Tuesday, May 08, 2012

Peace Prize?

Is it just me or does anyone else think the Nobel Prize committee is feeling a little sheepish these days. They were the ones who presented President Barack Obama with the Nobel Peace Prize. At the time many people, including myself, wondered what he had done to deserve this award so soon into his presidency. Don't get me wrong, I still feel that President Obama is a major upgrade on President Bush as well as any of the current Republican candidates.

Still, Obama seems determined to brag about killing Osama Bin Laden as the campaign begins to ramp up. It's as though he's boasting about bagging a deer during huntin' season. It feeds into the whole "myth of redemptive violence" which seems pervasive in American culture. It's a tough job being president of the most powerful military machine on the planet. Looking presidential appears to include a willingness to hunt down the bad guys and shoot them dead. It's a sad statement that this becomes a plank in the campaign platform.


What are your thoughts?

5 comments:

Laurie said...

It is election year, he is going after the votes.(I hope it works). There have been a few Peace prize winners that I shook my head at. I went and looked up the past winners. 1979 and 1973 puzzled me. I also spent a large part of an hour reading up on the winners.I was amazed at how many years no prize was awarded. Thanks for an educational morning!

IanD said...

I agree that he's head-&-shoulders above the opposition.

As president, too, he deserves credit for his successful bailout of the American auto industry, for slowing the recession (before it became a full-blown recession), for taking the first steps in health care reform, and for restoring America's prestige abroad after eight years of intense damage.

He has not been perfect, nor nearly as aggressive as he needed to be while he stood to gain from his majorities in both Houses of Congress, but he's been good. Certainly, he's been as good as Bill Clinton was in his first term, and he (Lewinsky aside) was one of thet most successful presidents since Eisenhower.

Obama is using the Bin Laden "kill" as a political image simply to deflect any criticism from Republicans that he is "soft on defense." It's quite simple, really. When your party couldn't take down Bin Laden in the 8 years it had after 9/11, and then the new guy does it in less than half that time? You lose ... and they're never going to let you forget it!

Does it bother me? Not really, considering over three thousand people lost their lives because of Bin Laden's machinations.

IanD said...

full blown *depression*. Whoops!

roger said...

I agree with Ian - you know the Republicans will be slinging as much mud as possible at Obama over the next 6 months, as a lead up to the election. Why not emphasize the fact that the Republicans not only waged war against two countries, but didn't even achieve their goal of getting Bin Laden?

David Mundy said...

Laurie raises an interesting point about past peace prizes and the absence of an award some years.Check out the recipients.

I'm with you Ian on some of the psoitives of Obama's term and his seperiority of the alternatives. I still think it is medieval to crow about killing someone in one moment, then musing on Christan faith. Getting shoved down that road by political pragmatism just doesn't sit well with me.