Many media sources around the world have pronounced the awarding of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama as something difficult to comprehend.
The Times of London implied giving the award to Obama was simply a slap in the face to President Bush by the Norwegian Nobel Committee. In other words, it was an award to Obama for not being George W. Bush, referred to by some European leaders as the “war” president.
In the Wall Street Journal, Peggy Noonan wondered what Bush had done to deserve such feelings by the Nobel Committee.
After all, he was responsible for putting Osama Bin Laden on the run from Afghanistan into the caves along the Afghan-Pakistan border.
In Iraq, she noted, Bush ended the reign of a vicious dictator who murdered 300,000 people. By toppling Saddam, he liberated 50 million people.
As pointed out by Ronald Kessler, writing on an Internet Web site, because of Bush:
• Afghan women can attend school, go out in public without being accompanied by a man, and hold down a job if they so choose.
• Saddam’s reign no longer inflicts torture on Iraqis by attaching electric prods to their genitals or by giving them a bath in acid.
• His reign no longer drills holes in their ankles and skulls.
• He no longer leaves them naked in refrigerators for days.
• He no longer cuts out their tongues or cuts off their ears.
• He no longer forces Iraqi men to watch gang rapes of their wives and sisters.
• His sons no longer roam the streets of Baghdad grabbing young women, preferably virgins, taking them to the palace to rape them, then dropping them back in the streets, if not killing them.
Bush also sent $15 billion to Africa to combat AIDS, dramatically dropping the rate of deaths there from that horrible disease.
The committee was wrong in awarding the prize to Obama, whose efforts at world peace so far are just talk. Better to have waited until those efforts show fruit.
And, in the meantime, give the award to one deserving of it: former President George W. Bush.
G. SAM PIATT can be reached at (740) 353-3101, ext. 236.
Obama did not seek the prize, it was given to him. Big deal. Is the world (or Portsmouth) worse off that he got the award? I think not. Get over it.
I was upset when the Times changed their comics page for the waste of paper it is now. Fortunately, we still have Frank and now Sam to give us a good laugh now and then. It would be wiser for the few writers that the Times has left to focus on real issues in this area, than to waste all of our time on this jibberish.
Meanwhile pappy39, liberal Americans are equally fed up with the likes of your childish ranting!
You'll notice "pappy" doesn't say much about the column, other than that he obviously agrees with it. Fine, whatever. Instead he spends 2/3 of his post calling me names because Rep's are so bitter that President John Wayne has left the saloon and now we have someone with real brains, temperament, charm and the ability to talk to other countries with words that aren't written on the side of bombs. You had your 8 years. Now for an opposing view.
It would be one thing if "pappy" made one snide remark and then defended the points of the column. Instead he calls me names personally because he doesn't agree with me. And he thinks *I'm* childish?
Thanks Daily Times for showing once again where your politics are.
If the county drives you crazy do what I did, move. The only problem with that, in your case, is you're a miserable person and no matter where you go, you'll still be miserable.
Please note, Twitterbug, conservative Americans are fed up with brats like you.
And 8 recomendations already? This county drives me crazy! How can I UNrecommend a column?!