If you’ve watched any news station or come across a copy of Time Magazine, then chances are you’ve heard some of the buzz surrounding President Barack Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize win. The nuts who can often be seen comparing Obama to Hitler while nearly going into cardiac arrest on Fox News are clearly outraged. On the other hand, liberals could not lend more support to the President’s victory.
As a self-proclaimed die-hard Democrat, it seems as if I should be defending the Obama win. I’ve even been called “obnoxiously liberal,” and “in love with Obama.” However, on this issue, I am simply not in support of now calling the President a Nobel Laureate.
While the man has broken seemingly immovable barriers and will undoubtedly be remembered in history as a political hero, his Nobel Prize just is not deserved. Now, as the title implies, the Peace Prize should go to a man or woman who fosters peace; someone who settles conflict. But as many, including me, are quick to point out, Obama has not lived up to his promise of pulling American troops out of Iraq. A considerable portion of his support during the 2008 campaign was in part due to his ambition to end American involvement in Iraq. Even I thought, “Yeah, he’ll for sure get us out of there if he wins.” Yet Obama has done virtually nothing to end the Iraqi conflict, not even an attempt to remove troops from the country gradually (which really is the least he could do).
Not to mention the Afghanistan conflict, which has proven itself to be just as detrimental to U.S. troops. My point in noting these conflicts is this: with two wars going on, why was Obama a good choice for the Peace Prize? War, in my opinion at least, is the exact opposite of peace. In fact, by definition, it pretty much is.
It’s clear that Obama’s win is based solely on his hype. He’s a likable guy, yes, with plenty of charisma, charm and handsome looks. But Nobel Prizes just can’t be thrown out to whoever looks good in the spotlight. You can’t just give the popular kids everything merely because they’re popular.
Though his accomplishment of becoming the first African-American President is extraordinary and highly commendable, it is hardly deserving of a Nobel Prize. In no way has his election as President created peace in the world. Sure, other countries like us more, but that’s only because it’s not George W. Bush trying to convince them to loan us money or soldiers. It’s great to have elected a man of racial diversity, but he has done nowhere near enough in the ten or so months he’s been in office. And certainly not enough to have won the honor of a Nobel Peace Prize.
