96785752acgdhHere’s a blast from the past, gentle readers. You remember 2009, when Barack Obama, in office for a few days, having accomplished nothing whatever, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He eventually, as Rush Limbaugh noted, admitted he didn’t actually do anything to deserve it:

OBAMA: I am both surprised and deeply humbled –

RUSH: You’re not humbled.

OBAMA: — by the decision of the Nobel committee. Let me be clear, I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments.

RUSH: Uh-huh.

OBAMA: — but rather as an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations.

RUSH: Except this one.

OBAMA: To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who have been honored by this prize.

RUSH: Then why did you accept it? He gets $1.4 million. He should put it in his stash for Detroit because they’re not going to have enough there. All right. He’s going to accept the award because it will give momentum for his cause.

Well here’s bit of cosmic irony. As Mr. Obama is fond of saying (in a aphorism he stole from Theodore Parker): “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Things just got a bit more bendy, according to The Washington Times: 

Screen Shot 2015-09-23 at 8.27.50 PM

The former director of Norway’s Nobel Institute revealed this week that he regrets the committee’s decision to give the 2009 Nobel Peace award to President Obama.

Geil Lundestad, director at the institute for 25 years, said in his just-published memoir that he and the committee had unanimously decided to grant the award to Mr. Obama just after his election in 2009 more in hopes of aiding the American president to achieve his goals on nuclear disarmament, rather than in recognition of what Mr. Obama had already accomplished.

Actually, this is just another stunning and lightworkerishly historic accomplishment for Mr. Obama. He is the post-Constitution president, the post-racial president, the post-fiscal solvency president, the post-truth president, the post-credibility president, the post-avoidance-of-treason president, and the post-ability-to-recognize-America’s-deadliest-enemies president. Now he is undeniably the post-accomplishment president, establishing the handy precedent of accepting international accolades for possible future accomplishments.

[We] thought it would strengthen Obama and it didn’t have this effect,’ he told the Associated Press in an interview.

Golly! Who could have predicted that?

The award so early in his term appeared to take the Obama White House by surprise, and Mr. Lundestad said U.S. officials privately asked if a Nobel Prize-winner had ever skipped the awards ceremony.

Those that subsequently paid attention as Mr. Obama bowed to every tyrant and despot within bowing range might remember this: 

Norwegians are incensed over what they view as his shabby response to the prize by cutting short his visit.

The White House has cancelled many of the events peace prize laureates traditionally submit to, including a dinner with the Norwegian Nobel committee, a press conference, a television interview, appearances at a children’s event promoting peace and a music concert, as well as a visit to an exhibition in his honour at the Nobel peace centre.

He has also turned down a lunch invitation from the King of Norway.

According to a poll published by the daily tabloid VG, 44% of Norwegians believe it was rude of Obama to cancel his scheduled lunch with King Harald, with only 34% saying they believe it was acceptable.

‘Of all the things he is cancelling, I think the worst is cancelling the lunch with the king,’ said Siv Jensen, the leader of the largest party in opposition, the populist Progress party. ‘This is a central part of our government system. He should respect the monarchy,’ she told VG.

But Norway’s king isn’t a lunatic murderer who hates America! How could Mr. Obama legitimately be seen with him? Back to the Washington Times:

Even many of Obama’s supporters thought that the prize was a mistake,’ Mr. Lundestad said. In the book, he expressed regret that the decision had been based in a hope for the future rather than recognition of past accomplishments, and that their expectations for Mr. Obama were not fulfilled.

credit: cnn.com

credit: cnn.com

Oh, so that’s it! The problem isn’t that the Nobel Committee and Mr. Obama are frauds and intellectual lightweights; the problem is Mr. Obama turned out not to be the god-like figure some imagined him to be, thus exposing them as frauds and intellectual lightweights.

I don’t know about you, gentle readers, but I’m going get my shrimp tacos, and my Peace Prize too. I might accomplish something significant for world peace someday, and if I don’t, the Committee can regret that every bit as much as they regret Mr. Obama’s Peace Prize. The certificate and medal will look splendid on my wall. Maybe I can include a shrimp taco in the display?