And the Nobel Peace Prize goes to....President Obama?

I wish I could say I was thrilled to bits learning that President Obama had won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize this morning.  It's a huge and prestigious honor, and while he has done a number of things that have not pleased me since taking office, I still admire the guy and think he's doing a credible job.  

But the Nobel Peace Prize? Really? I know peace has a broad variety of definitions, and certainly, Obama has made some good moves towards repairing the international diplomatic destruction wreaked by eight years of the Bush Doctrine, but he hasn't really done anything yet.  I understand the rationale behind the prize committee's decision, I just don't agree with it. 

I would have loved to see President Obama get this award in two, or three years time.  Right now, in addition to feeling like the prize was solely used to make a statement rather than make a statement while recognizing exemplary behavior/actions, I worry that this may backfire terribly on him.  Not only in the sense that people are now asking "wait, seriously? What's he ever done to deserve this?" but in the sense that it may have placed too many expectations on him (once again).   It also leaves me wondering if the Nobel Committee isn't tacitly saying "hey, you're the antithesis of Bush.  We want to recognize and reward that."  Because if they are, that's a huge shame in my book, because this prize should stand for something, it does stand for something.  

Is Obama capable of being placed in the same category as Muhammed Yunnus, Mother Teresa, Shirin Ebadi, and Desmond Tutu?  Quite probably, yes, but I don't think the hour for that ascension was this hour.   So it is with decidedly mixed feelings that I congratulate President Obama on his Nobel Prize, though I will say sir, that was one heck of a speech.