The American Spectator : Revenge of the Norwegian Nerds

Text Size

The Obama Watch

Revenge of the Norwegian Nerds

By Larry Thornberry on 10.12.09 @ 6:08AM

Pax Obama in our time.

Seinfeld was a program about nothing, and Obama's recent Nobel award was a prize for doing nothing. Yet another case of Dementia-Obama, and further proof that Obama should have run for president of Europe last year.

Our rookie president has done exactly nothing to promote peace, world or otherwise. In fact, our Apologizer-in-Chief has done a good deal to imperil such peace as still exists on the planet by making his lust for American weakness clear to the world. This makes him a perfect choice for the Marxist debating club known as the Norwegian Nobel Institute, which awards the Nobel Peace Prize, referred to in more alert circles as the "Nobel Left-Wing Nut-bag and Anti-American Prize," or, abbreviated in recent times to, "The Anti-Bush Prize."

Obama's selection should surprise no one. After all, Al Gore and the United Nations' Let's Scare the Living Hell Out of Everybody About Global Warming Committee took the prize (if such it is) in 2007. You can even be a terrorist and win the prize, as Yasser Arafat did in 1994, in this case a peace prize for one of the world's then leading disturbers of the peace.

OK, there've been some sensible selections in the mid-to-long-range past: Mother Teresa in 1979, MLK, Jr. in 1964, Albert Schweitzer in 1952, and Teddy Roosevelt in 1906. But the entire process has lately been overwhelmed by left-wing politics.

What is surprising is that anyone takes seriously a prize, the winner of which is selected each year by the five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee of present or former members of the parliament of Norway (the Storting), a socialist country with a slightly smaller population than Alabama (though with more cases of frostbite and lots more cream of mushroom soup and pickled herring).

The current committee is made up of one guy, the chairman, former prime minister Thorbjoern Jagland, and four women: Kaci Kullmann Five, Sissel Marie Ronbeck, Inger-Marie Ytterhorn, and Agot Valle. The short bios of these folks at Nobel websites describe them all as politicians and/or academics. Nothing in the material suggests these five supernumeraries have any expertise in international relations, let alone any achievement in this area.

If honoring people who've actually done something to promote peace in the world were the real purpose of the prize, we could do better by turning the choice over to a committee chosen randomly from the Lake Wales, Florida telephone directory (or that of Yazoo City, Mississippi, or Pagosa Springs, Colorado, or…) Of course it's not peace but left-wing politics the prize promotes.

Jimmy Carter was awarded the prize in 2002 as a means of sticking a thumb in George W. Bush's eye during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. The committee nails W again on the way out by awarding the prize to Obama, who had been in office only two weeks before the nominations ceased. Pretty quick work of cleaning things up and promoting peace after eight years on the dark side.

The Nobel Committee's statement on why it chose Obama is, by turns, empty and fatuous, as Obama's speeches are. Stuff such as, "The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people." It didn't elaborate on what any of these efforts might have been. Affixing a "just be nice" bumper strip to Air Force One is not a foreign policy.

Here's another knee-slapper: "Obama as president created a new climate in international politics." If there's any new climate since Obama took office it's one that encourages the belief that America has, with thanks to Margaret Thatcher for the expression, gone wobbly, and that America's security interests are now a free-fire zone. Adios, Pax Americana. (When Obama leaves office in January of 2013 with America's standing in the world much reduced and our security interests in shambles, he can summon up his best Bogie impersonation and say to Michelle, "We'll always have Oslo.")

In a particularly surreal moment during the prize announcement, Jagland said, "The question we have to answer is who has done the most in the previous year to enhance peace in the world." We know the answer Jagland wanted. But clearly any lance corporal in the United States Marine Corps has done more to advance peace in the world than Obama has.

Finally, consider, "Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts." Translation: third-world, UN hustlers, living it up in New York on the American taxpayers' dime, can now spend even more time banging Uncle Sam's head on a locker.

So, you see, Jagland et al. are hoping Obama can negotiate a civilized world, much in the manner that the enlightened Norwegians negotiated Hitler and the Nazis out of their country in the 1940s (the clincher then was getting old Adolf into a good 12-step program).

In response to all this drollery, Obama was modest. (He has much to be modest about, though he doesn't seem to know this.) He said he was surprised and humbled by the award and would consider it a "call to action." What this faux prince of peace would consider action is anybody's guess.

Obama will go to Norway in December to accept the prize, which comes with about a million bucks in prize money, a car-load of cream of mushroom soup, and a big wet tongue kiss from some obscure Norwegian shut-ins.

The Nobel Peace Prize doesn't belong on the front page of America's newspapers. It belongs in a Saturday Night Live skit. It has become a parody of itself. Which is probably the best reason why Obama deserves this crackpot distinction.

topics:
Europe, Nobel Peace Prize

About the Author

Larry Thornberry is a writer in Tampa.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (112) | Leave a comment

drudge ette obama| 10.12.09 @ 6:19AM

Some club with living members like Gore and Carter, dead ones like Arafat.

Where is it written that this is it? That this defines peace efforts? Why do we kneel at this socialist altar or give it any value at all.

Most people don't know where Norway is anyway. Norway not my way.

zumaman| 10.12.09 @ 6:50AM

correction: most Americans don't know where Norway is; most people know where Norway is. By the way, Mr Thornberry, Norway is not a member of the EU. Please check your facts and then get a grip. Please.

drudge ette obama| 10.12.09 @ 7:08AM

Zu-mama or Zu-maman, your disdain for Americans stems either from you nonAmerican heritage or your progressive education.

Your "most people" are probably in Western Europe, but I dare bet that "most people" in the world - the whole world - don't know or care a vermin's backside where Norway is on the earth or why anyone should care about Nobel prizes of so-called peace.

Zu-maman? Is that the equivalent of "yo-mama" or Pokeyman?

Michael L. Hauschild| 10.12.09 @ 7:41AM

In one of my undergraduate Geography classes we were given a map of the United States and a map of the world with political boundaries and no labels. Most of the students (60+) failed this exam. This group, most of whom were striving to become educators, was representative of our best and brightest citizens. If you did this quiz a la Jay Leno you would spend an incredible amount of time out on the street finding ANYONE who knew where Norway was located, much less cared if it was a member of a dysfunctional socialist "Union."
I suggest you, not Mr. Thornberry, is the one that needs to get a grip.

Eric Cartman| 10.12.09 @ 12:09PM

Hey zumpy! Maybe everyone in the world knows where Norway is, but they don't care! Damn Mackerel Snappers! I've been thinking about peace for a long time! Well, I was thinking about getting a piece - where's my NPP?!

Eric Cartman| 10.12.09 @ 12:11PM

A joke wrapped in a farce and tied with a gag!

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 6:15PM

zulu-man or zuzuman, whomever, is correct: education has been dumbed down so that 25 year olds are 20; 20 now means 15.
No hope except in tech, and, again and again, that means brave new world.
You'll have to wait until Jesus comes back 'til you know an educational system worthy of the greatest country in the world.

And I don't mean Norway.

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 6:32PM

not that "Zuzumamwhambam-nothankyouunclesam"
is unmotivated by ill will.

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 9:37PM

Zuwhambamthankyouunclesam shows that even an anti-American punk (another example is Toddler) can be correct about some things. After all, Toddard (I know you are reading this), even Chomsky has been correct about SOME things.
Okay, here's another pedantic, talking-past-each other discussion of why Norway is six of one, half a dozen of another. Scandinavia is the one region i know well, having been there enough time to get a grip on why it is so, justifiably beloved. it is the best region in the world-- but for how long? it is like a mouse surrounded by cats, which is why Scandics told me over & over; "ve like you, but pliz, go home; don't lif here, ve haff our nazion to zink about, az you alzo haff your nazion."
But my nation has much more ... porous... borders. Scandics can come here and do what they please; blonde hair will open alot of doors-- esp. when it's female.

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 9:45PM

to the ASSinine below:
Ja,
But if Scandics allowed the huddled masses of the wretched earth to immigrate to their exquisite region, as America does, they would drop down the food chain farther than America ever will. Got it, you mau mau ASSh*le?

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 10:13PM

My best friends growing up came over from Norway. They were awesome. Very motivated, too. My girlfriend became a millionaire, and her cousin an inventor, and he also joined the United States Military. They never wanted to go back. They knew a good thing when they saw it! Hey. God bless the U.S.A.!

Wright| 10.13.09 @ 12:44AM

Hey Mr. Liberal. Mr. Thornberry did not say that Norway is a member of the E.U. Please check your facts and get a grip.

Even if he did say it, what does that have to do with his premise that Obama doesn't deserve this piece of international liberal propaganda?

Typical of liberals, you can't deal with the question, so you resort to obfuscation. I'm waiting for you to call him a racist, or better yet, how about a Nazi?

ASSpectator| 10.12.09 @ 1:49PM

Norway has the highest standard of living 4 years running. US rarely breaks the top ten.

Shamwow Guy| 10.12.09 @ 3:51PM

A small, homogeneous country of 4,800,000 plus change living on the welfare of American military protection, evil oil drilling and EU free market participation without joining the EU and giving up their krone. WOW! What an accomplishment! Just like Ted Kennedy's accomplishment of being born rich! Maybe we should charge them for protecting their sorry asses!

Campy| 10.12.09 @ 4:32PM

Yes, and obviously why they have such an immigration problem.

Shamwow Guy| 10.12.09 @ 5:11PM

Who wants to live with a bunch of guys with names like : Blurn and Snorg and smell like whales and Jagermister! They need a Shamwow to clean their bums with! Damn Mackerel Snappers!

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 6:17PM

because Norway is a SMALL, almost insignificant nation, under the protection of NATO's nuclear umbrella.

BTW, which publik skool did you go to?

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 6:20PM

"because Norway is a SMALL, almost insignificant nation, under the protection of NATO's nuclear umbrella.
BTW, which publik skool did you go to?"

that was directed at the ASSh*le.

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 6:24PM

shamwow,
all you have to ask the ASS (orifice), any such punk, is:

"WHICH SKOOL DID YOU ATTEND?"

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 9:49PM

Campy?
He or she is inscrutable-- no facetiousness intended.

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 9:53PM

I like Campy.
I just wish Toddler would show his snout here today.

victor| 10.12.09 @ 11:40PM

So, why are you here?

Christopher Holland| 10.13.09 @ 12:40AM

I bet you didn't make a big deal out of that one when the Germans occupied your country. You weren't too particular about who liberated you then.

Robbins Mitchell| 10.12.09 @ 6:38AM

pax pickannicus

Michael L. Hauschild| 10.12.09 @ 9:15AM

I give up, what does pickannicus mean? When you try look it up the only reference is circular, it says see American Spectator-Robbins Mitchell.

John II| 10.12.09 @ 12:34PM

The correct term is Pax Pickannica. The word "pax" is a feminine third declension consonant-stem noun requiring modification by the feminine nominative singular form of the first-second declension adjective pickannicus, -a, -um.

For further explication, see the Junior Woodchucks Guidebook of Universal Knowledge.

Michael L. Hauschild| 10.12.09 @ 1:36PM

Well, I tried to reference the Junior Woodchucks Guide to Universal Knowledge and once again the search was circular, the only result; see the American Spectator, John II. It appears that the ultimate repository of knowledge lies concealed among the posters at AM, except for me of course.

John II| 10.12.09 @ 8:06PM

Chapter 89 of the 17-page Guidebook provides a complete overview of Latin grammar, and my concern was simply with correct morphology, not with definition.

As to the meaning of the correctly formed "Pickannica," the Guidebook is indeed silent, but I have some theories. First, the -annica morpheme seems to be a play on the same morpheme evident in the historical expression "Pax Britannica," which itself was, in the 19th century, a play on the term "Pax Romana" dating all the way back to the establishment of the Principate of Augustus. The Romans were at least finished with killing one another, so the next few centuries were deemed a time of Pax, enforced by the Roman army--notwithstanding the slashing and killing which continued apace against recalcitrant Frenchies and Brits and Germans. Where was I?

There remains the problem of the morpheme "Pick-" and it appears that Professor Mitchell has been called away to an important Moose conference at the University of Saskatoon. We shan't hear from him for some time, and there is work to do.

I should begin, therefore, by pointing out that we are surely dealing with a morphological hybrid, since the letter "k" doesn't occur in the Roman alphabet. The "k" therefore acquires extra significance, else we should expect it not to be there at all.

Perhaps the witticism is in reference to "pickle"--there having been some point made about the Norwegian fondness for the aforementioned nutriment.

On the other hand, . . . oh my. I don't think I want to go in that direction. No. No, that could entail all sorts of complications, perhaps even a reposte from Professor James Earl Carter of Middle Eastern Studies fame. Professor Carter is a old man now, inclined to a certain bitterness of recollection, and charity prevents me from enflaming his wits.

So I must leave you, Michael, with this hint about the possible provenance of the morpheme "pick-". In 1902, as the Pax Britannica was already waning, the great American composer Scott Joplin wrote a characteristically brilliant and beautiful piece titled "I am Thinking of My Pickanniny Days."

And now back to Laurel and Hardy, as I leave you to your considerable deductive powers.

victor| 10.12.09 @ 11:43PM

John, you went round the Horn for that one.
I saw that from the start.

wright| 10.13.09 @ 12:50AM

You, sir, are a wonderfully well spoken fellow!

I enjoyed your discussion, not that I could follow much of it.

Michael L. Hauschild| 10.13.09 @ 4:28AM

One thing for sure, I've deduced why certain languages are "dead."
Pax Hyperventicus.

John II| 10.13.09 @ 12:08PM

Correction: Pax Hyperventica. Must we go through THAT again?

Oh, the trials of being correct all the time!

reads1| 10.12.09 @ 7:29AM

This farce is the equivalent of giving Bill Maher, (the 2nd. ugliest man in the world) the Emmy for Comedy!!

Jim O'Brien| 10.12.09 @ 7:42AM

Sir Ted Kennedy will be receiving a posthumous Nobel prize for Safe Driving. A Nobel prize isn't worth the toilet paper it's printed on.

Alan Brooks| 10.12.09 @ 6:27PM

AWAY WITH THAT BAUBLE.

gold trinkets from ancient ga ga Scandinavians.

ergosy| 10.12.09 @ 8:19AM

".......Obama's recent Nobel award was a prize for doing nothing"

Larry: do you not remember the famous Gates vs. Crowley controversy? The audacity of an officer of the law responding to 911 call to protect private property was called into questin by gates and a high ranking government official. I could go on.
Many of us were in awe as Obama's diplomatic prowess went on display. I am of course referring to the "lets have a beer" strategy.
Apparently a smashing success as I have not heard a word of the matter for weeks.
Peace was attained by all. Also,may I add that nary an apology was voiced, or at least made public.
That some would question my president's accomplisments as to the Nobel. I just don't know.

Northern Rebel| 10.12.09 @ 9:00AM

The Anti-Christ president said he wasn't sure he belongs in the awesome company of the previous winners.

Yes, he does!

He is just another in the long line of America haters that have had this award bestowed upon them.

A perfect fit!

Mike| 10.12.09 @ 9:16AM

The Norwegian leftists gave the middle finger to W and the right wingnuts. End of story. Move on!

Hal G. P. Colebatch| 10.12.09 @ 9:23AM

The Peace Prize was already so contaminated in the late 1940s that they dared not offer it to Winston Churchill. He got a Literature Prize for his histories instead.

But aren't the Peace Prize Committee (three of the five have long records as Left-wing activists) Swedish, not Norwegian, anyway?

Rahul Ghosh| 10.12.09 @ 12:30PM

Only the Nobel peace prize is awarded by the Norwegian committee, the other prizes are awarded by the Swedish academy of Sciences. Obama's choice at this time does come as a bit of a surprise though. I think the world at large is enamoured by the "new fresh thinking" and the possibilities which he embodies. I do hope that he is successful in his ventures, if not the US and the rest of the world have to suffer. Anyway I agree in broad terms that the Nobel peace prize has been contaminated, however Churchill despite his great leaderhip in the second world war would have been a very bad choice. He was extremely bigoted and racist. He was as one of his biographers put 50% genius and 50% bloody fool. Due to his intransigence and despite the best efforts of viceroy Wavell, his policies resulted in deaths of millions in famine in the Indian province of Bengal in the 40's. Churchill was in essence a quintessential 19th century racist.

Scott Martin| 10.12.09 @ 1:03PM

I'd be thrilled if our current president was only 50% fool, instead of the 100% ranking he currently has.

Serge from Wellington| 10.12.09 @ 1:41PM

If Churchill 'quintessentially' belonged to the 19th century, you shouldn't judge him in the terms of 21st. Then you wouldn't look as a quintessentil biased idiot.

Rahul Ghosh| 10.13.09 @ 11:03AM

There are certain universal values which cannot be compromised. Racism and anti-semitism are some such. Going by your logic, those who bayed for Dreyfuss' blood were okay, because anti-semitism was okay in the 19th early 20th century.
Anyway there is an anecdote of the Buddha. He used to ask for alms and a Brahmin berated him everyday. Buddha would just move away. One day the Brahmin asked the Buddha, why did he persist and did not get angry by the insults. The Buddha replied, "my friend suppose you were to give me a pot of rice, and I did not take it, who would have the rice", the Brahmin replied - "You fool of course I would have it", Buddha then said - "My dear friend, In the same way, I don't accept your insults and abuses, so who has them ?". Serge my friend go in peace! I always choose what I accept.

Nick| 10.12.09 @ 5:45PM

And by "world at large", of course you mean the LIBERAL world at large.

Normal people around the world LOVE America. You bleeding heart libs need to stop trying to speak for them.

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 6:35PM

Thank you Nick! And besides, Obama's "fresh new thinking" actually isn't new (or fresh) at all. Let's see, just how old is Marxist Socialism? Hmm, Mr. Ghosh?
America is a FREE country and we do not want this "fresh" thinking of his!

victor| 10.12.09 @ 11:52PM

"Fresh, new thinking"??
Think again Rahul.
Obama, New?
Since God made man, one man has enslaved another man and the other man has escaped his chains.
Ecclesiastes 1:9
What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
Obama is all about enslaving man with the chains of Government.
Churchill was all about freeing them from the chains of bondage and tyranny.
Choose this day whom you will serve.
We will all suffer, even you, if he will succeed.

Christopher Holland| 10.13.09 @ 12:48AM

Churchill had this minor distraction called World War 2 to worry about and the Japanese were right next door to Bengal. A famine in Bengal was hardly his fault. Why blame Churchill for climate change when every liberal in town now says greenhouse gases are to blame? Churchill had a lot of leadership qualities but ability to change climates and end famines was hardly one of them.

Billybobdawg| 10.12.09 @ 9:37AM

Obama for the Heisman Trophy! He's done as much to earn that as he has for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Christopher Holland| 10.13.09 @ 12:54AM

I reckon Obama should be made the NASCAR Champion as well. Why do we need to hold all those races anyway - we know he is the best guy on the grid. Just give him the cup thing right now and save all that trouble. And I reckon he should be WBC world heavyweight boxing champion as well. Just give him that belt, no need for all those matches.

Georgie's Girl| 10.12.09 @ 9:39AM

My name is being submitted for the Nobel prize for literature for next year because I INTEND to write the all-American novel. I might get around to it or I might not. However, MY intentions are the same as the current Pres. I expect to win it too as I have the same criteria as the Pres so I should be a shoo-in.

Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 10.12.09 @ 1:06PM

Georgie’s Girl: And if that “All-American novel” you’re writing ever comes out next year, I intend to read it.
But as an early indicator, as to how good it’s going to be whenever you’re done writing it, I’m giving it 4-1/2 stars out of 5 stars already. I would’ve given it 5 stars right now, but the ending looks like it’s going to be a little predictable, and I’m sure you’ll admit to that too. So maybe you can work on that a little, before you write it, and then I might end up giving it 5 stars after all, we’ll see.

Howard| 10.12.09 @ 10:10AM

In reality the joke is on us. In Nov. 2008 we as a country had a choice to vote for a distinguished Senator and war hero, or a flashy guy with no experience, but a great "life story". So we get what we deserve, including an ersatz Nobel Prize winner.

Michael L. Hauschild| 10.12.09 @ 1:45PM

I'll go along with that "war hero" part, but if we would have actually had a "distinguished Senator" on the ticket we would have won going away. The nomination of the RINO McCain was the reason we lost not that Obama was "flashy guy."

Son Of Sam| 10.12.09 @ 10:11AM

oh my GOD, people, why on earth are we complaining about this? This is perfect, and not just because it reveals (again) the utter emptiness of the Nobel Peace prize. It's wonderful because for the next four years, it is going to be the gift that keeps on giving. From now on, every time some tinpot nutcase puts a thumb in the world's eye by testing a missile, exploding an atom bomb, massacring peaceful protesters or slaughtering thousands of his countrymen, we can rightly ask what "Mr Peace Prize" is going to actually DO about it! After all, he's supposed to be such an expert on bringing about peace, that the mere act of words coming out of his mouth is enough to grant him international recognition.

The utter worthlessness of this foreign imposter masquerading as an American President will become as plain as day to everyone who hasn't already drowned in the Kool Aid. My wife and I are both seeing it already among friends and co-workers who voted for this clown, some of whom are independents, many of whom are Democrats. THEY think this is a joke, and they are beginning to connect the dots.

Only thing is, the joke isn't so damned funny among people we know who have lost their jobs and keep hearing about all the millions of jobs saved by the stimulus.

stand strong until freedom dawns
Son Of Sam
http://www.samadamssos.bravehost.com

Ned S.| 10.12.09 @ 10:11AM

If this unbridled adulation continues we will all be in a world of shit. And unlike King Canute President Obama will never take a trip to the ocean beach and actually order the waves to stop when they reach his feet.
I am afraid we are all in for a very rude awakening during this administration’s time in power. The appeasers are going to keep lance corporals in demand for a very long time, as they always do.

Michael Tomlinson| 10.12.09 @ 10:33AM

Who cares? It's just a bunch of worthless Europeans. They should have given him the economics prize too.

Reality is unemployment is 16-17%, the dollar is worthless, this President has spent more than all previous Presidents combined, the deficit is out of control, the Iranians have or will soon have nuclear weapons, we're going to lose the war in Afghanistan and that will destabilize Pakistan and the region, crime is going to go up and more Americans go to bed homeless and hungry than at any time in our history. That's the good news. The bad news we have over 3 years of Obama left.

mejamom55| 10.12.09 @ 12:08PM

"Spent more than all previous presidents combined." That's an awful lot to spend in just 9 months. Could you show your math?
I'm not trying to be confrontational, I really want to know.
Also, many of the other problems you mention were in place before he took office.

Michael Tomlinson| 10.12.09 @ 3:12PM

Please check out the Heritage Foundation. If I've overstated Obama's spending then I claim I fell for statements in the Democrat MSM. Statements that were a defense of Obama's out of control spending.

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 4:22PM

In today's news (actually on the radio) "The recession is over but unemployment is expected to remain high."

Michael Tomlinson| 10.12.09 @ 10:37AM

Proof that George W. Bush was and will be the most important President in US history since Ronald Reagan, Abraham Lincoln and George Washington. Long after Obama is gone and just a bad memory George W. Bush will still be irritating Democrats and Euro-trash now that's a legacy to be proud of.

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 5:36PM

Love it!
~Anybody longing for "old days" when we had a President who actually believed America was the best there was, and was willing to fight for it?

Rahul Ghosh| 10.13.09 @ 11:23AM

Reagan was a very likeable sort of chap, who did not have a mean bone in his body. To compare Bush with him is really an insult to the great man

Tim| 10.12.09 @ 10:47AM

If the five Nobel space cadets had to give the peace prize to another American Democrat just for the sake of showing up Bush.....

then at least give it to Ted Kennedy.

Like him or not he spent nearly 50 years peddling his liberal/socialist stuff and a plausable case could be made that he at least should have been nominated and considered back in February.

Roger| 10.12.09 @ 11:09AM

I just drank a bottle of Coke, I looked under the bottle cap, and guess what? I won the Nobel Peace Prize!

Bruce| 10.12.09 @ 4:30PM

Can't be, Rog - I won the prize yesterday when I opened a new box of Wheaties!

The Man| 10.12.09 @ 11:28AM

If the chisen one brought peace to the world in the 12 days between his taking office and the nomination deadline, so be it; he wins.
Since the unemployment numbers have doubled in his 1o months in office, shouldnt he win for economics too?

Rmm| 10.12.09 @ 11:31AM

Are we on a slow-drip to going stark raving mad? If BO was worth his weight in salt, he would have graciously declined the award as unwarranted,but no, he has become even more top-heavy, with the Big Head syndrome.

Pete| 10.12.09 @ 11:47AM

To him this constitutes a "mandate" from the "world community" to continue weakening and emasculating the United States. Dangerous arrogance from this dungheap of a President.

victor| 10.12.09 @ 11:59PM

Hey, watch who you're insulting now.
Dung is very useful, it makes great fertilizer, which makes the flowers and vegetables grow. As opposed to our president who has a black thumb, and kills everything he touches.

logan| 10.12.09 @ 11:51AM

First of all, I think it's too soon to know if Obama is worthy of this prize. I like to keep an open mind.
It's interesting, though, that all of the Obama haters sound surprisingly like the following:
We have seen no change in his strategy for peace. He has done nothing for peace in Afghanistan. He has not taken a single step for peace in Afghanistan or to make this country stable. We condemn this award of the Nobel Peace Prize for Obama. We condemn the institution awarding the peace prize. We condemn this years peace prize as unjust.
I read this on BBC News as attributed to Zabihullah Mujahid--Taliban spokesman

I submitted this comment because the hate filled comments are overwhelming. The people and groups who are branded as anti- American has just gotten to be too much. I was trying really hard to keep an open mind to the conservative viewpoint. I voted for McCain,btw. But most of the commenters on this site are turning me off. I know I'm only one person and no one here cares if I ever read this site again. But that's my opinion and if you can rant, so can I.

Serge from Wellington| 10.12.09 @ 2:00PM

First, about you preferred source of info: the BBC. Do you know what these initials stand for? There are two equally fair interpretations: B(ritish) B(ullsh*t) C(entre) or B(loody) B(ritish) C(ommunists).

Secondly, your synopsis of the comments on this site shows you need to improve your reading and comprehending skills - it looks you're able properly to read only the abovementioned Bullsh*it Centre's texts.

Thirdly, methinks you lie you'd voted for McCain.

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 5:18PM

Logan,
You may be just a young person who is beginning to learn about these things, so I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt because I appreciate it when others do the same for me. Here's what I say. If your mind is an open and an honest one, you will do very well in distinguishing the right from the wrong. If you have been taught in a public school or University you were probably taught that you have to be "nice" to everyone no matter what. When you're into telling the truth because you don't want others falling off a cliff or being led astray it may not sound nice. There's a good reason why we're outraged at what Obama is doing. Keep reading. Because if you truly have your eyes open you will find out.
Glean information and come to your own conclusions. The truth tends to stick out like a sore thumb!

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 6:12PM

Logan
1."We have seen no change in his strategy for peace." ~The Taliban says this because America is still there fighting them. WE say there is no strategy for peace because he refuses to send more troops in order to WIN. AND Obama actually said he doesn't like the word victory.
2." He has done nothing for peace in Afghanistan. He has not taken a single step for peace in Afghanistan or to make this country stable." ~This is the Taliban's code for~He hasn't withdrawn troops, He shows no sign of leaving." WE say:He hasn't sent enough troops to beat the enemy, declare victory, and leave a stable Afghani government.
3. "We condemn this award of the Nobel Peace Prize for Obama. We condemn the institution awarding the peace prize. We condemn this years peace prize as unjust." ~Of course they condemn it and them for the above phony reasons. WE condemn it because it and they are FRAUDS, who've awarded the Prize to another FRAUD.
~Not "nice" words, but TRUE words.
P.S. The BBC does have a long history of anti-American bias. Also TRUE words.
I read this on BBC News as attributed to Zabihullah Mujahid--Taliban spokesman"
~These comments made by the Taliban "spokesman" here it is:
1.

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 6:16PM

*Oops~ disregard last sentence as I inadvertently recopied this ~These comments made by the Taliban...."

mkvgtired| 10.13.09 @ 2:30PM

"I think it's too soon to know if Obama is worthy of this prize"

That is exactly everyone's point here. The Nobel Peace Prize is supposed to be the most prestigious award given to someone with a PROVEN track record in achieving world peace. To give it to someone who's only contribution is rhetorical is a slap in the face to the prize itself as well as Alfred Nobel who wanted the prize given out in his honor.

Jeremiah| 10.12.09 @ 11:54AM

Dumb Zumaman (are you an admirer of the latest South Africa's dictator?) Check a map before lecturing smart people: Norway is IN Europe, and while it is not legally bound by the EU, it is much more european than that muslim s.hithole,Turkey, that the US armtwists us to accept as a an EU member just because it is a member of NATO.
Get lost dumb liberal.

mandm| 10.12.09 @ 11:57AM

Hey Roger, Thank you for the biggest laugh I've had since I heard Obama won the 'peace' prize. The Nobel peace prize under the bottle cap was priceless.

Jeremiah| 10.12.09 @ 12:04PM

Yeah right, Logan, we're used to people like you and their tactics ("I voted McCain but... ) You're just the usual liberal fellow traveller that just doesn't realize how absurd, obscene and shameful it is to award the Nobel Peace Prize to Hussein Obama after 10 useless months in office, whereas there are hundreds of men and women in this world who live dangerously and fight for freedom against incredible odds and who would badly need this prize, the public exposure and the money that goes with it.
But you're right to consider avoiding this site, actually you would do us a favor.
Bye bye.

Rahul Ghosh| 10.12.09 @ 12:46PM

I understand that the issue about Obama getting the Nobel peace prize is debatable. However the shrill rhetoric of the people opposed to Obama is quite like the rants of the Iranian "Death to America" rants. Calling people dumb liberals or Turkey as an Islamic ***hole is quite unfortunate. This smacks of a kind of bigotry which militates against core "Conservative" values. Though I am not religious (and do not profess any of the Semitic faiths ), I do find it quite "Unchristian".

logan| 10.12.09 @ 1:15PM

Exactly the point I was making in my first comment. Jeremiah had a good point in his reply that there were/are probably more people deserving of the prize.
But name calling doesn't enlighten anyone. I thought these comments could help me understand a viewpoint from different perspectives. I like to be informed from more than one source.

Serge from Wellington| 10.12.09 @ 2:09PM

Logan: I like to be informed from more than one source.

Hell, no! Continue to suck the BBC tit. Don't compromise your integrity.

Michael Tomlinson| 10.12.09 @ 3:19PM

Obviously, you were asleep or living under a rock during the Bush years. At the link you'll hear Ms. Clinton shrilling defending the vitriol of Democrats as patriotic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJxmpTMGhU0.

Unlike the left and Democrats NO serious Republicans wants Obama to die. Yet, movies were made and celebrated by Democrats and the left about killing President Bush.

Turkey is an example of a nation that may be going the way of Islamic extremism and fears of that are not racism. In a world where Muslim extremists are close to retaking Afghanistan and possibly nuclear Pakistan concern about Obama's failed peace and foreign policies are not racist, but rational.

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 5:55PM

However the shrill rhetoric of the people opposed to Obama is quite like the rants of the Iranian "Death to America" rants."

Don't think so, there, Rahul! We shout Death to Socialism! Not death to Obama. Just a liiiittle bit different, hmm?

Rahul Ghosh| 10.13.09 @ 11:12AM

Actually, pictures of Obama with a Hitler moustache were quite distasteful. The kind of abuse heaped in some of the responses here is quite shrill. Actually in NKorea also they shout "Death to Capitalism"

Margie| 10.13.09 @ 1:23PM

Lesson for the day:
Communism-Evil.
Capitalism-Good.
Or is that too "shrill" for you?
Or shall I sing "Barack Hussien Obama, Mmm, Mmm, Mmm?"

Rahul Ghosh| 10.14.09 @ 4:57AM

Exactly my point, why impersonate the devil?
Why embrace fascism?
By the shrill rhetoric, and depictions of Obama as Hitler, why look like Taliban buddy-buddies?

Margie| 10.14.09 @ 4:39PM

Speaking the truth is now equated with impersonating the Devil, according to your warped brain.
Yet you will continue bowing to your "lord", won't you?

Rahul Ghosh| 10.15.09 @ 7:34AM

Calling people names, who don't share your views is not a great calling! What?
My point (I am sure you undertood) was that one must be measured in one's criticism, not go overboard using shrill rhetoric.
McCarthy-ism or Stalinist-rhetoric or Iran-mullah-speak are similar cousins. I hope you surely didn't mean that Obama as Hitler depiction was true?

mejamom55| 10.12.09 @ 1:34PM

Well, I was going to reply to "logan," but you make some good points.
It's hard to imagine why the prize was awarded to Obama with no track record. I don't know much about the system, were there nominees? Does anyone know who they were?
But mainly, Jeremiah, you seems to be echoing the issue that logan has with some of the commentators here. The charges of anti-Americanism and other negative names to those who have a different opinion. At first I thought that quote from the Taliban was something written from a right wing perspectve. Don't we all love America and want to see it thrive?

Richard McNally| 10.12.09 @ 12:07PM

How did the Norwegians get mixed up in the Nobel Prize? My Funk and Wagnalls encylopedia says Alfred Nobel was a Swedish engineer and inventor. And the prize is awarded by the Nobel Foundation which is managed by a board of directors, all residents of Stockholm.

DutchGuy| 10.12.09 @ 1:08PM

When Alfred Nobel died, Sweden and Norway where one country (a personal union). In his will he said that one price (the peace price) was to be decided by the parliament which was then in Oslo (Norway) and the other 4 prices by the Karolinska Institute (medicine), the Royal Academy of Science (physics and chemistry) and the Swedish Academy (literature) which were all in Sweden. The Nobel price for economy is rewarded since 1968 and was never mentioned by Alfred Nobel. It is officially the " Price of the Swedish National Bank for economy in memory of Alfred Nobel"

Bill Carson| 10.12.09 @ 12:27PM

Upon reflection, I am really glad that fraud got the award. We've all been so sick of all this "messiah" and "the One" worshiping, that maybe now some voters in the middle will start to see the huge flaws of this fake leader. He's much easier to make fun of now than before. Yes, any criticism is still considered racist but I think more and more people (me included!) don't mind at all being called a racist just because we criticize this socialist loser.

Al Adab| 10.12.09 @ 4:25PM

A lot of things he is, but a loser, no. We are the losers. Those who voted for this guy took us all along on the Titanic with them.

davelnaf| 10.12.09 @ 1:41PM

Good article. Of course the Nobel committee wanted to influence Obama’s foreign policy and by stroking his vanity it seemed a good bet this prize might encourage him to see things their way, particularly in regard to Afghanistan and Iran. But because the award was so undeserved it will probably be one of those things that people here will hold against him. Declining the prize would have proven that he is a smart politician. The perception now is that Obama went like a fish for the skinny, baited hook the Nobel committee cast at him. More than anything this will confirm the judgment that many have of him as a showman-like campaigner first and a person of substance a distant second.

Allen Hanson| 10.12.09 @ 2:11PM

Remember the Simpsons episode where Mr. Burns awarded Homer Simpson the "Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence Award"?

As I recall, the award was created to trick Homer into signing away his right to sue over the fact that the nuclear power plant had rendered him infertile.

Who knew cartoons were prophetic?

jeff| 10.12.09 @ 3:05PM

You all keep forgetting Obamas upcoming Cy Young award for pitching excellence.

Al Adab| 10.12.09 @ 4:22PM

How about the new Abe Lincoln Award? "Some of the people all of the time, all of the people,,," well you get the idea.

the-gunslinger| 10.12.09 @ 3:06PM

Logan writes: "First of all, I think it's too soon to know if Obama is worthy of this prize..."

That's pretty much the point, dude. In the REAL world, you don't get a prize when it's too soon to know if you're worthy of it.

And calling the totally appropriate mocking of this absurdity "hate" just makes you look ridiculous. That dog don't hunt anymore.

Houston Rao| 10.12.09 @ 3:21PM

I was surprised to see him get the Peace prize; I expected him to get the Nobel prize for Economics given how he has single-handedly saved us all from an irreversible decline in the economy with his stimulus 'investments'. Maybe they are saving that for him for next year. In the meanwhile, they are determining how to establish the Nobel prize for Hope.

Martin j smith| 10.12.09 @ 3:27PM

For a man of "peace" Obama and his fellow travelers strike me as among the most vitriolic,hateful and intolerant. Those who disagree are "astroturfers",carry "swastikuz","racists", and you name it. So I would say Obama and his minions,now that they have a "peace prize" out to try practicing peace at home. You know "charity begins at home "? So I would also like to know if the Nobel Peace prize committee thought about personal behavior --I guess this was not a criteria. The other point I would like to make is that the European left have been blatantly interfering with our political process this being the most egregious.

For those who do not see the light the joke is on you. For those who do--own the knowledge and expose it to those who are ignorant.
with these awards this being the most blatant.

Martin j smith| 10.12.09 @ 3:27PM

For those who do not see the light the joke is on you. For those who do--own the knowledge and expose it to those who are ignorant.
with these awards this being the most blatant.

Hubert Horatio Hornblower| 10.12.09 @ 3:31PM

It is absolutely astounding he won this award the same day he launched the first ever preemptive strike on the moon!

Bruce| 10.12.09 @ 4:32PM

After giving this a LOT of thought, I have determined to MY satisfaction that the only good thing to come out of Norway was a splendid little blond I was banging some years ago.

c.j. acworth| 10.12.09 @ 4:47PM

For next year's peace prize I nominate the 1st Marine Div. , or ,for that matter any randomly chosen division of US military personel, any squad of which has done more to promote world peace than the last 50 winners put together.

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 6:46PM

I'm with you, c.j.
Today on his radio Rush said that instead of Obama going to pick up the prize, we ought to send the Mother of one of our Soldiers who has been killed in combat.

Margie| 10.12.09 @ 5:00PM

"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people." It didn't elaborate on what any of these efforts might have been."

Wasn't one such "effort" Obama's bowing to the Saudi King?

Logan~~ what does that tell you?

drudge ette obama| 10.12.09 @ 9:05PM

Norway spelled backwards is Yawron - a heavy metal band from NORWAY!

So Obama, spelled backwards is Amabo which means: "I shall love" in Latin. (Latin is an ancient langauge which some really old people speak.)

So when Amabo won the Yawron "Lebon" pax prize, it was for his future efforts in loving some Norwegians who play loud base guitars and wear lime-green lipstick.

fred| 10.13.09 @ 9:16AM

"Peace through Weakness".
The Obama rallying cry.

Vincent Yeoh| 10.14.09 @ 1:29AM

For the record, the Norwegians are neither socialists nor nerds. And be thankful they awarded the prize to Obama. Imagine if they actually gave it to some Moslem 'peacemaker'?