Skip to content

Obama, Nobel & The BCS Part 2

November 2, 2009

I wasn’t intending to write a Part 2 for this post, but my thoughts continued and so I decided to go for it.  If you didn’t read Part 1, go check it out and read the comments.  The first comment is mostly what this is a response to (not in a bad way but solely because I just had a bunch more thoughts!).

As I stated in Part 1, I haven’t really been up on my news other than some headlines.  It seems to me that a huge amount of the vocalization about the Prize is because President Obama is a very hot topic for the nation. I am not jumping on any band wagons here, so understand that I am trying to look at it without any preconceived notions of President Obama.  So from what I have briefly gathered and from what was commented in Part 1, here is what I am thinking.

It would seem to be a pretty fair guess to say that most people wouldn’t care at all about the Prize if it had been awarded to pretty much anyone else (Rush Limbaugh excluded). I am not in the “watch America burn as long as Obama burns too” camp. I love this county and I love that we have to opportunity to voice our opinions.  I am not an Obama hater.  I don’t agree with some of his things, but he is the our president and we elected him.  Just because one may or may not have voted for him doesn’t get them out of that.  We live here in America, know the rules and accept them.  So I will not just jump on top to dog President Obama.  I would not want his job.

The biggest thing for me is that going into all this madness I didn’t know anything about the Nobel Peace Prize.  I mean really.  I couldn’t have told you anyone on the list other than Mother Teresa.  So without understanding what it is awarded for it is pretty easy to jump to conclusions.  So after the first blog, I decided I should do a little research.  I didn’t do much (mostly because my attention span is severely lacking), but I did find one thing that helps me start to understand the whole deal.  Wikipedia states the following:

According to Nobel’s will, the Peace Prize should be awarded to the person who:
“during the preceding year […] shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition of reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promoting of peace congresses.”

(Now unless we treat this like the Heisman and basically make it about the winner’s entire life and career, it specifically states that it is within the past year.  That’s it.  So, if you did something really, really peace-y on December 31st but then the next year did nothing, it shouldn’t be counted.)  So being in the state of ignorance I was in, I didn’t know this.  It is not a lifetime achievement award.  I agree that it is not wrong for one to be elected or praised on the basis of an idea.  Anyone trying to bring peace to the world should get props for it.  (Sadly our world has turned into a place that we have to celebrate when someone actually wants and promotes world peace.)  But, I don’t think you should be awarded a Prize like this just for ideas though.  There must be some action happening, too.  It has to be more than just ideas in my book.

That’s what I’m saying.  If he lives up to that criteria, then, yes, he deserves to win the prize.

Oh, and PS – I still don’t believe that the government should be involved in any way with the BCS.  It is sports.  I absolutely love sports, but I just can’t get myself to believe that there is a need for a Senate hearing over steroid use and that our president needs to actually be involved with fixing the BCS.

One Comment leave one →
  1. kevin permalink
    November 2, 2009 7:06 AM

    I’ve found myself getting too negative when it comes to politics, so I’ve tried to refrain from political tweets/comments. But I have some thoughts on this – most of which agree with your perspective. Disclaimer: I did not vote for Obama and don’t agree with most of his policies (thus my lack of vote). That being said, he is our President and that alone requires some respect.
    My issue is with the NPP committee. Could they not find anybody who had actually done something for peace, rather than giving it to somebody who would like to do peaceful things? Obama spent 2008 campaigning for President. Campaigns are a 24/7 gig that allow for no personal time. It is a bit hard to accomplish anything for peace in the midst of a campaign (side note: campaigns themselves are quite the opposite of promoting peace. Negative ads, character assaults – pretty peaceful, right?). The NPP gave it to him for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy…” He may do that in the future, but what did he do for that prior to Feb 1, 2009, when nominations were due? The NPP “has attached special importance to Obama’s view of a world without nuclear weapons.” Didn’t Bush want that? I certainly don’t think that Bush deserves a NPP, but given the committee’s logic/reasoning he should get one. What about Bush’s aid to Africa? He gave (through the US) billions of dollars to Africa to fight HIV/AIDS, provide education and build infrastructure. That’s not very peaceful I suppose. It seems the NPP wanted to give it to Obama for not being Bush. Which is fine, except about 9 billion people aren’t Bush. You can’t blame Obama. It isn’t his fault that he won – he was admittedly surprised. He has the opportunity to earn it in the future, but that doesn’t mean he deserves it now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: