That's because you don't award the Nobel Peace Prize to someone on a lick and a promise -- duh! And yet, when I think of Obama's presidency, I am disappointed for exactly the opposite reasons. He has done too much along those lines.
In Europe, where more than 200,000 people thronged a Berlin rally in 2008 to hear Barack Obama speak, there's disappointment that he hasn't kept his promise to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, and perceptions that he's shunting blame for the financial crisis across the Atlantic.
In Mogadishu, a former teacher wishes he had sent more economic assistance and fewer armed drones to fix Somalia's problems. And many in the Middle East wonder what became of Obama's vow, in a landmark 2009 speech at the University of Cairo, to forge a closer relationship with the Muslim world.
In a world weary of war and economic crises, and concerned about global climate change, the consensus is that Obama has not lived up to the lofty expectations that surrounded his 2008 election and Nobel Peace Prize a year later.
- You don't close a military prison unless you're sure you have no need for it anymore, as I'm sure Obama discovered upon taking office.
- Shunting blame for the financial crisis across the Atlantic -- what, to the
twilightEuro zone? Say it ain't so! I hate to admit it, but he got that one partly right.
- Armed drones are one thing, but if forging a closer relationship with the Muslim world means appeasing Islamic extremists, then no.
- War weariness will not be addressed simply by calling home the troops. Wars happen because of cultural differences and human ambition. Those things won't go away by ignoring them, or by creating one world government. Dream on.
- Economic crises will not be addressed by creating class warfare, nor by imposing the same old, same old collectivist non-solutions. Maybe they were "progressive" 150 years ago, but now they're just a cruel joke.
- Climate change will not stop whether we impose a "sustainable" world government or not. The climate has always changed, and it always will. The idea that humans can affect climate on a global scale is not verifiable, and is most likely false. Having the premise wrong guarantees that we'll get everything else wrong for as long as we cling to that cockamamie hypothesis.