Quote:
Originally Posted by octothorp
The problem with the Nobel Peace prize (and to a lesser extent the other Nobel prizes) is that they do not so much reward past actions as much as seeking to influence current and future events. They'll highlight someone who's champion of an issue they want to draw attention to, even if the person has not necessarily done a lot for that issue yet. Al Gore comes to mind here. With Obama, my guess is that they see him as someone who has the potential to have a significant impact on resolving the ongoing middle-east crisis, and they want to try and build an international consensus behind him in order to give him more clout. It's a highly flawed if somewhat well-meaning approach, but this particular decision stretches their credibility more than any other choice they've made.
|
Ya, it has already been mentioned, but when it comes to partisan politics, people will believe what they want to.