So you think the Nobel Prize was awarded for good intentions?

By Tanya Crosby-Straley
Nice powers of observation there, George. President Barack Obama does, indeed, seem to come bearing “good intentions,” and, evidently, it’s not just members of the “loony left” who are standing up and taking notice.

The world is.

For those of you who lament that (and yes, I’m actually quoting someone’s post-announcement Facebook status), “You wish you could win a prize for all the things you meant to do.” Well, then, go get yourself nominated ASAP! Let me tell you how…

According to the Nobel Foundation, to be valid, a nomination must be submitted by someone who falls within one of the following categories:

So first, you need to catch the attention of someone who matters—and shooting your friend in the face, while it does get you noticed, just doesn’t quite win you the right notoriety.

Most years there are between 150 and 200 candidates, the Nobel Committee says, and sometimes the candidates are nominated several thousand times. They don’t disclose the names of the nominees, but I wonder how many nominations Obama received. One would be remarkable, but I’m guessing one doesn’t snag you the prize.

So what are you going to nominate yourself for?

Maybe it’ll help if I tell you a bit about the Nobel prize itself. Alfred Nobel (that guy the award is named after) patented nitroglycerine-based explosive dynamite in 1867. While the invention made him a very, very rich man, it also cost him dearly: His younger brother died in an explosion at one of his own explosive factories, and he spent his life thereafter battling misgivings about the potential destructive uses of his invention. By the time he died in December of 1896, he’d become a vocal supporter of those who rallied against militarism and war. After his death, his will declared a “Nobel Peace Prize” should be awarded “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.” And he left the bulk of his fortune to the pursuit of pacifism (that’s what they use for the prize money).

Pacifism—Nobel Peace Prize—get it?

So what does this mean? It means that water-boarding in the name of peace just doesn’t qualify you for the prize. It means that if you think it’s OK to lie to your country about the existence of weapons of mass destruction so you can beat up the man who embarrassed your daddy, you need not apply. It means that Darth Cheney’s profiteering, fear-mongering, King of the Hill philosophy just doesn’t make the committee’s cut.

So why did President Barack Obama win the Nobel Peace Prize?

No, it isn’t because he means to cut the national budget. It’s not because he cares enough about every American to want them to have access to health care. And no, it’s not just because he did order Guantanamo Bay closed. But, YES, it is because he banned the use of torture. And YES, it is because he is taking the moral high ground in the “war against terrorism” (instead of invading countries that have oil, but absolutely no complicity in the 9/11 attacks). And YES it’s because his diplomatic endeavors are, according to the Nobel Committee, “founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world’s population”—and for President Barack Obama’s “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”

Among other Nobel prize winners are Jimmy Carter (2002), Nelson Mandela (1993), Mother Teresa (1979), Martin Luther King Jr. (1964) and Theodore Roosevelt (1906). Given that among his fellow Nobel Laureates are some of the most generous souls to ever live among us, it’s no wonder Obama is gracious enough to be humbled by the award and to consider it, not an affirmation of his own deeds (which are growing in number, despite what the raging right would like you to believe), but a call to action for himself and everyone.

For those of you who object to this reasoning, I’m guessing you’re of the mindset that “might makes right,” and hey, congratulations, this is your legacy to the world: On January 1992, while at a formal dinner in Japan, George H. W. Bush vomited on the Prime Minister of Japan. While I’m sure he didn’t do it on purpose, it was a moment symbolic of the Bush dynasty’s attitude toward foreign policy of any kind. And the world, did, indeed, take notice then, too. And guess what, they didn’t like it—or us—very much. So stand by your man, I say. In unison, make your vomit known… go on and hurl on the concept of Good Will on Earth. Update your Twits and Facebook statuses with regurgitated political execration. The rest of us will don our boots, pinch clothespins on our noses and walk away, so you can enjoy the stench of each other’s company – undiluted by anything as unpleasant as peace and prosperity.

Happy warring!

This article © Copyright ModerationNation.net. For reprints, please inqure with the webmaster. Tanya A. Crosby is the New York Times bestselling author of 16 novels and an award winning journalist. Visit Tanya's official site at www.tanyaannecrosby.com Check out her MySpace DORway’s current webmaster