« life's not fair, deal with it | Main | the gentle art of making enemies »

ain't that a kick in the ass?

ain't that a kick in the ass?

I had a post here earlier saying what a farce it is that Jimmy Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize; I compared the importance of that prize to the importance of winning a grammy. Which is to say, hahahhaa.

The post is gone now, because some nitwit decided to leave 14 comments in the space of two minutes calling for my head on a platter. It was easier to just delete the whole thing.

Anyhow, Gunnar Berge, the Nobel committee chairman, hds the courtesy to drive home my point that the peace prize is nothing more than a sham:

"It should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current administration has taken. It's a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the United States."

So basically he is saying, "Yea, here's your peace prize, Jimmy, but don't read too much into it. We're just using you to make a point."

I think that someone should go kick Mr. Berge in the leg. Wear steel tip boots, ok?

linkage from Mr. Shark.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference ain't that a kick in the ass?:

» i'm no pundit but... from negroplease.com :: better left unsaid
the reasons, the reasons are why we're here... [Read More]

Comments

Of course, the rest of the Nobel Peace Prize committee has disavowed Berge's statement, for what that's worth. Me, I stopped believing in the Peace Prize the year it was given to Henry Kissinger.

Wouldn't turn away the money if it was given to me, of course. . .

And let's not forget that staunch advocate of peace himself, Arafat, won the prize once.

Which makes it the equivalent of an MTV award, which is just below the grammys on the award scale.

I admire Carter for his commitment to peace and his willingness to lend his stature to support efforts to further peace and democracy. Suffice it to say, though, that the Nobel Peace Prize ain't what it used to be. Once the committee awarded it to Arafat, it lost all credibility as far as I'm concerned. Now, I'd have to say it ranks on a par with the People's Choice Awards- and that's being generous.

I've been unable to take the Nobel Peace Price seriously ever since they gave one to Henry Kissenger.

It's pretty meaningless anyway, because the true significance of any peacemaking or peace treaty won't become apparent until many years later. How many times have they given it to some peacemakers who's peace unravelled after a couple of years?

It's only on thinking this topic over that I realised that, darn it, I don't know of a single other recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, notwithstanding those already mentioned. It's just not covered in the National Press unless there's some small controversy or you physically go looking for it (and, believe me, it takes some looking)

Now I'm perfectly willing to admit that I'm not great with current affairs at the best of times, but it is an indication of the state of the population that you can't miss who got kicked off Big Brother, or whose insipid manufactured single scored a number one on the back of what one of the blonde singers wore in the video, whereas awards for achievements in peacemaking (however flawed in mediation and presentation...lalalala) are all but passed over.

Do we need the media to inform us of events occuring around the world, or do we wish it to distract us from them?

I can think of some past winners off the top of my head: Albert Schweitzer, Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa, Aung Kyi, Mikhail Gorbachev, the Dalai Lama, Lech Walesa, Elie Wiesel, and of course Sadat and Begin jointly during Carter's term. This probably says more about my Trivial Pursuit abilities than anything else.

i have to send this comment to you americans stop panicking and looking for war after sept 11 you have been shitting yourselves.i am from england i am not a liberal in fact i am probably centre right in politics,however stop kidding yourselves this is about terror this is about oil and money.if you was so concerned about terror why fund the ira openly,why not take that twat mugabe out,simple its not to do with terror.the best thing you can do is find out why one of your citizens is running rond washington popping people off for fun thanks.

If you were a citizen of the United States, I'd say kiss my ass. But since you're a clueless Brit, I'll say slurp my butt.

In defense of Pres. Carter - he has spent the last 20 years doing what he could to bring peace to the world. You may not agree with what he has done but I believe he has always been sincere. For that he deserves credit - and the peace prize.

I'd have to agree that awarding it to Jimmy Carter in this way undermines the value of the price itself, not that he doesn't deserve it. He might, I don't know. But it seems they are just using him to make a point.

Why do I suspect that if Bush and Blair or Hamid Karzai had won the prize you right-wingers would be lauding the brilliance and perspicacity of the selection committee?

Next it'll be "The Oscars are worthless trash because they gave Best Director to Barbra Streisand, that liberal bitch!"

Brian,

I am not now nor have I ever been a "right winger." Nor do I think Bush would have been an acceptable choice for the peace prize.

Your analogy makes no sense. The peace prize deals with word politics. The Oscars do not. I only compared the peace prize to the grammys in that it's pretty much a worthless prize. See Arafat and Kissinger for reference there.

I take more issue with the fact that giving Carter the prize was only meant to serve as a kick in the face to America than I do with the fact that Carter won it at all.

For the past day and a half the Nobel Peace Prize has been turned into the equivalent of being handed a fresh turd because the right is offended that a member of the selection committee voiced an opinion that it was meant as a slap to George Bush.

That Arafat and Kissinger could be awarded this prize in the past reflects the context in which they were given, as does the award to Carter, which deserves to be judged on its own merits and not upon previous award winners and their relative political positions viz. the position of the complainers. This was my point about the Oscars.

Michele whether you consider yourself to be on the right or not is your own choice, but the crowd you have begun to attract here sure does skew that way.

Brian, I'm not offended that the award was intended as a slap at Bush, per se. I'm offended that they have taken what is supposed to be a prestigious award and used it to make a point, rather than give it in the spirit in which it was intended.

If I was Jimmy Carter, I would be just a bit offended by the statement of the chair of the committee.

Oh, and now I'm guilty by association? In the past I have attracted both left wingers and right wingers to this site. I have had facists and anarchists have their day here as well a religious fanatics and gay-bashers.

Does that mean that I skew their way? Should I invite only people who have the same ideology as me to leave comments here or read my site?

Whoa, hang on there - "they" did not make the comment that the award should be viewed in any light other than what it is. One person - who happens to be overall chairman of the Nobel Committee - said this, as you rightly noted in the initial entry. Bad idea? Certainly, as it provides fodder for things like we see here. For the record, I don't pigeonhole you into any particular realm of the political spectrum; however, I think that outrage would be better directed at the individual and not have the unfortunate effect of devaluing whatever work Carter has done that the committe saw fit to award him the prize in the first place.

Not in agreement with you this time.

An observation:

'i have to send this comment to you americans stop panicking and looking for war after sept 11 you have been shitting yourselves.i am from england i am not a liberal...'

Posted by: simon on October 12, 2002 04:06 AM |

'If you were a citizen of the United States, I'd say kiss my ass. But since you're a clueless Brit, I'll say slurp my butt.'

Posted by: Sekimori on October 12, 2002 08:02 AM

Does this mean that ignorant jingoistic hatemongering masquerading as precious 'patriotism' is back in vogue? Yeah, some people really learned something from 9/11, didn't they?

Forgot the username on that last one. Wouldn't want you to think I'm taking a shot anonymously...

wow. i'm pretty sure you can think someone's an idiot without being an "ignorant jingoistic hatemonger."

I did mean BOTH printed in the comment, not just the latter...