Mr. Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize.  There has been a lot of talk about if it was deserved, if politics played a part, etc.  I don’t care.  What the whole thing has stirred up in me is the question, Is it more noble to be wanting peace at any cost versus to fight for the mistreated? Am I crossing the line on Libertarianism by suggesting that we should look upon ourselves as those fortunate enough to help others in time of need?  Maybe.  I really don’t care.

From my very limited understanding of the current brewhaha over this announcement, it appears that he is getting the prize for wanting to find peace by finding “shared values”.  I may be a closed-minded warmonger but I find it really hard to believe that I have much in common or share anything of interest with those that believe they are superior to women, that believe that marrying off children to old dirty pervs is a good idea, that blindly follow something which was written over a thousand years ago.  I know I have much more in common with dogs than with those mullahs and their cronies (rub my belly and my leg actually twitches).

I have no idea what the answer is as I am conflicted in my desire to have our country (which stands for personal freedom at its core) help those that are in need of it yet not wanting to impose that belief onto others.  With that said, I’m not conflicted in thinking that it’s a bad idea to continually award prizes to those that want to perpetuate a system that is destructive to personal freedom.