Last week was an odd one for millions of Americans. President Obama was announced the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, and no one really knew what to do.
The Peace Prize is the big one, the Nobel people remember for generations. But Obama has been in office only months, and the Nobel committee more than hinted he’d been named the Peace Prize recipient because of idealistic speeches, not because he’d been able to implement his ideas.
Obama seemed almost embarrassed by the prized accolade. It instantly created a political problem for him. Opponents were quick to seize on the point he had been in office only nine months and has had trouble implementing his domestic plans, let alone his grander vision for the world.
It was easy — and arguably even justified, given the names of recent Peace Prize recipients and the committee’s inclination to politicize the award — to view any world figure who opposed the policies of former President George W. Bush as worthy of the Prize.
Bash Bush. Get a Nobel.
Even people who support Obama were baffled by the selection. The award is too serious, of course, to spark a ticker-tape parade to honor the recipient. But Obama’s allies in the Congress and in the voting pool were not able even to puff out their chests in a convincing way. It was hard to call the award a win for America, no matter how one views the President.
And this brings us to this week’s issue of Time magazine, which features one of the most thought-provoking columns we have ever read. Before we describe what the column is about, perhaps we should take a moment to explain why we’ve spent some time today to write about politics when this Blog normally writes about crime.
It’s because the Time magazine column challenges people to think and to question their views — something we try to do around here. No, we’re not Time. We’re a small Blog in an ocean of Blogs. Even so, we try to provide readers with some brain fodder and always are pleased when they respond with posts that help us shape our thinking, even if their posts don’t help us change our mind about the issues we write about.
The Time column by David Von Drehle poses a question we never before had contemplated:
Should the Nobel Peace Prize be awarded to nuclear weapons?
Von Drehle says yes — and he makes a thought-provoking argument. Noodle it if you have the chance.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1929553,00.html?xid=rss-fullnation-yahoo