So President Barack Obama hasn't done much yet, and still, he won one of the most prestigious prizes possible. The economy is still shaky. The LGBT community is still waiting for his attention. U.S. troops are still in Iraq. Criticizing him for being slow at overturning a system that's been in place for many years would be far from being fair. But what has he done for world peace?

Some may argue he received the Nobel Peace Prize because he started talking to countries the U.S. hadn't talked to in years. But that's just what presidents are expected to do -- nothing less, nothing more.

This just goes to show that the Nobel Peace Prize has become nothing more than a popularity contest. Al Gore won the prize in 2007, but what did he do for peace? At most, he improved people's awareness concerning the environment, but nothing related to peace.

In the past, recipients were as emblematic as Nelson Mandela (1993), Aung San Suu Kyi (1991), Mother Teresa (1979) and Martin Luther King, Jr. (1964).

There have also been other American presidents on the list of Peace Prize winners since its creation in 1901: Jimmy Carter, Jr. (2002), Thomas Woodrow Wilson (1919) and Theodore Roosevelt (1906). All those presidents, however, received their prize either after their term ended or toward the end of their time in office -- once they actually had time to accomplish anything to promote peace.

I agree we should give the president a break because nobody can possibly accomplish the many things the public wants him to fix in so little time, but we shouldn't give him the prize while he hasn't done anything for peace...yet. It's like getting paid for a job you haven't done.

Let Obama find all the bathrooms in the White House before he can get down to business and be worthy of a prize as prestigious as this.