Foreign Policy: War and Peace Prize

Posted by Tina

A must read article appears in The American Spectator today:

Obama, who less than nine months after his inauguration won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples” while fostering “a new climate” in international relations, especially in reaching out to the Islamic world, has the U.S. engaged in conflicts in six Muslim nations. Today Mr. Obama has more troops in Afghanistan than when he took office. He has widened the use of drones. (The U.S. now has 8,000 of the unmanned remote control planes.) He involved the U.S. military in an undeclared war in Libya, and waged covert wars in Yemen and Somalia. Perhaps most alarming, he is the first U.S. president to authorize the assassination of an American abroad (the New Mexican born Anwar al-Awlaki).

The number of uttered complaints, negative headlines, or speeches meant to destroy and damage Obama’s name have been few in number and are certainly not loud enough to reach the average citizens ears and eyes. I gather from this that the radical left progressives don’t hate war…they hate conservatives, freedom, a vibrant private sector, and power in the hands of the people. They protest and use war, when waged by a Republican, simply to grab power.

So far, according to The American Spectator, 20,000 signatures have been gathered to revoke the President’s Peace Prize in a bid with a goal of 25,000. The effort may only be a simple gesture, but it is worth noting if for no other reason than to point out the absurdity of a man who won the Presidency criticizing his predecessor for his war making.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Foreign Policy: War and Peace Prize

  1. J. Soden says:

    The only “prize” Obumble has earned is the Booby Prize.

  2. Tina says:

    And its a prize he won’t be able to give back!

  3. Chris says:

    Giving the Nobel Peace Prize to a wartime president was absurd and forever damaged the reputation of the Nobel Committee, that much I agree with.

    Tina: “The number of uttered complaints, negative headlines, or speeches meant to destroy and damage Obama’s name have been few in number”

    Maybe you don’t know this, but journalism isn’t really supposed to be about destroying and damaging people’s names. However, Obama has gotten plenty of negative coverage in the mainstream press. In fact, studies show that contrary to Republican dogma, Romney got more positive press in the run-up to the election than Obama did:

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/romneys-press-coverage-more-positive-than-obamas-in-the-past-year-study-shows/

    http://www.journalism.org/analysis_report/cr

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/is-president-obama-getting-a-free-pass-from-the-media-not-really/2012/04/24/gIQAYhdreT_blog.html

Comments are closed.