Lately, I've been plagued with this vague suspicion that things aren't really changing or improving as much as they could. Not regarding myself or my life, mind you; the suggestion that I've done absolutely nothing of meaning this year is a stone cold fact that I've completely accepted and am comfortable with. I'm talking about today's Nobel Peace Prize announcement and Obama's first ten months as a whole.
Now, since I don't feel like doing any actual work or research here, I'm just writing off the top of my head. Anyone that can fact-check this for me and leave corrections in the comments below would be much appreciated (I'd also like an "Obama Score Card" in Excel format when you get a chance).
Obama Cons:
* Didn't prosecute any of the Bush administration for war crimes.
* Does not wish to pursue or prosecute the people who ordered, okayed or performed the Gitmo torture.
* Will not close Gitmo by the promised January 2010 date.
* Has not repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
* Health insurance benefits still not extended to gay partners.
* And that Health Care Reform thing where poor people no longer need to die for stupid reasons isn't looking too umm, healthy.
And now this Nobel Peace Prize win. The nominations deadline for this year's award was February 1st, when Obama hadn't been in office even two weeks. Even assuming they judged him on his work after the fact, you're still giving one of the world's most prestigious awards to someone based on promise and intent, not actual accomplishment. You know, kind of like how Hugh Jackman keeps getting nominated for Golden Globes.
Did Obama deserve this award more than Sima Samar, Dr. Denis Mukwege or the Handicap International and Cluster Munition Coalition? I dunno, you tell me.
There's a fine line between "full of promise" and "full of promises" and I don't think people are wrong to start being tougher on the guy and asking some hard questions, starting with "If not now then when?"
On the flip side, a quick trip to True / Slant suggests that "Obama has poured unprecedented funding into alternative energy ($15 billion) and alternative transportation, launched high-speed rail, exercised the power to declare carbon dioxide a pollutant, sought a low-emissions zone for 200 miles surrounding our coasts, enacted the toughest auto-emissions standards in U.S. history, and begun converting the auto industry to electric vehicle production. He’s preserved two million acres of wilderness and a thousand miles of rivers."
Again, I'm not double-checking any of that because well, I don't feel like it, but I do know for a fact that everyone agrees that Obama is a god damned ecco-warrior about this country's present habits and future and has enacted some amazing regulations this year. And I read that car law thing in Rolling Stone when Michael Moore was on the cover so I'm pretty sure at least that's true.
So paint me as still hopefully cautious for now but I'm going to start keeping a list of the things he reneges on and how the wording of his vows keep changing on the White House web site from here on out. So get to work, sir; there's still lots to do and we're going to be watching closer than ever during your sophomore year.
My issue with this whole situation (which I did a very, very poor job of conveying in 140 character segments, obviously is as follows):
ReplyDeleteFirst of all I WHOLE HEARTEDLY AGREE that he in no way deserved this award. I don't want to argue that point, in fact I think it's pointless to given that yes, he is winning an award based on promises and intentions and not actual actions.
As annoyed as I am that I'm not getting all the unicorns and rainbows that I was in no way promised but have definitely come to expect, I DO think the general response to this perceived failure is a little over-the-top. So over-the-top that it's endearing--it sort of implies that we were so naive as a whole that we genuinely though Obama was a perfect beacon of change and not just a politician who was particularly good at his job.
Anyway, that's not my problem with the whole situation. Moving on.
The ONLY thing I think is even sort of interesting about this is the very, very obvious bias on behalf of...whoever decides who gets a Nobel Peace Prize (I imagine a room full of sort of Council Elders in long robes with long white beards (even (or especially) the women)).
It's more interesting to me that people could potentially discuss the implications of this decision--I hardly believe that these Council Elders WEREN'T aware they were doing something that would stir up controversy. I think there's a more interesting sort of sociological discussion about what is potentially at least sort of representative of the global political mindset (or the European parts of it, at least).
I find it disheartening that instead people are just using it as another excuse to either claim Obama is a failure or that he's the greatest man who ever lived.
That said I'm practically a baby, so my thoughts and opinions a) barely matter and b) are almost definitely incorrect.