Glenn Greenwald, who has acted as a constitutional law and civil rights litigator in New York, criticises a top Democratic National Committee official for describing some Republicans of having "thrown in its lot with the terrorists" and putting "politics above patriotism" because -- just like the Taliban and Hamas they objected to the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama.


"That the domestic political opposition party would echo the sentiments of one of our nation's fiercest enemies is truly striking. The global community honoring the American President with one of the world's top awards should be a cause for national celebration, not cheap political games.
One could expect this reaction from our nation's enemies, but it is unseemly and downright unpatriotic coming from American political leaders."

Greenwald argues -

"What's particularly bothersome about yesterday's attacks is the premise that it's improper, unpatriotic and even Terrorist-mimicking to do anything but cheer -- have a "national celebration" -- when Obama is awarded the Nobel Prize.

Whether Obama is actually pursuing policies of peace happens to be an extremely legitimate topic of debate.

The same is true for whether he's done anything meaningful yet to merit the award.

Numerous liberals in good standing objected to Obama's award -- from Ezra Klein ("It is undeserved. It is a bit ridiculous") to The Nation's Richard Kim ("I woke up, read the New York Times website and thought I had come to the Onion instead . . . Obama doesn't deserve the prize, yet") to Naomi Klein ("disappointing, cheapening of the Nobel Prize"). While there are arguments to make in his favor -- I even made some myself yesterday in the first two paragraphs of what I wrote -- there is something unquestionably bizarre about awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to a leader who did not merely "inherit," but is advocating, actively prosecuting and escalating, a major war that is killing large numbers of civilians with no plans to stop, while at the same time building prisons to house people who will have no due process.


Unquestionably, those are and must be legitimate topics of debate."

full article