For the second time today, I have seen a news report and thought it was a joke. The first time was when I heard the POTUS had one the Nobel Peace prize this time it was the Democratic Party’s reaction to the criticism. According to Ben Smith at Politico the reaction was basically, “if you criticize the President’s award, you are siding with the terrorists”
A top Democratic National Committee official reacted furiously to a statement from Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele mocking — and describing as “unfortunate” — President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize.
“The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It’s no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore – it’s an embarrassing label to claim,” Woodhouse said.
U.S. Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele contended that Obama won the prize as a result of his “star power” rather than meaningful accomplishments. “The real question Americans are asking is, What has President Obama actually accomplished?”
Perhaps these party leaders did not have time to see many of the reactions to the President’s award. Many LIBERALS thought it was absurd.
The winner of the 1983 Nobel Peace Prize, anti-communist Polish leader Lech Walesa, was quoted in The Wall Street Journal as expressing surprise. “Who, Obama? So fast? Too fast — he hasn’t had the time to do anything yet,” the paper’s Web site quoted Walesa as saying.
the Washington Post this morning:
Obama is the third sitting U.S. president–and the first in 90 years–to win the prestigious peace prize. His predecessors won during their second White House terms, however, and after significant achievements in their diplomacy. Woodrow Wilson was awarded the price in 1919, after helping to found the League of Nations and shaping the Treatise of Versailles; and Theodore Roosevelt was the recipient in 1906 for his work to negotiate an end to the Russo-Japanese war.
In contrast, Obama is struggling over whether to expand the war in Afghanistan, preparing to withdraw from Iraq, and searching for ways to build momentum to restart Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and assemble an international effort to stop Iran’s nuclear program.
From the New York Times:
With American forces deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, President Obama’s name had not figured in speculation about the winner until minutes before the prize was announced here.
Reporters at a news conference to announce the prize pressed the committee’s chairman, Thorbjorn Jagland, to explain the reasons Mr. Obama had prevailed over other candidates who included human rights activists in China and Afghanistan and political figures in Africa.
Specifically, reporters asked whether Mr. Obama might not become mired in a war in Afghanistan as Lyndon B. Johnson was in Vietnam.
But the committee said it wanted to enhance Mr. Obama’s diplomatic efforts so far rather than anticipate events in the future.
From the Associated Press:
Nobel observers were shocked by the unexpected choice so early in the Obama presidency, which began less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline.
When Jimmy Carter won the peace prize in 2002, word leaked out of the committee that the one of the considerations for picking him was to deal a blow to President George W. Bush. Obama’s award, which was submitted only 11 days after he took office may have been given for similar reasons.
Nancy Gibbs of Time Said the last thing this President needs is wining an award based on his promise instead of his results.
Joe Klein also of Time Said
I’m a big fan of patient, rigorous diplomacy–and there’s a certain lovely irony to any prize that brings the Taliban and the neoconservative Commentary crowd together in high dudgeon–but let’s face it: this prize is premature to the point of ridiculousness.
ABC News’ Jake Tapper, referring to a controversy earlier in Obama’s presidency: “apparently the standards are more exacting for an ASU honorary degree these days.”
(An Arizona State University spokesperson in April explained a decision to invite the president to give the commencement address without also giving him an honorary degree by saying, “His body of work is yet to come. That’s why we’re not recognizing him with a degree at the beginning of his presidency.”)
The Washington Post’s David Ignatius called the awarding of the Prize to Obama was “goofy” and continued “even if you’re a fan, you have to admit that he hasn’t really done much yet as a peacemaker”
Its true the award to Obama is just goofy. If anything is supporting the terrorists, it is not the criticism of the Nobel award, its more likely the goofy way the President has been handling the Afghanistan War, and the rumors he is going no longer consider the Taliban and enemy.
On another note, Here are some of the best Jokes on Obama’s Peace Prize I have heard so far. (the best jokes other than the award itself):
- Barack Obama’s Teleprompter: Big Guy says Bill Clinton called and was gracious in defeat; offered to fly Kanye West over 4 the Nobel awards ceremony.
- Isn’t it Strange that Obama won the Peace Prize on the same day that the United States Attacked the Moon?
- Erick Erickson: Obama is becoming Jimmy Carter faster than Jimmy Carter became Jimmy Carter.
- Ana Marie Cox: Apparently Nobel prizes now being awarded to anyone who is not George Bush.
- Kathryn Jean Lopez, National Review: I want to buy the world a coke.
- Ezra Klein: Obama also awarded Nobel prize in chemistry. “He’s just got great chemistry,” says Nobel Committee.
- Its a Sexist Award..Michele should have gotten it. Everybody Knows She Planted that vegetable garden…..What? It wasn’t the Pea’s Prize? Never Mind!
I can’t wait to see how Saturday Night Live handles this tomorrow.