Friday, October 9, 2009

Obama's Peace Prize

"Some people say — and I understand it — 'Isn't it premature? Too early?' Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now," Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, told the AP. "It is now that we have the opportunity to respond — all of us."

Why would it be too late three years from now? Perhaps the lack of actual accomplishments?

Many were shocked by the unexpected choice so early in a presidency that began less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline for the prize and has yet to yield concrete achievements in peacemaking.

No shit Sherlock. He'd been POTUS for two freaking weeks. A perfect example of symbolism over substance.

In his 1895 will, Alfred Nobel stipulated that the peace prize should go "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses."

Shall have done, not hopefully will do.

But since this particular award has already been given to crazypants such as Jimmy Carter and Yasser Arafat I don't see how significant it can be.

No comments:

Post a Comment