President Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize to an almost universal "Why?"
If Bill Clinton or Hugh Hefner had won the Piece Prize, no one would be surprised. Their qualifications in that arena are legendary.
But Obama, nominated for the Nobel after less than a month in office, actually winning it? He deserves a place in history as the first non-white president and accolades for his charisma and speaking ability but a Nobel Peace Prize - get serious. Acceptance of the prize puts him at high political risk especially if Afghanistan goes south or another 9-11 occurs on U.S. soil. His inability to fulfill his campaign promises even with huge Democrat majorities in Congress, putting the prestige of the Presidency unwisely on the line in the Harvard professor/Cambridge cops dustup and by flying to Europe in an attempt to sell the Olympic's 2016 site committee on Chicago, his overexposure in the media and now a farcical Nobel are beginning to make his tenure look like the Seinfeld show or a famous Shakespeare play - all about nothing.
President Clinton, shocked by the historic Republican takeover of the House in 1994, moderated his policies and in cooperation with the new Republican Congress accomplished welfare reform and a balanced budget. One wonders if a similar political upheaval in the 2010 midterm elections would have the same effect on President Obama. That would be worth a prize.
Posted by warrenpeterson at October 09, 2009 03:57 PM | Email ThisHillsdale College Professor Paul Rahe writes:
Charles Krauthammer has an article in the forthcoming Weekly Standard that, to their great credit, the editors of that journal have now made available online here. Although it only says what should be obvious, Krauthammer's article is nonetheless a piece that should be read in its entirety by every American.
Krauthammer's point is simple and unassailable. There is, he argues, an intimate connection between the foreign policy being pursued by the Obama administration and its domestic policy. The work undertaken in the domestic sphere by what I have called "Obama's wrecking crew" will, he points out, put a stop to the pattern of dynamic economic growth that made it possible for the United States to defeat Japan, contribute decisively to the defeat of Nazi Germany, contain communism, and ultimately defeat and prepare the way for the dismemberment of the Soviet Union.
It will produce economic stagnation of the sort that the Europeans have suffered from for decades, and it will eventuate in a collapse of the American dollar
This, as Krauthammer shows, Obama and his minions understand, and this they want -- the elimination of the foundations for American hegemony and the crippling of this country. They regard the role that we have thus far played in the world as shameful; they are intent on dismembering the alliances that gave us our heft in the world; and they are not only appeasing our sworn enemies but openly, publicly embracing them and their agenda.
This explains the praise showered on President Obama by Vladimir Putin, Hugo Chavez, and Fidel Castro. This is the meaning of our attempt to install a dictator in the Honduras on the model of Castro and Chavez; it is the meaning of our recent betrayal of Poland -- on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of that country.
It explains why Obama initially responded to the open theft of an election in Iran by professing his confidence in the Iranian government and why the State Department recently cut off funds for the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center in New Haven, Connecticut, which was collecting information on the imprisonment, torture, and murder of those in Iran who protested against the theft of that election (for the details see this post).
It explains the deliberate insults offered Gordon Brown of Great Britain and Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, which I catalogued here and here. And, of course, this explains the speeches given abroad again and again by President Obama, apologizing for American behavior in the past. and signaling a radical shift in American policy.
It is for this change of posture that our President has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. And if you think that the United States is the principal source of evil in the world, you should vigorously applaud. My bet is that in his acceptance speech Obama will confirm Charles Krauthammer's worst fears and my own.
me thinks thou doth protest too much.
:)
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on October 9, 2009 04:57 PM7 months later Clinton tried to use the Oklahoma City bombing as a pretext to ram the Anti-Terror Act through, hardly a moderate stance, which is why every gun dealer in Detroit thought the bombing a covert inside job.
"the open theft of an election in Iran"
Show us the proof.
"the elimination of the foundations for American hegemony"
Would you prefer a nuclear war with Russia?
"apologizing for American behavior in the past"
There can be no acceptable apology for Serbia, Iraq, South Ossetia, Afganistan etc.
"imprisonment, torture, and murder of those in Iran"
They broke the law just like David Koresh in Waco...or so they say.
"It is for this change of posture"
40000 more troops for Afganistan is changing what?
Posted by: donbless on October 9, 2009 05:47 PMRight, so you and Obama agree. That's why he won the prize.
Posted by: Gary on October 9, 2009 05:56 PMBecause the committee that chooses the winner is in Norway. It is chosen from the Norwegian parliament (run by socialists too).
Posted by: deadwood on October 9, 2009 07:27 PMHope it was original, if not I laughed anyway.
LOL
Posted by: LOL on October 9, 2009 07:50 PMThis award has now been dimished to the last pick in the NFL draf, "Mr. Irrelevent". Quite an appropriate name for the last several recipients of the NPP.
Posted by: Rick D. on October 10, 2009 09:36 AMIf by 'bait' you mean snickering at the joke being played on you and your Messiah? OK. We took the 'bait'.
Posted by: jimg on October 10, 2009 09:50 AMThe President was elected by a clear majority of Americans.
Posted by: John Jensen on October 10, 2009 10:19 AMall of this up-in-arms hullabaloo is too funny!
Still waiting for Obamabots like Mike BS and John J. to give us a reason why Obama was awarded with the Nobel peace prize. Last time I checked, being born half black and elected president wasn't the only qualification for the award. Apparently I was wrong.
Rick, as the senior member of The Norwegian Nobel Committee and a certified Obamabot, I am here to tell you that the reason President Barrack Husein Obama was named the Peace Prize winner this year is (as you stated) being born half black and elected president, and to piss small minded bigots like yourself off. How'd we do?
I think it's a good thing for America in that way, but I had the same reaction as everyone else when he won: "What the...?" On the other hand, it's not as if Obama did anything wrong by getting awarded something. It's not really his fault, is it? I think his speech about it took the right, humble tone. I suggest you watch it. It's only about ten minutes long and not in the least-bit self-congratulatory.
Posted by: John Jensen on October 10, 2009 01:24 PM...the pattern of dynamic economic growth that made it possible for the United States to defeat Japan, contribute decisively to the defeat of Nazi Germany...
We members of the reality-based community are permitted to know that the United States was in -- capitalize it properly, Chuck -- the Great Depression prior to going to war with the Axis, and that massive government spending ended the Great Depression. As the current holder of a different Nobel Prize, Paul Krugman, has pointed out, our recent economic stimulus was approximately one-third the needed size.
Their qualifications in that arena are legendary.
Jealous much?
Posted by: tensor on October 10, 2009 02:05 PMThanks for proving my point. It's very telling that even those agreeing with this award for the empty suited Obama can't spell out any accomplishments worthy of a nobel peace prize.
Too amusing.
Posted by: Rick D. on October 10, 2009 02:59 PMAnd was, by the way, unanimous, even amongst the right-wingers on the committee.
Posted by: demo kid on October 10, 2009 04:59 PMTo be fair, this wasn't Obama's fault, it's just some stupid old men who have lost touch with reality a long time ago. I'm not an Obama supporter by any stretch but the guy was obviously embarrassed by the award.
Shows ta go ya how politics stains all it touches.
Posted by: G Jiggy on October 10, 2009 08:30 PMBut I mention a few facts about blacks and get labled a racist. Rick D...Kudos to you and your "Conservative" opinions!
Posted by: TruthInWords on October 11, 2009 07:59 AMJust not with our allies in Eastern Europe, or Honduras, or Tibet, or Israel. Them we'll kick in the teeth for granting favor with Russia, China, Venezuela, Cuba, and mostly Iran.
He wants to end American exceptionalism and the Euroweenies love that. And that doesn't mean bringing the rest of the world up. It means bringing us down. I mean... just open a newspaper for proof of this.
Anybody who respects the award (we on the Right saw it as a joke years ago) should be angry that it's been so abused.
"I don't know how you put somebody in who was as crackerjack as General McChrystal, who gives the president very solid recommendations, and not take those recommendations if you're not going to pull out.
If you don't want to take the recommendations, then you -- you -- you put your people in such jeopardy, just like the base in Nuristan. We lost eight of our men. We didn't have the ability to defend them, and now the base is closing, and effectively we're -- we're retreating away from it. And so I think the decision has to be made sooner, rather than later."
Peace? Obama no longer think the Taliban is the enemy. Let's him give more awards!
You failed epically as usual, both in premise and in execution. You really suck at this! I'm amused, not pissed. What I am seeing is a bunch of pee~your~pants indignation from mouth-breathers such as yourself in typical knee-jerk fashion.
If the opinions of the right don't matter, why do you constantly obsess over them?
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 09:49 AMWe're laughing at you, fool. The world expresses great relief that we finally stopped inflicting your drunken, ignorant, physical coward of a war-monger on them, and you guys just can't stop whining about it. Delicious!
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 10:30 AMObamination's Worldwide Apology Tour and policies of appeasement at any price will pay off in spades for him in terms of increased terrorism.
When are you people going to learn that licking sphincters is no way to influence nations?
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 10:44 AMAnd because whiskey banana telephone, shut up that's why.
Oh, and I'm not even going to bother faking surprise that another self-described right-wing male shows great familiarity with gay bath-house lingo. Way to keep our political discourse classy, Senator Craig.
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 10:50 AMHypocrite much?
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 11:05 AMencouraged homersexurals
While I greatly enjoyed that episode of "The Simpsons", I don't think "encourage" is quite the right word. :)
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 11:19 AM21. "As Matt Tabibi notes, the Tea Baggers..." Posted by: tensor on April 20, 2009 08:25 PM
STFU you hypocrite POS.
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 12:02 PMWe call them "teabaggers" because -- now, read this carefully -- they were waving teabags in public. I was literally describing their actions. Your explicit terms in your comment have direct sexual meaning, and you have yet to provide any example of any liberal using such language, even though you claim you have.
"Teabagging", of course, has a sexual connotation as well -- a metaphorical one, not a literal one -- and this adds to the fun, because the self-appointed defenders of God, Family Values, and Traditional Morality always just so happen to know all about deviant sexual practices.
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 01:13 PM"...the self-appointed defenders of God, Family Values, and Traditional Morality always just so happen to know all about deviant sexual practices."
It figures that you wouldn't know that one can have awareness of degeneracy without actually lowering oneself to its actual practice. Says loads about you.
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 02:00 PMIt figures that you wouldn't know that one can have awareness of degeneracy without actually lowering oneself to its actual practice.
Yes, but we liberals don't obsess over what other people do in private, and we don't try to outlaw the very things we ourselves do. I wasn't the one who used explicit sexual imagery in this thread, pal, and it's not my fault you did. Grow up already.
Meanwhile, I'm going to continue enjoying my President's receipt of his Nobel Prize in Peace, which he accepted on behalf of all us Americans.
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 03:13 PMGrow up already.
Step in front of a bus already.
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 03:22 PMPresident Obama's dithering - as even Feinstein notes - will cause the death of hundreds more. Afghanistan is already Obama's War as he has consistently said it's the war that should be fought, and that he would win it.
President Obama is learning that actions have consequences, and simply wishing and hoping for change doesn't do much of anything.
Obama's pride lets soldiers die.
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on October 11, 2009 03:55 PMYea, but he'll have a nifty gold star that he can paste on his forehead. I bet these klowns feeeeeeeeel that O'Bumbler actually deserves the Nobel Piece~o~shiite Award...
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 03:59 PMCan you say Obama Derangement Syndrome?
Life is good
Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 11, 2009 05:13 PMHow's that hopychangy working out for ya?
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 05:21 PMIf President Obama can bring a successful outcome to a war his predecessor imprudently started and grossly mismanaged, he will indeed earn his Nobel Peace Prize -- not that any of the whiners here would ever admit it.
(I've recently read a rumor that Bush or his lackeys lobbied for this prize as they left town. If so, awarding it to his successor would be a well-deserved slap in the face to that warmongering cretin.)
Step in front of a bus already.
The erudition and intellectual force of modern conservatism continues to impress the world.
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 05:37 PMLife is good...
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 05:52 PMWould you care to enlighten the class on how the O'Bumbler is going to stumble his way into anything even remotely resembling a "successful outcome"? Or is wetting you pants, screaming like a girl, and running like hell your idea of a successful outcome?
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 06:05 PM(And, you can stop telling us about your difficult and unsuccessful potty-training anytime. It's not like we wanted to know...)
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 06:14 PMObama all along - with the rest of the Slavery Party dolts - said Afghanistan was the right war to start. Bush got Iraq sorted out; can Obama do the same in Afghanistan?
So far, he's dallying around, ignoring his generals, and covering his eyes hoping it goes away. His new rules of engagement are half the problem; his unwillingness to bolster the troop levels is the other half. The saying is quite appropriate:
Obama's pride lets soldiers die
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on October 11, 2009 06:24 PMThen he -- and they -- were wrong. We should have used force as a last resort, not as the first one.
Was it Bush's pride, stupidity, incompetence, etc. which got us here? Please be specific.
If we do achieve a good outcome in Afghanistan, I'll be looking for your praise of President Obama, succeeding where Bush abjectly failed.
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 06:53 PMIf we do achieve a good outcome in Afghanistan, I'll be looking for your praise of President Obama, succeeding where Bush abjectly failed.
Willing to do the same about Iraq?
OBAMA'S PRIDE LETS SOLDIERS DIE
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on October 11, 2009 07:15 PM"If we do achieve a good outcome"
I think tensor needs to go back to sycophant school. It doesn't sound very sure of the Obamessiahs reputed ability to walk on water...
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 11, 2009 07:42 PMI have a feeling I'd wait a long time for that to happen, though...
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on October 11, 2009 07:56 PMWhat's a good outcome, placing the Taliban back in power? Obama seems to think the Taliban are not a threat to us, and are "moderate".
I hope Obama succeeds in Afghanistan by defeating the Taliban by doing what worked in Iraq. I'd be behind him 100% if he chooses to follow McChrystal and Patraeus.
The Left won't though, because the Left just wants to flee.
Posted by: Gary on October 11, 2009 08:15 PMHe should pick on someone his own size - like the Mudville Gazette...
Actually, Dan, the past can affect the present. Had you ever qualified for membership in the reality-based community, you would have been permitted (this) knowledge. Bush's hasty and foolish decision to use force (when the whole world supported us against the weak Taliban!), his chronic incompetence for seven long years -- which, like the deaths of American soldiers it caused, did not bother you in the least -- now constrains our options in Afghanistan. (But we're glad to read American lives count for something with you again. You Summer patriots are still patriots, for so long as the sun shines warmly.)
Willing to do the same about Iraq?
Why, do you believe the Surge hath failed?
Hey, Iraq got straightened out so I figure that tensor needs to praise President Bush for getting it done.
Glad to read of it! You know, Mesopotamia is a place of unrivaled beauty, so perhaps you will do us all a big favor, and take a vacation there? You will, of course, wear an American Flag Lapel Pin(TM), and tell anyone within earshot about how great a man G.W. Bush was and is. Won't you please do that for us? Consider the price -- you can save big by not buying that superfluous return ticket!
...sycophant school. It doesn't sound very sure of the Obamessiahs reputed ability to walk on water...
Unlike you, I was deemed overqualified for any such destitution of lower nonlearning. Since you couldn't find a single example of explicit liberal potty-mouth upon which to blame your own sewer-line of a cake-tunnel, how about you now not find any examples of liberals regarding President Obama as a "messiah"? After all, not finding evidence to support your assertions is your core competency, so you should accomplish it with ease. It's pretty funny, you guys now demanding our President Obama succeed where your own Worst President Ever abjectly failed -- and then claiming that we liberals see him as a savior!
What's a good outcome, placing the Taliban back in power?
Gee Dumbya already did that, when he moved our troops into Iraq.
...feeeeeeels...
Thankfully, the days of brainless gut "feelings" are gone, and with us adults now back in charge, fact-free assertions ("We'll be greeted with chocolates and flowers"; "We'll stand down as the Iraqis stand up"; "The insurgency is in it's last throes") have become ugly remnants of our failed past. Do try to get over it.
Posted by: tensor on October 11, 2009 10:43 PMGee Dumbya already did that, when he moved our troops into Iraq."
-
Terrific. Now, what should the President (the one we have now) do in Afghanistan? Should he follow the advice of the generals trying to implement the counter-insurgency strategy that Obama agreed to a few months back?
Bush's hasty and foolish decision to use force (when the whole world supported us against the weak Taliban!)
So the world supported the Afghanistan war. It was the right war at the right time, even Obama said so.
So how is Obama going to solve it? It's the right war, and it's his war. And Afghanistan was pretty settled until Obama took office...
Here are the FACTS of the matter. Iraq is basically done, and Afghanistan is taking off. Sucks to be you, wrong so often!
And the most telling point about your ignorance and errors, you don't want to face the truth (the truth that even the far-left Feinstein has plainly seen and publicly addressed):
OBAMA'S PRIDE LETS SOLDIERS DIE
I wonder where the body counts are for the Obamassiah. Oh, that's right, blind worship of the man doesn't allow acknowledging the facts of his massive failures. The counts are known. Iraq is no longer an issue, that war was won. But Afghanistan is exploding, and the dear leader is a deer in the headlights. Stunned, unable to make a decision and unwilling to follow advice for fear it makes him look stupid. His pride is costing lives, but as long as it doesn't personally reflect on him he's OK with that.
And you say I'm not in reality.
And for the record, I've been to Iraq twice (mid 2008 and early 2009 to Al-Sulimaniyah for business) and had no problems. I'm not easily missed as a foreigner, being taller, fatter, and considerably whiter than any Iraqi you've seen, not to mention a nice red beard. Want to go some time?
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on October 12, 2009 08:14 AMAnd now he's gonna dither as it gets worse, and then he'll say, "Oh, it's too bad now. We must flee."
She would have to ask her mommy...
(for the record, no I haven't been and yes, I'd love to go. tensor would prefer to contemplate her navel)
Posted by: Alphabet Soup on October 12, 2009 08:51 AMYou say potato I say potahto.
Posted by: G Jiggy on October 12, 2009 10:11 AMTensor, please remember that the sphincter licking (a little bathhouse lingo there) Carter engaged in brought us the current nuke building Iranian regime and emboldened the Soviets to invade Afghanistan which lead to a destabilized state and the Taliban which supplied safe harbor for al-Qa'ida.
Thanks Jimmie!
Posted by: G Jiggy on October 12, 2009 10:31 AMYou righteously conservative, he-man manly heterosexual guys never seem to tire of it, do you? (Like Rev. Haggard, Sen. Craig, etc.)
If only your knowledge of history equalled your command of bathhouse practices...
Oh, and Dan? Why do we still have troops in those countries, many years after we routed their governments? Did our nation-building efforts fail for some reason? Was it our soldiers, or their Commander-in-Chief? How many Canadian flags did you take with you to Iraq?
Posted by: tensor on October 12, 2009 09:23 PMI don't know, ask the Prime Minister. Of Japan or Germany, your choice. We're still there, after all! I guess we failed, huh...
But tell me Ten-cents, how many soldiers have died in Iraq this year from enemy attacks? How many in Afghanistan? And which war was upheld by your leftist leaders as the "righteous" war?
OBAMA'S PRIDE LETS SOLDIERS DIE
How many Canadian flags did you take with you to Iraq?
Not one. How many did you take?
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on October 12, 2009 11:10 PM FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE DON'T KNOW NET CHANGE
PRESIDENT OBAMA 54 (53) 38 (39) 8 (8) 2
PELOSI: 36 (35) 56 (57) 8 (8) 2
REID: 32 (32) 57 (58) 11 (10) 1
McCONNELL: 18 (19) 64 (63) 18 (18) -2
BOEHNER: 14 (13) 61 (61) 25 (26) 1
CONGRESSIONAL DEMS: 38 (39) 56 (55) 6 (6) -2
CONGRESSIONAL GOPS: 17 (18) 69 (69) 14 (13) -1
DEMOCRATIC PARTY: 40 (41) 50 (49) 10 (10) -2
REPUBLICAN PARTY: 22 (23) 66 (66) 12 (11) -1
DIRECTION OF COUNTRY
Republicans continue to remain in the toilet with a 66% disapproval rating.
You just can't seem to get anything right. Right?
Posted by: Unkl Witz on October 13, 2009 07:27 PMRepublicans win generic ballot contest.
The "bellweather" Governor election in Virginia has the Republican up decisively over the Democrat.
Presidential approval index at -7, and job approval under 50%.
A majority of voters OPPOSE health care reform.
Oops. Looks like you stepped in it! But what's new...
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on October 13, 2009 08:08 PMCar bombs have detonated in Berlin recently? German Catholics and Protestants have carved ethnically pure neighborhoods, expelling the infidels? Fundamentalist Shintos control all of rural Japan? The "central governments" of Germany and Japan exist because American troops garrison those countries' capitals? Do tell. The absurd tales from even your limited imagination relieve the dreary realities of failures in Iraq and Afghanistan from the past decade.
So the world supported the Afghanistan war. It was the right war at the right time, even Obama said so.
No, the world supported America against the al-Qa'eda terrorists. Nobody supported Cheney's use of force against the Taliban. Anyone who regarded the use of force as the first option -- including some then-obscure politician from Illinois -- was wrong. (Exactly when did our use of force catch Osama bin Laden?)
Not one.
Yeah, it's best not to identify yourself as a North American. We're really hated over there.
The "bellweather [sic]" Governor [sic] election in Virginia...
"Welcome to America, macaca!" We Republicans are not in the least bit racist, we just happen to be all-white exponents of slurs against dark-skinned Americans! The Southern Strategy forever!!
Posted by: tensor on October 13, 2009 10:25 PMI thought you were complaining about troops left overseas once we "overthrew" the governments. That's exactly what the situation is today in Germany and Japan.
And you statement:
No, the world supported America against the al-Qa'eda terrorists. Nobody supported Cheney's use of force against the Taliban.
Is simply wrong. Please see the AUMF with the ONLY vote against in the entire Congress was Barbara Lee. Every Democrat save 1 in both the House and the Senate voted FOR the AUMF.
You're simply wrong that now one supported the use of force. And Barack Obama even as Presidential candidate Obama was stating since 2002 when, IN HIS OWN WORDS, he wanted to eliminate Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
So either you are ignorant of the facts, or you're trying to revise history and lie.
Yeah, it's best not to identify yourself as a North American. We're really hated over there.
I have no problem identifying as an American. Apparently you do. Your loss, but then again you don't know of what you speak, so no surprise there...
We Republicans are not in the least bit racist, we just happen to be all-white exponents of slurs against dark-skinned Americans! The Southern Strategy forever!!
You can talk all you want, the FACT is that the Democrat Party is, and always has been, the party of slavery. Again, you lie to hide your own shameful past, just like you lie to hide the truth of the position of your own elected party leaders - including President Obama - with regards to Afghanistan.
But hey, you have hope and change, right?
OBAMA'S PRIDE LETS SOLDIERS DIE
Hillary has come back with nothing. We unilaterally gave up Eastern Europe for what?
As with all weak Democrat presidents, the Soviets will be on the rise.
But he won a prize from some Norwegians.
Obama gave Iran "two weeks" to allow inspections. When was that... over two weeks ago?
Iran will become a nuclear power unless Israel and the other Gulf states do something to stop it.
Of course, we'll be acting as Iran's defender as we shoot down Israeli jets.
Peace.
Posted by: Gary on October 14, 2009 08:25 AM"Washington will tone down its criticism of Russia's human rights record in order to win Kremlin backing for possible sanctions against Iran, it has been claimed."
We have elected idiots.
Hillary:
"At the same time that we are very vigorously pursuing this track, we are aware that we might not be as successful as we need to be, so we have always looked at the potential of sanctions in the event we are not successful and cannot assure ourselves and others that Iran has decided not to pursue nuclear weapons,"
"Things do not look as good today as they did a week ago", she said.
Gee what happened in the past week? And what of Obama's "two weeks or else" threat?