Via Instapundit, I found this blurb on Atlantic Blog about the political agenda in choosing Jimmy Carter as the recipient for the Nobel Peace Prize:

"It should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current administration has taken," said Gunnar Berge, chairman of the Nobel committee. "It's a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the U.S.," he added.

MSNBC quotes the Carter citation:

“In a situation currently marked by threats of the use of power, Carter has stood by the principles that conflicts must as far as possible be resolved through mediation and international co-operation based on international law, respect for human rights, and economic development,” the citation said.

While in office, Carter didn't seem very consequential.   I was a little kid back then but I do have vague recollections of the econo-funk the US was in (I also have pictures of my grotesque wardrobe, but I don't blame Carter for that) -- but, of course, we're not talking about Carter for the Economics award.   

However I do give Carter major kudos for the '78 Camp David accords and he's apparently been nominated frequently for the award because of this achievement.  Unfortunately the timing of the grant creates a minor fly in the ointment for me.  Other reports are somewhat quick to take exception with Carter's prize on more substantive grounds. 

Via Drudge Report, I found this article (how the hell does Drudge find a link in the "Tuscaloosa News"?) which quotes other committee members reacting to Gunnar Berge's position:

Although the committee has often used the prize to send a political message, it rarely makes such a direct comment and some committee members distanced themselves from the remarks.

"As I see it, that is not the committee's opinion," said Inger Marie Ytterhorn of the right-wing Party of Progress. She said only the awards citation represented the committee's view.