Some on the right took pleasure from the left's (mostly) stuttering unbelief last week concerning the president's Nobel Prize. Many seemed to believe that the left's lament--"this is crazy, he hasn't earned it yet"--could be the first rumblings of a breakdown of the Obama myth. I don't know that I entirely agree.
Jay Cost and Steve Sailer hit on the truly unmentionable lens through which the prize could well be viewed: That the award was entirely in keeping with Obama's entire career history and that, in any case, he is not "less qualified" to have a Nobel today than he was "less qualified" to be president in 2008.
In a sense, cleaving to "he hasn't earned it yet" is actually a defense of Obama, in that it's a stance that allows his erstwhile defenders to avoid a more critical position. Also, I might well agree with Galley Reader C.L. who wrote in to suggest that at the end of the day, the Nobel stands on its own, becoming not a bug, but a feature. Instead of reminding voters of how unqualified Obama is, it becomes a listed qualification.
1 hour ago