http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-10-09/obama-wins-heisman-trophy/full/

Money Quote:

It is with deep humility that I accept this prize for the acceptance speech that I delivered with deep humility. In truth, I am in fact humbled by the very power of humility and have real doubts about my own ability to express its very deepness in the face of humilities’ daunting greatness.

“Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.” The wizard of Oz.

Me too Carol.

I do think even he is embarrassed although his trip to Germany after his nomination but much before his election was an attempt to court world and European favor, something I don’t believe a candidate should do. I hope that never happens again. Too Orwellian for me.

If only Lewis Carroll or George Orwell or Kurt Vonnegut were around to write about this topsy turvey world that just gets more non-sensical every day.

The only way I can fashion any sense of this is to think that the committee wished to influence the President’s decision on troop numbers and strategy in the Afghan/Pakistan theatre.

However, looking back at their previous recent selections in this, their laughable Nobel category, I guess there is no reason to think they use any sense in making their choice. After all…Carter? Arafat? Gore? Kissinger? But not Ghandi? Hey, Hitler was a nominee.

I think they should drop the category altogether. They and the award are becoming a laughingstock. (Even the literary category has yielded silly choices in the past two decades. )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31nqvyBTWis

I think this is like encouraging a poor speller by telling him he is creative!

(Painfully common, a study found that poor spellers who were treated with self-esteem enhancing interventions, believed inflated views of their abilities).

I made a comment on the CNN website on this choice, saying that they should have given Obama the Nobel prize for oratory talent. But since there’s no such prize, I proposed them to exchange the prize with Herta Muller’s prize for literature, who won the prize for writing about living under the oppression of a communist regime. She is much more qualified to receive the Nobel prize for peace and Obama really deserves the Nobel for literature, for his talent with words. Too bad CNN moderators did not validate the comment, because it’s a good solution.

Here;s one argument against this decision:

Some have mentioned as part of his accomplishments that after the meeting with Putin and Medvedev in Moskow this year, there could be a detente in the relations between US and Russia (the Reset button..). However, even if Obama gave up on plans to install the anti-missile shield in Eastern Europe after that meeting, as we speak Russia is changing its military doctrine to include pre-emptive nuclear attacks (according to media from Russia – you can google translate it). This is a sign that Obama has been played by Russians.

In a way ,motivating Obama to keep the ‘good guy’ approach to international relations could be seen as a sign of encouraging US weakness on the international stage, a situation in which other states are interested, politically and militarily. But Obama’s career will be going well.

President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday in a stunning decision designed to encourage his initiatives to reduce nuclear arms, ease tensions with the Muslim world and stress diplomacy and cooperation rather than unilateralism.

…

The Norwegian Nobel Committee countered that it was trying “to promote what he stands for and the positive processes that have started now.” It lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama’s calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease American conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen the U.S. role in combating climate change.

Above quotes from the link. It appears he’s been given the prize not for what he’s accomplished but to encourage his ideas. (Italics above are mine and go to the parts that seem to directly address the ‘why’ question.) Weird.