Peggy Noonan Wants To Write Obama's Nobel Speech

Peggy Noonan has a frighteningly good idea for Obama's Nobel acceptance speech in Oslo - sing the praises of America [UPDATE: Tom Friedman wants an acceptance on behalf of the US soldiers and sailors from World War II forward.]:

Assuming the White House did nothing to encourage or lobby for the award, it is not Barack Obama's fault that he has been embarrassed by this honor. And it may possibly hold for him an unanticipated benefit. It may give him pause: Look what idiots my biggest international supporters are. I may have to rethink a few things.

How to redeem this? That is a hard question, but here is one idea. The president will deliver a big speech in Oslo Dec. 10: white tie and tails, a formal, bound statement. The world, as they say, will be watching. He should deflect the limelight. (Can he?) He should make his subject bigger than himself. (Is there a subject bigger than himself?) He has been accused of traveling through the world on an extended apology tour. That isn't fair, but the tag is there. How about an unapologetic address, a speech, with the world's elites leaning forward and listening, about the meaning of America? A speech that shows a grounded and sophisticated love for his country and its great traditions and history. Not a nationalistic speech, not a prideful one, but a loving one.

For instance: The Peace Prize judges won't see it this way, but America has gone to Europe twice in the past century to fight for peace. This is an old concept, and has to do with killing killers so they can't kill anymore. It cost America a lot to do this, and we kept no territory, as they say, beyond the graves where our soldiers lie. America then taxed itself and gave its wealth not only to its allies but to its former adversaries, to help them rebuild. We didn't actually have to do this. We did it to make the world better. We did it to foster peace. (They should give us a prize.)

America hasn't just helped the world, it literally lit the world with its inventions, which are the product of its freedoms. The lights under which the Peace Prize judges read, and rejected, the worthy nominations? Why, those lights were invented by an American. The emails the committee members sent to each other, sharing their banal insights on leadership? They came through the Internet. Who invented the Internet? It was a Norwegian bureaucrat with a long face and hair on his nose and little plastic geometric eyeglasses? Oh wait, it was Americans. The members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee are healthy because they have been inoculated against diseases such as polio. Who invented the polio vaccine, an enfeebled old leftist academic in Oslo? Nah, it was a man named Jonas Salk. He was an American.

Europe's elites experience Mr. Obama as a historical accident that needs and deserves their encouragement. Actually he was elected with 69.5 million votes, and you know, they were cast by Americans. Go figure.

I just don't think he thinks that way but it would be a heck of a speech [Or Obama could go this way...].  And do let's note that Colin Powell took a similar tack at Davos a few years back:

Mr. Powell noted that the United States had sent its soldiers into foreign wars over the last century, most recently in Afghanistan, without having imperial designs on the territories it secured.

"We've put wonderful young men and women at risk, many of whom have lost their lives," he said, his voice growing hoarse. "We've asked for nothing but enough land to bury them in."

AMPLIFYING:  Re "I don't think Obama thinks that way" - Obama's standard and most comfortable pose is that of the mediator, the conciliator, the balancer, the bridge between rival points of view.  In 2002 he was not opposed to all wars, just dumb wars.  He deplores Jeremiah Wright's unreconstructed views, but he also deplores his racist, typical white grandmother.  He's got a crazy bombmaking friend in Bill Ayers, but he has a crazy pro-life friend in Senator Tom Coburn.  Obama is just the man in the middle, calmly trying to sort it out and helping the rest of us do the same.

Ms. Noonan has written half of Obama's speech, the "There are those who love America uncritically" part.  What she omitted is the balancing, the "Others can only find fault with America" side; those passages will include our treatment of Native Americans, slavery, Tuskegee, Vietnam, Gitmo, torture, and a litany deeply familiar to Obama and every other like-minded lefty.

Noonan's idea that Obama will focus on praising a bunch of dead white guys such as Thomas Edison or Jonas Salk is intriguing but incomplete.

It is easy enough to find examples of Obama's reflexive balancing in this June 2008 speech when he was kind enough to explain patriotism to the rest of us (and which was probably best remembered for his bold promise not to question John McCain's patriotism):

As I got older, that gut instinct - that America is the greatest country on earth - would survive my growing awareness of our nation's imperfections: it's ongoing racial strife; the perversion of our political system laid bare during the Watergate hearings; the wrenching poverty of the Mississippi Delta and the hills of Appalachia. Not only because, in my mind, the joys of American life and culture, its vitality, its variety and its freedom, always outweighed its imperfections, but because I learned that what makes America great has never been its perfection but the belief that it can be made better.

He then explains that the United States is better than Zimbabwe, Burma and Iraq.  Well, not exactly "better" - Obama is not quite that judgmental and condescending. Still, I'll assume that is what he meant, although he doesn't quite say it:

It is the application of these ideals that separate us from Zimbabwe, where the opposition party and their supporters have been silently hunted, tortured or killed; or Burma, where tens of thousands continue to struggle for basic food and shelter in the wake of a monstrous storm because a military junta fears opening up the country to outsiders; or Iraq, where despite the heroic efforts of our military, and the courage of many ordinary Iraqis, even limited cooperation between various factions remains far too elusive.

I assume he was serious.

UPDATE:  Tom Friedman wants Obama to accept on behalf of the peace-through-strength fighting men and women of the US military.  Friedman praises the efforts of US soldiers and sailors in World War II, in peace-keeping missions all over the world, and in Afghanistan and Iraq.  This will never do - missing is any balancing mention of the war crimes committed in Vietnam.  Friedman does give a one-sentence nod to "excesses" in the war on terror, but that is far too brief to satisfy either Obama or the Norwegians.  Closing Gitmo, or at least promising to, is one of Obama's signal accomplishments and Obama will want to tell the word about it (don't ask about Bagram...).

Let me repeat my earlier suggestion - send Gen. Petraeus to accept the prize.  That would be even more dramatic than having Obama publicly wrestling with the pros and cons of the United States and its military. Besides, should Obama be taking time out of his schedule to deliver a pretty speech just because some Norwegians want a semi-private showing?  Who's in charge here?

PILING ON:  Uncle Jimbo of Blackfive endorses Friedman's notion but doesn't think Friedman knows his man.

From Bruce Kesler:

I’d be more interested in what New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman tells his daughters about serving in the military than his telling President Obama to accept the Nobel Peace Prize “on behalf of the most important peacekeepers in the world for the last century — the men and women of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps.”

His young daughters, and President Obama’s, are about the same age as my older son.

Is that a serious question?  Does anyone think that Tom Friedman's children, or Barack Obama's, will be encouraged to enlist by their parents? When Obama gave the commencement speech at Wesleyan in place of Ted Kennedy in May 2008 he focused on all the ways America's youth might serve America without ever mentioning the military (the speech went through re-write and the military had arrived by July 4, presumably in response to criticism). Does anyone doubt where Obama's heart is on this?

AND FROM THE LEFT:  The Moderate (Yet Predictably Liberal) Voice takes exception to American exceptionalism; after lauding many European contributions to science, Kathy Kattenburg concludes thusly:

The point here is that human beings could not have survived and thrived on this planet without the collective brilliance of countless individuals throughout history whose imaginations, intelligence, and curiosity led them to do life-saving and life-enhancing work. Americans — in the relatively brief time we have existed as a people — certainly have contributed in very significant ways, and in some areas of human endeavor we have contributed uniquely and disproportionately (musical forms such as jazz, blues, and rock; as well as film and literature come to mind). Nevertheless, in the continuous roll call of contributions to the betterment of human existence, the United States is only one piece of the whole — and in the context of the entirety of human history, by far the least significant.

It’s really long past the time for Americans to start wising up to this, and to get the point: that alienating the rest of the world is not the path to peace.

Hmm - jazz, blues, and film.  I will modestly suggest that the American democratic experiment might go on that list of our accomplishments, but maybe I should wise up and shut up. 

And I assume that the claim that "in the context of the entirety of human history" the United States is "by far the least significant" is a failed attempt to say that we are far from the most significant. Otherwise, why ignore Canada, or Luxembourg, or plenty of other easily overlooked countries with little to look over?

And a Kathy commenting from Left Field finds the Friedman column "nauseating":

Long story short, he wants Obama to give a GWB speech.

...Why Friedman wants the President to repeat this Ode to American Exceptionalism — the same one his predecessor gave in every foreign policy speech he did throughout his entire two terms in office — is beyond my ability to comprehend. Obviously, it didn’t work because it wasn’t true, and the world beyond our shores could see that it wasn’t true because they could see the actual consequences of “American Exceptionalism” just by walking out their front doors.

Really? What do Norwegians see when they walk out their front door - street signs written in German?

Comments

[PD]

He has been accused of traveling through the world on an extended apology tour. That isn't fair

Oh, really? Why not?

[ROA]

Las Vegas bookies should have a book on how many times Obama will use the words "I" or "me" in his acceptance speech.

[Soylent Red]

It may give him pause: Look what idiots my biggest international supporters are. I may have to rethink a few things.

Hate to break it to you Peggers, but...

Barry thinks his international supporters are right to worship him and is eating this shit up like chocolate cake. It's what narcissists do.

[Gregory Koster]

Rubbish. Wilson thought he was hollering for war "To make the world safe for democracy," but Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman had a much stronger notion of what things were about: defending American interests, i.e. no one power dominating Europe (took 45 years after WWII victory to achieve this, and now it is in danger again), and rebuilding Europe enough so that it a) could stand on its own and b)would be a good customer for America.

None of this this is the sort of bilge The Once warbles. Nor is it why the Norskis gave him the prize. But it would be an honest statement of the way America works. The "America is noble and idealistic" will cause these three reactions in Europeans:

i) Suuuuuurrre you are. Hypocrits.
ii) Dumb Americans, hopelessly behind the times, can't see the postmodern socially constructed realities that show the way we whiteys hog everything.
iii) Good, they're still dumb enough to defend us so we don't have to build up out militaries.

This is merely Peggy Noonan steaming up The Once's mirror with her own reflection: anxious Once supporter, second class, who is getting a bit nervous about her own perch.

[daddy]

He has been accused of traveling through the world on an extended apology tour. That isn't fair.

am with pd on this one. why the heck miss noonan isnt that fair...thats precisely what hes been doing from day 1. why dont you take the time to try to write a column explaining why you think that is not fair and lay out your evidence please. perhaps you might consider comparing obamas mouthings with that man you used to know something about back when character was king, as opposed to gratuitiously slandering the character of ones country at every opportunity at every venue across the planet. that ought to be your assignment for the week---tell us why its unfair to correctly point out that obama has been traveling through the world on an extended apology tour. and when youre done come back and explain it to us all and see if we buy it. none are so blind as those who will not see.

am at an overseas computer with no capitals if anyone was wondering.

[Buford Gooch]

Peggy forgot that she is no longer a presidential speech writer. She was good at it once. She's been sucking up to those in power for too long now, though.

[Sue]

Notice she doesn't tell us why it isn't fair. A throw away line.

[bgates]

How about an unapologetic address, a speech, with the world's elites leaning forward and listening, about the meaning of America? A speech that shows a grounded and sophisticated love for his country and its great traditions and history.

That's two speeches, and he's incapable of the second, especially if by "his country" Noonan means "America". He doesn't know much about the country except how to fool most of its voters.

not a prideful one, but a loving one.

The 'O' is capitalized, Peggy, and he'll present himself as both. Our Great Black Father in Washington, who will take care of all his children all across the world.

[Elliott]

back when character was king

That says is all.

[JM Hanes]

You know, I could almost forgive Colin Powell for being a scumbag on the basis of those two sentences alone.

[JM Hanes]

BTW, Elliott, I have no clue which thread it was in, but I loved ACOIN.

[narciso]

That was the 'loved rather than feared thread,' JM. Noonan, fails by not
understanding her subject, I know that's
a bug not a feature nowadays with her.

Colin's another one that I soured on, but it took a while, I liked his bio, I dismissed some of the critiques of him that
came from spurious sources. But it was his
cliche 'Cracker Barrel' and his part in theArmitage deception

[Ann]

Yes, Elliott, ACOIN was brilliant!
--------
I will always remember Colin Powell as the reason we screwed Iraqis and President Bush the first time and the reason we almost screwed Iraqis and President Bush the second time.

[daddy]

When anybody else watches that new TV ad where all those hip celebrities pass around that telephone to the background music of Cat Steven's "If you want to be you be you, if you want to be me be me", does it strike anybody nuttily like it does me, that the royalties paid to use that song are being funneled to support guys who have a "Saw the Head Off" Fatwah against Salmon Rusdie because he wanted "to be you, not "be me"?

It makes me think we should start our own prize and bestow it upon the terrorist who sawed off Van Gogh's grand-nephews head, and encourage him to move to the land of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee and use it to build more mosques and madrassas spitting out hate and intolerance and Sharia Law and Burkha's and the enslavement of women into the society.

"What's that you say Nobel Committee Peackniks?" "You don't like the idea of folks from around the world purposely aiding and abbetting and funding individuals intent on destroying the Western Civilization Society that you currently enjoy?"

Welcome to the club.

[Extraneus]

I think Peggy should stop writing for a while and do a little reading instead. She can start with Krauthammer's latest piece for the Weekly Standard, Decline Is a Choice.

The current foreign policy of the United States is an exercise in contraction. It begins with the demolition of the moral foundation of American dominance. In Strasbourg, President Obama was asked about American exceptionalism. His answer? "I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism." Interesting response. Because if everyone is exceptional, no one is.

Indeed, as he made his hajj from Strasbourg to Prague to Ankara to Istanbul to Cairo and finally to the U.N. General Assembly, Obama drew the picture of an America quite exceptional--exceptional in moral culpability and heavy-handedness, exceptional in guilt for its treatment of other nations and peoples. With varying degrees of directness or obliqueness, Obama indicted his own country for arrogance, for dismissiveness and derisiveness (toward Europe), for maltreatment of natives, for torture, for Hiroshima, for Guantánamo, for unilateralism, and for insufficient respect for the Muslim world.

Quite an indictment, the fundamental consequence of which is to effectively undermine any moral claim that America might have to world leadership, as well as the moral confidence that any nation needs to have in order to justify to itself and to others its position of leadership. According to the new dispensation, having forfeited the mandate of heaven--if it ever had one--a newly humbled America now seeks a more modest place among the nations, not above them.

Obama is presiding over our decline, by choice. His Nobel speech should be consistent with that.

[PD]

Really, it all seems a bit like "Alexander stays home, conquers world."

[No one you know]

Extraneus:

Obama is presiding over our decline, by choice.

I would have said he's actively pursuing our decline. I'm sure the Nobel committee is on board with that.

[Extraneus]

PUK's and BigFurHat's Obama acceptance speech comes up #5 on a Google search of "nobel peace prize acceptance speeches" right now. Heh.

[J]

This pathetic little woman sang the praises of a man that openly detested the USA and ALL it has been since its inception.....he found nothing good about my country and ms. noonan sang his praises......I have no regard for this moronic woman.

[torabora]

The Pompous Ass got himself elected because we ran Bob Dole II against him.

Unless something changes, he's out ON his ass in 3 years 3 months.

If we ever get a look at his birth certificate, we'll have to drag him out of our house earlier.

[Chrissy]

I can not bear this woman. She's a colin powell in a dree. She cuddles with chris mathews and his ilk. she is arrogant and taks out both sides of her mouth. I wonder what President Reagan would think of her now?

[Matty_J]

You folks are acting like Noonan is/was some great philosopher. She was a writer! A wordsmith of the firs...well, second order, and a damned good one at that. But, one big consideration, y'all. The words were hers, but they were always someone else's ideas.

[Alicia]

Peggy who?

[Danube of Thought]

He will not say a word about the role of either the United States or its armed forces in promoting and preserving peace. It is against his nature to do so, and in any case he doesn't believe it.

I predict it will be puke-making.

[Paul]

Who cares what five lefty troll Norwegians think? Really? What special knowledge do they have?

Why does anyone care what THEY think?

Oh, "The Award". Nobel Peace Prize. Oslo. It just sounds so so..romantic. No wonder women, lefties, gays, metro men were so for BHO.

What if the award was called more honestly? The Five Lefty Norwegians In A Room Prize.

Jesus, we live in shallow times. Obama is perfect for it.

[dave morris]

So our President wins a prize for trying to do some good, and that bothers you. Why do hate America so much?

[bgates]

Dave, why do you equate the President with America? Why can't you tell the difference between "trying" and "doing"? What do you think Obama is trying to do that is good - delaying closing Gitmo, sending attack drones into Pakistan, continuing two wars? I think all of those things are good, but I wonder why Bush didn't get a prize for originating policies that Obama gets a prize for continuing.

[Wave at the crowd, dave.]

Most people think of the Nobel Prizes as achievement prizes, dave. What has been achieved here is hanging an albatross around Obama's neck, diminishing his options for doing any good at all. Why do you hate Obama so much?
==================================

[JAL]

ROA @ 11:17 pm -- don't forget "my."

[Dan]

I just don't think Barack Obama was given the Nobel Peace prize for WWII and the Marshall plan. Whether it was ridiculous or not, it happened for a reason, and for reasons more recent than the 1940s. To ignore that worldwide desire for change from the Bush policies is to remain blind. We really scared the world under Bush. That's what this is about.

As for Friedman, he's BSI.
He's all right on things green, but on war he's total doofus or as I call it, BSI. I do like that Brooks split. Everyone else but Bergan is preaching to the converted.

Learn about BSI here.

http://klogtheblog.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/thomas-friedman-is-bsi/

[Dan]

Sorry, some bad pasting there.

http://klogtheblog.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/thomas-friedman-is-bsi/

[Annoying Old Guy]

What changes from the Bush policies? Closing Gitmo? Putting an end to rendition? Pulling out of Afghanistan?