In the hard to believe, but par for the course catagory is this statement from the DNC

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1009/DNC_official_GOP_siding_with_terrorists.html#

“The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists – the Taliban and Hamas this morning – in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize,” DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse told POLITICO.

Considering that Pres. Bill Clinton — neither a conservative nor a Republican — imposed a just peace in Bosnian and Albania over Serbian agression when no one else would, thus saving the lives of millions of Bosnian and Albanian Muslims in the 1990’s from Serbian rape camps (young women), ethnic cleansing killing fields (all men) and lime kilns (for the bodies)

And he got bubkis from the Nobel Peace Prize committee.

While in the 12 days the Nobel comittee had to consider him, OBAMA DID NOTHING OF MERIT save start giving American tax payer money for foreign aid paid for abortions.

Yet the DNC is defending Obama’s Nobel Peace prize as if American Republicans criticizing, by his choice, were doing the same thing as beheading innocents like the Taliban…?

Proportion is not the province of the American Left anymore.

This the best one-liner I have heard to date on Obama’s NPP win:

“Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize reduces the chances of someone trying to off him, because he’ll just rise after three days.”

… with the expected negative nay saying that seems the very nature of any political remarks at the site instead of positive offerings…negativity is draining.

Man, that’s just modern leftism in a nutshell. Attitude and words mean everything, actions and their effects mean nothing.

Fine, have your way. Yea! America got an award for electing someone with a long track record of opposing democracy around the world! We’ve return to the mold of the people who brought “peace” (along with mass murder, tyranny and poverty) to Indochina! Hurray! The European chattering classes love us! Only those jerks in Eastern Europe like the old us better!

You know, there is a lot of research in psychology that shows that people who who are bombarded with approval for being good people are less likely to make moral decisions than those who are criticized. You might think about that while your on your little self-esteem instead of accomplishments kick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f61KMw5zVhg

That would be like Megan Fox giving Quaaludes to Bill Clinton to trick him into doing something that she might find enjoyable, but would not be in keeping with his marital vows.

If anybody can figure out a blatant attempt to manipulate the President of the US towards certain policy directions that may not be very pleasing to a European intellectual, but would be in the best interests of this country, do it.

What concerns me is that this award is a fairly blatant attempt by the nobel elitists to manipulate the President of the US toward certain policy directions that may be very pleasing to a European intellectual, but might not be in the best interests of this country.

The award says, “Don’t worry, Pres. Obama, we support you, especially as you seem to want to decide to wind down the war in Afghanistan instead of reinforce your troops there, and, even more importantly, we just know you would never respond militarily to any action by Iran. If you did, then you just wouldn’t be our big, strong peacemaker, would you?”

An award for not being Bush? Certainly. But even more, a carrot to lead the easily taken in down policy paths held in high esteem by the very people who have abdicated any global responsibility beyond high talk and meaningless conferences to conclude toothless agreements.

Beneath the superficial foolishness, there is a deeper and darker motive in play here.

Hard to say which prize was lamer.

Allow me to toot my own horn for my prescience:

From these pages on September 4th, 2008 at 7:37 pm:

Obama is an empty suit who has done absolutely nothing except work on his memoirs and run for office. He is a lawyer who never went to court. A law professor who never wrote an scholarly article. A state senator who voted present. A community organizer? Give me a break that is a meaningless title and job. Oh yes, a US senator, who spent his single term there running for higher office. I assume that if he loses, the next volume of his memoirs (working title: “Why Are Those People So Mean to Me”) will be out next year.

Here is my question what is the best name for him: 0bama, ØBama, Nobama, N0bama, NØbama, Zer0bama, ZerØbama?

Such is the bizarre nature of this award that I have even heard it said on BBC Radio 4, of all places, that Obama received it for “not being Bush.”

How sad is it to win an award because of the shadow cast by another person? Will Obama’s legacy be that “he wasn’t Bush?”