“Witnessing the beginning of new chapter of US and world politics and economic landscape in face to paramount challenges from current domestic and global economic downturn and defending US status in world politics and economy. ...

Witnessing the beginning chapter of sincerely saving the planet earth, our precious habitat, and potentially creating new-age human society. ...

Witnessing the swearing-in of new-kind of political leader / prophet who will truly work on policies on behalf of people, rather than for the sake of interest groups or capital owners, based on facts, science, complicate intellects. ... professionalism to do problem-solving of the society and world. …Witnessing God's history making of mankind in this country. (Full post here)

Since then, the exhausting roller coaster of financial and health care reform debates has made my initial fascination faded. And the President’s winning of Nobel Peace Prize revived the memory of my fascination, enthusiasm, and sentimentalism when he gave speeches upon winning the presidential election and inauguration and Prague, Afghanistan Strategy, and Cairo speeches. Despite all criticism, I have no way of objecting to the Norwegian Nobel Committee’s statement of choosing President Obama as the winner of Nobel Peace Prize:

“His extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between people and promotion of nuclear disarmament. ... Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future..."

Mark Halperine of Time/CNN listed Five Ways Winning the Nobel Helps/Hurts Obama:

Helps:

1. Validation of his world view.
2. Momentum in current peace talks around the world.
3. Adds to his aura as a historic figure.
4. Allows him to recover from his Olympic failure.
5. Gives him cover to expand the war in Afghanistan.

Hurts:

1. Raises expectations.
2. Emboldens and angers his domestic critics.
3. Will make him the target of late-night comedy jokes.
4. Further divides a polarized America.
5. Will alienate some other (jealous) world leaders, making it harder to work with them.

My reaction to these lists are, “Oh, come on. Let’s set the priority straight on this issue. I don’t see the importance of anything else but the item 2 of “Helps” list: “Momentum in current peace talks around the world.” The rest of the lists seem to be secondary or minor.

In the same context, as a meager effort to steer public opinion, I have commented to several news or blog posts such as Mr. Heilbrunn’s “President Obama’s Noble Nobel Prize” and Mr. Russnow’s “Barack Obama, Nobel Peace Laureate: Whatever Happened to Awarding for Deeds actually Done?” at The Huffington Post; and Mr. Joe Klein’s “No Peace, No Prize” at Time. These news/blogs either criticized the prematurity of the award to Mr. Obama or praised the positive sides of it. Here, I repeat my response to them.

This Noble Peace Prize is the confirmation of what I felt on the date of President Obama’s inauguration. My honest opinion is, his domestic and foreign policies since his inauguration have proved that he is a “Man of Mission." Three of the Nobel Committee also believed that Pres. Obama has achieved enough to deserve the Prize and the award was not based on future premise. What he has worked on so far have been all about "changing, correcting wrongdoings" that have chronically damaged domestic and world communities.

I believe, instead of focusing on how prestigious the Nobel Prize is, it is wiser to focus on how to use this Prize as a vehicle to serve the world and people better that will greatly boost Pres. Obama’s global agendas. World peace is a work-in-progress without time limit. It's not like outstanding science discoveries that can be discovered at one time and awarded with Nobel Prize after their success rates being tested by time. President Obama has demonstrated that, at this point of time, he is the "Single" person in the world who can achieve higher progress in international diplomacy and cooperation and disarmament of new clear weapons than anybody else.

He set the strong foundation for this task from the beginning of his presidency. As it has become obvious that Mr. Obama is the "One" in international affair, instead of awarding him when he finishes his task, why not awarding him now, in the middle of his work being progressed.

The timing of “now” will be better than “later” to help him maximize his potential, ability to achieve his global mission.

In the same context, I commented to Mr. Joe Klein’s “No Peace, No Prize” at Time to focus on the positive sides of the winning, if he really cared for the impact of this Award in the world and US.

The priority of this award should be given to the magnitude of progress it can make on world peace talk rather than bickering on whether Pres. Obama has accomplished enough or not. Does Mr. Klein have any other person in his mind who can achieve this global agenda far better than Mr. Obama for now and in near future? Probably not. Criticizing for the goal of criticism, opposing for the goal of opposition without working on solution do not help anything but adding to the problem. I ask Mr. Klein which one of the hypothetical options below he would choose.

• Pres. Obama, with winning Nobel Peace Prize, achieves 85% success rate of his global missions by the end of his term(s).
• Pres. Obama, without winning the award, achieves 50% success of his global missions by the end of his term(s).”

Finally, I want to comment on what I read from a book by Dr. Frank Lawlis. According to him, each person has six faces (natures) that are symbolically named after animals, wolf, eagle, snake, bull, deer, and beaver.

Here, I’d like to talk about a few of them. “Eagle” has the strength of having vision, future perspective and offering direction and guidance, but flawed with the weakness of not doing the details. “Bull” has the strength of focusing on goals and leadership toward objectives, but has the weakness of too narrowly focused and not seeing others.

“Beaver” is talented with the ability of coordinating, planning, group power, and mastery over details, but it lacks of vision and future perspective. It pays too close attention to all details and “now” to see big picture. Each person tends to heavily use one of these five faces, but not all of them, in forming their personality types. Sometimes, I wish to see more of political leaders that dwell on the quality of “Eagle”, rather than that of “Beaver,” especially after witnessing the disappointing rollercoaster of US politics this year.

And I believe, this “Eagle’s Quality” is what the Nobel Committee saw in President Obama when it bestowed the award to him - as a person, and in his past and future work.