Strange bedfellows: Muslim world and wingnut world incredulous at Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize


 American right-wingers annoyed at President Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize have common cause in that regard with certain people with whom they probably would rather not be associated.

 THIS PIECE from Reuters includes this paragraph:

The Norwegian Nobel Committee praised Obama for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.” But critics — especially in parts of the Arab and Muslim world — called its decision premature.

 And these:

The Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes a peace treaty with Israel, said the award was premature at best.

“Obama has a long way to go still and lots of work to do before he can deserve a reward,” said Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri. “Obama only made promises and did not contribute any substance to world peace. And he has not done anything to ensure justice for the sake of Arab and Muslim causes.”

 The Swedish Wire has an ARTICLE in which we hear from those lovely Taliban folks (holed up, of course, in their traditional undisclosed location):

The Taliban Friday condemned the decision to award this year’s Nobel Peace Prize to US President Barack Obama, saying he has “not taken a single step towards peace in Afghanistan”.

“We have seen no change in his strategy for peace. He has done nothing for peace in Afghanistan,” Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid told AFP.

“We condemn the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for Obama,” he said by telephone from an undisclosed location.

 And here at home, we find  SOUR GRAPES among the same people who cheered so lustily just a few days ago when Chicago (and, by implication, Obama) failed to win the 2016 Olympics:

The [Nobel]  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.



  1. Neftali

    Two immediate questions come to mind:

    1. Nominations for the award had to be submitted last February, when Obama was only in office for a month. What did he do to deserve the nomination at that time?

    2. Clinton never won a Nobel Peace Prize. Why did Obama do that was so much better?

  2. Stephanie

    Apologizing does NOT = peace. Maybe we can give him a star on the walk of fame or that glitter ball Tom Delay missed out on.

  3. DingDong

    He has doe nothing. All he has to do is show up. It is unbelievable how dumb these people can be.

  4. Neftali

    Well…Obama was the first United States President to Chair a United Nations Security Counsel a few weeks ago. That session specifically addressed nuclear disarmament.

    But if such a measure is held in such high regard, then theoretically he should be nominated NEXT year.

    I’m really trying hard to think of a rationale explanation to why he deserves the award, and I really can’t think of one.

  5. With her ill-informed remark about Obama “apologizing,” Stephanie reveals herself of as one of these bellicose, jingoistic wingnuts who take their cues from the likes of Rush Limbaugh.

    As the National Security Network states: “Obama has not apologized to anyone. His more respectful tone is a rebuke to the reckless and failed conservative policies of the past eight years which kept the United States isolated. This approach has already yielded material benefits such as an infusion of $1.1 trillion to the IMF at the G20 Summit, greater civilian and funding commitments from our allies for Afghanistan and Pakistan, and a new agreement with Russia to move forward on a non-proliferation treaty to reduce nuclear stockpiles.”

    Grow up, Stephanie. Barack Obama, not John Wayne, is the American ideal.

  6. shawnnews

    Neftali has a fine point. I like Barack Obama and I hope he maintains my favor until 2012. That having been said, I read the press release that praised Obama’s return to multilateralism. I think this year it was a political award — an international rebuke of American conservatism by rewarding its domestic rival. I think their logic was that anyone who would alter W’s policies for America should get a Nobel Peace Prize.
    I think it was premature to give him the prize unless W’s policies were SO terrible that ANYONE altering them should get a medal and some money.

  7. Mike Carroll

    Incredulous Wingnut checking in-
    Further proof, if any were needed, of the total degradation of the non-science related Nobel awards. An award given for Euopean style over substance since his foreign policy substance ranges from the questionable (European Missile defense), to the idiotic (Honduras). Our friends are either angry (Poland, the Czech Republic, Honduras, Columbia) or very worried (Israel, France). At least our enemies(Putin, Chavez, Ahmawhatever) are happy.
    I think it is fitting that the last US President to win the award was Jimmy Carter. This administration is starting to look a lot like Carter’s.

  8. DingDong

    Naivety is the Obama way. Yes, ideal in an ideal world. We don’t have that world, reality is harsh and violent. To believe that if we just talk to our enemies, that are sworn to kill us, even to the point of their own destruction in naive and dangerous. The Obama way is not the American way of self reliance and individual responsibility.

  9. FrankyG

    Pat Cunningham = In the TANK FOOL….LMAO…

  10. Jon Murray

    I’m amazed….Conservatives have their underwear in a bundle because of an event which reflects something positive about the US and our president. I guess you’d have to have blinders on to see that the current administration takes a mature and reasoned approach toward diplomacy & peace with our world neighbors. Maybe you would prefer a president who slings out “axis of evil” slogans. That was pretty darned helpful in building peaceful relationships!?! It’s an award and an honor for our country – let’s enjoy and use it as a catalyst for future efforts for world peace.

  11. Well, I gather from the Obamaphobic comments that I’m one of the few members of the Applesauce community who recognizes that Nobel Peace Prizes often are awarded for courageous efforts, not just successful efforts.

    Woodrow Wilson got the prize for the League of Nations, which turned out to be a bust (and which the Senate barred the U.S. from joining).

    Martin Luther King got the prize for efforts to obtain full rights for African-Americans, efforts that had not yet been realized when the Nobel Committee honored him. Indeed, the prize was already on King’s mantel before the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed and before the march from Selma to Montgomery.

  12. FrankyG


    Let’s take a look at the president’s first 12 days in the White House according to his public schedule to see what he did to deserve a Nobel Peace Prize:

    January 20: Sworn in as president. Went to a parade. Partied.

    January 21: Asked bureaucrats to re-write guidelines for information requests. Held an “open house” party at the White House.

    January 22: Signed Executive Orders: Executive Branch workers to take ethics pledge; re-affirmed Army Field Manual techniques for interrogations; expressed desire to close Gitmo (how’s that working out?)

    January 23: Ordered the release of federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries. Lunch with Joe Biden; met with Tim Geithner.

    January 24: Budget meeting with economic team.

    January 25: Skipped church.

    January 26: Gave speech about jobs and energy. Met with Hillary Clinton. Attended Geithner’s swearing in ceremony.

    January 27: Met with Republicans. Spoke at a clock tower in Ohio.

    January 28: Economic meetings in the morning, met with Defense secretary in the afternoon.

    January 29: Signed Ledbetter Bill overturning Supreme Court decision on lawsuits over wages. Party in the State Room. Met with Biden.

    January 30: Met economic advisers. Gave speech on Middle Class Working Families Task Force. Met with senior enlisted military officials.

    January 31: Took the day off.

    February 1: Skipped church. Threw a Super Bowl party.

    So there you have it. The short path to the Nobel Peace Prize: Party, go to meetings, skip church, release federal funding to pay for abortions in foreign countries, party some more.

    Good grief.

  13. FrankyG (who’s a fan of political assassinations, as we know from one of his previous comments) seems not to understand that they don’t give Nobel Peace Prizes for going to church. Nor does he understand that going to church doesn’t necessarily make one a better person than someone who doesn’t go to church.

  14. Neftali

    I guess Jon Murray is correct, the award should be taken in a positive light, regardless of how it was obtained.

    Still, I can’t help to wonder what did Obama do during the month of January that was so “courageous” (as Pat puts it). See FrankyG’s comment above.

    As a side comment, I’m curious what Obama will do with the prize money. The award is 10M Swedish Kronor, which is around $1,433,519.32

  15. DingDong

    Sure Pat, but what had Obama done by Feb 1? Stupid reasoning as always. The League of Nations was at least already running even though no one would have know its demise.

    Let see what did MLK do the year before getting the prize?

    On Good Friday, April 12, King is arrested with Ralph Abernathy by Police Commissioner Eugene “Bull” Connor for demonstrating without a permit.

    On April 13, the Birmingham campaign is launched. This would prove to be the turning point in the war to end segregation in the South.

    During the eleven days he spent in jail, MLK writes his famous Letter from Birmingham Jail

    On May 10, the Birmingham agreement is announced. The stores, restaurants, and schools will be desegregated, hiring of blacks implemented, and charges dropped.

    On June 23, MLK leads 125,000 people on a Freedom Walk in Detroit.

    The March on Washington held August 28 is the largest civil rights demonstration in history with nearly 250,000 people in attendance.

    At the march, King makes his famous I Have a Dream speech.

    Sure it is the same?

  16. Neftali: It’s a lead-pipe cinch that Obama will give the Nobel money to charity. He’s already financially comfortable from book royalties (with many more to come), and pocketing the prize money would only invite the wrath of his critics.

  17. DingDong: Having marched with King on several occasions, I am more aware than you of his activities prior to his winning the Nobel Peace Prize. I am also aware, as I noted in my previous comment, that he got the prize before the effects of the campaign he led reached full flower. The Nobel committee honored him more for his vision and courage than for his achievements. That’s what they’re doing with Obama, whether you like it or not.

  18. Mike Carroll

    I suspect even liberals are embarassed by this award. Watch as they scramble, like Pat, to justify the unjustifiable.

  19. Mike Carroll: The only thing that embarrasses me in this matter is the reaction of people like you. Obamaphobia apparently is an incurable mental illness.

  20. Treasonous mike, the advocate of a military coup, is back with us after an absence of a week or so. And he’s still spouting unintelligible nonsense. Pretty soon, he’ll again be calling the Democrats the party of Satan. Hopeless. Utterly hopeless.

  21. Mike Carroll

    Pat-I notice that you did not attempt to refute my points in the prior posts. Good choice on your part. Surrender is always an option.

  22. mike: Aren’t the feds still after you for treason? They should be. You’ve openly advocated the violation of federal law, which itself is a crime. You’re a fugitive from justice. Seriously, I have reason to believe that they have you on a list. If I were you, I’d lie low for a while.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *