Did Obama win the Nobel Prize for literature?

Oh, I guess they’re just giving out Peace Prizes for fiction now.

When even CNN is saying that the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Barack Obama “not for substantive accomplishments,” you know something’s up.

In this case, it’s the increasing irrelevance of the Nobel Peace Prize, an award once given to environmentalist Al Gore, who believes in his own cause so much that he “couldn’t be bothered to turn off the gaudy lights that show off his goofy trees.”

Now, apparently, the Nobel people in charge of giving out the awards can’t be bothered to give out the peace prize to people who have accomplished some things in the direction of peace.

You know, not a guy who’s currently fighting two bleeping wars. (See:  the Bush/Obama policies.)  By what standards is he considered a “peace prize” candidate?

Maybe people like this (courtesy Mary Katherine Ham) could/should have won instead.

Liberals love giving each other awards.  Al Gore has an Nobel Prize, and don’t forget the Oscar he’s won.  Teddy Roosevelt (”progressive”) and Woodrow Wilson have Nobel Prizes.  I’m reminded of the quote from “Casino,” in which Robert De Niro’s mob-connected character says something to the tune of “outside of Vegas, I would have been arrested for what I do.  Out here, they’re giving me awards.”

As a former Time Magazine Person of the Year myself, I know how totally arbitrary these things can be.  A group of people with suits somewhere gets to decide who wins a prestigious award – and when they give it away willy-nilly because a guy likes to talk about hope, it takes away from the award itself, not to mention the people who have won it for actually contributing to world peace, like Martin Luther King Jr.

Maybe Obama should feel “humbled.”  Because the peace prize ain’t what it used to be.