In the immediate wake of President Obama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, a lot of right-wingers have simply gone nuts over it.
To be very clear, we’re not talking about any old criticism or disagreement. Reasonable people can believe this award was not deserved and that Obama has not at this time demonstrated the true accomplishments required. (Unreasonable people can do it, too — Glenn Beck’s got a pretty good joke about it.) We’re talking about real over the top invective.
Bill Kristol likens Obama receiving the prize to Mikhail Gorbachev, the former leader of the Soviet Union — except that Kristol thinks the Communist leader was more impressive:
Mikhail Gorbachev won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990. A year later, he was out of power and the Soviet Union had dissolved.
I don’t mean to compare Barack Obama to Gorbachev, who was, whatever his faults, a truly historic and courageous figure. But let’s hope the parallel extends this far: that a year from now the Democrats suffer a major electoral repudiation, and that the New Liberalism goes the way of Reform Communism. And that, beginning in 2013, Obama will have lots of free time to spend hobnobbing with Gorbachev on the international celebrity circuit.
Kristol also suggested that a different American get it: “We could note that, if the Norwegians wanted to give the Nobel Peace Prize to an American, it would have been been better to give it to Sen. John McCain for having the guts to push through the surge in Iraq, which has brought relative peace to that country. But that would be overkill.” If you buy into the theory that this award is really a celebration of George W. Bush and his policies being gone from the international sphere, then Kristol has really missed the boat.
Rep. Gresham Barrett (R-SC) had this to say: “Congratulations to President Obama on his prize. I’m not sure what the international community loved best; his waffling on Afghanistan, pulling defense missiles out of Eastern Europe, turning his back on freedom fighters in Honduras, coddling Castro, siding with Palestinians against Israel, or almost getting tough on Iran. The world may love it, but following in the footsteps of Jimmy Carter is not where America needs to go. Hopefully, this surprise award will give the President cause to reevaluate his current course.”
Rush Limbaugh declared: “They love a weakened, neutered U.S and this is their way of promoting that concept. I think God has a great sense of humor, too.”
Michael Goldfarb fired back at the DNC for saying that the Republican Party had thrown in its lot with the terrorists in opposing the award: “It’s not Republicans that are throwing their lot in with terrorists — it’s the White House.”
Mona Charen says Obama is now in the company of Yasser Arafat: “Here is a list of Nobel Peace Prize winners since 1980. There are some worthy recipients — Lech Walesa, Shirin Ebadi, Mohammed Yunus. But most Nobel Peace Peace prizes go to conventional left-wing types popular with European elites — Kofi Annan, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, Mikhail Gorbachev. Before they break out the champagne at the White House, they may want to pause over the fact that Obama now shares this honor with Mohammed el-Baradei, Yasser Arafat, and flagrant liar Rigoberta Menchu Tum.”
Hugh Hewitt calls on Obama to think of this award and send more troops to Afghanistan, rather than listen to his advisers who want to appease the Taliban:
Now as he nears a critical decision on whether or not to provide the troops his commander in the theater is pressing for even as appeasers in his inner circle council appeasement of the Taliban, he is awarded the world’s most prestigious prize.
Hope and pray that the award puts some steel in his spine and impresses on him the prospect of looking at his medal through the years if as a consequence of his decisions in the next few weeks, another many generations of Afghan women are condemned to remain in their burqas without benefit of education or medical care even as their husbands plot unmolested to strike America again.
Erick Erickson decided that the intuitive attacks on the award (European wimps, Obama hasn’t accomplished anything, etc.) just weren’t good enough for him, and gave a racial angle to the whole thing: “I did not realize the Nobel Peace Prize had an affirmative action quota for it, but that is the only thing I can think of for this news. There is no way Barack Obama earned it in the nominations period.”
Last and certainly not least, Andy McCarthy has possibly the most overheated response out there, declaring that the award is, on its face, a trophy of anti-Americanism — and Obama has earned it:
I’m not all for Americans winning international prizes, especially the Nobel Peace Prize. In fact, I’m vigorously against it. The transnational progressives who pass out these accolades believe America is the problem in the world, the main threat to peace, the impediment to “progress,” etc. The award is a symbolic statement of opposition to American exceptionalism, American might, American capitalism, American self-determinism, and American pursuit of America’s interests in the world. That is why Obama could win it based on only ten days in office — merely by capturing the White House and the levers of power, he stands to do more for the Left’s “knock America off its pedestal” program than any figure in history.
After a number of years, the NFL renamed its Super Bowl trophy after its most fitting recipient — it’s now called the Vince Lombardi Trophy. I’d like to see the Nobel Foundation follow suit. If today’s headlines said, “Barack Obama Wins Yasser Arafat Prize,” that would be perfect.
- -Hiring More Journalists
- -Providing free memberships to those who cannot afford them
- -Supporting independent, non-corporate journalism