To my readership, I must apologize for the lack of entries as of recent, as I have been trying to conduct a campaign while going to work. It is either I will write crap when I sit down to write late in the evening, or I will write less, but decent stuff. I am opting for the latter temporarily. In the meantime, onto today’s topic.
Recently President Obama was awarded the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize, along with a whopping $1.4 million. In fact, he was bestowed the honor just today, and it was the first thing I saw on the news. I thought to myself, “Hmm, that is very interesting”. Today on my lunch break I perused around the Internet trying to learn more about this award and trying to get my mind around how on earth Barack Obama could possibly be awarded this honor after such a short duration. Before you leave and say I am just being a jerk for saying these things on this man’s day of honor, let us try and objectively look at what is happening here.
The Nobel Peace Prize is based upon the work of an individual for the years PRECEDING the date of nomination, which happened to be early last February 2009. While there has been some room for movement on this, by and large this is usually the case with the prizes.
The problem is Barack Obama was barely president for two weeks when the nomination process closed for the Peace Prize. Prior to becoming president for two weeks, Obama was a half term Senator from Illinois with a background in state government which has very little to do with what Alfred Nobel claimed this peace prize was for: “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
Let’s talk about this statement briefly. President Obama, being so early in his presidency, has done neither the most or the best work for fraternity between nations. If an example could be provided where in the last 8 ½ months either of these items have been fulfilled, I would gladly like to hear anyone out.
Let’s talk about the abolition or reduction of standing armies. This is very interesting to me, because Obama has done neither. A standing army is defined as “a permanent army maintained in time of peace and war”. Currently, this is not going to change. The U.S. government is not going to downsize its military anytime soon, no less abolish it. Democrat or Republican, that is not going to happen.
As far as holding and promoting peace congresses, this is just too early to tell. Folks, President Obama has been in office for 8 and ½ months. That is not a whole lot of time we are dealing with, and even if he has begun trying to talk with different nations, the reality is we are in the very beginnings of such processes. Is it possible Obama may do something great in the future? Sure, I do not doubt that. However, is he worthy of this award based on the last few months? Not a chance in hell.
Logically by Alfred Nobel’s own words, this just does not seem to fit the description of what Obama has done.
Taking this in a different direction, is Obama truly worthy of this award compared to others? I have a question for the Nobel Prize Committee. How can you justify awarding Obama with this honor after a few months while failing to award John Paul II for his tireless work and efforts for peace in the world over a number of years? How can you justify not awarding this honor to Ghandi? These are two individuals of tremendous stature and respect and honor that have been overlooked by this committee in favor of a president who has served for not even a year based on “the hope” as they claimed.
Republican or Democrat, you cannot honestly believe Barack Obama deserves this award. Yes, he may do tremendous things in the future, but the reality is this was just too early.
This is no disrespect to President Obama, but you know what, there are a host of people who have fought for peace who have put their lives on the line trying to achieve it. Some have even taken a bullet and forgave their assassin after the fact. I just think this was very bad timing on the part of the Nobel Committee, and it comes off more political than anything else.
Alex Mangie
The Mang
Candidate for Canfield Trustee and Conservative Capo of the Mahoning Valley
Recently President Obama was awarded the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize, along with a whopping $1.4 million. In fact, he was bestowed the honor just today, and it was the first thing I saw on the news. I thought to myself, “Hmm, that is very interesting”. Today on my lunch break I perused around the Internet trying to learn more about this award and trying to get my mind around how on earth Barack Obama could possibly be awarded this honor after such a short duration. Before you leave and say I am just being a jerk for saying these things on this man’s day of honor, let us try and objectively look at what is happening here.
The Nobel Peace Prize is based upon the work of an individual for the years PRECEDING the date of nomination, which happened to be early last February 2009. While there has been some room for movement on this, by and large this is usually the case with the prizes.
The problem is Barack Obama was barely president for two weeks when the nomination process closed for the Peace Prize. Prior to becoming president for two weeks, Obama was a half term Senator from Illinois with a background in state government which has very little to do with what Alfred Nobel claimed this peace prize was for: “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
Let’s talk about this statement briefly. President Obama, being so early in his presidency, has done neither the most or the best work for fraternity between nations. If an example could be provided where in the last 8 ½ months either of these items have been fulfilled, I would gladly like to hear anyone out.
Let’s talk about the abolition or reduction of standing armies. This is very interesting to me, because Obama has done neither. A standing army is defined as “a permanent army maintained in time of peace and war”. Currently, this is not going to change. The U.S. government is not going to downsize its military anytime soon, no less abolish it. Democrat or Republican, that is not going to happen.
As far as holding and promoting peace congresses, this is just too early to tell. Folks, President Obama has been in office for 8 and ½ months. That is not a whole lot of time we are dealing with, and even if he has begun trying to talk with different nations, the reality is we are in the very beginnings of such processes. Is it possible Obama may do something great in the future? Sure, I do not doubt that. However, is he worthy of this award based on the last few months? Not a chance in hell.
Logically by Alfred Nobel’s own words, this just does not seem to fit the description of what Obama has done.
Taking this in a different direction, is Obama truly worthy of this award compared to others? I have a question for the Nobel Prize Committee. How can you justify awarding Obama with this honor after a few months while failing to award John Paul II for his tireless work and efforts for peace in the world over a number of years? How can you justify not awarding this honor to Ghandi? These are two individuals of tremendous stature and respect and honor that have been overlooked by this committee in favor of a president who has served for not even a year based on “the hope” as they claimed.
Republican or Democrat, you cannot honestly believe Barack Obama deserves this award. Yes, he may do tremendous things in the future, but the reality is this was just too early.
This is no disrespect to President Obama, but you know what, there are a host of people who have fought for peace who have put their lives on the line trying to achieve it. Some have even taken a bullet and forgave their assassin after the fact. I just think this was very bad timing on the part of the Nobel Committee, and it comes off more political than anything else.
Alex Mangie
The Mang
Candidate for Canfield Trustee and Conservative Capo of the Mahoning Valley
Barack Obama doesn't even think he deserves the award, and instead, sees it as a call to action for himself and the American people to live up to the honor. Plus, he's donating the $1.4 million to charities, which is by far the best thing he could do with it.
ReplyDeleteDespite being a Democrat, I believe it was preemptive, and I fear that it might set him up for failure, which is, unfortunately, all some from your party, seem to wish on him. The videos they showed of rooms of people applauding when Chicago was eliminated from the Olympic bids, but that's an entirely different story.
I would like to think that Obama's address to our Islamic neighbors from Egypt was an example of working towards fraternity between nations. It says something when the international approval rating for the United States goes up by double digits after Obama takes office. He's pulled away from the cowboy "go it alone" attitude of the previous administration and lives as a global citizen -- something I hoped my peers from Model UN would be able to appreciate, or at least respect, but not so much.
Ha, I'm rereading the comment I made last night, and it should read:
ReplyDelete"The videos they showed of rooms of people applauding when Chicago was eliminated from the Olympic bids kind of proves the pettiness, but that's an entirely different story."
Good points Abbie, though I would have to say the Olympics do not really bring money. In fact, usually they lose money in cities rather than making it. I think that may be why people are happy they did not go to Chicago (though I am sure there are some who are happy just to spite the president). As far as failure, you are right in that this is setting him up for failure. I do not think we wish failure on this president rather we wish his policies do not get implemented since we fundementally disagree on where we'd like to see this country go.
ReplyDelete