Friday, October 09, 2009

For what?

Honestly, I just saw this headline on Washington Monthly and thought that he must be linking to the Onion or something.

I mean, I think Obama's rhetoric on nuclear reduction is good and all, but he hasn't done much yet.

My first instinct is that giving the prize prospectively -- or, as I've already seen a few people suggest, for not being George Bush and/or John McCain -- lessens the value of the prize more than helps Obama or peace. But who knows.

If the prize is being given for not having a lunatic in charge, shouldn't the recipient have been the American electorate rather than Obama?

(Josh Marshall makes a valiant attempt at defending the "not GW/JM" award here. Update: Steve Benen adds to what Marshall said here.)


Update: It's a sad day when I find the snark at the National Review's blog on the mark: "...what about Physics and Chemistry? Are we just going to ignore the president's contributions there?"

Update 2: My precise reaction -- that this reads like it was from the Onion -- has been shared by a large number of others. Which leads to the following idea: wouldn't it be funny -- a sort of meta-joke, as well as a news commentary -- if The Onion simply published this story straight? Just buy the rights to the AP version or something and run it as if it was an Onion story. It would be a good joke on the story, I think, as well as a nod to the Onion's own role in our cultural consciousness...

No comments: