Nobel, Obama, Bono, and ‘Rebranding America’

by Eugene Cho 10-19-2009

Like many folks a couple weeks ago, I was stunned that Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize. In fact, I thought it was some sort of joke but alas, it was legit. But I did manage to get couple tweets in there including this one:

Re: Obama: all he did was say to the world, “Hello,” “We’re sorry,” & “Let’s Talk”… All good things but Nobel was premature.

But I was surprised at the number of responses via Twitter & Facebook. Many people seemed to have an opinion. What did you think?

Again, I wasn’t a big fan, but then I read this quote from Cornel West and it got me thinking that this Nobel Peace Prize was indeed a forward-looking prize if there’s such a thing:

“It is going to be very hard to be a war president when you win the peace prize.”

And then I read this pretty amazing column from Bono entitled ReBranding America in yesterday’s NewYork Times. Here’s an excerpt:

A few years ago, I accepted a Golden Globe award by barking out an expletive.

One imagines President Obama did the same when he heard about his Nobel, and not out of excitement.

…Well, I happen to be European, and I can project with the best of them. So here’s why I think the virtual Obama is the real Obama, and why I think the man might deserve the hype. It starts with a quotation from a speech he gave at the United Nations last month:

“We will support the Millennium Development Goals, and approach next year’s summit with a global plan to make them a reality. And we will set our sights on the eradication of extreme poverty in our time.”

They’re not my words, they’re your president’s. If they’re not familiar, it’s because they didn’t make many headlines. But for me, these 36 words are why I believe Mr. Obama could well be a force for peace and prosperity — if the words signal action.

The millennium goals, for those of you who don’t know, are a persistent nag of a noble, global compact. They’re a set of commitments we all made nine years ago whose goal is to halve extreme poverty by 2015. Barack Obama wasn’t there in 2000, but he’s there now. Indeed he’s gone further — all the way, in fact. Halve it, he says, then end it.

Many have spoken about the need for a rebranding of America. Rebrand, restart, reboot. In my view these 36 words, alongside the administration’s approach to fighting nuclear proliferation and climate change, improving relations in the Middle East and, by the way, creating jobs and providing health care at home, are rebranding in action.

These new steps — and those 36 words — remind the world that America is not just a country but an idea, a great idea about opportunity for all and responsibility to your fellow man. [full column]

Eugene Cho, a second-generation Korean-American, is the founder and lead pastor of Quest Church in Seattle and the executive director of Q Cafe, an innovative nonprofit neighborhood café and music venue. He and his wife are also launching a grassroots movement, One Day’s Wages, to fight extreme global poverty. You can stalk him at his blog or follow him on Twitter.

Categories: Global Issues, Poverty, War & Peace

Tags: Barack Obama, Bono, climate change, cornel west, development, extreme poverty, global poverty, health care, millennium development goals, nobel peace prize, nuclear proliferation, Poverty, President, President Obama, speech, United Nations

BlueDeacon

One big reason why I think this is the way that he, or maybe I should just say democrats in congress, has opposed putting up the health care bills online for people to read after he campaign on a promise to be more transparent.

However, I understand this. As I mentioned before, the conservative movement raised a stink in 1994 when Bill Clinton first made a health care insurance reform program for no other reason than it would cause political problems for the Republican Party, and no doubt would be the case today.

cubfan19

I greatly disagree that Obama is a consensus-builder by nature. I understand all the politics surrounding health care and Afghanistan, but I think it is a stretch to say he has even tried to reach consensus. One big reason why I think this is the way that he, or maybe I should just say democrats in congress, has opposed putting up the health care bills online for people to read after he campaign on a promise to be more transparent. If it is the best thing for America then it should win on its merits and not need to be hidden or hurried through. And he did try to push health care through back in July when he mandated to Congress that they need to pass health care reform before their recess.

DHFabian

Tragically, President Obama has no interest in addressing US poverty beyond reciting the same old phrases about the eventual creation of "family supporting jobs" that we've been hearing for 30+ years. We are no closer to recognizing the reality that not everyone can work, and that this is simply not a full-employment economy. Americans have been conditioned to automatically feel contempt for our own poor, and to treat them accordingly. Meanwhile, Americans can and do die today as a direct result of poverty (we simply blame them for their own deaths, for "choosing" to be poor).

There have been a number of times when foreign countries reached out to offer humanitarian aid to America's poor, most notably following Hurricane Katrina, but our own government blocked this aid. There is nothing to indicate that Obama will reconsider that policy, either.

arachne646

I don't know if you watch or read any news about the U.S. from outside your country (BBC World, online stuff), but you might be surprised

arachne646

Like it or not, M'lord, your country's impression on the rest of the world has been of a rich amoral empire led by a fool. This has affected foreign relations for you, and made recruitment easier for radical islamist groups who point out U.S. military actions in Muslim countries to young men and women who become members of these groups rather than get an education and start a family. At first I was shocked that Obama was awarded the Peace Prize--but then I thought of how comprehensively DIPLOMACY has become the first strategy of foreign policy in the Obama government, instead of military force and threats of force, and pressure on other countries to commit their military forces to whatever problem there was. I too hope the promise that President Obama's government for the U.S.A. is realized. We pray for you.

BlueDeacon

Doesn't matter -- this has happened before, when Beliefnet was administering
the blog.

BlueDeacon

Oh, no -- the Republican Party is now just a vehicle for the conservative
movement, which I know to be separate.

Chris "Jesdisciple"

I actually think Obama is angling for "market" share. Most countries dislike us because of our history; Obama's flattering some slack out of them so he gets a chance to make his idea of an international difference, or at least not have them ganging up on him in the UN.

Don't mistake me; I don't like him. But that's what I see him trying to accomplish with all these foreign relations maneuvers. I wonder if he sees the Prize as a green light, i.e. "alright we like you now get to work."

Chris "Jesdisciple"

Got to ask... Are you equating conservatives with Republicans? For gripes I've been mulling over for a while, I'm identifying less and less with the party, even though my beliefs still easily fit the platform.

Chris "Jesdisciple"

Gosh, your nemesis adopted your writing style too well... I hope the Sojo techies can exorcise him soon. (Did you try changing your password?)

BlueDeacon

Nope -- this one's legitimate.

BlueDeacon

I can't recall any instance in which conservatives actually have
negotiated with the other side in good faith, but the most egregious sabotage
was when Bill Clinton proposed health-insurance reform back in 1993 or 1994
and William Kristol of the Weekly Standard magazine actually faxed other
conservative organizations to unite against it because it was "politically
damaging" (or something to that effect). In fact, that even hurt the
Republican Party down the road, what with the two 1995 government shutdowns
for which it was largely blamed, rightly or wrongly; only then did the two
sides come up with a budget deal. However, the converse isn't true.

Chris "Jesdisciple"

I do believe you're talking with the impostor...

judithod

Perhaps you could provide a list of all those times that conservatives have "never negotiated with anyone." Suspect that a commensurate list could be provided on behalf of the liberals.

The reality is that both the conservatives and the liberals do a disservice to the nation's citizens when they fail to include one another in negotiating to achieve a consensus. When people join together to negotiate in good faith, they not only have an investment in the decision but also in the outcome.

Chris "Jesdisciple"

Hijack alert.

BlueDeacon

No, he doesn't, not really. The trouble was that Obama probably knew full well that the conservatives would try to gum things up -- he learned from the Clinton years -- if one wasn't passed. And, as I said, conservatives in 30 years have never negotiated with anyone, so why in the world would he invite them?

judithod

And he doesn't want to dictate? He wanted a bill passed before the August recess; never mind, that 5 different versions were still in committee at that time.

When you're not invited to negotiate, you do what you have to do.

BlueDeacon

Apparently he's learned his lesson. They want to dictate, not negotiate.

judithod

Obama apparently decided several months ago that he didn't want to have any discussions with conservatives on health care. The last White House health-care soiree that included conservatives was at the end of May.

BlueDeacon

You're saying that Bush was always dominating. I'm saying that's a bunch of bunk.

The Bush people and his syncophants never highlighted his work with AIDS and malaria in Africa (although several "liberal" columnists did). They wanted him to be seen as a strong and decisive leader because they were concerned about staying in power BAMN and couldn't admit that his bullheadedness often caused more problems than it solved. That's not even the fault of the media.

As for Obama, I'll repeat, there will come a time when he pursues American interests over the interests of the world - he will play the role of dominater.

I seriously doubt this because, as I've mentioned, he's a consensus-builder by nature. If he were the unilateralist you think is actually is at heart he would have already tried to push health insurance reform through without Republican help.