THE NOBEL PEACE FARCE by Tim Siggia

THE NOBEL PEACE FARCE

By Tim Siggia

October 15, 2007

"The most important thing to remember about prizes is that Mozart never got any." -- Unknown

When the Landmark Legal Foundation's nomination of Rush Limbaugh for the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize was first announced on Feb. 1, I sent Rush an e-mail which sort of congratulated him on being nominated. I say "sort of" because in that e-mail I told Rush that if I were he, considering who some of the past recipients had been, I would have declined the nomination and would refuse the award if I won it. Rush never answered that e-mail -- I never really expected that he would -- but I know he read it. As anyone who listens to his program knows, Rush personally reads all e-mails sent to him.

Perhaps the last Nobel Peace Prize recipient who really deserved such an award was Mother Teresa of Calcutta, believed by many to eventually become a canonized saint of the Catholic Church. That the good Albanian nun was worthy of such honor there is no question. Whether or not the Nobel Peace Prize is worthy of her is another matter altogether. Ever since then, the Nobel Peace Prize, whatever it was originally supposed to be, has degenerated into an annual political-correctness award having nothing to do with peace, and everything to do with politics. Consider who some of the past recipients have been:

Desmond Tutu

Nelson Mandela

Yasser Arafat

Jimmy Carter

And now: Al Gore, co-recipient for 2007 along with the United Nations Panel on Climate Change. According to official reports, Gore's 2007 "documentary" movie, An Inconvenient Truth, weighed heavily in the decision to award him this year's prize. How do studies on climate change, so-called documentaries filled with distortions and exaggerations, and carrying on like a latter-day Chicken Little contribute to the cause of world peace, you might ask? It's a question only a confirmed leftist could answer. Now it becomes crystal clear, as if we didn't know it all along, that Rush Limbaugh never had a chance at actually winning the Nobel Peace Prize. The last time any conservative did win it was probably about the same time they last had a blizzard in Tahiti. That former president Bill Clinton actually campaigned to get this award should speak volumes about the prize itself.

There ought to be some balance here. Using the logic of Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), perennial unsuccessful candidate for president, since we have a Nobel Peace Prize, shouldn't there be a corresponding Nobel War Prize as well? At the very least, it would double the honors in this category. Imagine what a feather in the turban of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad it might be to not only get the Nobel Peace Prize himself (it could very conceivably happen), but to have his top general get the Nobel War Prize as well! Not only would this prospect drive left-wingers throughout America, and throughout the rest of the world as well, absolutely stark-raving mad with joy, but they would also see no dichotomy in it whatsoever. Nor would it particularly bother conservatives, who would tend to see both awards as being of relatively equal value.

But I digress. Since there is no Nobel War Prize and the Nobel Peace Prize is a reality, if a somewhat absurd one, let us stick to the issue at hand. If Bill Clinton still wants the Nobel Peace Prize, I say let him have it. Not even he can denigrate it any more than it already has been denigrated. Since it is these days, for all practical purposes, just a resume filler for liberals, what's the harm? After all, how many of us remember who last year's recipient was? And how many of us really care? All you really have to do to win it is be a well-known liberal, and Bill Clinton pretty much fulfills that criteria. He did, after all, become the Greatest American President Who Ever Lived in much the same manner. In fact, we might speculate for a moment or so on who some future recipients, in addition to Clinton, might be, such as:

Michael Moore, Hollywood politico-producer who has already demonstrated the ability to produce crock-u-mentaries every bit as laughable as Al Gore's.

Hugo Chavez, Venezuelan president, who, while doing everything he can to foment anti-American sentiment in Latin America and elsewhere, still sells his Citgo gasoline to American consumers, most of whom by now have to know where it come from, and is cozied up to by celebrities like Harry Belafonte.

Al Franken, satirist, kingpin of the failed Air America, and living proof that you don't need to be funny to be a comedian.

Fidel Castro, Cuban president, just for being Fidel Castro.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, aforementioned president of Iran, who, while still believing Unle Sam to be the Great Satan, denying the Holocaust and Israel's right to exist, and denying the existence of homosexuality in his own country, has nevertheless demonstrated the ability to connect with American college students.

Oh yes, and let's not forget:

Osama bin Laden, head of the peace-loving Al Qaida, who, while using such unconventional methods as suicide bombings and crashing airplanes into buildings to make his point, has nonetheless pointed out to the rest of the world that the key to world peace lies simply in everyone converting to his brand of Islam.

As the above anonymous quote so eloquently states, Mozart never got any prizes. Neither did Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi or Ronald Reagan. And it might be safely said that of those who are well known who did receive the Nobel Peace Prize, few if any are well known because they received it. It is at best an empty honor, much like that of Poet Laureate in Great Britain. You needn't have taken an English Literature class to have heard of Lord Byron, yet he was never a Poet Laureate. Robert Southey was, yet few of us have heard of him -- unless, of course, we have actually read some of Byron's work, in which Southey, the reigning Poet Laureate of Byron's time, was amply ridiculed. So it is that at this point some readers might say, "Look, Siggia, this column of yours in nothing but a bunch of sour grapes! You're just jealous because Al Gore, who's younger than you, got himself a Nobel Peace Prize and you didn't!"

Well, the last parts of that statement are true. Al Gore is younger than I am, and he did get a Nobel Peace Prize, and I didn't -- nor will I ever. But am I jealous? No, not really. After all, as previously stated, in order to even be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize you have to be a well-known liberal, and I am neither liberal nor well-known -- which means that for me, like it or not, I will never be so much as even nominated for this honor.

Ah, yes: Obscurity does indeed have its blessings.