The Peace (Keepers) Prize
Thomas Friedman is an award-winning New York Times columnist. As such, it should not surprise us that he is a liberal when it comes to domestic policy. However, other liberals may not accept such a description. On foreign policy, he is not so easily defined. If he does not accept the inherent conflict of liberal domestic policy with the realities of human nature and responses, he is not blind to the hard realities of foreign hostilities.
As a Christian, I could only wish that there were conservative Christian talk show hosts with quite as temperate a touch and as analytical approach as does the Jewish Dennis Prager. I agree with his analysis about 95% of the time and when I don’t, it usually traces back to our theological differences which after all, are to a great extent related: Judaism is the root and sprout of Christianity and Christians consider Christianity the flower of Judaism.
Monday, Prager read Friedman’s column which other papers titled, “The Speech Obama Should Give…” The Peace (Keepers) the article refers to are the members of the American armed forces who have fought those in history that have challenged liberty and peace in doing so.
Before Christ, in defining his ideal society, Plato in “The Republic,” identified 3 classes of men: producers, soldiers, and philosophers. Some men have the mettle in their being to submit to military discipline and challenges. I’m not one of them. They are of a type of character that I can only regard in a manner of awe. Obama, the article said, should give this speech in accepting The Nobel Peace Prize. Though I must admit that it isn’t terribly difficult these days for events to make me weep, I listened and wept. We’ve always had terrible acts in life and I’m becoming a sentimental old sop. But in addition, today, America is being destroyed. Prager ended, saying it was the best article Friedman had ever written: I imagine it was.