Obama : Massive Olympic Fail

[valvano]

Obama becomes the first president to actively get involved with olympic hosting selections...only to see his city go down in flames on the first vote..

I thought if we elected Obama the world would love the USA again?? :eek:

should have stayed home...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/10/02/obama-heads-denmark-lobby-olympics/

[Whatitis]

It's more like Chicago failed.

[kaiser soze]

Seeing that you're celebrating this you just proved how much YOU hate the U.S.

Hooray for vulvano the U.S.A Hater!!

At least he tried, better to try a bid rather than be piss drunk (http://www.rackjite.com/graphics/bushdrunk.jpg) and stumbling (http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/drunk-bush-olympics-2.jpg) in the stands of the Olympics.

[valvano]

Seeing that you're celebrating this you just proved how much YOU hate the U.S.

Hooray for vulvano the U.S.A Hater!!

At least he tried, better to try a bid rather than be piss drunk (http://www.rackjite.com/graphics/bushdrunk.jpg) and stumbling (http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/drunk-bush-olympics-2.jpg) in the stands of the Olympics.

obama decided to put his weight behind this effort, first by a president, and was basically bitch slapped by the olympic people...
i guess the obama "hope" is changing to obama "hype"

[YoungRemy]

Chicago made it to the IOC selection committee's top 4 choice. How does this constitute a failure on Obama's part politically?

It's Barack Obama's fault the Olympics aren't being held in Chicago in 2016?


MASSIVE POLITICAL THREAD FAIL

[valvano]

i'm surprise you havent accused the IOC of being racists yet because we all know that anybody who does anything in opposition to Obama is obviously a racist....:D

[valvano]

Chicago made it to the IOC selection committee's top 4 choice. How does this constitute a failure on Obama's part politically?

It's Barack Obama's fault the Olympics aren't being held in Chicago in 2016?


MASSIVE POLITICAL THREAD FAIL

he tied himself to the effort by actively lobbying the push to get Chicago the site, and became the first sitting president to speek to the IOC on just such an effort, all to be snubbed in the first round of voting.

i guess chicago ran out of dead bodies to contribute ballots at the IOC? ;:p

[YoungRemy]

i'm surprise you havent accused the IOC of being racists yet because we all know that anybody who does anything in opposition to Obama is obviously a racist....:D

you're still talking about Obama like he had anything to do with this selection?

What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[YoungRemy]

by the way, valvano, since you brought up politics, the Olympics, and racism, you might want to do some research about the IOC and the long history of controversy attached to the committee. They were accused of being racist long before Barack Obama was president. They have been accused of bribery, anti-semitism, and have been shrouded in controversy going back to the 1936 Olympics all the way through the 2012 selection and the bid for Turin in the winter of '06.

but before you do any research, go back to third grade spelling and learn how to spell the word S-P-E-A-K.

no I'm not elitist. I truly believe if you can't spell a word like SPEAK properly, you shouldn't be on the Internet, you should be in grade school.

[DroppinScience]

Wow, the IOC choosing one city over another constitutes "bitch-slapping" Obama? I'm sure Obama is disappointed they didn't choose his city, but this is laughable to think that it was some kind of anti-Obama effort. I guess the fact that the IOC didn't choose Madrid or Tokyo makes them anti-Yukio Hatoyama and anti-Zapatero as well.

I don't know how well Chicago would have worked for the Olympics, to be honest, simply due to their crime rate and rampant poverty in the city. Then again, the same can be said for Rio de Janeiro (on a much larger scale too!).

Valvano, you are a giant joke. You'd sell your country to the highest bidder if you felt it would humiliate Obama. You oppose just for the sake of opposing.

[Echewta]

The IOC knows its cities and Tokyo, Madrid, and Chicago suck. HAHAHA OBAMA NICE TRY GO BACK TO YOUR RANCH AND TRIM TREES!!

[yeahwho]

Well that's sad news, I'm sort of surprised at the over-reaction but I know these things along with schoolchildren singing really disturb you Valvano.

Your focus is on mundane bullshit.

[Bob]

he only had a 25% chance of winning AND HE DIDN'T HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT BITCHSLAP YOU GODDAMN SOCIALIST

[yeahwho]

Glenn Beck coined it an EPIC FAIL (http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/31452/), he kind of puts your Massive Olympic Fail to shame.

[yeahwho]

Rush Limbaugh was not actually as intense as you, Valvano. his Headline went after the First Lady, Michelle Obama's Trip to Denmark: It's Her "Sacrifice" for the Children (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_100109/content/01125106.guest.html) and then accused her of not sacrificing for the troops. Sure it's mean and distracting enough, but the Massive Olympic Fail you Valvano came up with is really hard hitting.

Rush has a picture though that is Pulitzer Prize level (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_100109/content/01125106.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg).

[RobMoney$]

Any day where he's jetting around overseas trying to intervene in something inane is one day less of his socialist agenda being steamrolled into place, and one day closer to the end of his Presidency.


BTW, just wondering how much the little jaunt to Copenhagen on a last minute whim set the taxpayers back?
Or was this funded by Oprah too?

[yeahwho]

i'm surprise you haven't accused the IOC of being racists yet because we all know that anybody who does anything in opposition to Obama is obviously a racist....:D


Wait... this just in, I think Rush must be following you valvano... yes he has changed his tone and come around to your speaking points...


RUSH UPDATE: The Ego Has Landed: A Racist World Wants Barack Obama to Fail
(http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_100209/content/01125106.guest.html)

[Echewta]

Any day where he's jetting around overseas trying to intervene in something inane is one day less of his socialist agenda being steamrolled into place, and one day closer to the end of his Presidency.


BTW, just wondering how much the little jaunt to Copenhagen on a last minute whim set the taxpayers back?
Or was this funded by Oprah too?

Don't be silly Rob. All Presidents, if you like them or dislike them, travel around the world and take vacation. Thats their job and everyone gets a break.

Having a President travel for something as "inane" as the Olympics :rolleyes: means he probably did dozens of other things as well that made the trip worth it.

Besides, he should have just stayed in Europe where "his" type of politics is enjoyed.

[RobMoney$]

http://www.drudgereport.com/

[DroppinScience]

I guess we've learned a valuable lesson from Rob: no elected official has any right to travel around because it "costs money to the taxpayers." Nevermind the billions spent in Iraq and Afghanistan daily, one HALF-DAY of traveling is bloated government waste!

[yeahwho]

Any day where he's jetting around overseas trying to intervene in something inane is one day less of his socialist agenda being steamrolled into place, and one day closer to the end of his Presidency.


BTW, just wondering how much the little jaunt to Copenhagen on a last minute whim set the taxpayers back?
Or was this funded by Oprah too?

Yes that makes perfect sense.

[Documad]

Thank goodness! I am so happy that we're not going to waste money on that bullshit. I've been sad about London since it was announced.

[yeahwho]

Hey look at these pictures from Rush's website "Blame it on Rio (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_100209/content/01125106.Par.39917.ImageFile.jpg)" and of course the ever popular "FAIL (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_100209/content/01125106.Par.89380.ImageFile.jpg)"! This is so cool how it has become an international FAIL and how it's gaining momentum. I am so embarrassed to be an American citizen after this latest crazy stunt.

How much money did all this cost? IT"S CRAZY and socialist too!!!

Hope? Change? lol!!!!!

[RobMoney$]

Here we go.
Once again we are going to use Defense spending to justify everything from "Cash for Clunkers" to UNECESSARY trips on Air Force One all over the world.

And No, you don't get to just "fly around" on Air Force One frivilously.

What would have been your response if W was in office and say, Dallas or Houston was up for an Olympic bid, and he traveled somewhere to try to convince the IOC to vote for those cities?
The liberals would have had 2,000 stories about the carbon footprint left on the environment for him to get there and back.

The truth is, Obama's meer presence should have had a positive impact on the voters to lean not only towards his country, but the city he calls home.

Obama set himself up as this great statesman that was going to unify the world.

Evidence now points to it doing the exact opposite as Chicago was supposedly neck and neck with Rio for this thing, yet somehow they're out in the first round of the final vote after Obama swoops in for a last minute plea?
To have the POTUS personally lobby for the games and be rejected almost immediately is something of a slap in the face. On some level, if he was respected, Chicago would have gotten a few more courtesy votes and then eliminated later.
But first thing out of the gate?
To have this happen is an utter and complete embarrassment on the international stage, and you can't even deny it.

Apparently, Abdul Yabba-Dabba-Do doesn't give a crap how happy Michelle Obama's father would have been to see the Olympics in Chicago.
Next time they should probably talk about something other than themselves.

[RobMoney$]

BTW, Is anybody really clicking on any of Yeahwho's Rush links?

Didin't think so.

[yeahwho]

Here we go.
Once again we are going to use Defense spending to justify everything from "Cash for Clunkers" to UNECESSARY trips on Air Force One all over the world.

And No, you don't get to just "fly around" on Air Force One frivilously.

What would have been your response if W was in office and say, Dallas or Houston was up for an Olympic bid, and he traveled somewhere to try to convince the IOC to vote for those cities?
The liberals would have had 2,000 stories about the carbon footprint left on the environment for him to get there and back.

The truth is, Obama's meer presence should have had a positive impact on the voters to lean not only towards his country, but the city he calls home.

Obama set himself up as this great statesman that was going to unify the world.

Evidence now points to it doing the exact opposite as Chicago was supposedly neck and neck with Rio for this thing, yet somehow they're out in the first round of the final vote after Obama swoops in for a last minute plea?
To have the POTUS personally lobby for the games and be rejected almost immediately is something of a slap in the face. On some level, if he was respected, Chicago would have gotten a few more courtesy votes and then eliminated later.
But first thing out of the gate?
To have this happen is an utter and complete embarrassment on the international stage, and you can't even deny it.

Apparently, Abdul Yabba-Dabba-Do doesn't give a crap how happy Michelle Obama's father would have been to see the Olympics in Chicago.
Next time they should probably talk about something other than themselves.

Since you brought up George W. Bush, how did you feel about his four days as a spectator in China during the last Olympics?

[Whatitis]

Regaredless of how anyone feels if this is a political failure or not for Obama, it was a goal of his and it failed and it might have hurt him by getting himself and the big O(prah) involved. I will even chalk the failed bid to the hangover from the previous 8 years the US has done for itself as a world image. Something Obama wants to clean up and getting an olympic bid could have done that in some way. Chicago has not had a great track record in the news recently that could have contributed. But IMO what really happened is the behind the scenes politics that goes on with the IOC is what was the real determining factor.

All the bickering of Bush did this but Obama is doing that but what if Bush did but Obama....is just partisan bullshit. But in reality it was a failed bid. Is it a major political gaffe? Not really but it's just fuel for the right, just as it would be for the left if the shoe was on the other foot.

[kaiser soze]

Thank god Obama's handlers didn't prop him up in front of a "Mission Accomplished" sign before the winners were announce!

whew!

It sucks and will be a slight embarrassment for a short period, but the U.S. has had the Olympics (summer/winter) 7 times - That's quite a count

Congrats to Rio for winning, I'm sure the ceremonies will be muy caliente!

[YoungRemy]

whatitis- good points about Chicago in the news recently. I was thinking to myself that a city with so many connections to gang violence couldn't ever secure the Olympics...

it's only been getting worse lately.

[Dorothy Wood]

uhh, I honestly don't think this was political. the U.S. has had the Olympics plenty of times, why not give somewhere else a try? there are thousands of factors to consider when choosing a city.

I know a lot of chicagoans were against the bid. I think it comes down to a few things:

1. the city is too residential, having a fuck load of extra people would put a huge strain on people who live and work here. already, downtown on a weekend is almost unbearably clogged with people.

2. the city is notoriously corrupt and has made bad choices lately (privatizing street parking, blago, ryan) and for decades previous.

3. public transportation isn't reliable and the subway stations are dirty as fuck and remodeling either doesn't happen or happens at a snails pace. my ex won a big design competition for a run down train stop in college, that was 5 years ago, they haven't touched it.

4. crime

5. cubs curse



I just don't think chicago was ready or able to cope with the olympics, no matter how many fancy drawings and plans we had. Logistically, it was perfectly rational of the judges not to pick it.

[Bob]

uhh, I honestly don't think this was political. the U.S. has had the Olympics plenty of times, why not give somewhere else a try? there are thousands of factors to consider when choosing a city.

I know a lot of chicagoans were against the bid. I think it comes down to a few things:

1. the city is too residential, having a fuck load of extra people would put a huge strain on people who live and work here. already, downtown on a weekend is almost unbearably clogged with people.

2. the city is notoriously corrupt and has made bad choices lately (privatizing street parking, blago, ryan) and for decades previous.

3. public transportation isn't reliable and the subway stations are dirty as fuck and remodeling either doesn't happen or happens at a snails pace. my ex won a big design competition for a run down train stop in college, that was 5 years ago, they haven't touched it.

4. crime

5. cubs curse



I just don't think chicago was ready or able to cope with the olympics, no matter how many fancy drawings and plans we had. Logistically, it was perfectly rational of the judges not to pick it.

6. obama sux lol

[kaiser soze]

...at the shot put!

[Schmeltz]

So the IOC didn't choose Chicago because... Obama is Hitler? Or because the last time the USA hosted the Olympics there was a terrorist attack by a right-wing nutjob, the same kind of people who are bringing guns to town hall meetings and shrieking about socialist agendas like the sky was falling?


While conservatives are laughing themselves silly over Chicago’s failed bid to host the 2016 Olympics, deluding themselves into seeing their own rabid hatred of Barack Obama reflected in the eyes of the IOC, let’s take a step back here. Putting aside for the moment that Rio is an excellent choice to host the 2016 games, if I was on the International Olympic Committee, I dunno if I’d be so keen on hosting the Olympics in the America either. I don’t know how much American news the Swiss receive, but if they saw one of the gun-toting mobs of tea baggers holding signs of the President’s face Photoshopped with a Hitler mustache, it probably wouldn’t do much to help them forget that the last time the United States hosted the Summer Olympics, a right-wing domestic terrorist planted a bomb in the middle of the Centennial Olympic Park.

If you take a look at Eric Rudolph’s statement on the Olympic Bombing, it looks like something that could have been written yesterday :

"Even though the conception and purpose of the so-called Olympic movement is to promote the values of global socialism, as perfectly expressed in the song Imagine by John Lennon, which was the theme of the 1996 Games even though the purpose of the Olympics is to promote these despicable ideals, the purpose of the attack on July 27 was to confound, anger and embarrass the Washington government in the eyes of the world for its abominable sanctioning of abortion on demand. "

I’m not saying this is why the IOC didn’t choose Chicago, but if I had to choose a venue for the Olympics, the recent explosion in right-wing lunacy would certainly make me think twice about whether or not it’s safe for the United States to host another Olympic Games.

Greg Saunders (www.thismodernworld.com)


The only possible political side to this involves the embarrassing hystrionics of the American right wing, and its total inability to participate in rational public discourse. valvano himself is a pretty good example of that.

[DroppinScience]

Saunders forgot that the last Olympics hosted in the USA was Salt Lake City in 2002, which did not have a terrorist attack despite it being so soon after 9/11. Nevertheless, that's a legitimate point he raised. I wouldn't want rabid right-wingers like valvano or Rob going open season on Olympians as if they set foot in a Holocaust Museum.

[Schmeltz]

Naw man, that's the Winter Olympics. It's, like, different from regular Olympics.

[yeahwho]

DroppinScience, Schmeltz, you guys are so far off, Obama is no Hitler, Hitler got the Olympics.

[kaiser soze]

Unbeknownst to all the single cell organisms (lovingly known as rightwingers) cheering the loss, bush who was president at the time also promoted the prospect of a Chicago Olympics - - - - before Obama even put a foot into the White House

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ko4nZnuJess&feature

bush: Massive Olympic Fail!

vulvano massive fail again and again and again...god when will the spinning end!

[Bob]

DroppinScience, Schmeltz, you guys are so far off, Obama is no Hitler, Hitler got the Olympics.

hahaha

[RobMoney$]

uhh, I honestly don't think this was political. the U.S. has had the Olympics plenty of times, why not give somewhere else a try? there are thousands of factors to consider when choosing a city.

I know a lot of chicagoans were against the bid. I think it comes down to a few things:

1. the city is too residential, having a fuck load of extra people would put a huge strain on people who live and work here. already, downtown on a weekend is almost unbearably clogged with people.

2. the city is notoriously corrupt and has made bad choices lately (privatizing street parking, blago, ryan) and for decades previous.

3. public transportation isn't reliable and the subway stations are dirty as fuck and remodeling either doesn't happen or happens at a snails pace. my ex won a big design competition for a run down train stop in college, that was 5 years ago, they haven't touched it.

4. crime

5. cubs curse



I just don't think chicago was ready or able to cope with the olympics, no matter how many fancy drawings and plans we had. Logistically, it was perfectly rational of the judges not to pick it.


"We're liberals.
We're tired of the rich countries (we're looking at you USA) getting all the olympics.
Time for the lower class countries to host one of the major sports events."

Except that Brazil will be hosting the two biggest world sport competitions within 2 years since they already are hosting the 2014 World Cup.


Hey, I'm sure Mr. & Mrs. Obama gave great speeches tho...
Just put it on our tab Mr. President (y)

[Guy Incognito]

this is all a bit bollocks isnt it.

south america = no olympic games ever
north america = shitloads of olympic games , its fair enough.

if obama didnt put in an appearance - some of you guys would have been whingeing that he could have supported his hometown more.
he cant win with some of you buggers. at least you lot have a president who gives a shit and tries to be in touch with his people. we have misery bollocks. and he doesnt really appear to even realise the lympics is over here in 2 years, yes i meant to put lympics

[QueenAdrock]

It's funny, because sometimes I'll come onto this forum and see threads like this and laugh and say "Only *insert conservative board member who is REALLY trying to reach for anything against Obama* would consider this to be Obama's fault, jeez, they're really desperate to have anything against him," and then I'll go on some news sites online or check out the TV and it's all the same talking points as Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh or any of the other right-wing hacks.

I mean, at first, I think that the poster actually had a thought of their own (regardless of how hackneyed or ridiculous), but then I find out they've just been tuning in to FOX and decided to post up what the right-wing media is shoving down their throats at the time. And they're lapping it up like kittens.

Annnyways, I clicked on the Rush/Glenn links and they're enjoying this. They're enjoying the "president failing" and they're enjoying the fact that the US lost. It's stupid and petty, and has a faint whiff of treason as well. Personally, I would have been for Bush to get the Olympics in Dallas or Houston too. The Olympics do cost a lot to host, but there's also a ridiculous amount of revenue gained from the whole world being there. I'm for the Olympics being in the US. But, it's also nice to see them being in Rio since South America hasn't had any Olympics yet and I think they should (or is that too socialist of me, thinking everyone should have a fair chance? Gasp!).

Either way, it's a non-issue that's being blown up by people who jerk off to the idea that Obama has failed at something.

[Documad]

Well, most people who post about politics on the internet are spouting someone else's opinion, whether it came from Glenn Beck or the Nation. Few people share thoughts derived from hands on experience.

[QueenAdrock]

True, but it's stuff that is so mindbogglingly stupid that I can't even imagine it came from the news. When I find out later that it did, it makes me just a little dead inside.

[yeahwho]

Well, most people who post about politics on the internet are spouting someone else's opinion, whether it came from Glenn Beck or the Nation. Few people share thoughts derived from hands on experience.

True, but it's stuff that is so mindbogglingly stupid that I can't even imagine it came from the news. When I find out later that it did, it makes me just a little dead inside.

Great insights and this is just the beginning of the age of the 24 hour nonstop news cycle. Obviously to fill a nonstop headline breaking eyewitness news cycle it's cheaper to babble than to have a helicopter follow a chase scene. If you put just the right graphics, spin and dramatic music into the presentation of the 2016 Olympics bid, it seems like the D Day battle.

[RobMoney$]

It's funny, because sometimes I'll come onto this forum and see threads like this and laugh and say "Only *insert conservative board member who is REALLY trying to reach for anything against Obama* would consider this to be Obama's fault, jeez, they're really desperate to have anything against him,"

It's not his fault alone.
Nobody said Chicago was denied solely because of the IOC's dislike of Obama.
But he did fail.
There's a reason this hasn't been attempted by a previous President. Because they applied some critical thought to the process and came to the conclusion that either a) it's ludicris for the leader of the free world to bow to a sporting comittee, or b) it's even more ludicris for the leader of the free world to bow to a sporting comittee and be denied.
Apparently Obama and all of his overeducated advisers failed to consider the possibility of the appearance of being a weak leader and the international embarressment that would ensue in the event of a loss.

BTW, If you want to make a point about someone publicly, then say their name.
Nothing is more annoying and cowardly than the Passive-Aggressive thing.

and then I'll go on some news sites online or check out the TV and it's all the same talking points as Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh or any of the other right-wing hacks.

Sweetheart, this is all over ESPN (http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=4526580), CBSsports (http://www.cbssports.com/worldsports/story/12299802), and my local news channels too.
As well as international news channels, I'm sure.
So just quit making assumptions about something that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

I mean, at first, I think that the poster actually had a thought of their own (regardless of how hackneyed or ridiculous), but then I find out they've just been tuning in to FOX and decided to post up what the right-wing media is shoving down their throats at the time. And they're lapping it up like kittens.

How EXACTLY do you "find out they've been tuning in to FOX"?
I want you to tell us how you're so sure where someone gets their news from?
And don't skip over this, because I'll keep asking.


Annnyways, I clicked on the Rush/Glenn links and they're enjoying this. They're enjoying the "president failing" and they're enjoying the fact that the US lost. It's stupid and petty, and has a faint whiff of treason as well. Personally, I would have been for Bush to get the Olympics in Dallas or Houston too. The Olympics do cost a lot to host, but there's also a ridiculous amount of revenue gained from the whole world being there. I'm for the Olympics being in the US.

Once again, I'm calling bullshit on you.
Is this statement about how much revenue the Olympics generates based on fact, or are you just posting up whatever media you watch is shoving down YOUR throat?
I contend you have absolutely no idea how much or how little the Olympics generate.



But, it's also nice to see them being in Rio since South America hasn't had any Olympics yet and I think they should (or is that too socialist of me, thinking everyone should have a fair chance? Gasp!).

How utterly convienient.
You're happy either way! YIPPIE!! (y)

Either way, it's a non-issue that's being blown up by people who jerk off to the idea that Obama has failed at something.

Obama attempted to secure the Olympic bid.
He did "everything we could". (his words)
He was eliminated in the first round of voting.

That's not an "idea that Obama failed"
It's a fact. And it's not a non-issue either.
He's losing clout on the international level. As much as you'd like this to go away, it's most certainly a real issue.

[RobMoney$]

Unbeknownst to all the single cell organisms (lovingly known as rightwingers) cheering the loss, bush who was president at the time also promoted the prospect of a Chicago Olympics - - - - before Obama even put a foot into the White House


Interesting.
So you're saying you would have been praising Bush if the Chicago bid had been successful?

[YoungRemy]

"We're liberals.
We're tired of the rich countries (we're looking at you USA) getting all the olympics.
Time for the lower class countries to host one of the major sports events."



did someone say those words you put in quotes?

It's not his fault alone.
Nobody said Chicago was denied solely because of the IOC's dislike of Obama.


where did the IOC say they didn't like Obama?


Interesting.
So you're saying you would have been praising Bush if the Chicago bid had been successful?

are you trying to bait posters into a response? Because the last time this happened I responded to a valvano question about Bush and it seemed to get to you when posters compare the two administrations. I'm just saying.

However, the answer to your question would be a "no."
If the Chicago bid had been successful, I would have celebrated the the US got the Olympics back, but the President's role in the process would be last on my list of things to praise.

welcome back, Rob!

[RobMoney$]

did someone say those words you put in quotes?

It was my DW impersonation.


where did the IOC say they didn't like Obama?

Nobody stated their feelings for Obama either way, which was my point.
Nobody is saying Obama was the sole reason for the fail.
But he is part of the reason, as was his wife, Oprah, David Robinson, and the mayor of Chicago, and everyone who had anything to do with the bid.
They all failed.



are you trying to bait posters into a response? Because the last time this happened I responded to a valvano question about Bush and it seemed to get to you when posters compare the two administrations. I'm just saying.

I'm not baiting anyone.
Kaiser brought up Bush's role in the bid and he would have been to blame more than Obama.
I'm just trying to point out how unimportant Bush's role was in this.



However, the answer to your question would be a "no."
If the Chicago bid had been successful, I would have celebrated the the US got the Olympics back, but the President's role in the process would be last on my list of things to praise.

welcome back, Rob!


I actually could care less.
The economic impact would have been minimal, and the fact that Rio is in our same time zone means we will get to see everything in in prime-time anyway.

BTW, Thanks for welcoming me back.
I recieved more than one message of support from some that I wouldn't have expected.
I think a break would do quite a few people here some good.

[QueenAdrock]

It's not his fault alone.
Nobody said Chicago was denied solely because of the IOC's dislike of Obama.
But he did fail.
There's a reason this hasn't been attempted by a previous President. Because they applied some critical thought to the process and came to the conclusion that either a) it's ludicris for the leader of the free world to bow to a sporting comittee, or b) it's even more ludicris for the leader of the free world to bow to a sporting comittee and be denied.
Apparently Obama and all of his overeducated advisers failed to consider the possibility of the appearance of being a weak leader and the international embarressment that would ensue in the event of a loss.

BTW, If you want to make a point about someone publicly, then say their name.
Nothing is more annoying and cowardly than the Passive-Aggressive thing.


Bow to a sporting committee? Give me a break. He was gunning for the Olympics at his home town. How is he a "weak leader" since we've been denied? A stronger leader would have magically convinced the non-partisan world committee that Chicago, despite an uphill battle against all the other cities, is the correct choice? A stronger leader would have maybe hypnotized them, perhaps bribed them a bit? What would a "stronger leader" do in order to secure the Olympics? There's only as much one person can do, the city has to meet him half way. :rolleyes:

BTW, there are two of you on the board, and you go back and forth between ridiculous topics, so you can fill in your names as appropriate.


How EXACTLY do you "find out they've been tuning in to FOX"?
I want you to tell us how you're so sure where someone gets their news from?
And don't skip over this, because I'll keep asking.


Due to the fact that Fox News worries about stupid shit like wearing flag pins, not putting your hand over your heart during the anthem, Obama being a secret Muslim, "indoctrination" of school children through songs. They all evolve from one source. And yes, it was all over the news that Chicago lost, but there was one station that was first to break the news that it was -- OBAMA'S FAULT. It just seems very convenient that the trivial bullshit that people bring up seems to go right back to Fox News. And if you haven't been tuning in to Fox directly, you've been picking up their dregs somewhere along the news cycle.


Once again, I'm calling bullshit on you.
Is this statement about how much revenue the Olympics generates based on fact, or are you just posting up whatever media you watch is shoving down YOUR throat?
I contend you have absolutely no idea how much or how little the Olympics generate.


No, actually. I haven't heard anything about this on the news. I heard it in --GASP-- class. (I know, how ELITIST of me!) The fact is, if you take the whole goddamn world, put them in hotels and have them buy everything in the local economy at an inflated price for a week, it's going to generate profit. Vancouver real estate is expected to inflate after the games, since it's a beautiful place and people are going to want to buy land there after they've visited/seen it on TV. Quite a few people up here are buying land NOW so they can sell it next year at a ridiculously high price. It's even spilling over into Alberta.


How utterly convienient.
You're happy either way! YIPPIE!! (y)


I know! If only I could be a jaded and angry about everything like yourself! Oh, to dream.


Obama attempted to secure the Olympic bid.
He did "everything we could". (his words)
He was eliminated in the first round of voting.

That's not an "idea that Obama failed"
It's a fact. And it's not a non-issue either.
He's losing clout on the international level. As much as you'd like this to go away, it's most certainly a real issue.

Rob, you're beyond ludicrous (believe it or not, "Ludicris" is actually a rapper with a misspelled name!). What was Obama supposed to do? He did do everything he could. CHICAGO didn't cut it. Was he supposed to convince the committee that despite Chicago's 4th place rankings behind the other countries, they should still have it there because it's HIS CITY? They didn't say "fuck you Obama," they said "Chicago's not good enough." It's like if someone goes in for a job interview, they do their best, and someone else gets the job. Doesn't mean that they suck or people don't respect them, it means SOMEONE ELSE IS BETTER FOR THE JOB. They're not hiring the other person to SPITE the other applicant, they're doing it because it's the best choice.

It's not his fault alone.
Nobody said Chicago was denied solely because of the IOC's dislike of Obama.

Then why are you acting like it is?

Non-issue. Period.

[kaiser soze]

Interesting.
So you're saying you would have been praising Bush if the Chicago bid had been successful?

I would be happy if Chicago won and I honestly don't care who is trying to sell this, shit I didn't even know Chicago was in contention until all this hoopla.

I'm just pointing out the fact that this was not Obama's idea so he should not be blamed for the bid falling through

[YoungRemy]

Chicago can invest all that money into cleaning up the crime and improving the schools and infrastructure. Some polls show that the city was spilt right down the middle on whether they even wanted the Olympics in their city in the first place. That sentiment seems to be echoed here by a few and on the other forums I've been reading.

I for one got caught up in the hoopla when I was in Chicago.
And I admit: artist renditions are one thing, making it a reality was another.

I don't think Chi Town ever stood a chance.

[Whatitis]

I would be happy if Chicago won and I honestly don't care who is trying to sell this, shit I didn't even know Chicago was in contention until all this hoopla.

I'm just pointing out the fact that this was not Obama's idea so he should not be blamed for the bid falling through

No matter who's idea it was, he ran with it. I can only imagine the praise he would have received if Chicago won. If most of you can't...get real.

[RobMoney$]

Clearly the members of the IOC were swayed by all the negative crap Beck and Limbaugh have been saying about Obama.

[Bob]

Chicago can invest all that money into cleaning up the crime and improving the schools and infrastructure. Some polls show that the city was spilt right down the middle on whether they even wanted the Olympics in their city in the first place. That sentiment seems to be echoed here by a few and on the other forums I've been reading.

I for one got caught up in the hoopla when I was in Chicago.
And I admit: artist renditions are one thing, making it a reality was another.

I don't think Chi Town ever stood a chance.

if i were the olympics, chicago would probably be my 4th choice too

in fact, if i were planning, say, a vacation, and my choices were chicago, tokyo, madrid or rio, chicago would be my 4th choice

i'd probably pick tokyo because as i understand it japanese chicks are into dorky white dudes

[RobMoney$]

Chicago and Rio were the odds on favorites according to everyone I read before the vote.
That's why it was soo shocking to have been eliminated in the first vote.

Clearly, Obama is regretting not being able to get ACORN involved in the voting. A few votes from Mickey Mouse, a few homeless folks, some dead people, and some Pimps and Ho's would have pushed this thing over the top for them.

[YoungRemy]

clearly. (y)

[RobMoney$]

Bow to a sporting committee? Give me a break. He was gunning for the Olympics at his home town. How is he a "weak leader" since we've been denied? A stronger leader would have magically convinced the non-partisan world committee that Chicago, despite an uphill battle against all the other cities, is the correct choice? A stronger leader would have maybe hypnotized them, perhaps bribed them a bit? What would a "stronger leader" do in order to secure the Olympics? There's only as much one person can do, the city has to meet him half way. :rolleyes:

Sure, have it your way.
He doesn't lose any face, internationally then by being flat-out bitch slapped by being dismissed in an embarressing display by a sporting comittee.
I'm sure the world didn't notice at all.

And Yes, he BOWED.
He went to the IOC with his hand out and was denied.
Vito Corleone would never put himself or his family in a position of having to ask permission or a favor of someone of lesser rank than him.
HE LEADS, he doesn't ask permission!
His very presence alone would have secured it.
Hell, Vito would have had Jacques Rogge serving him a cappuccino before he left Coppenhagen. :rolleyes:

BTW, there are two of you on the board, and you go back and forth between ridiculous topics, so you can fill in your names as appropriate.

Again, if you want to be a "tough-guy" and call someone out, then do it.
Or keep it to yourself.


Due to the fact that Fox News worries about stupid shit like wearing flag pins, not putting your hand over your heart during the anthem, Obama being a secret Muslim, "indoctrination" of school children through songs. They all evolve from one source. And yes, it was all over the news that Chicago lost, but there was one station that was first to break the news that it was -- OBAMA'S FAULT. It just seems very convenient that the trivial bullshit that people bring up seems to go right back to Fox News. And if you haven't been tuning in to Fox directly, you've been picking up their dregs somewhere along the news cycle.

So you're full of shit then about "finding out they've been tuning in to FOX". You have absolutely no idea where people get their news.
Ever consider that FOX is the one picking up others' dregs?
BTW, you sure are fluent about what goes on on FOX.
Part of the reason they spout most of the crap they do is because they know it spins the left-leaning lunatic fringe into a tizzy.
Congrats on feeding their monster.



No, actually. I haven't heard anything about this on the news. I heard it in --GASP-- class. (I know, how ELITIST of me!) The fact is, if you take the whole goddamn world, put them in hotels and have them buy everything in the local economy at an inflated price for a week, it's going to generate profit. Vancouver real estate is expected to inflate after the games, since it's a beautiful place and people are going to want to buy land there after they've visited/seen it on TV. Quite a few people up here are buying land NOW so they can sell it next year at a ridiculously high price. It's even spilling over into Alberta.

Let me break it down for you.
Yes, they were going to fill all the Hotels and restaurants and the entire city of Chicago for two weeks.
But our bid was to spend $2.5 Billion on infastructure and upgrades such as new stadiums for the games alone.
Rio bid $11 Billion.
Rio has absolutely no chance whatsoever of ever making a profit from this.
Neither would Chicago have.
You don't bid for Olympic games to turn a profit. It's a prestige thing.
It's the opportunity to show your city off, and be the focus of the world for two weeks.
Everybody knows that.
Well, almost everybody.:rolleyes:

As for the real estate theory. It's hilarious.
Who the hell buys these lines?
No one remembers where Olympics were held after a few years.
Are people falling all over themselves to book flights to Lillehammer nowadays?
And how'd it work out for Sarajevo?
That class you got your info from is a waste of time.


I know! If only I could be a jaded and angry about everything like yourself! Oh, to dream.



Rob, you're beyond ludicrous (believe it or not, "Ludicris" is actually a rapper with a misspelled name!). What was Obama supposed to do? He did do everything he could. CHICAGO didn't cut it. Was he supposed to convince the committee that despite Chicago's 4th place rankings behind the other countries, they should still have it there because it's HIS CITY? They didn't say "fuck you Obama," they said "Chicago's not good enough." It's like if someone goes in for a job interview, they do their best, and someone else gets the job. Doesn't mean that they suck or people don't respect them, it means SOMEONE ELSE IS BETTER FOR THE JOB. They're not hiring the other person to SPITE the other applicant, they're doing it because it's the best choice.



Then why are you acting like it is?

Non-issue. Period.

I'm not acting like it's his fault.
I'm trying to stop people like you from putting those words in my mouth.
My opinion is he fucked up by even getting involved.
And why the hell was Oprah over there?

[Randetica]

good, america doesnt always have to be the center of attention of everything

[QueenAdrock]

So you're full of shit then about "finding out they've been tuning in to FOX". You have absolutely no idea where people get their news.
Ever consider that FOX is the one picking up others' dregs?
BTW, you sure are fluent about what goes on on FOX.
Part of the reason they spout most of the crap they do is because they know it spins the left-leaning lunatic fringe into a tizzy.
Congrats on feeding their monster.


Well, I've seen you post up right-wing Drudge Report and Fox tons of times, and yet you seem SO insulted when someone calls you out for subscribing to right-wing bullshit and say I have "no idea" where you get your news. Riiight. But no, I'm sure you don't subscribe to them even if you do post up their opinion articles and then agree with what they're saying. And no, Fox is not picking up other people's dregs. They say what they want, no matter how outlandish, and people in turn will pick it up from them. Barack Obama's birth certificate wasn't an issue until they picked it up and started blasting it everywhere.

And yes, I try to be fluent on what all sides of the media are saying. I don't like not being in the know. I'd be terrified if people were actually listening to that crap and there was no one there to refute what they were saying.



Let me break it down for you.
Yes, they were going to fill all the Hotels and restaurants and the entire city of Chicago for two weeks.
But our bid was to spend $2.5 Billion on infastructure and upgrades such as new stadiums for the games alone.
Rio bid $11 Billion.
Rio has absolutely no chance whatsoever of ever making a profit from this.
Neither would Chicago have.
You don't bid for Olympic games to turn a profit. It's a prestige thing.
It's the opportunity to show your city off, and be the focus of the world for two weeks.
Everybody knows that.
Well, almost everybody.:rolleyes:

As for the real estate theory. It's hilarious.
Who the hell buys these lines?
No one remembers where Olympics were held after a few years.
Are people falling all over themselves to book flights to Lillehammer nowadays?
And how'd it work out for Sarajevo?
That class you got your info from is a waste of time.


I didn't say it would turn a profit. I said the Olympics cost a lot, but there's a lot of revenue gained. In the long run, it's not a bad thing to have the Olympics because it's not like you'd be just paying out the ass and getting nothing in return, like many seem to suggest.

As for the real estate theory, people buy directly after the Olympics. And no, no one now is buying up real estate in Greece or Salt Lake City now, but there was a market bump directly after the games. It directly benefited their economy in the short-term.

But I'm sure you know better than a tenured professor at a prestigious university, right? :p


I'm not acting like it's his fault.
I'm trying to stop people like you from putting those words in my mouth.
My opinion is he fucked up by even getting involved.


Fucked up how? By caring about his city enough to try and get it nominated? You say he lost international clout (umm, somehow...), yet I think he'd be seen as kind of a jerk if he wouldn't even go to bat for his home city. Can you imagine what the right would be saying if we lost and Obama HADN'T had tried anything? You'd hear "Obama wouldn't even TRY to get his HOME CITY to the Olympics! Does he hate America or just Chicago? Once he gets into the White House, he forgets his roots! What an elitist jerk!"

You're damned if you do, you're damned if you don't. :rolleyes:

[RobMoney$]

Well, I've seen you post up right-wing Drudge Report and Fox tons of times, and yet you seem SO insulted when someone calls you out for subscribing to right-wing bullshit and say I have "no idea" where you get your news. Riiight. But no, I'm sure you don't subscribe to them even if you do post up their opinion articles and then agree with what they're saying. And no, Fox is not picking up other people's dregs. They say what they want, no matter how outlandish, and people in turn will pick it up from them. Barack Obama's birth certificate wasn't an issue until they picked it up and started blasting it everywhere.

And yes, I try to be fluent on what all sides of the media are saying. I don't like not being in the know. I'd be terrified if people were actually listening to that crap and there was no one there to refute what they were saying.

I've said it many times before.
I don't watch, listen to, or even know what channel either of them can be found on.



I didn't say it would turn a profit. I said the Olympics cost a lot, but there's a lot of revenue gained. In the long run, it's not a bad thing to have the Olympics because it's not like you'd be just paying out the ass and getting nothing in return, like many seem to suggest.

As for the real estate theory, people buy directly after the Olympics. And no, no one now is buying up real estate in Greece or Salt Lake City now, but there was a market bump directly after the games. It directly benefited their economy in the short-term.

So define the difference between "Profit", and "revenue gained", genius.

But I'm sure you know better than a tenured professor at a prestigious university, right? :p

A tenured Proffessor? Like Henry Louis Gates Jr.?


Fucked up how? By caring about his city enough to try and get it nominated? You say he lost international clout (umm, somehow...), yet I think he'd be seen as kind of a jerk if he wouldn't even go to bat for his home city. Can you imagine what the right would be saying if we lost and Obama HADN'T had tried anything? You'd hear "Obama wouldn't even TRY to get his HOME CITY to the Olympics! Does he hate America or just Chicago? Once he gets into the White House, he forgets his roots! What an elitist jerk!"

You're damned if you do, you're damned if you don't. :rolleyes:

By all accounts, Chicago was one of the frontrunners.
I'm blaming him for failing to help, and possibly hindering the campaign. Not because the entire campaign failed.

[QueenAdrock]

Let me break it down for you:

Cost of Olympics MINUS revenue gained from people during that week = not in huge amounts of debt like some people seem to suggest

See how the equation is not profit, but it's not crippling debt either? :rolleyes:

And you have no proof that Obama DIDN'T help the campaign. Perhaps it would have had zero votes if he had not helped. "Possibly hindering"? Sounds like a bunch of hearsay to me.
So it's gone from "Obama failed" to "Well...Obama didn't help."

And there's other ways to get media than just the TV, as you have proven from your FOX News links in the past. How can you try to say you don't subscribe to them, when you've posted up Michelle Malkin and agreed with her crap in the past? It's mindboggling.

[DroppinScience]

Not to mention the man sucks the cock of Matt Drudge and other racists.

[QueenAdrock]

Uh-oh, Brett! Quick, get off your computer! We'll be seen as "tag-teaming"! Don't you know we can never be on the forum at the same time, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING?!

[RobMoney$]

Not to mention the man sucks the cock of Matt Drudge and other racists.


And you kiss your tenured University Professors with that mouth?

From the guy who inspired an entire internet meme of posing with a limp wrist in front of a cannon, there's irony in there somewhere about you talking about someone sucking cock.

[DroppinScience]

Interesting how you're more concerned about being gay than being a racist.

[RobMoney$]

You're the one who brought up cock sucking.
Not me.

[Schmeltz]

The bottom line is still the fact that the reason America didn't get the Olympics has nothing to do with Barack Obama and everything to do with the threat posed to the event's safety by armed and dangerous members of the American right wing. Those gun-toting teabaggers would have been up in arms if the international socialist Olympics had dared to contaminate American soil, and domestic terrorism (in the name of liberty, of course) would have been a very real possibility. Rio was the safer and more logical choice.

[kaiser soze]

and they have golden cocks as well (y)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAN5x6udi74

[RobMoney$]

The bottom line is still the fact that the reason America didn't get the Olympics has nothing to do with Barack Obama and everything to do with the threat posed to the event's safety by armed and dangerous members of the American right wing. Those gun-toting teabaggers would have been up in arms if the international socialist Olympics had dared to contaminate American soil, and domestic terrorism (in the name of liberty, of course) would have been a very real possibility. Rio was the safer and more logical choice.


LOL what?
Care to post some evidence to back this claim up?

The fact is that Obama was looking to bask in the glory of bringing the games home to Chicago and the fact that he'd be able to funnel $2.5 billion into Chicago but got denied in no uncertain terms.
I couldn't be happier I don't have to watch the Obamalympics in 2016.

[YoungRemy]

LOL what?
Care to post some evidence to back this claim up?

The fact is that Obama was looking to bask in the glory of bringing the games home to Chicago and the fact that he'd be able to funnel $2.5 billion into Chicago but got denied in no uncertain terms.
It totally would have been all about Obama.

I couldn't be happier I don't have to watch the Obamalympics in 2016.

interesting that you edited out that hypothetical, but in your perfect world you wouldn't have to worry about Obama past 2012, no?

do you concede Obama will last two terms?

[RobMoney$]

I thought the use of "Obamalympics" in the following sentence was enough.

As for Obama's presence past his first term...

1. Even if he failed to get re-elected after his first term, I suspect his name would have been linked to the games anyway.

2. The 2012 elections are going to be very interesting. The only candidate the Repubs have at this point to even challenge Obama is Romney, who I don't care for in the least, but he is a financial guy.
If Obama doesn't curtail the massive deficit spending, the backlash from the right could be big enough for Romney to upset Obama.
It's not like Obama won in a rout the first time.

BTW, I've posted quite a few times that I expected Obama to last two terms just from the complete lack of a viable candidate from the right.

[DroppinScience]

LOL what?
Care to post some evidence to back this claim up?


You didn't see the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, did you?

[Bob]

the obamalympics will be like berlin 1936 only JESSE OWENS IS HITLER

some twilight zone shit

I thought the use of "Obamalympics" in the following sentence was enough.

As for Obama's presence past his first term...

1. Even if he failed to get re-elected after his first term, I suspect his name would have been linked to the games anyway.

2. The 2012 elections are going to be very interesting. The only candidate the Repubs have at this point to even challenge Obama is Romney, who I don't care for in the least, but he is a financial guy.
If Obama doesn't curtail the massive deficit spending, the backlash from the right could be big enough for Romney to upset Obama.
It's not like Obama won in a rout the first time.

BTW, I've posted quite a few times that I expected Obama to last two terms just from the complete lack of a viable candidate from the right.

don't forget about the sarahcuda

[DroppinScience]

the obamalympics will be like berlin 1936 only JESSE OWENS IS HITLER

some twilight zone shit

Yeah man, Obama is going to refuse to give the gold medal when some white dude from Norway wins the gold medal at ping pong. DEVASTATING!

[RobMoney$]

You didn't see the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta, did you?


And what evidence do you have that this had any influence whatsoever on this vote?

BTW, you did know about the stabbing and murder of the American girls' volleyball coach's family in Beijing, right?
"Crazy" is not limited to the American south.

Also, the Atlanta bombing was not during an official Olympic event and security had discovered the bomb and began clearing the area. Unfortunatley, some people were still injured. But overall it was handled quite well and didn't affect the Games at all.
Why this is even being used by anyone as an excuse for anything is a joke.

[RobMoney$]

Yeah man, Obama is going to refuse to give the gold medal when some white dude from Norway wins the gold medal at ping pong. DEVASTATING!


He'll probably want to give gold medals to everyone.
In fact he'll probably introduce legislation that will make it illegal for anyone not to take a gold medal.

[Schmeltz]

Why this is even being used by anyone as an excuse for anything is a joke.

That's true, and applies equally to your laughable assertions about how the failed bid constitutes some kind of personal embarrassment for the President and the nation at large on the world stage. Watching you and valvano flail around while you peddle Rio's win as some type of confirmation of Obama's inadequacy is the real joke here.

Now go and find something to copy and paste in response.

[Guy Incognito]

in comes the brit with no clue:

this is the most entertaining and readable thread on this whole board for ages. people talking sense, people talking nonsense, people taking the piss, people having that piss go about 6 foot over their head.

anyhoo, the basic fact thats been mentioned is that it appears that chicago wasnt good enough option. Rio's bid was obviously very good. there has been hardly any credit for that on here. Plus when people are saying chicago was joint favourite. does that mean they think the bookies are directly linked to the IOC? I dont think they are. Bookmakers speculate on who is favourtie based on lots of factors.

I would imagine that any american city would be considered a favourite outside of the IOC because of the fact the states have a large olympic history and because Chicago hasnt had it, and maybe even considered a favourite because it was obama's home town. what i am trying to say is that chicago being considered favourite is irrelevant because of where that info has come from. So to say obama ruined the favourite status is a shaky opinion.

quick question - what has obama'a birth certificate got do with anything? just asking, can someone fill in that blank for me please?

[Whatitis]

The bottom line is still the fact that the reason America didn't get the Olympics has nothing to do with Barack Obama and everything to do with the threat posed to the event's safety by armed and dangerous members of the American right wing. Those gun-toting teabaggers would have been up in arms if the international socialist Olympics had dared to contaminate American soil, and domestic terrorism (in the name of liberty, of course) would have been a very real possibility. Rio was the safer and more logical choice.

Kind of a lame assertion giving the Olympics are subject to any terrorist attack from anyone due to the high profile of the Olympics and the number of crowds involved. It's a target no matter where the games are played. Nice spin though.

[RobMoney$]

Also lame when you consider that large parts of Rio are completely controled by drug gangs and are completely lawless.

[YoungRemy]

re: Chicago as Frontrunners

the way I see it, the reason why Chicago emerged as a Frontrunner in the recent weeks is because of the delegate featuring Obama, Oprah, David Robinson (wtf?) and Mayor Daly. I am willing to concede that their combined clout was not enough, and their effort was too little, too late.

but seriously, Oprah's one of Chicago's most powerful and wealthiest personality. I understand why she is on the Chicago 2016 bandwagon. Hell, Perry Farrell closed the Jane's Addiction set with a plea for support. (Granted, this was on the "Chicago 2016" Stage at Lollapalooza)

But David Robinson , the D.C. raised, Naval Academy bred, San Antonio hometown favorite, on the delegate for Chicago Olympics? that's what I don't get.

[Guy Incognito]

re: Chicago as Frontrunners

the way I see it, the reason why Chicago emerged as a Frontrunner in the recent weeks is because of the delegate featuring Obama, Oprah, David Robinson (wtf?) and Mayor Daly. I am willing to concede that their combined clout was not enough, and their effort was too little, too late.

but seriously, Oprah's one of Chicago's most powerful and wealthiest personality. I understand why she is on the Chicago 2016 bandwagon. Hell, Perry Farrell closed the Jane's Addiction set with a plea for support. (Granted, this was on the "Chicago 2016" Stage at Lollapalooza)

But David Robinson , the D.C. raised, Naval Academy bred, San Antonio hometown favorite, on the delegate for Chicago Olympics? that's what I don't get.


so you could say that obama's presence improved the chances. kind of. yes it was too little too late but it might have given ioc something to think about

[DroppinScience]

I wonder if Paul Krugman posts at the BBMB?

Krugram: "...[W]e learned that the modern conservative movement, which dominates the modern Republican Party, has the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/opinion/05krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

[yeahwho]

I wonder if Paul Krugman posts at the BBMB?

Krugram: "...[W]e learned that the modern conservative movement, which dominates the modern Republican Party, has the emotional maturity of a bratty 13-year-old."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/opinion/05krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
Read the article then read the readers responses (http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/opinion/05krugman.html?sort=recommended) and then I came across this one, which clarifies the NYTimes problem, it is a self interested corporation itself who championed the Iraq invasion pre-war then decided afterward's we were in too much of a hurry to invade Iraq. They report sideways to events. Not what is actually happening. It pisses me off.

Anyways here is the response;

Paul; you really should stick to economics. The Problems with President Obama and the Democrats has little to do with the Republicans and nothing to do with the Olympics. The Olympic stuff is already forgotten.

President Obama's problem is jobs and the economy. His friends at Goldman Sachs are richer than ever -- when they were practically insolvent a year ago. Read your own paper today, Goldman is to make over a billion dollar bonus when Citi files bankruptcy. There is so much hubris involved there, I can barely think straight to type.

President Obama sold us out to the bankers. So have the Democrats in Congress. Maybe the Republicans would have done exactly the same had they been in power. But they weren't and aren't.

Read Frank Rich's column, yesterday; and, then read the reader's comments. And , Paul, we are the base.

The Republicans are obnoxiuos. We all know that. But, the Democrats control everything. Out here, people are are out of work. People are losing their houses. People are raiding their retirement funds to survive.

But, you choose to talk about Rush Limbaugh. I don't care about Rush Limbaugh. I care about what the President and the Congress are doing -- or , rather, what they are not doing -- in regards to improving the economy for middle class working people.

[travesty]

The key point is that ever since the Reagan years, the Republican Party has been dominated by radicals — ideologues and/or apparatchiks who, at a fundamental level, do not accept anyone else’s right to govern.

Blatantly ironic coming from Krugman one of the left's greatest radical idealogues who also does not accept anyone else's right to govern, or especially make economic decisions.

[saz]

Not really but it's just fuel for the right, just as it would be for the left if the shoe was on the other foot.

nice try. having a succesful bid for the olympic games equals hundreds of thousands of full-time jobs, billions for the economy, a huge boost to tourism, infrastructure projects, private investment etc etc. if stephen harper landed the olympics for toronto or montreal, i'd be ecstatic. the only reason why a portion of the american right is cheering for this is because the radical, fringe redneck base (ie the john birchers) have taken over the gop and therefore we're seeing such ignorance and stupidity in action.

[saz]

Blatantly ironic coming from Krugman one of the left's greatest radical idealogues who also does not accept anyone else's right to govern, or especially make economic decisions.

yeah, the nobel prize winning krugman is just like rush limbaugh.

[travesty]

yeah, the nobel prize winning krugman is just like rush limbaugh.

WTF does the Nobel Prize have to do with anything? Are you saying that winning a Nobel Prize makes you inherently objective and devoid of extreme partisan slants? Hhahahaha that's funny!
He wrote book called "The Conscience of Liberal" fer chrisssake. How jilted can you get?

[saz]

you referred to him as a radical ideologue, which he isn't. he's a columnist and a brilliant one at that, hence the nobel prize. i don't see how being a progressive and advocating regulation of wall street makes one an extremist.

[travesty]

you referred to him as a radical ideologue, which he isn't. he's a columnist and a brilliant one at that, hence the nobel prize. i don't see how being a progressive and advocating regulation of wall street makes one an extremist.

He is as far left as anyone I can think of and eschewing that the far right are behaving badly is the pot calling the kettle black. He'll stick his face on any show that will let him and would probably hang himslef if the Times took away his column. He is an economist that quickly realized politcal flame throwing would get him more attention and praise. He is as much of an egomaniac and political glory hound as Rush or anyone else. Smart yes.....but really just more of smart-ass.

[yeahwho]

He is as far left as anyone I can think of and eschewing that the far right are behaving badly is the pot calling the kettle black. He'll stick his face on any show that will let him and would probably hang himslef if the Times took away his column. He is an economist that quickly realized politcal flame throwing would get him more attention and praise. He is as much of an egomaniac and political glory hound as Rush or anyone else. Smart yes.....but really just more of smart-ass.

C'mon, I consider myself slightly liberal, Krugman fits a bankers profile. He is intelligent, non-condescending and one of the brighter minds working in media today.

Rush Limbaugh is a complete fucking moron.

[travesty]

I never said he wasn't smart. Non-condecscending though? Really? Calling people bratty 13 year olds isn't condescending?

[RobMoney$]

For the BBMB, that's not considered condescending.

[DroppinScience]

nice try. having a succesful bid for the olympic games equals hundreds of thousands of full-time jobs, billions for the economy, a huge boost to tourism, infrastructure projects, private investment etc etc. if stephen harper landed the olympics for toronto or montreal, i'd be ecstatic. the only reason why a portion of the american right is cheering for this is because the radical, fringe redneck base (ie the john birchers) have taken over the gop and therefore we're seeing such ignorance and stupidity in action.

Montreal already had the Olympics, and unfortunately that one didn't work out very well for the city and it took them awhile to recover from it economically. However, that's the exception, not the rule.

Sorry travesty, I have to laugh at your assertion of Krugman being a "radical ideologue." Yes, he's a liberal, tilts a bit left of center, but far from what you'd call radical. When I think "radical ideologue" (at least for someone on the left), I think of someone like... oh, I dunno, Abbie Hoffman, Tom Hayden, Angela Davis or someone (and I'm not referring to them in a disparaging manner, but for all intents and purposes, they're radicals). Paul Krugman, a calm, pragmatic newspaper columnist who talks a lot of sense and reason doesn't fit the profile. Yes, he has views you no doubt disagree with, but I have not heard him yell and call for segregated busing. I've heard Limbaugh say that.

[travesty]

Montreal already had the Olympics, and unfortunately that one didn't work out very well for the city and it took them awhile to recover from it economically. However, that's the exception, not the rule.

Sorry travesty, I have to laugh at your assertion of Krugman being a "radical ideologue." Yes, he's a liberal, tilts a bit left of center, but far from what you'd call radical. When I think "radical ideologue" (at least for someone on the left), I think of someone like... oh, I dunno, Abbie Hoffman, Tom Hayden, Angela Davis or someone (and I'm not referring to them in a disparaging manner, but for all intents and purposes, they're radicals). Paul Krugman, a calm, pragmatic newspaper columnist who talks a lot of sense and reason doesn't fit the profile. Yes, he has views you no doubt disagree with, but I have not heard him yell and call for segregated busing. I've heard Limbaugh say that.

Maybe radical was a bit much but "tilts a bit left of center" doesn't even come close and "pragmatic" is a stretch. Kugman is a rabid lefty and all of his columns and all of his writings make no attempt to hide that fact. He is very proud of it and would be insulted if he knew you did not acknowledge his blatant positions.

[DroppinScience]

I have yet to see evidence of the "rabid" part. Compared to the historical radical/"rabid" lefties I've sighted, Krugman looks pretty moderate. Yes, he definitely is no fan of the right-wing (specifically those who don't believe in regulation for Wall Street). Hell, a quick glance at his "political views" according to Wikipedia shows he's far from being anywhere near radical.

Krugman describes himself as liberal. He has explained that he views the term "liberal" in the American context to mean "more or less what social democratic means in Europe".[73] A 2009 Newsweek article described Krugman as having "all the credentials of a ranking member of the East Coast liberal establishment" but also as someone who is anti-establishment, a "scourge of the Bush administration," and a critic of the Obama administration.[82] In 1996, Newsweek had remarked "Say this for Krugman: though an unabashed liberal ... he's ideologically colorblind. He savages the supply-siders of the Reagan-Bush era with the same glee as he does the 'strategic traders' of the Clinton administration."[18] According to economic journalist Robert Kuttner, Krugman before "viewed the left and the right as symmetrical evils" but he "has now discovered power".[114]

Krugman has advocated free markets in contexts where they are often viewed as controversial.[weasel words] He has written against rent control in favor of supply and demand,[115] argued that "sweatshops" are preferable to unemployment,[29] challenged minimum wage and living wage laws,[116] likened the opposition against free trade and globalization to the opposition against evolution via natural selection,[117] opposed farm subsidies[118] ethanol mandates, subsidies, and tax breaks,[119] questioned NASA's manned space flights,[120] and written against some aspects of European labor market regulation.[121][122] He once famously quipped that, "If there were an Economist’s Creed, it would surely contain the affirmations 'I understand the Principle of Comparative Advantage' and 'I advocate Free Trade'."[123][124]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman#Political_views

Yes, what a "radical."

[Schmeltz]

For the BBMB, that's not considered condescending.

True. Taking something written by somewhere else, by someone else, and trying to pass it off as something you came up with after a long night of research, and hoping nobody will figure it out - now that's condescending.

[yeahwho]

I never said he wasn't smart. Non-condecscending though? Really? Calling people bratty 13 year olds isn't condescending?

For the BBMB, that's not considered condescending.

I guess I give up, read whoever you figure isn't going to hurt your feelings. There are plenty of other sources out there. I highly (and I mean high in the literal sense) recommend ZAP comix as your next source of information. Sometimes a slap across the cerebral cortex is just what you need.

babies

[travesty]

I guess I give up, read whoever you figure isn't going to hurt your feelings. There are plenty of other sources out there. I highly (and I mean high in the literal sense) recommend ZAP comix as your next source of information. Sometimes a slap across the cerebral cortex is just what you need.

babies

You give up what? Were you trying to get me to agree with Krugman? Were you trying to get me to read Krugman? Well I do, occassionally. I don't care for his blatant political bias and I am not a subscriber to Keynesian styled economics either. So because I don't like him I need to get my news from comic books? WTF? I think you may have some idolatry issues.

[saz]

Montreal already had the Olympics, and unfortunately that one didn't work out very well for the city and it took them awhile to recover from it economically. However, that's the exception, not the rule.

yeah i know about montreal. the calgary games seemed to fair better, producing an endowment fund worth approximately 180 million.

still though, olympic games produces jobs, economic activity and a huge influx in tourism.

[NoFenders]

Hardly anyone in Chicago wanted these games for we all know what happens when our county gets a check for anything. About 1/3 goes to the actual bill, and the other 2/3 go to political tools and their friends.

That being said, the people voting for the games know about this stuff. They knew we didn't want the games plain and simple. Chicago lost the game, not the president.

What is odd, is that somebody told Obama that him going would set the vote over the top, since it seemed Chicago was such a top runner. Now we send a jet over to haul the first lady and Orpah over there for a week, and then we send another for the president. Only to be shuffled out as least favorite. Somebody got an ear full when he got back I'm sure.

The good thing about it all, is that first we don't have the headache of dealing with the Olympics in 2016, and second, I believe this has taken the Obama ego down a bit.

I hope he gets down to real business soon and leaves the left wing nut jobs cool their jets for a while.

His numbers aren't looking good, so I think it's time for a change from within his heart. Do what he said he'd do, and forget the publicity stunts.

He could even start with showing up in Chicago or Afganistan for one.

People need help in these places, and he seems to generate hope when he feels it's right.

I was very happy to know we didn't get the Olympics though. It was bound to hurt us in the long run.

Rio will be much better.

[saz]

His numbers aren't looking good,



Poll: Obama's Approval Rating Jumps 6 Percent

Beth Fouhy | 10/6/09 09:46 PM



NEW YORK — President Barack Obama's approval ratings are starting to rise after declining ever since his inauguration, new poll figures show as the country's mood begins to brighten. But concerns about the economy, health care and war persist, and support for the war in Afghanistan is falling.

An Associated Press-GfK poll says 56 percent of those surveyed in the past week approve of Obama's job performance, up from 50 percent in September. It's the first time since he took office in January that his rating has gone up.

People also feel better about his handling of the economy and his proposed health care overhaul.

But not about the war.

Support for the war in Afghanistan has declined, the poll said Tuesday. And approval of Obama's handling of it is holding steady – in contrast to his gains in other areas – as he considers a big troop increase there. Poll respondents narrowly oppose the increase.

Overall, 39 percent said they disapproved of Obama's performance in office, down from 49 percent last month.

While a majority of those surveyed remain pessimistic about the direction of the country, that number has begun to improve, too. The poll found 41 percent now believe the U.S. is headed in the right direction, compared with 37 percent in September.

But a large majority of respondents said they remain very concerned about most of the major issues facing the country. The economy was the biggest concern, with 88 percent saying they consider it extremely or very important, followed by unemployment, health care, terrorism, the budget deficit, taxes and the war in Afghanistan.

The increase in Obama's job approval rating was driven by a more positive view of his handling of nearly all of those issues.

Fifty percent of those surveyed said they approved of the president's handling of the economy, up from 44 percent in September. And 48 percent said they approved of his handling of health care, up six points and about equal to the 47 percent who said they disapproved. Obama has made health care the signature domestic issue of his presidency.

Terence Glass, a 45-year-old Milwaukee resident studying to be a teacher, said he was pleased with Obama's handling of health care and the economy, especially his decision to provide federal help to the ailing auto industry.

"We have to look at what was going on before he got in his office. The country was in pretty bad shape," Glass, a Democrat said, adding that since Obama had become president, "I look at it now and I think it's doing a little better."

The only measure that remained unchanged from September was Obama's handling of the war in Afghanistan. Forty-six percent said they approved of his handling of the conflict, while 41 percent disapproved.

Indeed, the poll found a drop in overall support for the 8-year-old war. Forty percent said they favored it, down four points from July, while 57 percent said they were opposed. Some 46 percent favor sending more U.S. troops there, while 50 percent oppose a troop increase, a major decision Obama is weighing.

Obama boosted troop levels in Afghanistan last spring by about 21,000. He and his national security team are now reviewing a warning by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, commander of U.S. forces in that country, that the war will be lost without another big increase.

Glenda Holton, 53, a retired Army sergeant from Dublin, Ga., said she strongly disapproved of Obama's performance in office – and opposed a troop increase.

"I don't feel like they need to have any of them over there," she said about U.S. troops in Afghanistan. "Because it's not doing any good, it's escalating and there hasn't been any improvement."

Holton, who did not vote for Obama in the general election and considers herself an independent, added, "It's not our fight over there."

To be sure, the poll found persistent and deep partisan divisions over Obama. While 88 percent of Democrats said they approved of his performance in office, just 18 percent of Republicans approved. But that GOP figure was up six points since September, when only 12 percent of Republicans said they approved.

Obama's job approval has also gone up among independents. Fifty-three percent said they approved of the president's job performance, a nine point increase since September. Even more strikingly, the percentage of independents who said they disapproved plunged 16 points, from 53 percent last month to 37 percent now.

The poll of 1,003 adults was conducted Oct. 1-5, using both landline and cell phone interviews, with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

___

AP Polling Director Trevor Tompson and AP writers Natasha Metzler and Christine Simmons in Washington contributed to this report.


.

[yeahwho]

You give up what? Were you trying to get me to agree with Krugman? Were you trying to get me to read Krugman? Well I do, occassionally. I don't care for his blatant political bias and I am not a subscriber to Keynesian styled economics either. So because I don't like him I need to get my news from comic books? WTF? I think you may have some idolatry issues.

I know, between ZAP comix and Paul Krugman I have subjected myself to abusing the second commandment.

[saz]

Thank You, Mr. President

Joe Scarborough
Host of MSNBC's Morning Joe, former member of Congress
Posted: October 2, 2009 02:47 PM


Count me as one conservative who is disappointed that President Obama's hometown will not be hosting the 2016 Olympic Games.

Chicago is a beautiful city that would have made a perfect backdrop for the Olympics. The President was right to fly to Copenhagen to try to land the games, not for the sake of his city, but for the good of his country. The fact President Obama failed makes me respect him more for taking the chance, and the fact many right-wing figures opposed the President's mission shows just how narrow-minded partisanship makes us all.

For the better part of 20 years, a bitterness has infected our politics that has weakened our country.

We Republicans spent eight years trying to delegitimize Bill Clinton.

Democrats spent the next eight years doing the same to George W. Bush.

Now that a Democrat is in the Oval Office again, it is the GOP who is trying to delegitimize a sitting president.

When I try to talk to Republicans about the need to break this cycle of viciousness, some cite the chapter and verse of every hateful left wing attack against George W. Bush.

Whenever I attempt to have a conversation with some Democrats about the need for us respect our president-- whether he be an Obama or a Bush-- I am told that Bush deserved whatever he got because he was a lying war criminal who hated the Constitution and loved torturing people.

Fortunately, there are a growing number of Americans who believe we cannot continue going on this way.

You and I may disagree on how the CIA handled terror suspects. But that does not mean that you are soft on terrorism anymore than it means that I hate the Constitution.

You and I may have a different approach to Afghanistan. But just because you want to stay there another five years doesn't mean you are an imperialist. And if I believe a decade in that forsaken land is more than enough, that doesn't mean I'm soft on al Qaeda or the Taliban.

It just means that we view the world differently.

That creative tension--that intense give and take--has been what has kept America strong since Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton fought like hell in George Washington's White House.

Hamilton wanted a strong centralized government while Jefferson believed that the government that governed least governed best.

Both men were frustrated by the checks and balances that stood in the way of their agendas, but that debate shaped America for years to come.

But something has gone terribly wrong.

Today on Morning Joe, NBC News Legend Tom Brokaw remarked to Pat Buchanan about how the level of partisanship is even more intense today than during the depths of the Watergate crisis. Brokaw was commenting on Congressman Grayson's comments, but he could have easily
been talking about Joe Wilson or death panels or the bizarre claim that the President "hates all white people."

Some of the rhetoric is dangerous. But what we saw from some conservative corners regarding the President's failed Olympics bid was just plain stupid.

I'm happy for Rio and think it is past time that South America got a chance to host the Olympic Games. But put me down as one conservative who is glad my president flew across the ocean to try to bring the 2016 Games to America.

Nice try, President Obama. And thanks for taking time away from your young girls for the sake of your hometown and your country, Michelle. I know that's never an easy thing to do.

.

[YoungRemy]

http://www.hulu.com/watch/100349/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-chicago-nope#x-4,vclip,1

[yeahwho]

http://www.hulu.com/watch/100349/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-chicago-nope#x-4,vclip,1

There you have it America, Conservatives hate Obama more than they love America.



funny stuff