Barack Gets a Nobel??

According to "Washington Watch" (a television show on Comcast's TVOne") 71 percent of all voted Americans agree that President Barrack does not deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. While on the other hand 71 percent of all black voted Americans believe he does. Is this a matter of racial favoritism or racism? The show continued with an interview with retired U.S. Army MAJ. GEN. John Hawkins (black) and (white) Washington Post reporter Michael O'Hanlon, both sharing different point of view reactions to the prize recipient. Not irrationally, O'Hanlon believes that our president is nationally respected for his accomplishments but has not concretely made changes sense his presidency. Alfred Nobel (the inventor of the Nobel Peace Prize) quoted the prize should be awarded as follows: "during the preceding year [...] shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." Afterwards GEN. MAJ. J0hn Hawkins perceived the prize was given and deserved on the belief the people are looking forward to future accomplishments. He stated when Barrack made his speech in Iran, cleared his vision that there will be a working relationship between the US and the Islamic Republic. Is Barracks' speech and promise enough to win a Nobel. What I cant understand is the reason the segment started off with facts about about racial voting differences. In the remaining part of the show all other guest appearances where African American. To me this allowed the (white) Reporter to look like the bad guy.