Nobel Update

I know, I know, but I have to do another update on this - the hits just keep on comin'!

In his acceptance response, which was 10 sentences long, Obama referred to himself 16 times. But it's not about him, you know. It's for the children. [with liberals, everything is for the children...]

The public's collective reaction appears to be: "Huh?" This prompted several people on Friday to suggest that Obama has finally lived up to his promise to bring unity to America. I mean, if everyone -- Left, Center, and Right, in America and abroad -- has this reaction, it's truly a moment of international unity.

Did you know that Barack Obama is the first Nobel Peace prize winner to endorse genocide? Yep:

In 2007 Barack Obama endorsed genocide rather than keep US troops in Iraq.

Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot use its military to solve humanitarian problems and that preventing a potential genocide in Iraq isn't a good enough reason to keep U.S. forces there.

Although...so did Arafat, unless you don't consider wiping out the Jews genocide. Personally, I kinda do.

One suggestion of what to do with that reward money is to save the 216 low-income children who the Dems screwed out of their scholarships to a top-notch private school earlier this year. The problem with that, of course, is that by getting them out of the poor public schools might enable them to actually become educated, and thus figure out that the Democrats aren't exactly their best advocates.

Of course, Obama said he was humbled and surprised, but that was yet another lie. In fact, he knew he was being nominated for the award back before the election:

According to the rules of the Nobel Prize nomination, a candidate receives an invitation for submission as a Nobel Peace candidate in September of the previous year, and must respond by the 1st of the subsequent February. That's right, in September of 2008, when nobody had even voted for the current President, Mr. Obama was under the illusion that he was qualified for a Nobel Peace Prize based on a few years as a community organizer, a little time in the Illinois legislature, an incomplete term in the United States' Senate, and a couple of books about his favorite topic -- himself.

Eh, what's one more lie? I think this guy lies more than he tells the truth.

And, to top it all off, SNL didn't disappoint on this low-hanging fruit:

Gateway Pundit reminds us that we can all help Obama win the Heisman, too.

Here are some of the other awards Obama's pre-emptively won:

Finally, here are a couple pieces of more serious analysis. First, we need to address the plausible criticism of the Left that conservatives aren't being properly happy that an American won such a high-profile international contest:

This isn't a case of Obama's popularity winning something positive for Americans, as might have been true if he had persuaded the IOC to bring the Olympics to Chicago. This is (1) a personal award and (2) an explicit award for a particular vision of what constitutes good foreign policy. I'm indifferent to Obama winning a personal award and opposed to his vision of foreign receiving an award.

Some might argue that the prestige that comes with this award will help Obama in his dealings with the rest of the world. I doubt it. First, these days the Nobel Peace Prize impresses those in the know to about the same degree as a positive column by Tom Friedman. Second, I suspect that some key leaders will be envious and perhaps less well-disposed to Obama as a result of his being awarded for who he is.

A number of people pointed out the fact that this particular award is most likely an attempt to influence future actions, and Rush Limbaugh sums it up:

That Nobel was not a gesture of Obama-worship by left-leaning Norwegians. It was the very opposite: It was a pre-emptive strike against Obama, an attempt to neutralize him. How can a Peace Nobelist strike Iranian nuclear plants? Or wage a protracted war in Afghanistan? Or tell the Palestinians, “Sorry, that’s the best offer, take it or leave it”? The hope of course is that he cannot.

Time will tell, of course, but essentially no one with a pulse thinks this was actually deserved. Except Obama, that is.

And that probably speaks a whole lot more about the situation than any other commentary, don't you think?

There's my two cents.