The Real Questions About President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize
Posted: Tuesday, October 13, 2009
by Mogama
http://www.mogama.info
On Friday, October 2, 2009, Mr. Barack Obama, the 44th president of the United States, did something any American president has never done: he appeared in person before the Olympic Committee in Copenhagen, Denmark, and made an all-out pitch for Chicago, his adopted hometown, to host the 2016 Olympic games. Even some ardent supporters of the president saw his attempt as naive, as misplaced priority, in the face of so many national priorities on his slate.
And when the American president was handed a shame basket of global proportions, equal to a public spanking in front of the watching eyes of the whole world, conservatives revel in President Obama's embarrassing disappointment. They were rejoicing while the President was weeping.
But then one week later, Oslo gave back what Copenhagen took away, as the Nobel Committee, meeting in Oslo, Norway, picked Mr. Obama as recipient of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, clearly an honor far superior to bringing the Olympic Games to Chicago, or any medal associated with the Olympics for that matter.
How did conservatives respond this time? With raving outrage. "What a joke! The Nobel Committee has sunk to the depths of pure, partisan politics. It's affirmative action time in Oslo. What the Committee has done is cheapen the value of the Peace Prize." They were weeping while the President was rejoicing.
The Apostle Paul's admonition to rejoice with those who rejoice and to weep with those who weep has been turned on its head by those who for the most part claim be the real followers of the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ. Religion is fond of creating lip servants of God.
Mr. Barack Obama is not the first American president to be awarded the prestigious prize. Very few voices, if any, ever questioned the reasons why the other three presidents got the prize -- Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th president in 1905; Woodrow Wilson, the 28th president in 1919; Jimmy Carter, the 39th president in 2002.
So why the ear-bursting uproar when President was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize? To which my right-wing friends respond, "You mean you don't know why we're angry? Obama has done nothing to deserve the Peace Prize. Nothing whatsoever!"
Does not envy have no part in this angry refusal to see the President's Peace Prize as America's win, at least to some extent? Oh the darkness of blind jealousy!
Others may disagree, but it is a big deal for President Obama to have changed the tone in the dialog among world leaders from constantly hostile just months ago to mostly civil now. While that may be far less than achieving world peace, it certainly contributes to the agenda or atmosphere of peace. If the man can get everyone to stop yelling at each other in the room, then I say, give him a big pat on the back, say, with a Peace Prize, so he can go all out in the cause of peace.
The real question about President Obama and his Peace Token is how his new crown as Man of Peace will affect his decisions about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Will Obama still order a troop surge in Afghanistan on one hand, with the Peace Trophy in the other hand? Strange mix there...
Unlike his predecessors who received the Prize atop mounds of past achievements, Obama was awarded the Prize forward, for real peace he has yet to achieve. How odd it will be if this messenger of peace continues to order the dropping of bombs and the shedding of blood in these two misguided wars that can in no way save the world? This War On Terror is no World War I or World War II. It would very anti-peace, won't it, if the Nobel Prize does nothing to scale down Obama's war-time president image?
Frankly, Mr. Obama looks weird in military uniforms, ready to unload bullets or rain down bombs.
So, President Obama, since you have been declared Mr. Peacemaker, will you now exercise what it takes to end the pseudo War On Terror much sooner than later? I doubt those who voted for you expected you to live up to your war promise, and very few people will ever take you seriously as a Man O' War. Don't even try to prove them wrong. It's better to live up to what you do best, what you were born for: Peace in the World Community. That's who you are: Community Organizer, Peacemaker.
You can't please the warmongers anyway, so why postpone their displeasure of ending the bloodshed in Afghanistan and Iraq? The sooner the better. Your haters will continue to hate you, and your fans will continue to applaud you. So be brave, Peace Soldier. End the war abruptly. Give the bombers something to fight about. That's the fight millions of us would like to see, beginning now, while your Peace Prize is still steaming hot. This is the moment. Seize it, and prove to the doubters that you really do deserve the Nobel Peace Prize.
Or maybe I'm just too chicken, like the Nobel Committee...
This Article has been viewed 313 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (5 total)Well written snap shot on words giving the reader much to think about. Thank you for writing this piece, Mogama. Marijo (Mary Jo)Please log in to respond to this comment.Thanks much, Marijo, for your comment. ~mogama~Please log in to respond to this comment.
Excellent article, Mogama,This was thoughtful and well-said. Keep them coming because it is always interesting to read 'your take' on the issues at hand.Thanks,NancyPlease log in to respond to this comment.Hi there, Nancy. You're such an encourager. Thanks for reading. ~mogama~Please log in to respond to this comment.
interesting that you said we on the right said little about the other presidents award but do so now. Its because as you said he is being awarded the prize before he has done a thing. It is to encourage him to do things their way. Fighting to promote freedom and democrocy is not war- mongering. It is a noble battle. How can you enjoy freedom without trying to promote it to people in bondage? I would have thought you would understand this.Please log in to respond to this comment.Thanks for your comment, Steven. One of the biggest misconceptions that many conservative Americans harbor is that there cannot be freedom and democracy without war. That may have been true in the American experience, but democracies like Canada and Australia were born without wars of liberation. Why is it considered naive or cowardly to at least try the the Canadian and Australian model of seeking freedom through peaceful engagement? Why must war be deemed usually necessary to birth freedom? This myth has been too costly in terms of money and human life, yet it's the only one that my "right" friends seem to cherish above all others. I know the thinking too well; I used to share it too. ~mogama~Please log in to respond to this comment.
Great article, Mogama. I was disappointed too, when Chicago did not get to host the Olympics. But I was proud and happy when our President received the Nobel Peace prize. You win some and you lose some--this was our win! Thanks for a great article.SandraPlease log in to respond to this comment.That's right, Sandra. When an American president is honored our nation is honored, regardless of whether that president shares our ideology or party affiliation. How long for the day when award for a national leader will be regarded as a reason for national pride, rather than an outrage! ~mogama~Please log in to respond to this comment.
If one gets a prize, having not actually accomplished anything, wouldn't that be an insult to those who have?"Unlike his predecessors who received the Prize atop mounds of past achievements, Obama was awarded the Prize forward, for real peace he has yet to achieve"Does this mean the prize committee was trying to influence U.S. foreign policy?Is that a reason to win a prize, for something one will do?I love you brother, nonetheless!Please log in to respond to this comment.Yes, Ken, the Nobel Committee was probably trying to influence US foreign policy. It's hard to deny that. But isn't that a normal part of the mix? Doesn't our own country use our money in the billions to influence other nations' foreign policies? Thanks for your intelligent input, though...I love you, too. ~mogama~Please log in to respond to this comment.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.