his little turn up on the catwalk.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:17 amMartinned says:
O, and for the record, I can’t think of any serious reason why Obama should get the Nobel either.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:18 amegd says:
This isn’t an anti-Obama post, it’s clearly anti-Nobel Prize Committee. Even the Obama administration can be likened to a “WTF” moment.
Maybe if he had ended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, or released the Gitmo prisoners into rural Southern California, this might make sense. Heck, he could have even narrated a documentary! What serious accomplishments in the area of international peace has Obama accomplished?
Please, someone point out some meaningful accomplishment, so this doesn’t sound like as much of a joke.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:18 amMartinned says:
Arafat doesn’t count, because they also gave it to Rabin that year, to even it out. You don’t object to giving Rabin the peace prize, do you?
As for global warming: I live 30 m above sea level, so sure, let’s keep the party going!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:19 amDavid Bernstein says:
Fixed post re the Norwegians. Thanks.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:20 amBlue says:
The only way this makes any sense at all is as an utterly cynical attempt by the Norwegians to constrain the actions of a sitting US president.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:20 amdisintelligentsia says:
Perhaps this is why BHO has refrained from making a decision on Afghanastan — it would look pretty silly to give him the Peace prize right after he OKs sending 40,000 more troops on a mission of war. Oh, what am I saying, this can’t be any more silly.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:24 amFedya says:
This says far more about the “developed world’s” bigotry towards the US than it does about the US itself.
As an example, I distinctly recall news outlets like the BBC being very wary of Hugo Chavez’ efforts to pack the courts and other anti-democratic measures — until the abortive coup of 2002 which GWB was seen to be in support of. At that point, the establishment classes of the rest of the world suddenly became rabid supporters of Chavez.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:26 amMartinned says:
Lord knows they’re not above a bit of politicking, but in this case that would be kinda hard: Constrain him with regards to what? Obamacare? Unlikely... Afghanistan? What position does the committee even have on that? What is the more peace-loving thing to do? Bring civilisation to the Pashtun or withdraw and let the Taliban run the place?
The official explanation by the committee means exactly nothing: “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples”. On a sidebar, the nobel website has a poll asking whether people know about Obama’s efforts for nuclear arms reduction, so that might have something to do with it. Who knows?
The Financial Times’ Gideon Rachman has collected some reactions.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:27 amMartinned says:
That is almost as silly as giving the Nobel Peace Prize to the sitting president of the United States.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:28 amDrGrishka says:
So I wonder then, where’s Reagan’s Prize? He actually DID reduce the nuclear arsenals rather than just talking about it.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:29 amanonymous says:
It’s not what he’s done people, it’s the coming attractions.
Hold on to your hats boys and girls; this ought to be good!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:29 amSarcastro says:
I’m glad so many people have Norwegian telepathy and know how they are totally doing this to dis Bush.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:29 amyoyo says:
Did you hear that Vegas has made Obama the odds-on favorite to win the Super Bowl?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:31 am11-B/20.B4 says:
Hey, I was trying to think of the massive achievements in Obama’s first eleven days, but came up dry. Was I drunk that week and a half?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:34 amMartinned says:
In other news, here are the three nominees for this year’s Sakharov Prize, each of whom would have made an excellent recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize:
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:36 amrarango says:
this is simply a bad joke–is there any thinking person out there thinks President Obama deserves this? really
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:36 amnevinscrna says:
The guy hasn’t done jack to merit any award yet.
This is nothing more than a slap at American policies and actions they didn’t like under Bush, Clinton, Bush...
By stroking Obama’s ego with this now they’ve got him like a puppet on a string dancing a jig called by the agenda of the europeans.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:38 amSarcastro says:
Oh noes its mind control through Nobel Prize!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:41 amMartinned says:
Yes, I’m sure now he has no choice but to repay the favour by agreeing to a comprehensive carbon reduction scheme in Copenhagen in December! (Just kidding, that summit will achieve squat...)
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:41 amJames T. Carrington says:
I blame Obama.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:47 amModa says:
Take it in stride, Obama.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:48 amFedya says:
I’d put the award to Gorbachev in place of the Arafat/Rubin award. A lot of actions, both from Western leaders and the ordinary East Germans who stormed the Hungary-Austria border or camped out at West German embassies, were ignored in the rush to make Gorbachev the one responsible for the European Communists’ falling out of power. Interestingly, a few months after winning the prize, Gorbachev was responsible for sending the military in to kill protestors at Lithuanian Radio and TV. (But we’ve been over this topic before.)
For me, though, the award that really made me understand just how much of a political bias the committee had was in 1992. With the war(s) in the former Yugoslavia going on, you’d think that the Czech and Slovak leaders’ coming together to effect a peaceful split of the two countries could serve as a model for how to deal with such nationalistic aspirations. Instead, the committee decided to award Rigoberta Menchu (who?). But, she fit the stereotype of woman of color fighting against those wicked right-wing death squads, while Vaclav Klaus and Vladimir Meciar were wicked right-wingers (hell, look at how the rest of the EU still hates Klaus).
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:53 amHoosier says:
I am more upset by the decision to induct Obama into Cooperstown based on how great a ballplayer he would have been.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:53 amShelbyC says:
And you figured a left wing pissant should get in on it too?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:53 amSubrosa says:
Wow. The Obama-Osama joke. How hilarious, Bernstein. Ouch ouch, my sides!
More seriously, this is straight-up hackery. Yawn.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:55 amRyan says:
Obama didn’t win the Noble PEACE prize.
He won the Noble PIECE prize.
It’s the award that honors the first person to order the bombing of the moon and it’s meant to commemorate all of the pieces of the moon that are now floating around in space.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:56 amEli Rabett says:
Top ten reasons more Jews aren’t Republicans
Antonin Scalia
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:00 amRyan Waxx says:
Main Entry: 1lit·er·al
Pronunciation: \ˈli-t(ə-)rəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Medieval Latin litteralis, from Latin, of a letter, from littera letter
Date: 14th century
1 a : according with the letter of the scriptures b : adhering to fact or to the ordinary construction or primary meaning of a term or expression : actual c : free from exaggeration or embellishment d : characterized by a concern mainly with facts
I mean it with respect to meaning c, and to some extent b and possibly d. Which dictionary are YOU using? You will please note that the example provided by the dictionary (“the literal truth” versus “it’s literally true”) is almost precisely the actual phrase I used. You don’t like it, pick up the phone and call Webster to tell them what a terrible job they’re doing adhering to what you prefer the meaning of the word to be.
So I can with great confidence say that “literally” does not mean what YOU think it means.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:00 amThe Nobel “[Aspirations of] Peace” Prize « The View From LL2 says:
[...] I never thought I’d link to him, but here it is: David Bernstein’s “Top Ten Reasons Why Obama Won the Nobel Peace Prize“. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize — [...]
Jennifer says:
So Nacy Pelosi can add a Peace Tax!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:14 amShelbyC says:
Oh come on, of course people who disagree with Obama are going to joke about this. Hell, could you imagine the reaction on the left if Bush won the Nobel peace prize?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:16 amMartinned says:
This year was a good year to give the Prize to someone who contributed to bringing down “this wall”, given that the end of the cold war is 20 years ago this year/next year. Helmut Kohl would have worked, but my favourite was Vaclav Havel. Giving it to Gorbachev at the time was yet another example of the committee “politicking”, i.e. using the prize to push a specific political outcome. (Another recent example was the 1998 prize for peace in Norther Ireland, at a time when peace was everything but certain.) Overall, not nearly enough Nobel attention has been given to those that ended the Cold war, so I’d have given it to Havel.
Havel would also have been a good choice for the Czechoslovakia split, although I’m not sure if splitting countries up is itself a great work of peace. That certainly could have ended much worse.
The current problem we have with Klaus is that he refuses to sign the ratification papers for a treaty that the Czech parliament lawfully ratified. (At the moment, there is a procedure running before the Czech constitutional court, which the president obviously has to wait for, but once that court rules, if it rules in favour of the Treaty, the President should delay no longer.)
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:21 amArthurKirkland says:
The decision to award this Prize to President Obama is strange. I sense the best explanation is that, after watching his predecessor break the world and mangle American conduct, people outside the United States may be so thrilled to have their ‘what will he wreck next?’ worries extinguished that they are moved to express gratitude and relief in even awkward ways.
I see no reason to fault Barack Obama for this; he has been placed in an awkward position. I see no reason to batter George W. Bush for this; he has remained honorably silent after leaving office and is no longer in a position from which he could inflict harm. A tolerant shrug may be the most appropriate reaction.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:29 amMartinned says:
Is there a way Obama could politely refuse?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:30 amdearieme says:
Because an annotation on his Long Form birth certificate says that he must be awarded the prize in 2009.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:33 amDaily Pundit » Okay, Just One More says:
[...] The Volokh Conspiracy » Blog Archive » Top Ten Reasons Obama Won the Nobel Peace Prize [...]
Guillaume Buell says:
Nominations for the award were due 12 days after the president took office.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091009/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_nobel_analysis_1
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:41 amMartinned says:
George Packer on the New Yorker website:
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:47 amMartinned says:
My point, which I unsuccessfully tried to clear up with the editing function, was that the only thing cooler than receiving the Nobel Peace Prize (or any prize) is to refuse it by saying that you don’t think you deserve it (yet). The only problem with that option, other than that the Republicans would undoubtedly call him arrogant if he did that, is that it might cause a diplomatic problem with Norway. (Rich, lots of oil and gas.)
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:49 amlls says:
On 9/12/2001...
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:50 amTaktix® says:
This is not surprising, the Nobel Prize has been irrelevant for quite some time...
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:53 amjake says:
The smart move by President Obama would be to thank the Nobel Committee and decline the award–saying he wants to actually acheive progress before being honored. That would be gracious, humble and smart politics (both domestic and international).
My guess is he does not do that.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:55 amMalvolio says:
Arafat, Kissinger, Lê Ðức Thọ, even Gore — these were important people, you can see why the committee thought of them, you just don’t necessarily see why the committee didn’t immediately think, “No, that would be absolutely the opposite of the kind of person who should win. If there were a Nobel Getting-People-Killed Prize, then yes.”
But Obama? It’s like making Incitatus a senator; it’s just a mocking of the institution.
And it’s a mocking of Obama: “Sure, Mr President, you worked so hard for the last two months, you can have a Nobel Prize. And you can be Pope. And a cowboy.”
I’m not criticizing Obama: for every president since James Monroe, when he first got elected president, getting elected president was the most impressive thing he’d every done. Some presidents — Reagan and FDR are the best 20th century examples — managed to build on that; others (Carter, George HW Bush) don’t. It’s still possible for Obama to become a great man; certainly the situation is right for it, and he has three years left to do it. I am not optimistic though and all this Prize does is get everyone talking about how little he has actually accomplished.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:57 amJoseph Slater says:
Good to see you back, Hoosier!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:57 amArthurKirkland says:
Another angle: Many people were willing to forgive the American public’s first election of George W. Bush; neither his failures nor the precipitating events were forseeable. That benefit of the doubt understandably vanished when Bush was elected again, replaced by anxiety that the United States’ blundering, bullying conduct was a new national norm rather than a mistake and an anomaly centered on a single man’s faults. The American electorate defused that anxiety by electing Barack Obama. This Prize might have been aimed at the American people, for rekindling hope in the United States as a world leader in a world requiring leadership, more than at President Obama.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:57 amlls says:
So what! GM stock is trading on Wall Street.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:59 amHoosier says:
Joseph
Thanks. I appreciate that. My health is a bit up-and-down these days. But I am (hoping that I’m) back for good.
By the way, when does Obama get inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? I mean, before or after Cobain?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:03 amArthurKirkland says:
Politely declining the Prize could be worth exploring. Acknowledging that it was spurred more by the American people’s rekindling of the world’s faith in the United States as a force for good than by anything the named recipient has accomplished also could be considered. As has become customary, an inherited issue creates a difficult situation for President Obama.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:04 amMartinned says:
Getting nominated is the easy part. This year, there were more nominations than ever before.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:08 amKen Arromdee says:
The neat part of this explanation is that it doesn’t actually depend on whether Bush really broke anything or whether those worries are true.
Europeans hate Bush, so they gave Obama an award for opposing Bush. That’s all the explanation needed. It doesn’t matter whether they had reasons to hate Bush; it only matters that they believe they had reasons.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:09 amLinda says:
Rush was too busy cementing the St Louis Rams deal.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:10 amDangerMouse says:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
This is too funny...
Arthur, I gotta commend you: You’re not dumb enough to believe that this is going to go over well with Joe Sixpack. You’re darn right that this is an “awkward position.” Everyday Americans will look at this and think that it’s more of the idiotic cult of Obama crap they’ve been seeing with increasing frequency. And it’ll just confirm his image of all talk and no show. In fact, if Obama has any brains, he’ll realize that he really doesn’t need this stupid diversion right now, and that it only works against him. Then again, the guy is vain and narsissistic beyound belief...
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:21 amSteve says:
As an Obama supporter, I have to say that some of these are pretty damn funny!
Major shout-out to Case3L “He was the 10th caller”! The ‘beer summit’ and ‘Obama? I thought we were giving it to Osama’? also made me laugh.
And if you can make someone laugh, you definitely made the world a better place. Be sure to check out http://itmademyday.com/
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:23 amMartinned says:
Great news! Case 3L’s comment above got quoted by Andrew Sullivan. For some reason that I can only ascribe to ridiculous partizanship, he seems to think this Nobel prize thing is a good idea.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:24 amMartinned says:
Here’s the longer version of why Andrew Sullivan thinks Obama deserves the Nobel Prize. It still doesn’t make any sense...
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:26 amrick.felt says:
Premature Barackulation, that’s what this is.
I don’t agree with several of the Nobels (Kissinger, Carter, Arafat, Gore) but those complaints are either (a) whatever peace they’ve brought about doesn’t outweigh the violence they perpetrated, or (b) their accomplishments are counterproductive. But there’s no doubt that these folks have done more than just talk.
What’s really stupid is the impatience. Obama is going to accomplish some things. Guantanamo Bay will close at some point in the next three years. We’ll be substantially out of Iraq (and possibly Afghanistan) within the next three years. There will probably be some cajoling of Israel into pulling back a few hundred yards. Perhaps there will be a treaty with Iran or North Korea (regardless of whether it’s immediately broken). As an American president, Obama won’t be able to help but accomplish a few things over the next three years. If the committee wants to give him a Nobel in three or seven (or more) years, I’ll may not agree that his efforts have actually promoted lasting peace, but I won’t be able to deny that he accomplished something concrete that the committee can point to.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:30 amBama 1L says:
Declining the prize might be seen as too arrogant. President Obama might do better to accept it on behalf of the American people and try to say something nice about his predecessor. And I think Arthur is on to something: this is the committee’s somewhat condescending effort to reward Americans for changing leadership.
Wikipedia thinks the only voluntary refusals were by Jean-Paul Sartre (who never accepted honors) and Le Duc Tho (who wanted to make the political point that peace had not been established). (A few others, including Boris Pasternak, were forced by totalitarian governments to refuse prizes.) There is really no need to join their ranks.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:33 amMartinned says:
Are you saying that all American presidents inevitably end up doing at least some things during their term of office that put them in the vicinity of a Nobel Peace prize? Cos if that’s what you are saying, that’s just a Bush snark waiting to happen.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:34 amDjDiverDan says:
And the Number 1 reason the Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama is:
The Committee learned that Roman Polanski probably would not be available to accept the award this year.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:37 amDangerMouse says:
For some reason that I can only ascribe to ridiculous partizanship, he seems to think this Nobel prize thing is a good idea.
Or, Sullivan is off his meds. The only people who think this is good news for Obama are both partisan AND stupid. Why feed the idea that he’s all show and no go? Why feed the idea that he’s vain as hell? Why feed the idea that he’s just a wanna-be celebrity who can’t actually make any decisions?
I’ll bet you that the political operatives at the White House are cursing this news privately.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:37 amMartinned says:
Surely there must be a way to phrase the decline that doesn’t sound arrogant. (Except to our friends at Fox and their ilk.)
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:38 amFloridan says:
All this sounds very much like the comments on college football blogs complaining that a particular team doesn’t deserve its current ranking (and besides their fans are ignorant, rude rednecks).
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:39 amrick.felt says:
Here’s the longer version of why Andrew Sullivan thinks Obama deserves the Nobel Prize. It still doesn’t make any sense…
It doesn’t have to make sense. Obama could take a big steaming dump in Sullivan’s cornflakes and Sullivan would praise him for adding fiber to his diet.
Know hope.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:39 amRob says:
Conservatives have often said a strong military, strong police force, and the death penalty are tools for peace so it is nice to see the Nobel committee recognize that. I’m just glad that being Commander-and-Chief of a country that is waging war all over the globe is now identified as a peaceful endeavor.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:43 amHoosier says:
Martinned
How about Bush’s Africa Policy? In a year with no strong contendahs, perhaps . . . ?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:44 amLumpus says:
“Even mainstream media stunned, skeptical over Nobel Peace prize”
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:46 amDotar Sojat says:
Could anything be more dopey?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:47 amrick.felt says:
Are you saying that all American presidents inevitably end up doing at least some things during their term of office that put them in the vicinity of a Nobel Peace prize? Cos if that’s what you are saying, that’s just a Bush snark waiting to happen.
Go ahead and snark at Bush; it’s no skin off my nose.
All American presidents inevitably do consequential things on the international stage that can arguably be considered to be promoting peace, and each president thinks that he’s promoting peace through his actions, at least in the long term. Giving Bill Clinton a Nobel for arm-twisting Israel into counterproductive concessions to Arafat, or giving Bush a Nobel for getting rid of Saddam Hussein is no more ridiculous than giving Henry Kissinger a Nobel for winding down the Vietnam War.
Surely there must be a way to phrase the decline that doesn’t sound arrogant.
There is. The key is no false modesty. None of this “when people gathered in Chicago on the night of my election, it wasn’t about me” business. No false deflection, either: “this prize belongs to the American people,” with the “for electing me” left unspoken. Just say that you understand the honor to be aspirational, but in light of the luminaries who have accomplished so much, you cannot accept it until you’ve actually done more than inspire hope.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:55 amMartinned says:
Here’s Obama’s own response.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:00 pmJRL says:
Maybe now he can win back-to-back Nobel Peace Prizes like Archie Griffin did in the 70s!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:02 pmkrs says:
Where’s Kanye West when you need him?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:06 pmDangerMouse says:
“Let me be clear, I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations,” the president said.
Even Obambi realizes he’s acomlished Jack Squat and has to spin this.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:08 pmDiversityHire says:
He has to accept the prize. His best move is to share it, pass it on in the spirit in which it was awarded to him. Give it to the people of Iraq. Or the SEIU. :)
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:08 pmJunkyard Ballerina says:
#1 reason Barrack Hussein Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize:
The world wants Him to get back to the heavy-lifting in Afghanistan so the rest of the world won’t have to.
Junkyard Ballerina, Nobull Peace Prize nominee : )
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:09 pmThe Curmudgeonly Ex-Clerk says:
Hauk wrote:
No, the Peace Prize is just the latest evidence that Obama is in fact the Messiah; so this post is about Judaism too.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:12 pmzuch says:
After reading the comments here, I begin to see the wisdom and perspicacity of my compatriots in the Storting:
By giving Obama the Nobel Peace Prize, they intended to make the heads of the RWers here all explode, thus ridding the world of this bellicose, aggressive, and sanguinary pestilence ... and it seems to be working. I note that the Taliban is all up in arms (so to speak) about this award as well. More evidence of the wisdom of this act.
Ja, vee gotcha gooood, yoobetcha! Uff da!
Cheers,
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:15 pmMcGehee says:
“It’s not easy topping last year for sheer lunacy. Next year: Emperor Palpatine.”
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:22 pmCMoore says:
Maybe it’s because he’s anti-semite...Carter is and so was Arafat...
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:32 pmdisintelligentsia says:
Perhaps they felt that if they gave him the prize that he would at least visit their country for the ceremony.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:37 pmdisintelligentsia says:
Even the Norwegians say that it’s all about “Hope”:
Addressing concerns that the Oslo-based prize was being given to the US president too early in his term, Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg indicated that the prize also looks ahead to the future. “The exciting and important thing about this prize is that it’s given to someone ... who has the power to contribute to peace,” he said.
and
“Only rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future,” the committee said in a statement.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:41 pmd says:
at least no one can compare Obama to Hitler...at least Hitler brought the Olympics to Berlin.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:44 pmGary says:
The jury is still out on this one. He’s weakened the U.S. in so many ways that the death toll may only be beginning.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:45 pmd says:
Be careful what you wish for! I feel that they awarded him this prize for what they think he might do in the future...what happens if he winds up like I think he will and be a total failure? Will the NPP committee change their procedures? So far Obama has done nothing and I believe he will continue to do nothing! He doesn’t have a spine.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:48 pmJohnny Canuck says:
d, Olympics awarded to Berlin in April 1931, long before Hitler came to power.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 12:49 pmScott says:
The Obamanation won because he is the most un-American and wimpiest president in US history. The rest of the world wants a weak, do-nothing, American president.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 1:21 pmJDC says:
Maybe the Nobel endowment has been wiped out by the Obama economy and this is their way of phasing the prize out.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 1:22 pmBob Heilbrunn says:
He got Malia & Sasha to stop fighting...
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:07 pmDan Blake says:
Reason Obama got Nobel Peace Prize: It was a slow news day!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:09 pmRickTheJarhead says:
Spoken like a true left wing pissant
For my part — I thought they were talking about the Fleece prize — which The One would win hands down...
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:11 pmBlue says:
I look forward to news stories like:
Nobel Peace Prize Winner Barack Obama today ordered a Hellfire missile strike on Taleban insurgents. Initial reports suggest that 12 were killed, along with their families.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:12 pmJoseph Slater says:
Even Obambi realizes he’s acomlished Jack Squat and has to spin this.
Even Dangermouse realizes Obama hit exactly the right notes with his response, and so Dangermouse has to try to spin this.
And CMoore, d, and Gary, thanks for exceeding my expectations for what the right wing kook-out would be on this issue.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:12 pmRoger W Hancock says:
The Nobel Peace Prize to Obama solidifies the Joke. The “Peace Commission” of the Nobel Foundation has not the sense Alfred Nobel intended...
Read more at http://FAN.PoetPatriot.com
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:19 pmVisitor Again says:
Yes, I remember the reaction on the Left when another U.S. figure, that murderous swine Henry Kissinger, won the Peace Prize.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:21 pmCara says:
suggestion: All of those on the deciding panel are connected to Acorn or one of its subsidiaries.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:27 pmWakeUpAmerica says:
They are still looking for a recipient that makes that Yasser Arafat award look good.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:32 pmJoseph Slater says:
And . . . Obama announces he will donate the prize money to charity.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:33 pmSarcastro says:
I can also write a 1 line witty comment about how O’Dumbo is awful.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:37 pmThoroughly Disgusted says:
It should be renamed the ” Ignoble Appeasing & Apologing Prize.”
Another in an ongoing, unending series of absurd, pathetic farces.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:37 pmJose Sanchez says:
Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in order to enhance his low self esteem.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:39 pmKazinski says:
Its like the Nobel committee is trying to sabotage Obama by reinforcing the growing impression that he is all form and no substance. Winning the Nobel Peace prize would have fit right in with the SNL spoof last week on Obama. I look forward to tomorrow’s show.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:40 pmflyngrape says:
And the number 1 reason Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize...
God wasn’t nominated. Oh wait he is God.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:42 pmmbsch13 says:
Leaving aside any issues with Iraq/Afghanistan, I continue to be amazed at the patently false assertion that GWB wrecked US-international relations during his presidency, and that Obama has magically created peace and harmony. True, W did eschew multilateral organizations and NGOs (and thus the left’s disdain of his foreign policy), but we had significant improvement in our bilateral relationships with a number of countries, including most notably India, Japan, Great Britain, Columbia, Russia (for a time), and many Central American and Eastern European countries. For some reason, these don’t count. Ask the Poles or Hondurans whether Bush or Obama had better relations with their countries, or Gordon Brown for that matter.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:42 pmApu Nahasapasapeemipetilon says:
because he’s the– OMG– first black president!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:45 pmGabriel McCall says:
So FTC regulations require Obama to disclose the prize whenever he blogs about Norway, right?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:49 pmSarcastro says:
The important thing is to blame Obama.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 2:59 pmThe Stiletto says:
Premature Deification
http://tinyurl.com/ykblf84
Quote
October 9, 2009, 3:10 pmPaulW says:
My Top 10 Reasons Why Obama Won The Nobel Peace Prize:
10) To piss off Bill Clinton.
9) Obama’s patent on a feasible hyperspace jump drive only got him honorable mention for the Physics award, so the judges felt a little sorry and all...
8. Putin was a shoo-in until that whole “Invade Georgia” thing
7) Obama’s geeky buddies hacked the vote.
6) To piss off Hillary Clinton.
5) Jean-Luc Picard’s post-Dominion War efforts to rebuild Klingon-Romulan relations haven’t been fully realized yet.
4) To piss off the Far Right Noise Machi... wait, like they needed this to hate Obama even more...?
3) Well, it’s stopped everyone talking about Letterman’s problems, hasn’t it?
2) Because by simply stopping the worst excesses of the Bush/Cheney Reign of Error, Obama still earned a peace prize. ...no, too honest an answer, this should have been sillier.
1) CLASSIFIED
Quote
October 9, 2009, 3:12 pmHoosier says:
I admire Geir Lundestad as a scholar tremendously. This came as a surprise, but hasn’t changed my assessment of his work. Again, it has just . . . surprised me.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 3:31 pmJim C. says:
I imagine it must have been a tough choice for them to give him the Peace or the Physics prize.
link
Quote
October 9, 2009, 3:34 pmArthur Ramos Jr. says:
He wasn’t eligible for the Academy Award For Best Actor!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 3:45 pmB Conyne says:
How about “He edged out Michael Moore by .0001 points”?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 3:49 pmsloane says:
My thought was also that giving a prize to Obama was yet another way to have a referendum on the Bush era.
I initially thought this must be some sort of spoof. Then I thought....it’s rigged..it must be....and I am basically a supporter of Obama. It just seems so absurd and unwarranted.
My brother pointed out, though, that in the U.S., we perhaps do not realize the full extent of Obama’s impact on the rest of the world. Not just what he has done (or failed to do, or not yet had the chance to do) in office, but in having run the campaign he did and for being elected to office at all. Do I think the Nobel Peace Prize should be awarded as a sort of symbol, or to give more credibility to someone the world Hopes might take the U.S. in a direction that will be more positive for the int’l community? Not really, no...but I was never much for prizes, either.
It is perhaps worth giving more thought to the reasons for Obama’s selection (did they run out of candidates? Do they see something we don’t see?) rather than criticizing what seems a rather off choice to much of the American public.
As for the implications for Obama...maybe this will help him...but I can see it hurting him..perhaps it would make sense for him to reject the prize. I’m not sure. Back in July, John Tantillo, a marketing guy who is an occasional guest on Fox News (I know, I know) had a piece on his blog about how Obama was at risk for overexposure.
“My concern is that the image might be that of an idealistic, professorial type who talks about leading rather than actually leading. Woodrow Wilson, not Roosevelt. . . . Instead of being impressed by Obama’s eloquence at the podium, people will connect it to inaction and lack of results. They will call him the professor and be unable to get the connection out of their minds.”
Being awarded the Nobel Prize has definitely just made it Harder for Obama to avoid being categorized in this way.
George Packer at the New Yorker suggests that Obama should decline the prize. That might be his smartest move.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 4:07 pmStuRat says:
Henry Ford was apparently wrong: “You can’t build a reputation on what you’re going to do.”
More reasons:
Because the Nobel Committee was cheaper to bribe than the IOC.
Because they were tired of awarding it to Americans and Europeans and gave it to a Kenyan instead.
Like most of the recent recipients, they are more noteworthy for what they FAILED to deliver.
So they could all meet Oprah at the Awards Ceremony.
Because he made a better music video than Beyonce
Hey, doesn’t the first President of the World deserve it?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 4:17 pmTamerlane says:
Obama was the second choice: They were going to offer it to Mumia Abu-Jamal until they heard a rumor he once voted Republican.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 4:26 pmPatriot says:
I am watching the White House, expecting to see a puff of white smoke from the chimney, announcing to the world that Obama has been selected as the Pope.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 4:39 pmHowdy says:
President Reagan did a great deal more in reducing nuclear weapons in the world than Obama. “..is genuinely the most important contribution to world peace this year”????? Again, kool-aid drinkers, WHAT HAS HE DONE for peace?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 6:08 pmOrson says:
BEST LINE
Obama REALLY is The Joker!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 6:09 pmKATHLEEN BERGERON says:
Because he deserves an award for living with his wife, a.k.a. the “bag lady”!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 6:11 pmCato The Elder says:
Obama is like unto a god.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:28 pmGene says:
Arthur, let me ask you a question? Why is it no matter how bad Obama bends the constitution, or makes behind closed door deals or just plain gets caught lying You people always want to talk about Bush & what he “inherited”. When does Obama become accountable for his own actions & when do you libs realize that regardless of what Bush did, 2 wrongs don’t make a right, isn’t that what we teach our children? So why is it always some other president, usually a repub, did it first so it’s ok? Please he’s just another crooked politician making deals & getting rich from his position. I know Libs will never admit that they were hoodwinked by this do nothing “organizer”. I’m not even a repub & I’m sick of this guy, which is why independants are leaving him by the millions. One more thing if you want to call me a liar check the polls & then post a link to prove it.
Now for everyone here, when will you all wake up & realize that the letter in front of the name doesn’t matter, the career politicians are screwing us all every day. Term limits are possibly the only way to fix this, since most people just pick the name they recognize at the ballot box. I guess that means the press decides, wow, isn’t that what happened this time?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 7:51 pmGuin Chapman says:
It was not worth anything . Gore got it, pres Carter it so WTF
. So why not give it to the Marxist loving big eared Obomnation
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:14 pmLeo Marvin says:
Brilliant. I was going to add that Obama got the prize for the same reason Bernstein blogged about it, because he’s Jewish, but CMoore beat me to it with his (I assume serious) spin from the Bizarro World.
I hope so. You were missed. I assumed you were under the weather again when you surfaced so briefly last time.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:47 pmleatherhead says:
It should have gone to Muhammad Yunus, the man who started Grameen Bank. He has done more to bring hope into the lives of millions of impoverished people around the world than any person in recent history, with his introduction of micro-lending. Now THERE is a peacemaker.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:49 pmUkemomma says:
his administration isn’t over yet.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 8:51 pmF.R. Duplantier says:
This whole thing’s been misreported. What Obama got was the No-Belly Prize for being slim.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:16 pmArthurKirkland says:
When does Obama become accountable for his own actions & when do you libs realize that regardless of what Bush did, 2 wrongs don’t make a right
I am pleased by the beginning period of the Obama presidency. I no longer worry that discredited ideology and brittle belligerence will cause the United States to invade the wrong country, and there is hope, at least, that thoroughgoing incompetence will no longer botch an occupation at nearly inestimatable cost. The economy, as measured in my daily travels, appears to be improving and the apprehension regarding a systemic meltdown appears to have been defused. I no longer expect relevations about ongoing torture, and I doubt we are in for another seven years of secret prisons, endless detention, and mishandling of detainees. I suspect our days of accepting handoffs from compensated bountyhunters have ended. I see a president working toward reform of our health care system — an important economic and moral issue that appears to have been beyond the grasp of other presidents — in a manner I support. I no longer fear that an overwhelmed man’s superstitutions will drive government policy, or that Regent and Liberty grads are running the Department of Justice. I expect the gap between the wealthiest Americans and the poorest Americans to decrease rather than increase during the current presidency, and the trend toward allocating opportunity based on inheritance and connections rather than merit to change. I believe our president inspires hope around the country and throughout the world, despite the clustermuck in place at his Inauguration Day, and stands a reasonable chance of improving our nation and our world.
This Nobel Prize, in my judgment, was awarded for America’s self-correction of its course. And properly so. It is not surprising or objectionable that the world has noticed and has spoken. The grotesque American failures between 2001 and 2008 were readily observable from many thousands of miles away.
If a conservative or Republican wishes to criticize this award, unless the first two words are “I apologize” or “I’m sorry,” I’m not much interested in what follows. There’s too much cleanup yet to be done.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:18 pmRosanne Odum says:
This TOTALLY diminishes what the Nobel Peace Prize once represented. If this wasn’t so pathetic, it would be laughable. Party affiliations aside; how can anyone feel he rightfully deserves this recognition?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 9:22 pmSheri says:
What a pathetic joke! This man makes me ashamed to admit that I’m an American.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:36 pmEvilNonGenius says:
This was a clever ploy to promote liberal tourism to Oslo.
Also, I am surprised that no one had noticed the connection between this prize and Ford’s decision to sell Volvo, which reaffirms the newfound lack of US Imperialist ambitions in Scandinavia (see also, the SAAB sale by GM). Suddenly, the US is giving up its imperialist beachheads in Scandinavia and of course the NPP Committee noticed. Oh, and Obama’s decision to serve that horrid salt cod at the White House probably clinched the deal.
Quote
October 9, 2009, 10:46 pmMitch Brown says:
Arkady, what CONCRETE thing has Obama done in 9 MONTHS to deserve it?
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:24 pmSarcastro says:
Yep, the Prize is only awarded to people who have done something. It’s never been used as a nudge for people to keep on doing something! And if it has been for decades, that is a bad way to do the Nobel Peace Prize! Encouraging peace is for losers, a prize should only look backwards, not forwards!
Quote
October 9, 2009, 11:28 pmJunkyard Ballerina says:
Mr.Obama’s –other– prizes:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/293446.php
What worries me is how in the world will He ever find the time to scoot off to Oslow to accept the prize?
I mean, with two wars...oh...yea...
Quote
October 10, 2009, 12:16 amJunkyard Ballerina says:
(someone posted...but obviously I don’t know how to quote)
“If a conservative or Republican wishes to criticize this award, unless the first two words are “I apologize” or “I’m sorry,” I’m not much interested in what follows.”
Haven’t you heard –enough– apologies already?
The same group of ultra leftists just gave America’s president the same prize they awarded to Yasser Arafat, the blue helmetted UN Peacekeepers of the 1990’s who ran whore houses in Kosovo, Kofi Anan and the whole United Nations of his era...I could go on.
I think the Nobel panel could do some apologizing.
That’d be good.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 12:25 amLeo Marvin says:
Meanwhile, liberals have Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 1:14 amLester Bestertester says:
Ted Kennedy — the “Lion of the Senate” was dead, so the Nobel Comittee gave the Peace Prize to the “Pussy in the Oval Office”.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 1:24 amProf. S. says:
The stimulus saved or created thousands of peaceful situations.
Managed to fight off an army of strawmen without firing a shot.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 2:28 amTim says:
Because Michael Moore is actually a terrorist, and doing nothing always beats doing something good.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 3:57 amPresident Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize ‘ “Blessed are the Peacemakers” « Lighthouse Patriot Journal says:
[...] Volokh Conspiracy (a blog group consisting of law professors), David Bernstein, using the David Letterman top ten list scenario – remarkable since the news was just freshly [...]
Hoosier says:
Arthur
I am sorry that I hurt you. It was just never meant to be.
OK. Feel better?
Or how is this: I am right-of-center, but forgot to vote for Bush. Twice. Oops, silly me. I probably agree with more than half of your criticisms of the previous administration. BUT . . . Obama has done nothing to deserve this award. AND . . . the Nobel Peace Prize is “starting” to become a parody.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 6:54 amRyan Waxx says:
You may be on to something there... someone award me a Physics nobel based on what I *might* do in the future!
Sarcastro, you are indeed hilarious... but not in the ways you intend.
{ WARNING! The following sentence has been produced in a factory that also processes logic. }
Psst. In order to “keep on doing something”, you have to be “doing something” in the first place, yes?
Quote
October 10, 2009, 7:35 amArthurKirkland says:
Republicans and conservatives didn’t hurt me, Hoosier. They damaged our country and our world, inflicting unnecessary misery and shaming the United States.
I agree that Obama’s achievements do not warrant the Peace Prize. The American electorate, by self-correcting in a manner that restored hope that the United States could regain its moral and practical footing as a leading force for good in our world, was the committee’s likely target. This still would not have been my choice, for several reasons, but it is understandable and within the range of reason.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 10:30 amHollyBarry says:
Well, cuz his mother-in-law’s in the bedroom next door. Hello!
Quote
October 10, 2009, 10:35 amJess Oria says:
I’d like to visit Gitmo sometime if it remains open. Where can one buy tickets?
JO
Quote
October 10, 2009, 11:47 amJoley Mack says:
The Nobel Peace Prize is now the biggest joke of the year — with a pretender as president. They probably awarded it because Obama has been so gifted in fooling the American people that he was actually an US Citizen — the Kenyan’s should be proud!
Quote
October 10, 2009, 2:11 pmTraveller1861 says:
It was his promise to reduce gravity by half so we could jump higher and it wouldn’t hurt as bad when we fall down.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 2:25 pmRobbieR says:
“Bomb the moon”? Shouldn’t that be “Moon the Bomb”?
Quote
October 10, 2009, 3:55 pmCatalina says:
Wait! I just figured it out..... They meant to award Obama the “NoTell Piece Pie” award for his taking such a large chunk of the American economy and not really telling anyone that was what he was doing!
Quote
October 10, 2009, 4:58 pmSean L. says:
It’s the whole new generation, it doesn’t matter if you win or lose, everyone gets a trophy just for playing, well because we wouldn’t actually want you to learn anything from your mistakes and lack of abilty.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 5:03 pmGene Madison says:
Now is not the time for the President to disclose the existance of an offshore swiss bank account.
Over 50% of Norway’s Government Pension fund is invested in the U.S., and there’s no time like the present to buy Obamasure, for those High Return, Low Risk, AAA Rated investments.
Quote
October 10, 2009, 11:09 pmStephen says:
Amazing. He won for doing absolutely nothing
Geez, the election was in November ’08. Get over it already!
Quote
October 11, 2009, 1:18 pmAshley says:
This was for the free concerts and beer during
his hate America tour. And who thought they were there for a speech ?
Quote
October 11, 2009, 6:28 pmMRM#20 « Cornell Insider says:
[...] — A roundup of Obama Peace Prize editorials from RCP. Glenn Reynolds also links to a cartoon roundup. VC also provides a Top 10 List. [...]
Becky S. says:
It should be called the “Nobel Piss Prize,” because Obama winning this prize really did piss off many people, on the right and left (for obvious different reasons). Seriously, awarding this prize to Obama is a joke. Another prize that just went down the toilet. :/
Quote
October 12, 2009, 3:33 amJess Oria says:
I think it was premature. Normally, an award is presented to someone for N AXXOMPLIHMENT
I,personally,think it was awarded prematurely. As a rule, an award is given for accomplishment (peace). How long did the Nobel Peace Prize Committee take to prepare the list of candidates, when was it done and how long did it take to decide the winner ?
I guess, my last question is — where is there peace? Afghanistan, Pakistan ? PLEEEEASE tell me!!!
Quote
October 12, 2009, 8:18 amAnonymous Troll says:
I just never get tired of this sublime form of argumentation, regardless of which side is using it. I get tingly the way the Viagra-cons do for SP and the way the guilty-libs do for BHO.
Quote
October 12, 2009, 10:37 amPsalm23 says:
Was the “sham-wow” guy not eligible to win the prize this year for some reason?
Quote
October 12, 2009, 11:20 amBeryl says:
Have the 2012 election results been fortold by those predictions of the end of the world one month following the re-election of Obama?
Quote
October 12, 2009, 11:22 amBill says:
Couple of more reasons:
“Norway couldn’t have afforded the award banquet if they gave it to Michael Moore.”
Obama gave Norway an honorable mention during the ‘Worldwide Apology Tour’
Quote
October 12, 2009, 2:26 pmLiz Tutton says:
Hug a radical Muslin, win a peace prize!
Free a country from a murderous oppressor and live with ridicule...what a world we live in!
Quote
October 12, 2009, 5:47 pmSue says:
ORSON! GREAT LETTER! You inspired me to also write the misguided “committee” & urge my fellow like-minded friends to do so as well. I loved your last line so much, I borrowed it — I hope you don’t mind!! Here is the email I sent on Friday:
—————————————————————-
Dear Nobel Peace Prize Committee...
YOUR ORGANIZATION IS NOW THE LAUGHING STOCK OF AMERICA!
I’m sorry, that’s inaccurate — let me restate that..
You became the laughing stock years ago when the very bloated & unworthy Al Gore was decorated with your aimless, hollow award over the rightful & much deserving humanitarian, Irena Sendler! Your organization is increasingly becoming a disgraceful obscenity, marring the reputations of any respectable award winners of the past.
It’s ironic that a country more commonly associated with a cruise line rather than sound governance, can’t recognize a sinking ship when they see it. If it wasn’t far too late, it would have served you well after the Jimmy Carter or Al Gore bungles, to un-wedge your giddy faces from the nether regions of the failed, discreditable dullards you so slobberingly adore & reassess your award standards.
On a positive note, however... in the midst of a painful recession perpetuated by YOUR new hero, you have given the American people the joy of an endless butt of humor & further enflamed our zeal to restore our Great Republic!! Thank you.
Quote
October 12, 2009, 9:01 pmRumor Has It « Fraud with Peril: Levin & Gallagher Lawyers says:
[...] Has It Posted on October 13, 2009 by Steve Levin From the Volokh Conspiracy, we have these Top 10 Reasons President Obama Won the Nobel Peace [...]
Grouchy Old Man says:
Why Obama got it...
Nobody told Hillery about the money that comes with it.
Quote
October 14, 2009, 8:30 ambuffalobob says:
I think that the nutty Norwegians gave the Peace Prize to an (any) American for doing nothing, for fear that if he did anything, it would be disastrous. In essence that is how Al Gore got his Peace Prize. He was not elected as President, so, he also got the consolation prize for essentially doing nothing. Perhaps the Norwegians have been imbibing on Schnapps so much that they view anything that an American does would disqualify them for the Peace Prize. Obama should be eligible in 2010 as well, as he continues to do nothing.
Quote
October 14, 2009, 6:08 pmJack says:
As a veteran of 26 years, now working in support of the troops in Iraq, can someone please direct me back to planet earth and my real country, you know...the one with a Constitution??? Please? I must have taken a wrong turn in Baghdad on my way back to work.
What I find even more laughable is how liberals can defend this? Even if this was someone I supported in the election (he wasn’t), I would have to admit it is ridiculous, but then again he is in the company of Yassir Arafat, Al Gore and Jimmy Carter, so he deserves that!
Jack
Quote
October 15, 2009, 12:23 pmObama File – Dangerous Road for America with a Dysfunctional Driver at the Wheel « Lighthouse Patriot Journal says:
[...] Barack Obama’s nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize was based upon his aspirations, not achievements. His stifling of truthful reporting and commentary truly puts him in the league, [...]