I want to start off like this: Congratulations President Barack Obama on being the recipient of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize. That is how it should be.

At first, I thought I was dreaming when I heard that the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded Obama the prize just eight months into his presidency.

But as I thought about it more, I understood why he was given the prize, unlike other skeptics.

So here is my case on why every single American should be proud of the president’s award rather than question the choice:

Who were the other 200 nominees? The Nobel Committee doesn’t release the list of nominees until 50 years after the year’s winner is named.

How does Obama compare to those that were nominated? That answer is unknown. So if Obama wasn’t the right choice, who was?

And what are the criteria for choosing a winner?

Nobel stated in his will that the prize should go to “The person who 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.” That’s all it says.

So far, I think Obama has been doing a lot of this. So much of it, some hate him for it. So what’s the deal?

In eight months in office, he has done his share of upholding Nobel’s broad criterion.

Obama has helped navigate a noble path of friendship between the U.S. and the Muslim worlds, made strides in attempts to reduce the world’s nuclear arsenal, taken an admirable and promising stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and has started winding down the Iraq war.

And the single most important reason he deserves the award: He has helped heal America’s wounded image.

The award was a vote of confidence for Obama’s foreign relations policy and a warm appraisal to the U.S. as a whole.

If you still think he doesn’t deserve it, then answer this: How many things have you gotten in life that you don’t deserve? Answer: a lot.

Guess who else thinks the president does not deserve the award? The Taliban — just the kind of affirmation needed.

Mudslingers’ only beef with Obama involves good fortune and favorable outcomes. The whiners called the decision “embarrassing,” saying he has done nothing to deserve such honor. Some even requested that the president turn down the award. Yeah, who likes candy anyway?

But as hypercritics of the president engaged in their favorite pastime, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said it best.

“It confirms, finally, America’s return to the hearts of the people of the world,” he said.

For so long, the rest of the world had looked upon America with contempt and distrust because of its bully-like foreign policies, which angered rather than engaged.

When the U.S. lost its bid to host the Olympic Games earlier this month, the president was chastised for an unsuccessful attempt.

Now, he wins the peace prize — something that should bring pride to America — and he gets rebuked again. Americans rooting against America?

A win for Obama is a win for America.

Like Bill O’Reilly said, “Let’s put partisan politics aside here. Whether Mr. Obama deserved the award or not, this is a good thing for America.”

Food For Thought: The most effective critics are not the ones who always nit-pick to find faults but those who call it as it is. They condemn when needed and give praises when deserved.