Last April, I wrote this post about one of my personal heroes, Greg Mortenson. If you are familiar at all with his work, building schools in Pakistan and Afghanistan, you will agree that the Nobel Peace Prize would be a fitting honor for him. I will be honest in saying I really didn't pay much attention to who else was nominated for the 2009 prize; there were 205 nominees, and they say his odds of winning were 20 to 1 (Obama's were 14-1, supposedly. I don't know how people come up with those numbers; I understand there are actually people who place bets, like it's a horse race or something.) I have no doubt, too, that many of the other nominees, including a Chinese dissident and two organizations whose sole purpose is to clear land mines, are equally deserving. Imagine how stunned I was, and still am, at the news that the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to President Barack Obama. The reason? Apparently they gave it to him because he's supposedly trying to help world leaders communicate with each other better, and for the things he hopes to accomplish.
OK, quick side note. Blogger is giving me fits and it won't let me publish this post because supposedly I have some html code it doesn't like. Does anyone else ever have this problem? Sorry, on with the post.
So here's what the committee who awarded Mr. Obama the prize said: "The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation betwen peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons."
His "vision?" Since when do we hand out prizes for things people hope to accomplish? Do they give the Heisman Trophy to young men who hope to one day be good football players? Is the Pulitzer Prize given to school children who hope to grow up to be great writers someday? Heck, even the celebrities who win the Dancing With the Stars Mirror Ball trophy have to work pretty hard to get it. Sure, our President has some lofty ideas about the future of America and the world (I don't want to get into the politics right now about whether or not his ideas are actually "good," but let's pretend they are for the sake of argument); but what has he actually accomplished? Oh, I remember! First he decided to repeal the Mexico City Policy, which kept our tax dollars from paying for abortions overseas. Now we are funding child murder worldwide. Oh yes, he also made sure that we would be forced to pay for embryonic stem cell research. Now our you and I are funding the destruction of human beings at the earliest stages of development, supposedly so the living can have a better quality of life. (I guess nobody told Mr. Nobel Prize that embryonic stem cell treatment has already been proven to be useless.) Not to mention his "vision" of an America where any woman can get an abortion anywhere and any time she wants, and if she can't afford it, the rest of us would have to foot the bill. If the unborn children who have died since January 20 were on the committee, they certainly wouldn't give Obama an award for peace.
Barack Nobel Obama has a "vision of a world without nuclear weapons. OK, that's something we can all get behind, but how is he going to accomplish this? Umm, how about getting tough with rogue leaders who are threatening their neighbors (and us) and bragging about how tough they are while they're developing weapons of mass destruction? But I digress. This blog isn't about politics, and I know there might be people reading this who have different ideas about how our President should handle things, and not being an expert on foreign policy, I'll save that for the folks who are.
I'm not upset because Greg Mortenson didn't win. As I said before, there were many others who have done great things for the good of mankind. I'm disappointed because I expected the Nobel Prize Committee to choose someone who has actually done something good. (I heard his little speech today that he gave in the Rose Garden: he said he was surprised and humbled, he didn't feel he deserved it, that he would consider this a call to action--words you would expect from any Nobel Prize winner, especially one who hadn't actually done anything that would merit such a high honor. Forget about an honorary Doctorate from Notre Dame...)
So, Therese, if I don't get a chance to post a recipe, my apologies. I'd really love to win one of those prizes, and I hope I still have a small chance of winning if that doesn't get done. (If not I'll post it next week, it's a good one!)
Who would you choose?