Here's what I would like to talk about in all this: The First Lady and her husband made terrible presentations to the IOC! In retrospect, it makes complete sense that they got the boot in Round 1.
Here's Michelle Obama, patronizingly slow-talking, using the phony "crying voice," whining about the very special poverty and discrimination that is Chicago, trying to guilt-trip the IOC into being charitable to the downtrodden Americans who have suffered so much:
What's with these Americans and their endless fretting about their own self-esteem? If we're going to boost egos, why the hell would we boost American egos? They are scarily hungry for inspiration, for their inspiration. Why should the athletes of the world be enlisted in that effort? And, good lord, the woman's husband is the President of the United States — isn't that enough? She still needs us to make her feel good at long last? This insatiable lust for encouragement — enough!
Now, here's the husband that she introduced as if it was roundly well-understood that everyone adores him:
I got impatient with the emphatic, pause-laden slow speech and had to switch to text. Toward the end:
Nearly one year ago, on a clear November night, people from every corner of the world gathered in the city of Chicago or in front of their televisions to watch the results of the U.S. Presidential election. Their interest wasn't about me as an individual.Can't you just see the eyes rolling? Somehow he's President of the whole world. And he's bigger than himself as an individual.
Rather, it was rooted in the belief that America's experiment in democracy still speaks to a set of universal aspirations and ideals....Actually, it's kind of cool to hear him reciting the ideology of "American exceptionalism" he's usually accused of not believing in. But isn't this exactly the wrong place to do it? Is he about Chicago or America or the whole world or does he somehow think it all becomes one... in him?
At the beginning of this new century, the nation that has been shaped by people from around the world wants a chance to inspire it once more...That is, not only was the world inspired when he won the Presidency, the world can be inspired by — what? — the sheer greatness of Chicago?
And so I urge you to choose Chicago. I urge you to choose America. And if you do; if we walk this path together; then I promise you this: the city of Chicago and the United States of America will make the world proud.I'm picturing them thinking: What is this pride? Why would we be proud of you? Why should we give you the Olympics so that you can — what? — boost our self-esteem? Because — why? — we, the world, contain Chicago? Get your nutty American inspirationalism off me. We're talking about where to site the Olympic games, not who's the dreamiest city in the world. Why do the games belong in Chicago? What was the argument? It's Obama's adopted hometown and it has ethnic neighborhoods, where all the colorful peoples live in peace and harmony?
Nobody yelled out "You lie," but what a lie!
Posts
184 comments:
I'd have voted them out just from the insulting speech too.
Carl Lewis was in the Olympics from 1981-90. Michelle was born in 1964. She would have been 17 years old, sitting on her father's lap watching him perform. Sure, Michelle, sure.
Ask not what Chicago, America and I can do for the Olympic Movement. Ask what the Olympic movement can do for my self esteem, my sagging popularity and the pockets of my Chicago cronies. Because, God knows, it would be wasted on a bunch of poor, filthy cariocas.
"This is a war zone," Jackson said.
No lie.
He accomplished his goal. He got us to stop talking about his marxist takeover of the healthcare industry. Personal embarrassment is even worth that to him.
The smart move would have been to hire William Shatner.
Belmont Club:
When in other international settings, like Afghanistan or the Middle East or Russia, the United States is told that its setbacks come from a lack of nuance, a deficit of humility or a lack of sophistication the story itself is really a test. Those who tell it are testing to see if you believe it. If you believe it and come forward groveling then they’ll tell you another story about Santa Claus. You’ve failed the test because then they’ve got you pegged for a chump
suggesting that cash and a gun to the head are the real currency in the international world.
This whole business of pretending that this is a great loss for America, as opposed to a great loss for Richie Daley and his cronies, is absurd. It's no loss whatsoever for 99% of the country, we can watch the Olympics on TV and not pay a dime.
I think that at least some of the people who seem to be relishing failure are instead relishing justice.
This failure was minor and amusing except that it speaks to a poorly run US foreign policy establishment and lack of WH staff prep.
In order to get the President involved in a foreign policy event or dealmaking certain precurors must occur.
1. There needs to be a pragmatic understanding of the landscape. Who benefits among the parties, where are the votes, who can be influenced, who is the competition, how can they be neutralized? Who do we need to buy off?
2. Serious professionals must set the stage and do the tough deal making
3. There has to be a realistic evaluation of our chances, and the risks of the downside.
4. only when you are assured of the outcome, do you put the prestige of the President and the US on the line for the signing ceremony.
These guys are rookies. If you can't count IOC votes, the Iranians are going to eat you alive when you talk with them
Bush did lose the NY Games. And, the NY Games did lose w/ about the same # of votes as Chicago. W didn't go to the thing in person, but he did send a video plea. And, this time the other three countries did send their heads of state.
And, when NY lost (post 9-11) Americans were disappointed and felt slighted--the Ds didn't celebrate. The IOC are spiteful and revel in our country losing, in this way they are like the Rs, except the Rs are acting more transparently.
I don't really know how these IOC politics work, except I readily believe it's as cynical and corrupt as many say.
But my guesses are that:
1) Shouldn't the windup pitch, the closing argument (is that not what the Obamas' presentations were?) at least seem to be about what Chicago will do for everyone else, and make people feel good about the choice? I didn't much in these speeches that said that.
2) It seemed really clear to me from the get-go that if the IOC was going to go for Chicago, they'd prefer not to be seen as doing so at the heavy-handed bidding of the President of the United States.
Does President Obama and his crowd really need to have it explained to them that the rest of the world doesn't like to be seen as doing what we want all the time?
If that's true, then this whole enterprise was primed for failure. Far better had he said he was all for it, but stayed home, and perhaps kept Mrs. Obama home too.
Like Dems wouldn't have hooted with glee if Bush had gone all out trying to get the Olympics to come to Texas and gotten his comeuppance in the first round of voting.
Oh, bullshit, Althouse. Dems actually wanted New Orleans to be rebuilt. And a Houston Olympics would be fine, thank you very much.
No, you and your Republican friends are the ones all about failure, the ones are glad that the U.S. lost.
How charming--and patriotic.
Their speeches were bad. As a friend of mine would say, their I's were too close together. Michelle's was especially bad. It wasn't how Chicago would be perfect for the Olympics, it was how happy she would be if Chicago got the Olympics.
Barack's was better until the end. What the hell did his election have to do the Olympics?
In the end I think both speeches were more about the Obama's than about why Chicago should have the Olympics. Those were the wrong speeches for the venue.
To be fair, apparently everybody they talked to connected to the Chicago Olympic effort told them Chicago was in the final two. So maybe they thought a personal appeal would work.
The First Couple's speeches were predictable blather. What's mystifying is that Chicago lost. One must assume that the Chicago organizing team thought they had the games in the bag, that all the right palms had been greased. Looks more and more to me like team Obama is just not ready for prime time. And of course, the IOC is racist.
To be fair, apparently everybody they talked to connected to the Chicago Olympic effort told them Chicago was in the final two.
symptomatic of a much bigger problem. They need to get better advice, from more honest advisors instead of closed group of syncophants
Take my hand, and let's walk this path of hope and freedom together.
Me in my 747, and you flying coach.
Flyin coach later - not today.
Say on a one month advance purchase ticket.
If you can afford it.
If you're not unemployed for too long.
Make no mistake about it. This was a huge misstep by President Obama. He spent a boatload of political capital and he got squat in return.
I wonder if President Obama can learn from this mistake?
And of course, the IOC is racist.
By voting for our little brown brothers in a developing country on a continent that has never had the games?
/sarc off
Seriously Rio is far better than Chicago and everybody but the Obamas must have known it.
Ocean, beaches, mountains, Carnival, sea level games, little polution, low humidity, Summer games at winter temps. It will be a great place to party and set records?
Chi-town? Hot and sticky in August :(
Personally, I don't give a fuck about the Olympics and couldn't care less where they're held, but I hardly think the immediate rejection of Chicago can be said to be a repudiation of Obama, however self-serving his and Michele's speeches may have been, no matter how badly dullards like Limbaugh and Beck wish it were so. (The Beck minion who asserted "I don't know if that's true, but I choose to believe it, Glenn!" has immortalized the mindset of these creeps for all time.)
A more possible contributing consideration, the suggestion of which is not original to me, is that other countries are conscious of how onerous American travel policies have made it for visitors to travel here. Among the many factors that go into casting these votes, I don't doubt this was not absent from the voters' minds.
And then of course there's the fact that we're bombing and imprisoning and torturing people in the Middle East in our endless terror wars. THAT can't have made us too attractive a choice for the supposed prestige and privilege of hosting the Olympics.
(There are many reasons, by the way, for disdaining Obama, but talk of his "marxist takeover of the healthcare industry" is ignorant nitwittery; rather, he is to be disdained for, among other failings, his lapdog continuation of Washington polices that cater to corporate interests. As were his recent predecessors, Obama is a puppet for those who own America. As Beck and Limbaugh, et al. are propagandists for these same special interests, Obama and Beck and Limbaugh and Malkin and Coulter all work for the same team. It's the WORLD WRESTLING FEDERATION writ large, where the heroes and villains all work for and are paid by the same organization.)
No, you and your Republican friends are the ones all about failure, the ones are glad that the U.S. lost.
Oh, pulleeze!
Better to be glad that the U.S. lost the olympic venue than glad that the U.S. lost in Iraq, which was all the Dems were capable of 3-4 years ago.
The funny thing is, the cry thing was the plan.
A top White House adviser said first lady Michelle Obama is planning to make a dramatic presentation when she offers the closing argument for the bid by her hometown of Chicago to win the 2016 Summer Olympics.
“There won’t be a dry eye in the room,” said Valerie Jarrett, who plans to travel with the first lady to Copenhagen for the Oct. 2 International Olympic Committee vote.
What kind of ego do you have to have to think the story of watching the Olympics with your dad will move the WORLD to tears? Isn't that experience kind of....common? I mean, except for many of the people in the world, in places like Brazil, where people can't afford tvs in their homes.
Is it because so many people have spent so much time telling the Obamas that they really are just that special, they've come to believe it? Or do the Obamas believe it, and enough people are willing to use them and their mighty egos to gain power for themselves?
"suggesting that cash and a gun to the head are the real currency in the international world."
That's certainly how America does its business.
When I got to the word "dreamiest", an old skit from Saturday Night Live popped into my head. Lorraine Newman and (I think) Gilda Radnor play young teen girls discussing movie versions of Jesus, and the phrase "dreamiest Jesus of the all" is used.
Can the canard that this guy is such a brilliant, inspirational speaker finally be put to rest? I hear it from everyone on the left and the right, and it's completely spurious.
Michelle's speech as maudlin and inappropriate. It makes me think of Steve Martin in The Jerk, "I was born a poor black child..."
Who cares how she felt during the Games of her youth? And does she think her childhood agonies measure up to, say, a Rio kid's? Another example of Bitter Michelle, perennially dissatisfied.
Michelle's Book
Good grief, the narcissism is thick as syrup. Note the few applause when she ends and introduces her husband.
(WV-humbily. How Michelle should have given her speech.)
Too bad that the gleeful haters on the world stage are Americans. Shame on them. The happiness that the righties showed is hateful. No one should wish failure on anyone here in the US. I consider Rush, HAnnity and Beck to be traitors, deserving or rancor not praise. Shame on all of you who supported this viciousness.
"Is it because so many people have spent so much time telling the Obamas that they really are just that special, they've come to believe it?"
I'd guess 90% (or more) of everyone in Washington is convinced of their own unique "specialness."
Would Chicago have won if Obama hadn't gone in and made his pitch? If not, then what's the big whoop? He didn't give a great speech, let's stipulate that, and I hope that he and his wife learn from the experience. But there really wasn't that much at stake here.
Given that wikipedia characterizes Rio as "the most violent city in the world" at least we can be confident that videos of gangs murdering honor roll students with 2x4s probably didn't play very much into the IOC decision.
Robert Cook said...
I'd guess 90% (or more) of everyone in Washington is convinced of their own unique "specialness."
perhaps the first thing you've said that I agree with. :)
It's about time that the Portugese part of the New World got some respect. Now where did George Soros put his money to strike it rich in off-shore oil??? The peons in the Brazilian electorate need something to take their minds off the Petro-Dollar schemes of Obama's Sugardaddy in the next six years...behave or you will screw up the World TV debut of Brazil.
The leftist comments here strike me as bizarre. Who is reveling in the fact that Chicago did not get the bid?
Obama's speech was atrocious. He brings up his election in any relation to the Olympics? You must be kidding. There is definitely a strong comeuppance and inexperienced stupidity and humility narrative here. Anyone who claims otherwise is simply not being honest.
I've learned something interesting in reading these threads on Althouse.
Republicans/conservatives: Patriotism is America first in substantive issues, while ambiguous or happy about the rest of the world winning in symbolic issues.
Democrats/liberals:
Patriotism is America first in symbolic issues, while ambiguous or happy about other parts of the world winning in substantive issues.
All the charges of traitoricity and hating America and such on this thread show exactly what really matters to some people.
"It's just grand to be the beauty queen! Why don't you mean Republicans want America to wear her sash and tiara?"
I blame reality tv for this value system.
Fortunately, I don't think those on this thread are necessarily representative in this anemic rhetorical bullying.
"And, when NY lost (post 9-11) Americans were disappointed and felt slighted--the Ds didn't celebrate. The IOC are spiteful and revel in our country losing, in this way they are like the Rs, except the Rs are acting more transparently."
"No, you and your Republican friends are the ones all about failure, the ones are glad that the U.S. lost."
"The happiness that the righties showed is hateful. No one should wish failure on anyone here in the US."
1jpb, J.J., victoria: Be sure not to look for any facts that might contradict your bullshit claims. Unless you'd like to argue that Markos and all his commenters were all Republicans in 2004, that is.
(For those too lazy to click the link, it's a front-page post by Markos on Daily Kos blaming Bush [pre-emptively!] for losing the New York Olympics bid, and the majority of the hundred or so comments are like "It's good that Bush screwed this up, we didn't want the Olympics here, they're a rip-off and would ruin the city.")
I am laughing at how hard the O cult is taking this amusement over the smackdown - of losing the Olympics!
See, this is kind of revealing, isn't it? Cheering for us to lose in Iraq, where American lives were being lost vs. being amused at a comeuppance over egos and sports. And that's just one example of the real hate a lot of Dems brought for 8 years
Yes, it's quite the same. Here's hoping the American voters have come to their senses after their brief dalliance with the "grown ups".
First of all -
What Robert Cook said. Who cares? The left would have cheered if Bush couldn't get the Olympics to be held in Texas, you say? Really?
Some people have too much time on their hands. And what a projection.
Second -
Rejoice for Rio. It's never been held in South America before? Well, then it's about time. Go with the more vibrant city - from which Americans could stand to learn a few things when it comes to not being so damn uptight, appreciating others and actually celebrating life.
Some will see the lost bid as a blow to American pride? Well, then learn from it. Not every defeat is meant to give you time to lick your wounds. Some are actually meant as opportunities to learn something.
The Day of Obama is withering away. How will his powerful and connected Players on the world stage who made him use him now? Can Obama be re-cycled or will he just be thrown out?
It's not like people in Chicago were crazy about getting the Olympics, by the way. The people of Rio are apparently ecstatic. Bully for them.
Here where I live, had we gotten the nod, it would have basically been a collective meh. Most people I know (virtually all of them Obama voters) would have been unhappy.
How could a city like this not deserve an Olympics?
(NSFW)
And no, I'm not "happy" America/Chicago lost the Olympic bid. I wasn't invested in it, though. I enjoy seeing the cities of the world showcased at these events, and we've had our share. I am scornful of the Obamas' egos here, though.
Yesterday, I had wondered whether anyone had read/listened to Michelle's speech beforehand. It seemed crazy to me that it would have met with approval. But now I see that it was.
We're so screwed if they have people like this surrounding them. We really are.
Paddy O:
I agree with your observation. For example, surveys show conservatives are more generous in their charitable giving. That tidbit supports what you see here. While liberals are very concerned with living up to the collective, PC narratives, conservatives act on their indivdual beliefs with their own checkbooks.
Liberals, on the other hand, want the govt to extract more money from everyone to support the liberal symbolic goals [AGW, more school money, the arts, health care for all, etc].
It isn't the President's critics who have made this a big deal. It is the President himself who made it a big deal.
Which is one more reason he might have been wiser not to do so--since it should have been obvious he might have failed in the attempt.
Also -- and it is Glenn Reynolds who makes this point -- but this is one more blow to the argument, the Obama folks used to stress, about "smart diplomacy" . . . this along with the mis-translated "reset" button, and the announcement about Polish missile defense, on the anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland.
Not-so-smart diplomacy.
Finally, I'm not gleeful about this. I didn't care much about Chicago getting the Olympics, but I do care that the President of the United States looks bad and the nation is in any way hurt by that. Is that what some label as faux patriotism on the right?
Fuck Olympics 2016. I'm already getting set for Carnaval 2010.
The closest place the U.S. has to something like this is New Orleans (the city Bush let go under). Or maybe Vegas (devastated by the housing bust). Perhaps New York on a very, very good day with rose colored lenses?
Awwww... fuck it. You guys get the point. America doesn't know how to party like it used to. It's too busy cleaning up all the messes it made.
As an Obama supporter, I'm just a crumpled ball of pain and weeping over this IOC thing. (haha) Seriously, you Obama bashers enjoy yourselves over this. Go ahead, you earned it. (pause) Because obviously if Obama had decided not to go to bat for his hometown of Chicago for such a rare honor as hosting the Olympics, none of you would've jumped on him in any way for that, noooooo. Not at all. Such as wondering aloud if he's secretly ashamed of it or his country. No, of course not. You're all better than that. (pause again) So yes, enjoy this moment. You earned it.
Am I the only one who thinks we should have sent Bob Newhart and Suzanne Plushette instead?
Competitions for who can take the best shots and have the most fun while at Carnaval should be an Olympic event.
Who's up for it? How long have you been training?
It really seems to me like the Obama supporters in this thread protesteth too much.
I predict real ugliness as things unwind to incivility.
Right on Montana. This is a learning moment. Too bad most of the righties consider it a slam Obama moment. I am not a big supporter of Obama, eventhough I am a ardent liberal. I just think it is poor form and a "true colors" moment when the rightie press revels in our failure as a country. They are every bit as venal and nasty as anyone on the left, and will (hopefully) be seen as the childish ranters that they truly are. These people do not care about any of us, they only care about their power and their ratings. As they say they are "just folks", that could not be further from the truth.
BTW, I lived in Los Angeles during the 1984 Olympics and it was fantastic. It brought such a feeling of community to the city we had not seen before or since. And money, we are still reaping the benefits from the '84 Olympics 25 years later. Anyone who doesn't think this would have been a bad thing for Chicago and the US is just plain wrong.
Montana -- If I'm going to Carnaval, I'm not doing shots. I'm focusing on other things.
And let me just say that if I could buy a dividend-paying stock in a South American drug cartel right now, I would.
Victoria -- Who is this a learning moment for? Certainly not Americans. How about any elected officials in the executive branch? What about them? Could they learn a thing or two from this thing?
Or will they just go on living as the embodiment of an Important Historical Moment?
Seven and AC,
Kos posting an article stating that the IOC is pissed at W is not the same as right wing leaders reveling in the IOC screwing America. Your link to Kos shows that Kos is lamenting that W is making it less likely we'll win the NY Games, he's not celebrating the loss to America.
The "salt of the earth" meme is really becoming frayed. As someone recently said, anyone whose primary sources of inspiration are both Ayn Rand and Jesus must have some better integrating to do.
Speaking of ratings, Michael Brooks' column on the way the right mistakes the power of media for political power more generally was great.
I think that what we've been seeing is the same implosion that Hillary and McCain underwent when Obama revoked their sense of entitlement. The hard-right feels entitled to political power, and doesn't believe in actually earning it. Which explains the ever more desperate efforts to identify with populism. If only they knew how cynical the rest of us see it as.
jpb -- I didn't link to anything. I can only conclude that you are including me because I am so persuasive.
Did I say I was doing shots? I should clarify... I'm actually going to be taking shots. With a Canon Powershot 8 megapixel and 12X digital zoom. As usual. And with some close-up poses.
Google Images, eat your heart out.
Montana:
Those are lousy examples. McCain and Hillary have been very gratious losers IMO.
Oh, please. Stop it. It is not an American failure. It is an Obama failure. Very simple. Man/woman up and accept that. Olympic Obama Fail. And a needless fail at that, as Freeman suggested.
I see Freeman and Father Martin's points, though. We shouldn't want our president and first lady to look so terribly foolish in front of the world. But perhaps now that they have, they'll come away with a little more humility. That would be an upside. And not a moment too soon, IMO.
Feeding the assholes again, huh...Ann?
As if cheering an American failure is good.
You're just another wing nut.
If you are looking for an ungracious loser with a sense of entitlement, it's obviously Al Gore.
But let's focus on the Olympics.
Obama made it political when he inserted himself into the middle of the mess. Some people kept saying he was damned if he did, damned if he didn't, but that's a darn lie. No other POTUS has ever got involved, so he was better to keep it that way.
The IOC was obviously not impressed with their *it's all about me* speeches, which were perfectly summed up by you.
They were also not impressed with TOTUS....
I am happy for Rio - it's about time South America gets the Olympics.
Too bad we wasted $70 Million trying to win them, so we could go into even more debt.
Seven,
That part was for AC. Sometimes I'm too lazy to respond to y'all individually--unless clarification is needed for certain Althouse commenters who are easily confused. Does that clear it up for you?
"Michael" Brooks is a great example of media power. Too bad, that does not include the power to get people to remember his correct name.
Those are lousy examples. McCain and Hillary have been very gratious losers IMO
Only once it was clear to them that there was nothing more either of them could do. Hillary certainly spent the better part of 3 months sparking off an internal fight between the Dems, and their delegates - all in the name of a war against mathematics. How this could have benefited the ultimate candidate is anyone's guess.
And the amount of contempt McCain showed Obama during the debates was unmistakeable. By then he knew he was losing, and losing bad. Even if he couldn't concede until November 4th.
The thing Obama needs to have shouted at him is only occasionally "You lie!" Most of the time, it's "Get over yourself!"
Seven,
You wrote:
"Who is reveling in the fact that Chicago did not get the bid?"
Michael Brooks was a great columnist from the 1980s. It's too bad he committed suicide. Some people say it was a result of auto-asphyxiation. The rumor is that he accidentally hung himself while masturbating.
Of course, I don't believe that.
Also, it's not like Chicago hasn't had their fair share of *wins* lately. How many celebrations do they need in one year? Obama winning the nomination, the election, his swearing in... Spread the cheer around, for crying out loud. Not everything is about Obama, as he would like to think it is. Inserting himself into the pleas at the IOC, making it all about him was obnoxious. The WORLD does not revolve around Obama.
How much proof does anyone have (or need) that the appeal by a head of state would make or break the bid?
Tomorrow Obama will spill a couple of corn flakes on the table and this blog would publish a post tagged under "Massive Fail" or some other such red meat bait.
I mean, really... isn't this getting a little out of hand?
I gave Bush the better part of six or seven years before coming close to a fraction of the personalized contempt some of you guys harbor toward Obama. Whatever keeps ya warm at night, I guess.
Darcy said:
"Obama Olympic Fail".
Does he get a medal?
J.J. Schmidt:
No, you and your Republican friends are the ones all about failure, the ones are glad that the U.S. lost.
As opposed to the dems and libs wanting us to fail in Iraq while our soldiers are fighting and dying there. Saying things like the 'war is lost" or we should lose or that we are fighting the minutemen,. You dems and libs were rooting for failure in Iraq from day one. Even the "I support the troops but not the mission" talking point. Irregardless of whether that is even logically possible, the simple fact is if you don't support the mission then you want it to fail. can you honestly stand here and say democrats weren't wishing for Bush to fail over and over?
And we're talking about the Olympics here. There will be other Olympics where we can go again and plead our case. It's not a life or death situation whether we get the olympics unlike say a war against terrorists and dictators who may possess WMD's.
But on the most basic level you seem to think that its ok for dems to wish us to lose in Iraq do everything you can to make it happen, take glee at all body counts etc ad infinitum but that somehow its unnaceptable that some people experience shaudenfreude when the guy who insulted the previous president as being beyond incompetent, and who suggests that now is the time in history when all problems will be solved, becuase of his election, and who suggested that the only reason that Iran wasn't playing ball was that Bush was mean and that he will get all countries to like us again, can't get something as simple as the Olympics. Sorry but he just got his comeuppance and I'm laughing my ass off about it.
Even France is talking about Obama's pie in the sky rhetoric when it comes to his call for "a world without nukes" when he doesn't have the first clue about how to hold Iran to task.
It seems that Obama can't do anything right. Dare I say it, he's kind of an idiot. And the worst kind. The insufferable kind who considers his idiocy to be profoundly smart and enlightened. No, its inexperienced drivel that has as much intellectual content as wonder bread has nutrients, and has always been such.
And if you want to talk practical considerations, the Olympics would end up costing Chicago far more than it ever brought in, so by us losing we're saving money. I'm just thinking of the economy, dude.
But oh yeah did I mention that Obama looks like in incompetent vain idiot?
It's also funny to watch the media who is certain that the world has drunk the Obama kool aid be shocked when reality hits them in the face.
"Chicago is out?! Chicago is out?! You mean we aren't the people we've been waiting for?! There is no santa clause?! Chicago is out?!"
Montana:
Hillary kept fightng til the vote counting was over. Does an overmatched boxer give up when there is still a chance he could score a knockout?
As to McCain, I guess you have a scorn detector! Did you get it at the same store where you buy the liberal pundit talking points?
Not everything is about Obama, as he would like to think it is.
American Girl nails the issue. Obama's failure here is nearly ironic. Is he really going to spend four years milking his own story? Really?
Foreigners in particular don't give a single, solitary shit that you Obama is black. Our race issues are very peculiar.
I hope you are in Florence, American Girl.
Victoria, I lived in Los Angeles during last years Lakers victory.
Same thing. Brought the city together and all that.
So do earthquakes and fire and USC victories (well, half the city together). Shoot, we're brought together every new year on Colorado Blvd in Pasadena.
We in LA have lots of stuff to bring us together.
Los Angeles was also the last Olympics to make money. The chances of Chicago doing that is pretty slim.
More importantly, the world did not reject the US. It chose to celebrate South America.
And we're all one big, happy, global family, right? We can celebrate others too.
"No one should wish failure on anyone here in the US"
I should and I do. I wish failure to those who are corrupt. I wish failure to child molesters. I wish failure to murderers, and cheats, and bank robbers. I wish failure to those who use power to abuse others. I wish failure for those who abuse the profundity of patriotism to further their personal goals or enhance their partisan rhetoric. I wish failure to the Boston Celtics. I wish failure to those who file baseless lawsuits. I wish failure to bureaucrats who use their small powers to hinder good men and women. I wish failure to racists and sexists. I wish failure on human vampires and vultures who feed their emaciated souls from the life of land and people, spitting them out ruined.
I wish failure on those who are cruel. I wish failure on those who spend their lives making other people worse off.
Lots of those people in the US, and I wish failure to all of them, so that the good, the many, the typical, American can live their lives in liberty and hope and fruition.
Rio was the better choice. Rio is one of the world's truly great places. Yes, greater than Chicago. Sorry. Besides, we had the summer Olympics here in the US in 1984 (LA) and 1996 (Atlanta). It isn't like we haven't had our turns. Give other places a chance. Places like South America and Rio, where they've never held the games.
And yes, this little display WAS amusing. It was amusing the way Obama and Michelle took personal ownership of the cause, believing they could just swoop down and dazzle the IOC with their mere presence, and then with their personal little life stories seal the deal and walk away with the prize for Chicago. The words hubris, arrogance, and narcissism don't even seem adequate to fully cover it. Maybe because those words don't get to the ignorance and naivete aspect of their presumptiousness. These are things some of us have been noticing and pointing out about Obama for a couple of years, so it's kinda fun to be vindicated in such a most demonstrative but harmless way.
I wish failure on Satan.
AJ: Hee. No, he gets a "litte brown bag of cash" as Michael Haz suggested on Twitter. Just a little less in it.
;-)
As to McCain, I guess you have a scorn detector!
Number one rule of a political debate (Well, of any debate. But particularly a political debate.):
Never scowl at your opponent.
Theo Boehm thinks I'm tone-deaf. Apparently I'm not the only one.
Listen man. Appearances can give things away. You guys ever hear of the Nixon-Kennedy debates?
I think the issue is that the right eventually learned how to very adeptly make use of every tactic of "image manufacturing" known to man during the age of television and talk radio. The problem is that there's a new medium - and just because the left seems to be mastering it better, doesn't mean that you guys can afford to look nasty on televised debates.
In 2005, the New York bid finished third, proof of the world's contempt for the reviled war criminal Bush. In 2009, the Chicago bid finished fourth. What dOes that tell you about the hope and change embodied in Obama?
ANYWHO... the point is that McCain knew he was losing. I'm sure there were other ways one could pick up on how his confidence was either fake or otherwise affected.
O O O
O O
5 Olympic zeros for O-man
McCain knew he was toast by the time the economy crashed in October. Remember, that's when he snubbed your other hero, (Dave Letterman), so that he could dramatically ride into Washington on a white horse and save the nation's economy. We were all set to feel the bipartisanship, until his fellow Republicans told him to go piss off.
It was tragic, really. Melodramatic. But tragic.
I'm hearing a lot of complaints along the lines, how dare the wingnuts celebrate this terrible loss for America. The underlying assumption is that hosting the Olympics is the best thing since indoor plumbing. It's not. Few things are more overrated than the Olympics. Sorry- Olympic Games.
One strain of the reaction to the reaction is mentioning how much money would have been spent- I think I saw 22B mentioned. The implication is that this is like profit that's coming from overseas to the US. But most of that is just shuffling money around inside the US- and too much of it from taxpayers.
And what's the city end up with? A few new sports arenas. Not exactly a high priority item. If Chicago wants that, they should just do it the old fashioned way- have their teams threaten to leave town until the funds are stolen from taxpayers who make a lot less money.
I'm not sure whether Michelle Obama's speech had anything to do with the loss (not very likely), but it was awful, as most of her speeches are.
What's with all these sad, personal stories? Why does she try to persuade people by whipping up emotional responses? (We need government takeover of health care: little Sasha had a medical scare. Chicago needs the Olympics: her father struggled with MS, and little kids in Chicago need to learn to swim and ride bikes)
She needs to work on a better, more sophisticated approach.
I was quite frankly embarrassed by the speeches given by the President and his wife - embarrassed for my country.
What is interesting is so many of my friends who were 'on the fence' about the prospect of Barack Obama as US President said, "At least the World will like us better". But do they? I'm certain they don't respect us more.
Norm,
Are you sure?
I thought it was a five way that went:
London
Paris
Madrid
NY
Moscow
So, we were fourth.
And, our vote total when we were eliminated was 16 (down from 19 when Moscow was taken out).
Please let me know if I'm wrong, or if you're wrong.
Montana -- You do realize that conservatives and Republicans in general do not like McCain, and didn't particularly like him before the 2008 election, don't you?
I would be much, much more confident in a President Clinton (either Clinton, and possibly Chelsea) than a President McCain.
There are at least two major reasons the IOC is not partial to American bids, in addition to the generalized thrill that some get in sticking it to the USA.
1. The overhang from Carter's boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics. Yeah I know we got Atlanta in 1996, but they still don't think we are a very reliable partner. (This from Canadian Dick Pound--one of the biggest wheels in the Olympic movement.)
2. The fact that USA Olympic Committee insists on a very large take of the receipts of the games if held in the USA. (This from Dick Ebersole who knows a thing or two since he has had the TV rights for a long time and understands the dynamics as well as anyone. Ebersole believes USA will never get another Olympics until this changes.)
Against this is balanced that USA is the best TV market so the TV rights go for more.
So yeah, I agree that the Obamas made a crappy presentation, but they also failed by not understanding the disadvantages the USA has and addressing them directly. They were politically clueless. This tells me they either have no advisers who got clued in, or none that dare tell them the truth.
These disad
Either the Chicago Olympic bid was lost some time ago - or Chicago was one of the top two in the running.
The Obama's failed efforts in this matter were then either epic clueless and painfully embarrassing - or clueless and epic painfully embarrassing.
For the record, I was hoping Chicago would win one for itself and so for America.
Exit question, were the Iranians and North Koreans taught anything from Obama's handling of this matter that will help America achieve her best interests in our dealings with them?
This is exactly right, it's almost as if he has been in a protected media bubble over here.
I use to think that maybe the media knew they were schilling for candidate-now President Obama but it's worse than that.
They believe.
It was obvious in the reaction of the CNN crew.
I just saw one clip that the BBC highlighted and it was of President Obama saying-
"I'm asking you to choose Chicago, I'm asking you to choose America..."
Huge emphasis on the *I'm* and then he asked them to let him-let America show the world once again- to cut that short he did something that he has done in the world of foreign affairs he has -
diminished and cut America in half.
It's a very, very dangerous thing to do in foreign policy.
He has let it be known that perhaps agreements won't be kept because it was made with America's "others" or worse that perhaps even retribution will be doled out.
Canadian Dick Pound
Is this a person? Or is this what happens on long winter nights in the upper reaches of Manitoba?
David,
3) The committee is extremely euro centric, about 50%. So the deck is stacked. This is especially true for the early rounds where votes may be promised to local favorites, even if these same members may have agreed to support non-quasi-home-town favorites in the later stages, assuming the non favorites can get that far.
4) In this particular case Brazil (gov) was willing to spend about 3x the Chicago budget (privately funded). And, of course, there was the whole it's South America's turn thing.
I'm aware of the intriguing hatred that conservatives nestle in their breasts toward McCain. I'm not sure I fully understand it. I'd like to think it's because they feel that someone reconciled with bipartisanship and moderation is doing so in a short-sighted way, and not because they think ideological purity is the answer to everything. But, of course, that's for them to clarify.
A prominent Republican said that 2008 would come down to personalities, rather than policies. And I can't help but wonder whether some of that GOP warmth toward Hillary had at least something to do with the facts that:
1. She grew up with a hard-ass, abusive Republican father and spent the better part of her political career worrying about what would happen if she didn't gain the approval of the right by sufficiently kissing up to them.
2. She was known to be as authoritarian as W. at best, Nixon at worst.
For the record, on the two most prominent issues of economic policy that Obama and Hillary debated - Hillary was way to the left of Obama. Fixing housing prices and making health care universal. Somehow conservatives didn't seem to care or take notice. I guess the "Obama the Marxist" meme was newer to them as they felt that the "Hillary the Marxist" theme had already been played out. Even thought the latter was, and is, much closer to the truth.
As I indicated, you guys still seem more hung up on issues of image than anything else. But reality matters. The television can't manufacture reality the way it once did. We've got an internet for that, now. It works better and can be made to present things more accurately and in more detail.
You contrast the BBC clip of Obama's speech [and it looks like they were being generous after I see portions that Ann has highlighted]-
with the small clip the BBC chose of the Japanese Prime Minister and it was really bad.
I really was surprised how much I wanted Chicago to win it-but after I saw the Japanese presentation-which the BBC happened to label as "rather dull"-I knew they got the meaning, intent and spirit of the Olympics-and deserved to beat us at the least.
A big part of the reaction too is that Obama, in his role as caretaker of the office, has diminished the presidency. Going to Denmark to beg before some ridiculous intl committee- and without a guarantee of a win? People are pointing out that presidents and PMs from other countries went, but that's the point, isn't it?
As for MO and the "crying voice," this trend comes to us from actresses' Oscar acceptance speeches, which I think Althouse has written on before. Among that small set, it's pretty much a contest now to see who can most dramatically demonstrate all those conflicting emotions. It's quite vulgar and obviously fake.
1jpb,
I'm sure you're correct. I only knew that the US bid was not dead last in 2005, at the height of worldwide Bush hatred.
Blah, Blah, Blah. Obama is so hard to listen to. I wonder how many there heard only interpretations into their native language. He really said very little about what Chicago would do for the Olympics and Michele said less.
I've mentioned Obama's narcissism several times. Maybe they're a narcissistic couple. I recall a couple that moved into my old neighborhood in Knoxville. They both had an uppity air about themselves and said they were in management for "British Petroleum" (their words). Turns out they managed a BP convenient store/gas station together. (Which is perfectly fine but would be akin to me calling myself a software developer when all I really do is program surveys.)
As narcissists Barack and Obama can't put themselves in others shoes. They can fake it for a time, but they really don't understand, can't empathize, with others. Their attempts are limited to manipulation techniques.
With unemployment continuing to rise, GM and Chrysler sinking fast, and Afghanistan, all Obama could think about was putting himself on a world stage to further be admired by all.
LilyBart said, "What's with all these sad, personal stories? Why does she try to persuade people by whipping up emotional responses?"
It's because this group makes everything about the person. It's about personal audacity, dreams, and hope. It's about sculpting a compelling personal story so that people identify with the person. It makes policies easier to swallow. It also fashions a myth, like the one created about Michelle, the daughter of a South Side plumber. Her father, in fact was a Daley precinct captain. Everyone from Chicago knows what that means.
Europe does not have over 50% of the IOC members, though they do have membership that is quite disproportionate to their population. North America has very low representation, as shown on this data from Wikipedia. The low number of members from South America did not stop their bid however.
Europe 45
Asia 26
Africa 14
North America 12
South America 6
Australia 5
"It's because this group makes everything about the person. It's about personal audacity, dreams, and hope."
If the tea party/ 9-12/ culture warrior types weren't non-stop whining about their persecution they'd be easier to listen to too. Self pity is knows no political bounds.
Montana Urban Legend: "... on the two most prominent issues of economic policy that Obama and Hillary debated - Hillary was way to the left of Obama. ... Somehow conservatives didn't seem to care or take notice."
It wasn't that conservatives didn't notice, it was that we believed that Obama was being far less than truthful about his real positions on the issues than Hillary.
Unlike Hillary, his positions did not even close to jive with his upbringing, political or otherwise.
David- said:
"politically clueless"-
I hope Obama realizes that the "old Chicago crew" failed him here-and if they couldn't analyze the international game of the IOC correctly then how bad is it in the-real game changing arena?
Democrats have been sitting on the benches for a long, long time now and while they were sitting on the sidelines they refuse to see that some of their critiques of Reagan with time were absolutley wrong and that their time up at bat under Clinton in retrospect might not have been the best.
Where there is experience-Mullen, Petraeus, and McChystal-[who are providing a united front on Afghanistan] they have tried their best to work against that.
They float trial balloons in front of America suggesting that they will do other than what the one team with experience recommends.
They are dragging their heels because they want to test the American public-you can almost feel them focus grouping the hell out of it.
1jpb,
My link demonstrated exactly what I said it did: proof that your, JJ, and victoria's claims that only evil Republicans celebrate when the President fails to win the Olympics for a U.S. city were utter bullshit. To review:
1. Kos put up a post blaming Bush for New York not getting the games.
2. Kos's commenters said that they were glad that Bush/New York/America failed.
You can hang your "the right wing is unpatriotic and hates America!" hat on the behaviour of some scary right-wing leaders at an opinion website in reaction to losing an Olympics hosting opportunity. I'll put that up against the left's reaction to something a little more serious, like murdered Americans, any day. (Hint: Screw them.)
"I would be much, much more confident in a President Clinton (either Clinton, and possibly Chelsea)"
In terms of international relations, yes. Hilary has her shortcomings but naivete and narcissism aren't among them.
It would have been a different story domestically. Given the Dem majorities in Congress, imagine the harm that a competent White House could have done. (For competence at playing the Washington game few could rival the Clintons.)
Instead we have O. If it weren't for his self-indulgence and fecklessness, we'd be in serious danger of having his agenda enacted.
David,
"About 50%" is not the same as more than 50%. Using your numbers they represent 42% of the votes. I think an 8% variation is close enough to be called "about." Even acceptable public polling can include +- of 5%.
Further, the US (like the other candidate countries) couldn't have their representatives vote. So, that means that the relative strength of the Europeans would have been strengthened beyond the 42% you reference. In other words, your count adds up to 108, but only 94 folks were able to vote. So, I'm sticking w/ "about 50%,"
I want to know how Althouse and Meade can live in the hellhole of Madison after the Joel Marino and Brittany Zimmermann murders.
What a hellhole of epic proportions. Madison, Wisconsin: people were murdered there. Hell on earth.
"Republicans/conservatives: Patriotism is America first in substantive issues, while ambiguous or happy about the rest of the world winning in symbolic issues.
"Democrats/liberals:
Patriotism is America first in symbolic issues, while ambiguous or happy about other parts of the world winning in substantive issues."
Paddy O. nails it. Good job, sir.
AC,
A handful of Dkos commenters is not the same as the leadership of the professional conservatives that were quoted in my earlier link.
Who do you think you're fooling?
Sheesh.
"Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules."
Lefties do this when they charge conservatives with being "unpatriotic". We all know lefties dislike patriotism, and when they accuse conservatives of being "unpatriotic" or "Letting down America" - they are simply using of one Alinsky's rules.
It wasn't that conservatives didn't notice, it was that we believed that Obama was being far less than truthful about his real positions on the issues than Hillary.
Unlike Hillary, his positions did not even close to jive with his upbringing, political or otherwise.
If I decipher the second above paragraph correctly, we are not discussing a style of music, but whether or not Hillary's positions or Obama's were closer to a certain "upbringing".
Unlike the other Democratic contenders, Obama had a well-deserved reputation for considering viewpoints far outside the comfort zone of the political "left". U. Chicago is a conservative place, and the friendships he forged with Cass Sunstein and Austan Goolsbee were and are genuine.
(In contrast, Bill Clinton put so much faith in what Alan Greenspan said as to warm the cockles of the conservative heart. But in hindsight we now realize that Greenspan was advocating a mythical, "self-regulating" crony capitalism moreso than any sort of deregulation that would have allowed the financial markets to a truly, "self-correcting" course of action. Oh well.)
The idea that Obama's warm personal and professional relations with accomplished intellects well-understood to be "market friendly" was a facade, does not seem likely. And it seems even less likely that his comfort with market-based solutions was a ruse. So while it's legitimate to question the sincerity with which he held positions "to the right" of Hillary during the campaign, he does seem to know enough about economics to not look like as much of a fool when he talks about those matters as any of his adversaries on the left.
Maybe you're not comforted by that. But given what I've seen coming out of the right vis a vis ideological purity and the rhetoric of "socialism", I'll safely bet that they're focused more on manufacturing image, propaganda and politicking than on having a true debate over which policies that Obama proposes will truly have a net positive effect on the market and how free it remains.
Hilary has her shortcomings but naivete and narcissism aren't among them.
Pity that Dick Morris and others on the right who actually know the Clintons beg to differ. And they even made a movie about why they do.
At some point a consistent meme would be nice.
The reason the right loves Hillary on foreign affairs is that she fulfills the wishful thinking they keep about the "strong leader who will crush terrorists with an iron fist (and leap over tall buildings in a single bound)" meme of presidential authority.
It might not be the stuff of superhero comic books to accept that constructively engaging the 999 million Muslims in this world who are not terrorists is important business. Not sexy. Just important. But competent presidents know otherwise.
If Obama is more successful implementing a health care program that Americans are favorable to than Hillary was, we will already know that he is at least intelligent enough to learn from his predecessors' mistakes.
But who needs intelligence when you can engage the love-hate relationship that the far right has with leaders of unimaginable, fantastic power?
Why is it that our Althouse leftists cannot simply admit that the right doesn't like Obama because of his policies? It's always some lame psychological/personality analysis.
Is this a front, and you actually know in your private thoughts that it's all about policy? Or are you really so shallow that you base your whole worldviews around personality and other such tripe?
All of that said, tjl, you make an acute point about Hillary Clinton. A competent executive could actually enact bad policy.
Cheering over not winning this bid or, more accurately, Obama's failure, is a bit sophomoric but I don't understand the traitors charge.
Traitors as in treason? As in giving an enemy aid and comfort?
When did this war between Brazil and the US start?
M U L...I like the pro Rio comments. The Olympics needs to expand from the USA just like the NFL is doing. And Rio has a cultural tradition that is made for the Olympic celebration of young beautiful people. As to McCain, the traditionalists loved McCain for his grandfather, father and his own dedicated service. But Mad McCain didn't love the traditionalists for some reason. The way he used Palin and then acted like she was a problem forever soured us on McCain as a self centered jerk who would tell any story to the next rube.
I love how the right bleats about Obama going to Denmark WITHOUT BEING ASSURED A WIN! This, after starting two unwinnable cluterfuck wars and handing them off to Obama.
Garage -- Please. We won in Iraq.
Bush only started one unwinnable clusterfuck war -- the one the left supported until it decided not to.
Who do you think you're fooling?
I have no need to fool anyone, 1jpb. They can follow my links and see it is you, JJ, and victoria who were being dishonest in your assertions.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You're also now being further dishonest by characterizing the Talking Points Memo link you provided as
1. leadership of the professional conservatives
Erick Erickson? John McCormack? Matt Drudge? Those are the people you're claiming are conservative leaders. To make that claim you have to be either stupid or a liar.
and 2. reveling in the IOC screwing America.
Here is what these "conservative leaders" said:
"So Obama's pimped us to every two bit thug and dictator in the world, made promises to half the Olympic committee, and they did not even kiss him. So much for improving America's standing in the world, Barry O."
"I'm glad that the Obama White House's jingoist rhetoric and attempt to pay back Chicago cronies at the expense of undermining our relationships with our allies failed"
"WORLD REJECTS OBAMA: CHICAGO OUT IN FIRST ROUND. THE EGO HAS LANDED."
They're all laughing at Obama's epic fail. None of them said anything that could be interpreted as reveling in the IOC screwing America.
Who do you think you're fooling with your bullshit, 1jpb?
"It might not be the stuff of superhero comic books to accept that constructively engaging the 999 million Muslims in this world who are not terrorists is important business. Not sexy. Just important. But competent presidents know otherwise."
Wow, MUL, you just called GWB competent.
Rio to Obama, "I won"
BWAHAHAHAHAHA
AC,
Is there some reason you didn't mention Rush and Newt and The Weekly Standard. These folks, as well as the ones you listed, are clearly professional conservatives. These folks undeniably make their livings as conservatives, hence they are pro-cons.
Here is reminder of the whole piece. It seems that you've missed a lot of it.
BTW, thanks for the Dkos link, I rarely read stuff over there. But, after following your link I found this comment interesting:
"Here's what these people have rooted against so far:
-Bill Clinton freeing American journalists from North Korea
-Marines rescuing Americans from Somali pirates
-Rescuing American automobile manufacturers
-Health care for all Americans
-An American city hosting the Olympics
Can we call them anti-American yet?"
Of course, the car manufacturers are still likely to fail, and the right more mocked rather than rooted against some of the other stuff. But still, if the right keeps on w/ it's blind BHO hatred it is possible that there could eventually be an arguable track record of anti-Americanism.
Canadian Dick Pound
That would be a place where we lock up guys like Cedarford.
Or a game where we let garage run on the frozen tundra and let the chicks chase him with mallets.
Sort of a bigger version of whack-a -mole.
Someone fed me a line yesterday- don't mistake "I told you so" for shadenfreude.
Not all critics are happy with the outcome of this incident. Some are appalled at O's ineptness, but have come to expect it from him. No happiness for them.
Why is it that our Althouse leftists cannot simply admit that the right doesn't like Obama because of his policies? It's always some lame psychological/personality analysis.
Why is it that certain Althouse "rightists" cannot simply admit that their bitching about something Obama does, when they would never think to bitch about Bush or McCain doing the same thing, says something lame about their psychology/personality?
Is this a front, and you actually know in your private thoughts that it's all about policy? Or are you really so shallow that you base your whole worldviews around personality and other such tripe?
It's not about policy. You guys live in the fantasy that Obama will kowtow to your ideology. Knowing that he won't, and knowing that he, further, has no reason to, one might think you might actually consider a debate regarding the practical and realistic merits of a certain policy in itself instead of the same stupid melarchy about how his ideology doesn't match yours, is inferior, evil, etc., etc., ad infinitum ad nauseam.
The way you tell it, Machos, learning is just some liberal conspiracy aimed at brainwashing conservatives into believing that they aren't always right about everything all the time.
Well, let me puncture the suspense for you: They aren't.
All of that said, tjl, you make an acute point about Hillary Clinton. A competent executive could actually enact bad policy.
All of that said, who needs to say anything more after a comment like the above?
I wait with bated breath the day when Machos admits that a competent executive is preferable to an incompetent executive. But he can't, you see. Because it's all about the ideolog --, I mean, it's all about the policy!
stupid melarchy
Indeed. Whatever that is.
I guess I stand corrected, Laura. Somehow all the contempt that Bush generated overseas and in the Middle East isn't as important as the fact that he had nice things to say about Muslims.
Two note two interesting points in your comment.
1. The cons here love to say that all Obama has to offer is warm, mushy, but meaningless and ineffective rhetoric. Well, at least with the Bush quotes we know Obama isn't the only one capable of offering ineffective rhetoric.
2. Your linking to that site seems to indicate an unwillingness to distinguish what the speaker aimed to accomplish and what his audience actually thought.
People here say the same of Obama.
But Obama's been in office less than a year.
What we know of Bush is that he had six years to change perceptions in the Muslim world of America, and failed or made the problem worse.
Still, that doesn't seem to stop some people from offering his quotes as if they were proof that the sentiment in Bush's words are reflected in the mind of the audience. They aren't. These are two separate things. Just because Bush thinks something and says it doesn't mean the people he's trying to persuade agree.
But then again, for all of Obama's alleged arrogance, you can't claim that he never gives a damn about what people really think.
And that's something that can't be said for Bush.
Bush was the self-appointed "decider". He didn't have to care. Remember?
So you genuinely believe that Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich are the leadership of the professional conservatives. I guess that answers the question of whether you're dishonest or stupid.
As to the comment you cut and pasted, it's as full of untrue and unfounded assertions as yours have been here. I am not surprised you fancied it.
When you find a Republican political consultant running a high-traffic website whose response to Americans being murdered in a war zone is something like "I feel nothing... Screw them.", point it out to us.
Because until you have something substantive, your efforts to label as "anti-American!" anyone who dares to laugh at Obama's buffoonery or criticize Obama's bad policies just reek of desperation.
Whatever that is.
Don't worry Machos. It's just some liberal conspiracy aimed at brainwashing conservatives into believing that they aren't always right about everything all the time.
Much like learning, science, Glass-Steagall, diplomacy and other liberal conspiracies.
I think that's going to become my stock answer for every time you refuse to give a meaningful response.
Joke at Montana's expense goes over Montana's head. Again.
According to the NYTimes, there was "stunned bewilderment" on Air Force One when the decision was announced.
That bewilderment is the single most damning thing I have heard about Obama. It indicates the extreme degree of both his narcissism and of his incompetence.
According to the Times, Valerie Jarrett was a prime mover in pushing the trip to Copenhagen. Is anyone investigating whether she stood to make money in Chicago if the Olympics went there? She has, I believe, extensive real estate interests there.
If so, she should be fired or resign for jeopardizing the national interest for the sake of her own financial gains.
Who was his speech writer? Was it that 27-yr-old again? This is the kind of embarrassment his "uniquely global" viewpoint as supposed to prevent.
I hate to agree with the right wing racists etc. but this really is an example of Oprahfication and Affirmative Action as far as the *style* of the speech. When I had to pull a paper out of my butt at the last minute, I'd do a "my dad was an alcoholic" paper. You can work it into a lot of subjects. My black friends did an "I'm black" paper. needs cites or reading when you are your own reference?
I thought of them as the astrology papers. "I'm an Aquarius with a Leo rising, so my POV on this poem, policy, history, political movement, journalistic endeavor is blah blah blah" and here's why that has a greater socioeconomic context.
I knew it was bs. They knew it was bs. I would sometimes wonder if the sociology or aa studies majors or professors thought it was in any way anything OTHER than mickey mouse BS. It just screamed "I broke up with my boyfriend and am too distraught to write a real paper. Please accept this POS instead. I fancied it up as much as possible."
After I left college, I am told it got even worse. It became *essential* if you were applying for grad school, law school, or certain majors to work the personal sob story even if you were white. You had to have an angle or you were handicapping yourself because that is how the system was set up to score you.
So...here we are. It doesn't work on the world stage. And i have the answer to my question, that yes, some people really didn't know it was an elaborate excuse. Ha. ha. ha.
BTW, now that I have subordinates, I hear this schmaltz all the time. I stop listening the minute someone starts pimping "the children".
Is anyone investigating whether she stood to make money in Chicago if the Olympics went there?
There's no need for an investigation here. The obvious answer is yes.
However, I urge against this silly sniping. There's nothing particularly unseemly about honest graft.
Lucid,
You'll be happy to know that Beck is investigating.
BTW, have you seen this leading professional-con working his instant tear magic?
Any 9/12ers in commentariat?
Glenn Beck = Keith Olbermann sans class. Why bring him up?
You've made some solid points today, jpb. Don't soil yourself now.
Well why don't you try making some jokes at your own expense then? I guarantee you those will be understood by me and anyone else.
Hmm, I bet we can now get Obama and the Dem's onboard to finally kick the UN out of the US.
Sheesh... I didn't hear anything much about America... I heard the Barak and Michelle show... it's all about me, Me, ME.
For the first time in my life, I'm ashamed to admit I'm an American. How embarrassing!
Seven Machos walks into a bar.
Bartender says, "Hey pal, why the La Lucha mask?"
As if cheering an American failure is good.You're just another wing nut.
8 8 8 8 8
"We justhave to hope Iraq goes badly so we can take back the white house." -- Ellen Ratner to Linda Vestor on Fox News
"I confess, sometimes I hope we fail in Iraq justbecause I hate Bush so much -- Some guy writing in the Wapo.
Finding humor in two privileged people getting handed a little humility after they tried to "game" the Olympic committee is quite different than those two quotes. Asshole.
Shocking, but perhaps inevitable:
Tired Floor Routine Costs America Olympic Gold
"I guess I stand corrected, Laura. Somehow all the contempt that Bush generated overseas and in the Middle East isn't as important as..."
Isn't as important as... believing your own spin.
It started right after Bush was elected the first time and those disappointed but who weren't having a psychological melt-down (re: news reports at the time of a surge in people seeking psychiatric help for their distress in 2000) were instead lamenting to their fellows that Bush was bound to laugh too loud in a fancy restaurant or wear cowboy boots with a tux or order McDonald's in Paris and they didn't think they would be able to face their sophisticated international friends. It was all simply too embarrassing.
And that's exactly how long it took to create an alternate reality where we *used to* be accepted as equal to the sophistication of Europe and Bush was going to ruin it because he was so unrefined.
And there was enough *contempt* in the Middle East prior to Bush's ever being elected (except that hatred is a better word than contempt) to bring about 9-11 and all of the deadly terrorist attacks prior to it. His overseas reputation depends entirely on who we talk to. Bush was popular in Africa and our relationship with India flourished, he managed to secure staging areas with nations that don't necessarily like us around Afghanistan and Iraq that might not have been as much as he wanted but is more than Obama has *maintained*, allowed Pakistan the appearance of independence as long as possible and obtained permission from Indonesia (who *really* didn't like us) for us to assist with war ships after the tsunami... at least until the UN eventually got around to showing up and throwing a hissy fit over who was rightfully in charge.
In a whole lot of ways Bush was very effective over seas, but the fiction is maintained that somehow he wasn't and that somehow this was a NEW thing that Europe despised our uppity ways and that the Middle East was a hotbed of hatred for America and the West.
Perhaps Obama's trouble is that he actually believes that fiction. (The Clintons certainly do not!) He ran on the idea that he would fix all of the foreign relationships that Bush destroyed... and how does one do that without a conscious realization of what the situation was prior to Bush? Simply by Obama being Obama peace would break out all over. He was black, he was liberal, he wasn't Muslim but he was close enough to Muslim that suddenly generations of hostility, mistrust, and grievance would disappear.
As a campaign thing we roll our eyes and don't really believe anyone actually believes that... but apparently some of the Obama voters really did, and it could be that Obama *sort of* believed it himself.
the only people who are watching this exercise in narcissicism are the NORKs, the Iraninas, al queda, and Vladimir Putin. Olympipic games arent important--the failure of an american president to sway world or even IOC opinion, is the takeaway lesson for them. the experienced incumbent who is our president has been thorougly diminished in the eyes of the people who mean to do us harm.
Here is one I heard..
Why did Chicago lose the IOC vote?
Because the IOC does not allow dead people to vote!
[I bet there is an Acorn voter registration joke floating around too]
None of this would have happened if Ditka was da president.
(You may need to be a Chicago resident to get this joke.)
AJ,
What do you call an Ethiopian IOC official that swallows an acorn ?
Pregnant.
Maybe you had something else in mind.
1jpb:
re: Beck
It's a photoshoot numbskull. Beck gets made fun of all the time for his histrionics. He's making fun of himself.
Look up "sense of humor" in wiki.
Seven Machos walks into a bar.
Bartender says, "Hey pal, why the La Lucha mask?"
Machos: "What, and reveal my true identity to everyone in Manitoba?"
"...(conservatives) believed that Obama was being far less than truthful about his real positions on the issues than Hillary."
You were right...he pretended to be far more liberal and reformist than he is or ever intended to be.
Seven Machos walks into a bar.
Bartender says, "Hey pal, why the La Lucha mask?"
Machos: "What, and reveal my true identity to everyone in Manitoba?"
And with that, Seven Machos rode off on his horse into the bitterly cold night to take care of some private business.
"We won in Iraq." --Seven Machos
"To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a desert, they call it peace." --Publius Tacitus
"We won in Iraq."--Seven Machos
OD,
I did get that. Did you read my link? Did you see who was taking the photos? What do you think about that?
And, bigger picture; yes, I do get that Beck is a clown on purpose. I'm a fairly regular listener, and occasional watcher. Do you get that part of playing a clown is being laughed at and ridiculed?
Are you a a 9/12er?
Great post by Drill SGT at 10:23.
What should be greatly discouraging is not that Michell and The One's message of phony empathy and personal struggle, of loving The One failed so ridiculously.
It is just the entire clueless retinue went there with no realistic idea of where the IOC votes were...and just ASSUMED...as the unlamented Dubya did in Iraq.....that if they just show up the natives will love them and do as we wish.
And given Lula, the Spaniards, and Japanese thought circles around the hapless Chicago delegation....what augers for Obama dealing with the cunning Israelis, Iranians, Chicommies, Russians and other problem counties the US will deal with.
Poor dumb Dubya was snookered by Karzai, Omert, Chalabi, Malaki, the Neocons, Putin, Sharon, Presidente Fox, Hu Jintao, 'Lil Kim, even the Froggies....and it doesn't look like Obama is a step up.
================
And I think people in other countries are somewhat bewildered by and disgusted by the Michelle Obama self-pitying bio. "Ever since my magnet grade school through Princeton then Harvard Law then minimal effort sinecure jobs arranged by my husbands wealthy patrons...I have suffered from wet ass syndrome. Caused by all the guilty white liberals schmootching it and getting me "deals far beyond my talents". Now, please, vote for Chicago, for me, for diversity, for my Dad who suffered with multiple sclerosis!"
================
Some small points -
1. Chicago was the lone bidder that arrived without a commitment of national financing. On it's own, Chicago is a parasitical city that sucks more from Illinois than it generates in taxes, more from the Federal Gov't...and still has a very shaky financial base and the highest tax rate of any large American city.
2. Since 1972, there have been 4 Olympics in Europe, 1 in the Soviet Empire, 3 in Asia, 3 in N America. It was Latin America's turn.
3. Rio is the annual host of the global event of Carnival. It is a World Cup host, and will have another in 2014. They have a very good reputation as hosts.
4. Chicago used to be a big national convention center because of its centrality and all rail lines converging there. Dwindling with each generation...It is best known for it's head-bashing 1968 Convention. Bill Clinton's 1996 2nd Convention after 28 years of Parties avoiding the City did little to rehab it's luster..
You know what didn't happen?
What didn't happen was Mayor Richard M. Daley didn't get blamed for Chicago not getting the summer Olympics.
Do you think maybe that Hizzoner saw the IOC support for Chicago slipping away and asked Obama to fly to Denmark to make a last sales pitch, knowing that Obama'd get the blame if Chicago wasn't selected?
Could be. Daley is waaaay more politically savvy than Obama.
1jpb,
Of course, I read your link, which I found as lame as your post.
The photographer and her subject were making a fiction with no attempt at deception. Did you know that most magazine cover photos are staged? I'm not kidding you.
And as for the rep of the photographer, who cares? Even child rapists make good pictures. Have you seen the cover of Beck's new book? Gee, I wonder if he was trying to tweak the noses of lefty fruit cakes? Or maybe, it was real, shot in Beck's secret lair where he keeps his Nazi stuff.
Are you trying to say that we're done dicking around in Iraq, Machos?
(Expect witty comeback here about how Obama is losing the war that Bush already won.)
Obama was elected on "a clear night in November, all over the world." How, on such a momentous occasion, could there have been a cloud in the sky? Anywhere on the globe?
And yet he's accused of thinking the world revolves around him...
"Wet ass syndrome". Had never heard that one before now.
"Obama was elected on "a clear night in November, all over the world." How, on such a momentous occasion, could there have been a cloud in the sky? Anywhere on the globe?"
of course it was clear that night... all the smoke in the world was being blown up our collective asses.
Cedarford forgot that Brazil also gets points for having an F1 race (even if it is in San Paulo). For some reason the rest of the world is more interested in truly cutting edge car technology and turning both left and right. But we've still got the big three (or at least the bigish two--for now), NASCAR, and Palin. So, we win!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm glad he failed. It confirms my belief that in the end, arrogance and conceit will out.
Must Michelle Obama smack her lips so much when she's giving a speech? It's incredibly distracting.
And can't she hire a decent fashion designer? She makes Bess Truman look like the epitome of good taste and fashion.
Petty peeves, I know, but everybody else has pretty much chewed over everything I had in mind.
"We won in Iraq." --Seven Machos
Not true. We avoided a military defeat.
Iraq is now a closer ally with Iran than it is with the West.
Iraq awarded it's first oil exploration deals to the Chinese, Italians, and an Egyptian firm backed with Russian money.
The most popular man in Iraq is the guy who threw shoes at Bush's head. Something he thought was a curious, funny local custom.
Would Chicago have won if Obama hadn't gone in and made his pitch? If not, then what's the big whoop?
More like the big whoops. He did go, he did make his pitch, and as with everything else he does, it was presented as The Biggest Deal Ever. So it's kind of funny to watch it not work.
On the bright side, Obama did take home the gold in the Men's Political-Capital Toss.
Oh, and when Michelle was sitting on her dad's lap watching Carl Lewis in the Olympics, she was 20 years old. And dating David Letterman.
"Iraq awarded it's first oil exploration deals to the Chinese, Italians, and an Egyptian firm backed with Russian money."
And it what place, C4, other than the fevered swamp of anti-war fantasy did we go to Iraq for Oil?
...the same with not getting a puppet pals government there. At what point was that our goal?
We've got a mega-Embassy and we *ought* to (but no one listens to me) have a permanent military facility JUST LIKE we do in Germany and in Japan and for a lot of the same reasons (I've said before... we've WON when Iraq is an accompanied tour with families living on the local economy) but we never WANTED a lap dog, so not GETTING one is not failure.
"And it what place, C4, other than the fevered swamp of anti-war fantasy did we go to Iraq for Oil?"
Well, we sure didn't go there to "liberate" it's people and even Colin Powell and Condi Rice admitted publicly well before our invasion that Hussein was well contained and could offer no threat to his neighbors, so...you do the math. We went there for control of the access to oil.
"...but we never WANTED a lap dog..."
Hahahahahahahahahaha!
Wait... Cedarford commented on something having to do with... wait for it... wait for it... Brazil!?
The idea of a truly multi-ethnic society must make smoke rise up from his ears.
Their speeches were American political stump speeches. Totally out of place in that setting. The IOC would give Chicago the Olympics to raise the hopes and lives of kids in Chicago. Really?
Then the me me me me aspect...its a pattern with these two.
Re: Carnival PartAY Olympics "Who's up for it? How long have you been training?"
About 45 years. Prepare to lose.
The Obama speeches probably did more harm than good. They were self absorbed and dismissive of the IOC. All about them and not much about why the Olympics would be better held in Chicago.
I bet if they had just stayed home and STFU Chicago might not have been voted out in the first round. Rio probably had it in he bag anyway. I'm happy for Brazil
What is it with liberals attributing this as a "failure for America"? It wasn't. It was a failure of diplomacy...on the part of the Obama administration, and in the greatest...the Obamas themselves.
See, I don't necessarily agree that belief that Chicago was either "in the bag" or "in the top two" was in error. It very well could have been. Then, as a result of the pathetic performance by both Obamas...went down the tubes.
I believe any conservative glee is based upon a sense that justice has been done.
hahahahahaha ... and you Ann Althouse voted for these clowns to be your leaders and commander in chief ... IT"S YOUR FAULT TOO!
Ann nailed it. They went unprepared, and their presentation was all the kind of stuff that Europeans HATE to hear from Americans. What did they think would happen and how could they be that naive?
The reveling over failure, such as there is, isn't schadenfreude. It's just relief that American taxpayers don't get stuck with another big bail out.
I didn't read all the comments--did anone notice YouTube's racism?
In the lower right corner of the Michelle video, there's a SPADE!
Guess they're just calling a spade a spade.
Racists.
"And can't she hire a decent fashion designer? She makes Bess Truman look like the epitome of good taste and fashion."
She dressed better before she decided she was a fashion icon.
"And it what place, C4, other than the fevered swamp of anti-war fantasy did we go to Iraq for Oil?"
Let me amend... What place other than in the fevered swamp of anti-war fantasy and Robert Cook's delusions, did we go to Iraq for Oil?
With all the talk about her father, you'd think Michelle was trying to secure the Special Olympics.
Lest we forget, the IOC is pissed that George Bush celebrated our 'comeback' too hard at "their" party in Salt Lake City. Good riddance!
"Wet ass syndrome" Damn, I like that.
Those speeches were empty and had a strange "we are better than you" ring to them.
Lula gave a great, passionate and emotional speech that did not focus on his life as a poor shoe-shining boy with no college education that somehow made it to the top job in Brazil.
She shamelessly used "hope" and "change"...I almost had coffee all over my desk...yuk...
wv: renard
"Adieu, dit le renard.
Voici mon secret. Il est très simple:
on ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur.
L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux."
ElcubanitoKC
Facile pour vous de dire
C'est vrai, cependant ;)
wv: hessessi
Post a Comment