Jimmy Carter got one (maybe it was for abandoning a key US ally in the Shah and inviting in the Ayatolloahs?). Al Gore got one for being a global warming propagandist. Barack Obama got one for being nothing but a slick-talking socialist.
Ronald Reagan, who won the Cold War that had plagued the world for nearly fifty years, and who turned around an economy that was on its way down the toilet, didn’t get one.
So clearly being an ideological partisan liberal is a prerequisite for “winning” a Nobel Prize.
Murderer Yassar Arafat got one. So maybe being a terrorist or at least being someone who is good at destabilizing world peace is a prerequisite, too.
And, of course, one of the few people who actually deserve the award was languishing in a Chinese prison while the Chinese who were crushing the human spirit were sipping champagne with Barry Hussein in the Obama White House. So I guess hypocrisy and moral cowardice are probably criterions, also.
The background for giving that dissident – Liu Xiaobo – the Nobel Prize, is itself rather revealing. Basically, in giving it to Obama for doing nothing beyond being a leftist, the Nobel committee felt pressured to give the 2010 award to somebody who actually deserved it. If this was a Pee Wee Baseball umpiring deal, the dirty umpire would make sure his kid’s team won every single game but the one where league officials came to monitor his calls.
All that said, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange would seem to be a perfect choice for the award.
A cup full of horse crap stuffed in his face would be a pretty good choice, too.
There’s also the complicity of Wikileaks in possible torture and death, but who cares about that? Wikileaks callously released the names and whereabouts of Afghan informants helping US troops drive out the Taliban — a truly corrupt, murderous, terrorist regime — putting not only the lives of the informants in danger, but also the lives of their families. (Even Amnesty International was disgusted by this.) Julian Assange doctored a video of an Apache shooting insurgents in Baghdad, calling it collateral murder, but his little act of exposure in Afghanistan could lead to real collateral murder. The “courage” of the Wikileaks document drop also put the lives of US citizens and troops in danger, but hey, maybe that’s why they’re being nominated.
Julian Assange also admitted that Wikileaks was responsible for a Kenyan massacre that followed one of their document drops, but who cares? The Kenyans were informed before they were slaughtered. I’m sure that, were they alive, they would totally say it was worth it.
Even the flagship of liberalism The New York Times acknowledged that Assange and Wikileaks altered video to falsely demonize the US military:
By the time of the meetings in London, WikiLeaks had already acquired a measure of international fame or, depending on your point of view, notoriety. Shortly before I got the call from The Guardian, The New Yorker published a rich and colorful profile of Assange, by Raffi Khatchadourian, who had embedded with the group. WikiLeaks’s biggest coup to that point was the release, last April, of video footage taken from one of two U.S. helicopters involved in firing down on a crowd and a building in Baghdad in 2007, killing at least 18 people. While some of the people in the video were armed, others gave no indication of menace; two were in fact journalists for the news agency Reuters. The video, with its soundtrack of callous banter, was horrifying to watch and was an embarrassment to the U.S. military. But in its zeal to make the video a work of antiwar propaganda, WikiLeaks also released a version that didn’t call attention to an Iraqi who was toting a rocket-propelled grenade and packaged the manipulated version under the tendentious rubric “Collateral Murder.” (See the edited and non-edited videos here.)
Too bad those Reuters journalists decided to pal around with armed terrorists. And too bad that Wikileaks released what was clearly propaganda that edited that little detail out of their Nobel-Prize-winning effort.
But propaganda is FINE with the political left, as long as it’s propaganda that demonizes conservatives, Republicans, America or the US military. And just as is the case of Al Gore, the fact that Julian Assange is a documented propagandist who falsifies stories really doesn’t much matter in whether or not he should get a big fat award.
The New York Times, which of course helped Assange get his America-undermining pile of secrets to the world, was rather petty in its treatment of Assange. After all, they were the arrogant elitists, and Assange wasn’t even a “real journalist.” So after benefitting from his story, they turned on him like cockroaches eating their own:
On the fourth day of the London meeting, Assange slouched into The Guardian office, a day late. Schmitt took his first measure of the man who would be a large presence in our lives. “He’s tall — probably 6-foot-2 or 6-3 — and lanky, with pale skin, gray eyes and a shock of white hair that seizes your attention,” Schmitt wrote to me later. “He was alert but disheveled, like a bag lady walking in off the street, wearing a dingy, light-colored sport coat and cargo pants, dirty white shirt, beat-up sneakers and filthy white socks that collapsed around his ankles. He smelled as if he hadn’t bathed in days.”
So maybe really lousy personal hygiene habits are desirable for winning a Nobel Prize, too.
John Stossel pointed something out in an interview with Bill O’Reilly. O’Reilly mentioned all the awards Stossel had won as a journalist, including 19 Emmys and 5 awards for excellence by the National Press Club. But John Stossel noted that he wouldn’t be winning any more such awards. Because he went to Fox News. And the field of journalism is largely comprised of radical leftwing ideologues who are simply far too biased to recognize that the same great journalist who won all those awards is still the same great journalist doing the same great work. But the field of American journalism doesn’t care about that; as far as these ideologue propagandists are concerned, John Stossel is persona non grata. It’s just the way the roll.
And frankly, John Stossel is a better journalist than he’s ever been, because he cares more about the truth than he cares about playing these sick people’s game to win their stupid awards for leftwing bias.
The only reason the Nobel Prize award gets any coverage at all any more is because it is clearly lagely a far leftist award, and the media that gives us “the news” are a bunch of far leftists who think their fellow leftists (and only fellow leftists, mind you) deserve accolades.
Start Thinking Right 