Let's face it. Friday was not a good day not to be on the air. But who knew that these five leftists Norwegian Arctic Circle Moonbats were going to hand the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama?

For what? For not being George Bush, that's what!

Hopefully you weren't all that surprised.

Since I wasn't here Friday, let's re-post some of the comments I emailed back to the Web Wench from Texas ... and then add to those thoughts.

First - you have to come up with a definition of "peace." There's a Nobel Prize for physics and one for medicine too. In virtually every culture and every country in the world you define "physics" and "medicine" pretty much the same way. That's not the way its done for "peace." During the post World-War II the Soviet Union defined "peace' as "an absence of opposition to world Communism." As long as nobody was challenging their communist expansionism they felt we were all at peace. Let some country; like the evil United States for instance, challenge their plans for world domination and ... no more peace.

For me any definition of "peace" must have a component dedicated to freedom. You can, after all, live a life of peace in a jail cell, so long as there isn't someone there to stir things up. You're not free, but peace reigns. Web Guy forwarded some emails to me over the weekend that disagreed. These people said freedom was not a proper component of peace. Well ... see what I mean? There are perhaps as many different definitions as there are definers. I'm not at peace if I'm not free. Simple as that.

Now ... to Obama and the Peace Prize. I take you back again to that Pew Research poll conducted in Europe last year. Almost 60% of Europeans who responded to the poll wanted America to be less powerful in world affairs. That's not an uncommon sentiment over there ... not uncommon right up until the Germans or Russians come marching across a border.

So ... here we have these five Norwegian politicians; The Nobel committee. Can we reasonably assume that this committee reflects much of the European attitude? I mean, they're not exactly headquartered in Boise. They look at the nominations before them, and there's PrezBO! Now what has Obama done in the past nine or so months? Why, he's given the Euro-weenies just exactly what they wanted! Now we have a United States with a weaker presence in world affairs! Russia and China are striving for military domination. Obama backs off the American promise of a shield against Iran's missiles for Eastern Europe. Putin says "frog" and Obama jumps. Putin says "jump" and Obama asks "how high?" Then we have the Arab states reportedly working to replace the dollar as the petroleum trading currency. And last week there are suggestions that Obama is just going to declare that the Taliban are too entrenched in Afghanistan for us to possibly prevail there - a prelude to a cut and run. Does any of this sound like a projection of strength? Of course not. America is projecting feel-good, hopey-changey weakness at every turn; and this is exactly what Europe wanted.

So last week they delivered a message to Obama. Europe likes your style. You're giving us exactly what we wanted --- what we asked for. You're weakening the United States; for us, the key to peace.

Oh ... and don't forget the slap in the face for George Bush. Bush is in office for eight years. He responds strongly to the attacks from terrorist Muslims. He frees Iraq from a ruthless dictator and his rapist sons. He projects American strength .. and Europe hates him for it. So ... the Nobel committee comes along and delivers a slapdown.

For those who define peace as an living free of threats to your natural right to be free ... this just isn't your day, is it?

Well ... at least this will give Newsweek a reason to put Obama on the cover again.

But wait! There's more! If you act now ..........

With all that being said ... in case you are not aware, criticizing Barack Obama for winning the Nobel Peace prize makes you a terrorist. Seriously, folks. That comes from the DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse. He said, "The Republican Party has thrown in its lot with the terrorists - the Taliban and Hamas this morning - in criticizing the President for receiving the Nobel Peace prize ... Republicans cheered when America failed to land the Olympics and now they are criticizing the President of the United States for receiving the Nobel Peace prize - an award he did not seek but that is nonetheless an honor in which every American can take great pride - unless of course you are the Republican Party." There's more to his rant. Woodhouse says, "The 2009 version of the Republican Party has no boundaries, has no shame and has proved that they will put politics above patriotism at every turn. It's no wonder only 20 percent of Americans admit to being Republicans anymore - it's an embarrassing label to claim." By "the 2009 version of the Republican Party," I assume that he is referring to the Tea Party protesters. It is "that" type of Republican that has the Democrat boxers in a bunch.

Now we get it, don't we? If you aren't fawning over our new Nobel Peace Prize winner you're in the same bed with Islamic goons who kill innocents in Israel by lobbing rockets their way, and you're supportive of the Taliban's brutal efforts in Afghanistan. That's where political discourse has brought us today.

Hillary's state department also took the time to take a swipe at George W. Bush in the wake of Obama winning the Peace prize. Assistant Secretary PJ Crowley said, "Certainly from our standpoint, this gives us a sense of momentum -- when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes."

One thing for certain: If the Nobel Peace Prize wasn't all-but discredited when it was awarded to Yasser Arafat, this ought to do it.