Peace Prize isn't just about Obama's First 2 Weeks in Office
Mike Huckabee says the following:
"There will be an outcry from those on the right who will say that Obama's nomination, made two weeks into his presidency, is impossible to justify, but I think such an outcry will sound like right-wing whining," Huckabee wrote. "The better response is simply to allow those on the left to explain what he did in his first two weeks as President that merited such recognition."
It's not about just the first two weeks of President Obama's
administration Mr. Huckabee, the Nobel Peace Prize he won is more than likely about
the way he handled his campaign and the way he approached American citizens and
their desire for change.
It was about the way
he approached other nations around the world and the way he asked Muslims to join us
in the fight against terrorism.
It was about the way he showed everyone they deserved to be listened to and respected for their ideas.
It's about the way he took on the establishment and proved that anybody could run and become a leader if they worked hard enough for it.
It was about the famous speech he made about race. That speech is considered as famous as Martin L King's, "I have a Dream" speech.
It was about the way he got people to follow his dream.
Just look at the pictures and listen to the stories of those he visited across this nation during his campaign. He made history with all the types of folks of all ages. He made history with the amount of people that came to see him at his rallies. Thousands traveled for miles to see Barack Obama in person.
Go back and at look the pictures and videos that were shown during Obama's campaign in the United States and in places like Germany during his world tour in July of 2008. Look at the pictures in Germany when he spoke to over 200,000 people wanting to see and hear his opinion about the world's views and our connections.
No Mr. Huckabee, President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize wasn't just about his first two weeks in office. It was about the way he drove the world to the idea of 'change' in 2008.
Sadly, your argument isn't backed up by the actual citation from the committee.
I agree that Obama got the prize for being elected President (and all the sociological issues he faced and overcame in the campaign). But few on the left are arguing that today.
October 9, 2009 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the date Obama was nominated is irrelevant. What counts are his credentials at the time the decision is made, which is after eight months in office. The nomination was presumably made in February as a type of wager on his being competitive when the time to decide arrived eight months later.
As to whether the award was deserved, my own take on it is described in detail in Steve Clemons' blog on Obama's 'Unclenched Fist'. I'm ambivalent, but inclined to react favorably, and I've offered some reasons in the comments section of that blog.
October 9, 2009 8:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fred: At the time of nomination, the "package" has to be prepared. That means at the time of nomination, you have whatever you have put together at that time, including whatever resume accomplishments you submit. So, yes, if they really do hold to the deadline, then you have to judge on the basis of Obama's resume in September. Whether they decided to let slide on the deadline is a wholly other matter.
October 9, 2009 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm unaware that the Committee is prohibited from considering anything beyond what was in the nomination package, and the content of their announcement in fact implies otherwise - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0umuxf08vg&feature=player_embedded
Do you have evidence to the contrary?
My point was that the nominator(s) presumably considered the nomination a gamble, and hoped that by the time of the award, Obama's resume as president would have made him competitive in addition to any pre-election credentials he enjoyed.
October 9, 2009 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just to be sure we're on the same wavelength, I'm not arguing that the nomination was submitted later than the February deadline, but rather that the award was based on his record both before and after that deadline, and so the fact that the Committee used evidence up to its decision date is what is important.
October 9, 2009 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nobel had in his will that the prize was to be awarded for PRECEDING year -- so it was for the way he ran his campaign.
October 10, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink