A nobel Peace Prize For Obama?

Talk about debasing the coin of the realm! I’m aware that the criteria for the Nobel Peace Prize are a bit nebulous—and the array of eligible achievements is quite broad, but shouldn’t there be SOMETHING substantive that the recipient has accomplished?
Other than get elected to office? This becomes an especially pertinent question when you consider that the closing date for the nomination is February 1st—ten days after Mr. Obama took office. All he had done at that point was win an election and make a few speeches.
(Frankly, if you compare Obama to an actor or a good orator, his speeches are wooden, without emotion.) I am, as I have written, well aware of the mountain of problems Obama faced when he took office. He staved off eminent ECONOMIC collapse for the moment—the jury is still out on whether his fix will prove to be permanent.
He drew down forces in Iraq—but he did not END the war or bring any serious sort of peace to that politically artificial entity (created by Churchill in 1921 to save Britain money in administrating her new imperial territory obtained after World War I). Too early for a peace prize there.
Afghanistan has heated up considerably since he took office. You don’t win a peace prize for doubling the number killed in a year (however worthy the cause—neither Roosevelt, Stalin nor Churchill won the award for fighting World War II).
He got the Palestinian and Israeli prime ministers to shake hands as he glared down at them—one handshake does not merit a peace prize. There is honestly no sign that he has brought resolution to the ancient American domestic racial divide—except in some symbolic way.
Iran continues to build nuclear weapons; North Korea fires its missiles. We’re still breaking up terrorists rings that are trying to do us mischief. Venezuela’s Chavez spews hatred and imprisons his opponents. The drug wars on the Mexican frontier go on apace.
The savage political infighting between conservatives and Roosevelt liberals seems only to intensify in this country—and no person who understands the health care issues in America is sanguine about the bill that is likely to emerge from Congress this fall.
What therefore has President Obama DONE so far? “Holding the lid on”, keeping his balance so far on a jiggling tight rope may show political talent, but is it Nobel class achievement? I suspect that this year’s prize was actually given for a far different reason than any kind of accomplishment.
It almost seems the Nobel Peace Prize judges were saying, “Mr. Bush was such a nasty man and you, Mr. Obama, seem so much nicer, we are going to award you our highest honor for just not being Bush.
On that basis, Nikita Khrushchev (who seemed much nicer than the Stalin he replaced) or Admiral Doenitz (who took over Nazi Germany for the week after Hitler died—and was far nicer) should have won the Peace Prize. No more ludicrous than giving it to Obama for not being Bush.
Teddy Roosevelt won it for actually stopping a war between Russia and Japan. Jimmy Carter won one after decades of being a world class good dobe. Ralph Bunche won for negotiating a cease fire between Israel and five nations that had attacked it. These are significant and REAL achievements.
So are the achievements of Peace Prize winners Jane Addams (Hull House, Annville Institute), the efforts of Dag Hammarskjold, George Marshall (Marshall Plan), Martin Luther King, Jr., Mother Teresa, Lech Walesa, Nelson Mendela, Albert Schweitzer, Cordell Hull (primer mover in founding the UN), and even the duo of Sadat and Began.
When we look at Obama’s accomplishments so far, we an only echo the little old lady in the 1980s hamburger commercial—“Where’s the meat?”