Newsweek Political Correspondent: Losing Olympics Good for Obama

Photo of Noel Sheppard.
  • Bookmark and Share

It goes without saying the Obama-loving media will be in full damage control mode this weekend trying to spin Friday's announcement that Chicago will not be the host of the 2016 Olympics, but this one has to take the cake:

Losing the Olympics Bid Is Good for Obama

Such was the headline of an article posted at Newsweek's "The Gaggle" blog Friday.

The author, Katie Connolly, is a political correspondent for Newsweek, and she actually elaborated on this premise (h/t Hot Air):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

This is pretty embarrassing for the White House. (Especially letting Obama having to fail in front of his wife—ouch!) But ultimately, it’s a good thing for him. As I wrote on Monday, the Olympics are notorious for running massively over budget. The organizing committees are always rife with infighting and power games as all manner of colorful cronies badger members to get their paws on some of those coveted Olympics dollars. Public support for the Olympics in Chicago itself was already lukewarm. Residents would have been facing seven years of disruptive construction and roadwork as their city raced to prepare itself. It’s a recipe for serious disgruntlement.

Obama would have been inextricably tied to all of this—the budget overruns, the construction hiccups, the predictable corruption. By going to Copenhagen, he became the public face of the effort. Already, some of his closest supporters and friends were on the bid committee: his campaign’s national finance chair Penny Pritzker and a co-chair of his inaugural committee, Patrick Ryan, both had key roles. Senior adviser David Axelrod’s communications firm, AKPD Media, was one of the contractors for the committee, and Obama confidant Valerie Jarrett had been involved in supporting the bid. When problems would start to arise in the planning of this mammoth event—and they invariably would have—Obama would be implicated, regardless of his actual involvement.

Wow! Now THAT's some SERIOUS spin! 

If Katie keeps this up, she could be the next media member recruited to work for the Administration...or is that the point?

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

SPINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

the only ones it's good for is the hard working tax paying people of Chicago 

 

 

 

"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can
bribe the people with their own money." – Alexis de Tocqueville

Chicago

They have already spent $50M on the Olympics. 

JDW

DAILY WAVE

I didn't know ACORN was getting a lot of money

JDW

Is that true? Okay, I'm really getting even MORE steamed...

That puke landmark of corruption and crime city... and the U.S. has already had it's share of games the past few decades... and now this crony in the WH doing their stinky bidding...... uggghhh.....

Thank G- they lost.

 

Yeah, Shy, because in these

Yeah, Shy, because in these times the most horrible thing would be to bring the Olympics back to the US.  The hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue alone makes me want to puke.   

xoxo - Ted

Right...

The cost of 4.8 billion and revenue of 3.8 billion really works out good for everyone! 

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

You're not exactly

You're not exactly understanding how this works, are you? Consider that according to your article, most of the $4.8B comes from private funding, not the city of Chicago.  Local businesses aren't funding the games, but will be beneficiaries of the tourism and entertainment income the games bring to the city.  

xoxo - Ted

I'm not sure you understand

I'm not sure you understand how money works. If you start an enterprise that costs 4.8 billion and it only reaps 3.8 billion that's a net loss of 1 billion to someone (most likely the tax payers).

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

What part of "Ryan

What part of "Ryan reiterated confidence that the public funds would never be tapped" do you not understand? 

xoxo - Ted

What part of 3.8 - 4.8 =

What part of 3.8 - 4.8 = -1 do you not understand? 

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

Obviously more than you do.

Obviously more than you do.  You might want to read the entire article next time.  Nowhere does is say it's costing the city of Chicago 4.8B, nor does it say the revenue to the city will be 3.8B.  Those are costs/revenues of the games.  Why on earth would the city want to host something with a net loss of a billion dollars?  

xoxo - Ted

"Why on earth would the

"Why on earth would the city want to host something with a net loss of a billion dollars? " 

Exactly!

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

MM, here's an article that

MM, here's an article that is somewhat relative to what we're discussing.

 http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2009/09/28/chicago-s-olympic-bid-both-a-blessing-and-a-burden.aspx

xoxo - Ted

Ok I read it.

 The comparison was the games in Sydney to those that could be in Chicago. The most telling paragraph is the last one that starts with:

"I'd hazard a guess that Chicagoans, if their bid is successful, will have a similar journey."

This is obvioulsy written by someone who has never been to Chicago nor meet many Chicagoans (especially those in the unions and the politicians). The Olympics being held in Chicago would be a Charlie Foxtrot compared to virtually anywhere else on Earth!

And the idea that tourism would be boosted is ludicrous because after it's all said and done its still friggin Chicago for God's sake!

 

I think the fact that more than half the people in Chicago don't want the Olympics is very telling although moot at this point.

 

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

That's what you gained from

That's what you gained from this article?  How about this:

I'd hazard a guess that Chicagoans, if their bid is successful, will have a similar journey. Over the next seven years they'll grumble about the cost, the traffic, the interruptions. They'll be shocked by incidents of planning incompetence. They'll be annoyed that so much effort is being put toward two weeks of fun while their schools and libraries appear neglected in comparison. And, being Chicago, there will no doubt be a bribery scandal or two. But when it's all said and done, and their voices are hoarse from cheering, they'll just want to do it all over again.  

Here's what I think: Because it's Chicago, a liberal leaning city, and because the president (whom you all despise) is from Chicago and is lobbying on the city and country's behalf, even if the games brought a hundred bajillion dollars to the US economy, you'd still find a problem with it.  There's proof in the article that despite the negatives, there's a huge future payoff, such as infrastructure  improvements and economic gain.  Now it's all a moot point anyway. 

xoxo - Ted

You are probably right if

You are probably right if Obama had not made it about HIM we would have left it alone. But he didn't did he?

(Chicago was a bad choice regardless)

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

Conservatives made it about

Conservatives made it about Obama, not Obama himself.  The USOC picked Chicago several years ago, long before Obama became president, or even won the election for that matter.   

xoxo - Ted

From ILTK--

"The USOC picked Chicago several years ago, long before Obama became president, or even won the election for that matter."   

So Obama can just say he "inherited" this failure then?

Is that a "gotcha" question?

Is that a "gotcha" question?   

xoxo - Ted

Seems more like a

Seems more like a rhetorical question.

 

"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error.  To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson

FF--

Yep! Besides, isn't that Obama's usual excuse for everything? Oop...there goes another rhetorical question.  LOL

samharmon

So Obama can just say he "inherited" this failure then?

 

I don't know if you could say President Obama "inherited" the failure.  The Bush Administration put the date at September 12 of the first year of the first term as the point at which a new administration starts taking responsibility, right? Well, we're already past that date!

I wish I could say I'm surprised that the angry right is so gleeful about the United States losing the Olympic games.  You would think that promoting one of the country's biggest cities, creating potentially tens of thousands of jobs, and boosting the stature of the leader of the United States in the rest of the world would be a good thing.  When did the angry right become so anti-American?

Riposte to an angry Leftist

 I wish I could say I'm surprised that the angry right is so gleeful about the United States losing the Olympic games.  The Right isn't NEARLY as angry as the Left, and I find this shocking, especially after last November.

You would think that promoting one of the country's biggest cities,  Huh?  CHICAGO?  All of a sudden, the city which was for many years, well over a century in fact, was America's "second city" suddenly needs promotion???  As if no one outside the United States is familiar with the city of Chicago!!!

creating potentially tens of thousands of jobs,  Right.  San Antonio hosted HemisFair '68 and the streets there aren't exactly paved with gold as a result.  It provided some temporary work for some for awhile, altered the skyline of the city...and did what else? 

Ask Montreal about how its Olympics turned out.  I'd argue the city that got the most mileage out of the Olympics in my lifetime was Seoul, because that was basically an event which raised South Korea's profile. 

and boosting the stature of the leader of the United States in the rest of the world would be a good thing.   Not you or your God, His Majesty The Shahinshah.  He spent a day last week at the UN proclaiming how embarrassed and ashamed He was to be an American.  And that wasn't surprising considering how embarrassed and ashamed Leftists are of being American citizens (unless it becomes a whiny, babying Nanny State).

When did the angry right become so anti-American?   When did the hate-filled, angry, contemptuous Left all of a sudden start backing the United States?  Where ws their love for America when New York competed for the 2012 Games?  By the way, as big an Olympic nationalist as I am, I wanted to see a American city get the Games on its merits.  Sorta like, oh, I don't know, how Los Angeles got Games without Presidential help - twice.  Or how St. Louis got the Games.  Or how Atlanta got them, by some miracle, without Bush the Elder's intervention.  Or how Lake Placid got the Winter Games - twice.  Or how Denver got the Winter Games and promptly threw them away to Innsbruck.  Or how Squaw Valley got the Games.  (Yes, I am leaving off SLC; it was good to see them get the Games, just not the way they got them.)

Oh, and I figured that, with the perpetually pissed-off Left being so embarrassed and ashamed of the United States, that they would actually be quite happy for Rio.  What's the deal?  (If it were Madrid I would have been bent as Europe has hosted enough times and Spain had the Games in 1992; and Tokyo has hosted an Olympics in 1964.  For that matter, I am less than thrilled that London is hosting its third Olympics in 2012 - the only city to do so.) 

"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)

Unsane     1 Whiny,

Unsane     1

Whiny, angry liberal     0

 

So taking the

So taking the Barrack-Michelle-Oprah show on the road was not a way for Obama to add to his legacy and stroke is huge ego? 

If you believe Obama got invloved to this extent for the sake of all Americans you really are living in a dream world Teddy!

The man is a narcissist!

"The bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy"

 

~Sorry, Teddy dear

No one is talking about how the city was originally picked, we're all talking about Obama's full court press for the city over the past few days. Here's a link to a full transcript of Obama's speech to the IOC.

And here's the money quote out of the whole thing..

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.

Yes, Obama did make this about him. He used "I" 22 times in his address. There are also 2 "my"s and a "me". He mentions America 10 times and Chicago 13 times.

That means that if you add America and Chicago together, the count still isn't equal to references to himself.

That high-pitched scream you hear is the banished troll weeping and gnashing his teeth.

that would be funny

if it weren't so sad.

____________________________________________ 
The Emperor, he has no clothes

Oh cheer up,

Oh cheer up, kata....

Republicans haven't been this positively giddy since Geithner was exposed as a tax cheat.

Jer

~C'mon Jer,

Don't begruge it to us, we have so little to live for nowadays.

 

No begruding here.  In

No begruding here.  In fact, how about opening a forum where everyone can go to memorialize their reactions, register their joy, revel in Obama's embarrassment, and describe exactly where they were and what they were doing when the glorious news was announced.

[I'm mostly kidding about this--here and elsewhere.]

Jer

In response to usual hackery

Except, my dear hack, that I am not a Republican; far from it.  I just think that considering the United States has hosted Games in 1904, 1932, 1984 and 1996 - ALL without Presidential intervention, that ANY President from whatever party going over to lobby the IOC was a stupid idea.  (Oh, and I forgot to mention the 1932, 1960, 1980, and 2002 Winter Games.)  I would argue that the move may have put the IOC in a very bad spot - because had they picked Chicago, the rest of the world's whiners and complainers would have been out in force. 

This was possibly the most blatant attempt by a nation to strong-arm the IOC since the Soviets did it in 1974 to force the IOC to give the Games to Moscow.  (If they didn't, the Soviets whined, they wouldn't play in the IOC no more...)

"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)

Except that I've never

Except that I've never called you a Republican.  You're just the garden variety angry Rightest, of very modest consequence.

Jer

What? Me angry?

I'm angry, all right...but not for the reasons you accuse me of.  I'm angry because the educational system has foisted several hundred students upon me who have next to no ability to write.  Again. 

If I see those educational "geniuses" patting themselves on the back at a high school graduation next spring, I will be sorely tempted t walk up to them with a 2X4, several bad papers, a baseball bat, total derangement, and an attitude problem, at the rate I am going. 

In any event, the fact that you are unwilling or unable to see how this decision by His Majesty The Shahinshah to fiddle in something Presidents in the past have seen fit to not mess with (and wisely decided to allow the chips to fall where they may) is a political embarrassment only demonstrates your hackery.  It may surprise you but I have actually had many civil discussions with Leftists this week on this, which I concluded "If I supported the Shahinshah I would be totally befuddled by this decision."    

"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)

Gosh, Unsane... It was

Gosh, Unsane...

It was just a nineteen word post.  I don't believe it included a list of reasons for your putative "anger".  Besides, I only mentioned it because you had recently posted about the "angry Leftists".  [Plus, I thought your storming out of nowhere to call me a "hack" was impolite.] 

Finally, please show me where I expressed the view that Obama's Olympic shilling was wise, or that his being shot down was no cause for embarrassment.  I'm betting you can't.

Jer

Jer, Jer, Jer...

You will be an attorney to your dying breath, won't you, Jer? 

No, you did not say His Majesty The Shahinshah's Olympic snub wasn't an embarrassment (as far as I have seen).  But prove me wrong.  Did you say it WOULD be, or IS, anywhere on NB???

You only just now noticed I called you a "hack"? It's hardly impolite.  It is accurate.  Not to mention I have done it at least twice before.  You just haven't responded. 

Off I go once again to "spank" some children with red ink...

"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)

I am cheerful enough

today is my parents 42nd wedding anniversary.  I am cooking dinner for them.  Life can't be too bad when your house smells like roasted garlic and baking bread.

Watching "The One" get his ego deflated is a minor smile but there are so many things happening in this world that needed his attention far more than this.
____________________________________________ 
The Emperor, he has no clothes

As well you should be. 

As well you should be.  Congratulations and best wishes to your parents.  That's quite a milestone.

And, I agree with you about other issues needing far more attention.

Jer

Using the letter I doesn't

Using the letter I doesn't make the sentence he's speaking about him.  With that claim, anytime an NB member uses I in a post, it automatically makes that post about him or her?  I don't buy it.  But if that's the case, we're all happy that Chicago isn't hosting the Olympics because then it would be more about Obama, and less about us being proud as Americans to host the games and show the world what America has to offer, all while boosting the economy and infrastructure of Chicago.

xoxo - Ted

"Using the letter I doesn't

"Using the letter I doesn't make the sentence he's speaking about him. With that claim, anytime an NB member uses I in a post, it automatically makes that post about him or her?"

Pretty much, yes. 

LOL, Ted!

When Obama uses the word "I" he is always talking about himself.  Do you pay attention to what he's saying?

 

"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error.  To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson

~Don't hate me, buddy

You know I love ya.

Using the letter I doesn't make the sentence he's speaking about him.

"my family moved around a lot. I was born in Hawaii. I lived in Indonesia for a time. I never really had roots in any one place or culture or ethnic group. And then I came to Chicago. And on those Chicago streets, I worked alongside men and women who were black and white; Latino and Asian; people of every class and nationality and religion. I
came to discover that Chicago is that most American of American cities,
but one where citizens from more than 130 nations inhabit a rich
tapestry of distinctive neighborhoods.

And I ran for President because I believed deeply..

there is nothing I would like more than to step just a few
blocks from my family's home, with Michelle and our two girls, and
welcome the world back into our neighborhood."

That speaks for itself, so I'll save my witticisms for the next post..

 

chose

There's no "I" in "team".... and only one in "United States of America".

 

Yeah, Shy...

but there's "me" in both.

By the way, is it Unted States of America, or United States of Amerca?  By your count, there's one "I" too many.

Jer

Jer

Oops.... Okay, scratch that whole "USofA" part. :p

........ There's no "I" in "States". And there are only 50 of them of all the United ones. :)

 

Aye, Aye...or, rather, "I"

Aye, Aye...or, rather, "I" "I" Shy.

Jer

Aw, come on.  The guy likes

Aw, come on.  The guy likes telling his life story.  He just needs to make sure everyone knows it, and there were probably one or 2 people in the crowd who hadn't.  Anyway, point taken.  I disagree that the speech was more about him than bringing the Olympics to the states, but I digress.  I for one wish the games were coming to the US, just for the opportunity to catch an event or 2 - even if it's badminton.  And I don't care which city either, whether it's Miami, Crawford, El Dorado or Walla Walla.

xoxo - Ted

~"I"

Don't have any objection to the Olympics being held in the States.

Chose, thank you very much

Chose, thank you very much for the link.  The line from the speech that really make me think it was all about Obama was this one:

And while we do not know what the next few years will bring, there is nothing I would like more than to step just a few blocks from my family's home, with Michelle and our two girls, and welcome the world back into our neighborhood.

This was all about Obama and what he wants.  It's no wonder the Olympics went to another country.

"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error.  To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson

Actually, I thought that

Actually, I thought that was one of the better lines in a generally pedestrian address.

Jer

Jer

It is a good line, but the point was that the speech was about Obama and awarding the Olympics to Chicago because of Obama. 

The spotlight in that sentence is clearly on Obama and not the Olympics.

 

"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error.  To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson

Oh, Kennedy, you are so naive

If Chicagoans voices are hoarse from screaming, it will be from screaming at their TVs. Most of the population would be lucky to come with the $$$ for one ticket to one event.

And can we pretty well guess in whose hands a "huge future payoff" would end up in.

(hint: Obama's Chi_ _ _ _ pals) 

And you're

And you're ill-informed.

xoxo - Ted

ILTK

OMO, Ted, please, no... You're actually quoting and putting faith in something someone said from His inauguration team?

You're hopeless.  

→ Shy

He still believes Americans making $250,000 or less won't pay more in taxes too.

How much more in taxes are

How much more in taxes are you paying right now, Tex? 

xoxo - Ted

→ Nothing yet

Do I have you on record as claiming my taxes won't go up as a result of Obama's Presidency? 

You honestly believe taxes won't go up?

Depends, Tex.  How much do

Depends, Tex.  How much do you make? 

xoxo - Ted

→ Drupal

Not nearly that much. 

The amount of the expired

The amount of the expired Bush tax cuts, and that is just the beginning as Obama's ruinous program takes root.

→ NL207

He needs to remember that when we take over the Congress and the White House and roll back his silly health care package. 

Don't worry, Tex.  My

Don't worry, Tex.  My health care package is secure and fantastic. 

xoxo - Ted

Wait until you lose your job

I never thought it would happen to me, but it did.

I hope he fails, too.

 

 

J, and if he does, he is going to find out getting another job

...is going to be virtually impossible.

Nobody is hiring, anywhere.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

Dave, do you watch

Dave, do you watch TV? 

xoxo - Ted

Ted, Dave, J, etc...

You people are depressing me... I only play a famous rock star on NB, but I'm on burgers and pickles these days...

PLEASE, buy my CD (PayPal) :) (Shy or my previous band, New Soul Orchestra... you won't be disappointed. :))

** All proceeds go to food in my mouth and to my upcoming video currently in production! **

 

I understand that the best

I understand that the best way for a musician to make money these days is to go on tour.  Every think about dusting off the ol' Vanagon and hitting the road?

xoxo - Ted

ILTK

No, I can't stand musicians. Unless I'm totally in charge and they respect me... which would mean, I'd have to be somewhat famous. Otherwise, I'm just the dumb singer.

:) 

Maybe you really need to get

Maybe you really need to get out of town and find some musicians with whom you can work.  If you don't work with other musicians, does this mean you don't perform?  There's nothing wrong with simply being a recording artist, but to really be productive and make money, a musician needs to get out there and perform for the people who he hopes to sell his music (and underwear apparently).

xoxo - Ted

I rarely watch TV

Football, golf, and the FoodNetwork.

I may watch Special Report on Fox maybe once a week, but that is about it.

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

J, you know what I do for a

J, you know what I do for a living, and while nothing is ever certain, the division of the behemoth I work for is one of the few profitable companies even during these times.  I've got banked hours that have locked up my bennies until the end of next year.  But again, you're right.  Nothing is 100%. 

xoxo - Ted

Ted

I do.  And I also understand that you think you are invincible in that job....so did I.

Having said that....just think about it a bit, OK?

Because there are thousands, nay, hundreds of thousands of others, just like US, who thought..."No Way, Not Me"....who are now unemployed.

It sucks.  And what is even worse is the stupid polticians blathering about it.  Truly.

Okay, I'm done.

I hope he fails, too.

 

 

I really do sympathize with

I really do sympathize with you and everyone else who lost  work, and while I do feel somewhat invincible, it's really because the business I'm in has certain securities.  I'm a freelance worker who is hired for periods ranging between 6 months and a year and a half.  When one gig ends, I'm immediately rolled into the next one.  This has been the story for the past 7-8 years, and though I'm freelance, I've not been laid off a single day over that period.  I'll be the first hired and the last laid off per project.  In other words, as long as the company is still in business, I'll have a job.

I've experienced first hand the emotions that go with losing a job, and/or not being able to find work.  My wife struggled for over a year before finding permanent employment, and thankfully I've been able to weather the storm.

xoxo - Ted

Really, Ted?

Are you married to or related to a doctor, or something?

 

"Reason and persuasion are the only practical instruments against error.  To make way for these, free inquiry must be indulged" - Thomas Jefferson

For now

...until you are dumped by your employer for the public "option".  But that does not bother you, as you clearly want the government to completely and thoroughly baby you as much as possible.   

"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)

Waaaaaahhhhhhhh.  Are you

Waaaaaahhhhhhhh.  Are you one of the unemployed righteous ones who sits at home online all day?  You seem to know all the answers, but in my case this does not apply.  I don't know what gives you the idea that I want the government to take care of me. Could you share your expertise here?  I work full time, as does my wife.  Who's taking care of you right now?

xoxo - Ted

Huh?

You have completely missed my point to the point where I must question your reading comprehension. 

I actually have quite a bit of redundancy - three employers.  My schedule is such where I don't really do much outside of my employment and my other grand projects, which not everyone around here is privy to.

Why three employers? Well, to save server space, I won't explain it all.  But financially, no worries, for the moment. 

My health care plan works like this: pay for it on an "as I need it" basis.  Much as I do with my groceries, water, clothing, and shelter and everything else I need to worry about far ahead of worrying about a doctor.   

I don't know what gives you the idea that I want the government to take care of me  Because you are a Leftist.  It's either that or you hold the greater part of humanity in deep contempt, or you want to keep the icky masses away from you.  I can explain each of these base motivations in detail if you wish.  As for me, I am a Rightist because basically I want to be left alone for the most part. 

"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)

Eh, go be crabby somewhere

Eh, go be crabby somewhere else.  First you jump on Jer for something he didn't say, now you go on about something that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of this page, and stating ignorant babble such as:

 But that does not bother you, as you clearly want the government to completely and thoroughly baby you as much as possible.   

What exactly do you base this on?  What do you know about my employer dumping my insurance for a public option?  Actually my employer doesn't get to pick the option.  My union does, and it's quite fabulous, reputable, and consistent.   

xoxo - Ted

→ Interesting Drupal

With a BLE card, I'd think your handle would be "I Love Joe Biden

Weak, ILTK

 Eh, go be crabby somewhere else.  Is this an attempt to bark orders at me?  If so, this is a prety ineffective one.  If you or your paramour, Jer, don't like me responding to your posts, I suggest you stop posting on NB.  Anyone can respond to my posts.  I never gripe.  Why?  The same thing...if I never wanted anyone to respond to my posts again, for being "crabby" or otherwise, I simply would stop posting here.  Anyone can respond to my posts.

What exactly do you base this on?  Stop whining. You are the one with a screen name which proclaims your love for one who wanted to baby, baby, baby, and baby people.  What else am I supposed to conclude? Government, to you, is here to totally baby people. That Ted Kennedy wanted it done to keep those icky masses away from his precious compound at Hyannisport doesn't register with you in the slightest.    What do you know about my employer dumping my insurance for a public option?  The CBO estimated that 88 million people will be dumped for the public "option" once enacted.  Before you ask me that question again, I suggest you read HR 3200 and other proposed legislation.  Your precious union and employer is EAGER to dump the cost of your health care plan on ME, and other taxpayers, so that they can utilize that money elsewhere. 

Of course, I am compelled to ask, once again, why can't I be left the f*** alone to buy my health insurance from whoever in the country I damn well please on my own, and then set up an MSA for sniffles, paper cuts, and twisted ankles?  Why does your union, your employer, or the government owe you a doctor?  What, do you go crying to them for them to buy your groceries? 

Don't get me started on unions and how parasitic and worthless they are. 

"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)

Tall orders.  To remove

Tall orders.  To remove or override Obama, impeach the bigot, Sotomayor, and cleanse the Federal Judiciary will take 2/3 in both houses.  We need to win 26 Senate seats and 113 House seats.  Even if we run the table in 2010, we can't gain that many Senate seats.

If we win big enough, one thing we can do to reduce their numbers is unseat quite a number of Democrats for corruption.  Among them Rangel [tax fraud], Conyers[accessory to bribery], Pelosi [spousal conflict of interst + missappropriation] and Feinstein [same as Pelosi].   I think a vigorous investigation into the vote counting in Franken's election might be useful.  While it will not unseat Franken unless it can be proven he colluded in vote fraud, it will send some Democrat canvassers to the slammer and a chill through some spines.

Cool -->

Look, below... out pops the, "Hey, it's not that much better now!" .... or my other favorite.... "It wasn't all that great under Bush!"

Here, Ted, put on this sweater and shake these poms-poms:

MAKE - IT - WORSE

MAKE - IT - WORSE

GOOOOOOOOO - OBAMA !!!!!

GOOOOOOOOO - EVEN - BIGGER - GOV'T !!!!!

 

Did you have something

Did you have something substantive to add to this discussion? 

xoxo - Ted

Ted

Exposing someone's utter illogic and hypocrisy is not substantive? And when it directly relates (gov't spending, taxes, etc.) to what we're discussing here?

Wow.

Do you always pout like this when people call you out on things you can't refute?

 

Do you always pout when

Do you always pout when people aren't impressed with your music?

You really should understand how this Olympic funding/revenue works before declaring your triumph.  You'll end up with much less egg on your face.  

xoxo - Ted

ILTK

Thanks. Yes, I'm definitely learning more... from MM, from Cool, et al.

I pouted over you not being impressed? See below. :)

 

I hardly think you're

I hardly think you're learning a thing, given you have yet to make an argument concerning this thread.  And MM and Tex have it wrong too, so if you're learning anything, you're learning it wrong. 

xoxo - Ted

I'm sorry Shy, and please

I'm sorry Shy, and please don't take this the wrong way, but I can't take you seriously anymore.  I clicked that link to the Mr Shy page in your profile, went to iTunes to hear some of your material, and...dang. 

xoxo - Ted

Ted

Thanks for checking it out.

And don't be hating on talent.

And buy a few downloads, please. You will be humming those songs in no time.

Now back to the arena you are really clueless about (besides taste in music) ... politics!! 

 

Oh I get it.  Buy a few

Oh I get it.  Buy a few downloads.  No wait, I prefer to have a hard copy of the music I buy, especially with the really special albums.  I like the cover art, the inserts... So where do I get that?  I couldn't find the link on your site, nor amazon.  My local Amoeba doesn't carry it either apparently. 

xoxo - Ted

ILTK

It's all here.

You can buy it directly from my label, using PayPal (best and fastest way) or also CDBaby.com .... :)

My previous band, if you scroll down (New Soul Orchestra) is a real retro/classic album with, get this... real instruments throughout! And vinyl, too, no less.

 

ILTK

If you want to keep promoting a corrupt administration, and corrupt business to an already way-too corrupt city like Chicago, be.... no, don't be my guest.

 

Montreal

Yeah.  It worked out GREAT for Montreal in 1976.  They didn't pay off their Games until 2006. 

The Economist described the economic benefit of the Olympics best: a case of building a bridge for a large crowd of people to cross one time, and one time only.

The way I see it, this is no great loss to the United States.  The IOC is NOTHING without the United States, and they will be back.  There will be a Summer Olympics in 2020.  Bring on another American city to compete for them.     

"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)

It does not surprise

It does not surprise anybody here that the prospect of generating revenue that was a tax increase must turn your stomach quite a bit.

You might be taken seriously if you actually asked a poignant, intelligent question, like , yes, the Olympics will generate revenue, but will it even come into the same ballpark as the money that will be spent to put the Olympics on? Of course not. your goal here is to be, well, an embarrassment to liberal trolls at Newsbusters.

Well, you have reached your goal! Now go away before you get your flabby ass beaten with a railroad tie one more time.

 

Question: Who foots the bill

Question: Who foots the bill for the Olympics?

You're about a day late to this conversation.  I've already proven my point that I am in fact correct, which makes you an angry, flabby assed, misinformed, hack.  Now go away and find a thread you actually know something about. 

xoxo - Ted

~I have a question

And since I'm a day late, here's a dollar. Don't spend it all in one place..

Is the point being argued now:

A. Whether or not the Olympics lose money or make it.

Or,

B. Whether or not tax dollars are lost paying for the Olympics.

I forgot what we were

I forgot what we were discussing in the first place ; )

I'm arguing the specific point that despite the numbers MM threw out, it would not have cost the city of Chicago $4.8B to put on the Olympics while generating $3.8B for the city.  The funds are mostly raised through private investments, and a lot of the profits go back to the Olympics.  I'm arguing that the revenue that the games bring to the city in the form of tourism dollars, as well as the forcible infrastructural improvements on the city is a win/win situation for Chicago.  The Newsweek article I posted above has more details as to the pros and cons of the games coming to your city.

xoxo - Ted

Correct about, what,

Correct about, what, again?

The Olympics do not make a profit, they cook the books when they claim they do (like not counting hundreds of millions on security as "costs"), and you prop up a Newsweek article as some sort of holy bible of truth?

Vancouver's Olympics in 2010 is expected to cost the already-poor Canadian taxpayers over $500 BILLION dollars. Add to that, their Olympic Village is almost $1 BILLION in the hole more than expcted. Do you think it will cost the US taxpayers any less had Chicago got the bid? Don't bother answering.

The only angry little tard here is you. the constant slap-downs you receive on this site is impressive, especially since you keep coming backk for more. Which old-timer NBer troll are you, again? Because most of the smarter lib trolls give up after a while.

Keep the laughs coming, Pumpkin!

 

 

 

 

Grow up.  xoxo - Ted

Grow up. 

xoxo - Ted

Sage advice, coming from a

Sage advice, coming from a douche with a juvenile username and signs off every post with hugs and kisses.

Sage advice, indeed, Pumpkin.

 

Dude, you quoted Dio on your

Dude, you quoted Dio on your profile page.  Even if you were going for irony (which I highly doubt), you're still a tragically hopeless cheeseball metal head. 

Were you one of the whiners who obsessively complained at my former screen name, Kennedy Death Watch?  This is what it is now, so deal with it. 

xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo - Ted

Bid

Chicago — America's choice for 2016 — had already spent $48 million on its bid by Aug. 19...

JDW

DAILY WAVE

I didn't know ACORN was getting a lot of money

Soooo

"Losing 2012 election good for Obama!"

That'll be good for

That'll be good for everyone.

Republicans take back

Republicans take back Congress in 2010 - good for Obama.

Katie, George Orwell would have been so PROUD!

Sigh!

Wonder what Katie Connolly is going to say when Iran tests...

...its first nuke?

-Dave

The election of 2010 will be our last chance to save our republic. -Neal Boortz

He inherited the Iran

He inherited the Iran problem from President Bush.

... and he inherited the Israel problem from Abraham

The Most Accountable Administration evah!

...

It'll be Israel's fault for not negotiating directly with Teheran and not turning more of their territory over to terrorists.

Losing the Olympics bid is good for America

I agree with Katie...Obama lost the battle and has egg on his face, buy avoided a war as the corruption of Chicago gets more and more coverage.

 Though Katie, can we apply that same logic to cap an Trade, and  with Obamacare?

When is this going to happen

Obama would have been inextricably tied to all of this—the budget overruns, the construction hiccups, the predictable corruption

You mean the same way the media has held him accountable for all of the previous budget overruns, corruption...?

the same time

newsweek shows flag-draped coffins from the deaths in afghanistan on its cover next to Obama's name.

____________________________________________ 
The Emperor, he has no clothes

Hmmm. I would offer that if the Olympics

 

are notoriously over budget, corrupt, etc. as the writer suggests, Obama should have brought up these points a long time ago and told Chicago to withdraw their bid.

Don't Tax Me, Bro.

Character Builder

Being a loser is said to build character. God knows this guy could use some character. And hopefully a little less ego. The media myth making continues in spite of obvious world rejection of not only the myth but Obama!

Repost of new picture

I thought I'd repost this since another thread on the same subject just popped up. Here's my guess as to why we got bumped in round one:

A little early celebration

AAAUGH!

A little warning next time - that seared my retinas!

Good For Obama

Axelrod: This president is going to go anywhere he can to promote this country, to try to bring good things back to this country.

JDW

DAILY WAVE

I didn't know ACORN was getting a lot of money

What?

"bring good things back to this country...?" Oh, things like the American Dream, jobs, optimism--yes, bring them back, they began to sag when the Hype Machine revved up...and by that I don't mean "when Bush was president."

Why is it that every time...

Obama "brings something back to this country" swine flu looks more attractive in comparison?

 

"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will
be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for
pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner."
— Malcolm Muggeridge

StarAZ, Stage9

WH spin. 

JDW

DAILY WAVE

I didn't know ACORN was getting a lot of money

Just mocking the patronizing tone again

Yes, spin-to-win...More downtalking by the sweaty, hangdog one.

So, a twenty-something (no

So, a twenty-something (no offense to our younger -and much more brilliant than I- posters here) Harvard-grad blogger has determined that failing to land the Olympics for Chicago is actually a better outcome than the reverse? Why didn't she speak up before the city put $50M into the effort, and Barry dumped a whole bunch more CO2 into the atmosphere?

This tawdry debacle has produced the classic headline

defining what "sycophancy" in the media means.  I saved it in case any "Journalism" schools out there want to copy it for class slides.  

http://www.damaverick.com/obama141.jpg 

 

You might need a Dramamine

You might need a Dramamine for the spin on this one!

=-) Are you getting airsick

=-)
Are you getting airsick or seasick? Is it because we're destroying the earth? sarc/off

  MSM - shaping all the perceptions you need to believe, then confirming it with a poll.

Facial impressions are very

Facial impressions are very misleading ...

So the president wastes a few days, millions of dollars, meanwhile the troops in Afghanistan are still dying, and unemployment is now 17%.

Methinks the naive one doesn't now what is important.

That's Priceless

If there was a Pulitzer for Media Stupidity, Ms. Connelly would wind hands down.  So according to her, none of those involved in the Chicago Olympic bid had the insight she had for the pending financial disaster, least of all the President of the U.S.  Here's a headsup to Ms. Connelly.  This had nothing to do with any potential difficulties for the City of Chicago - neither the mayor, the Governor, or the President give a damn about what the citizens might have had to put up with to host this farce.  What it was about was pure greed.  The real potential was for the money that would flow into Chicago, particularly from the private sources and U.S. Goverment, to fund this extravaganza, and end up in the pockets of all of the politicos, unions, and developers that would have made millions off of this event.  This would have been unadulterated fraud on the grandest of scales and if anyone thinks that this merry band of Chicago politcos from the White House, to Springfield, to Chicago would not have benefitted in the spoils, they are sadly mistaken.  Mr. Obama did lose out in this deal, just not the way Ms. Connelly thinks he did.

Meaningless

In the early twentieth century, philosophers debated the notion of "verificationism." Big word, simple idea: if your argument can't be proved true nor false, it's meaningless. To be meaningful, you have to take a stand. You have to commit to something. You have to say it's either true or false; you can't try to keep both.

The White House has become the headquarters of meaninglessness. Since they refuse to admit that anything's a failure, they lose the right to call anything a victory.

Think about Obama's claims. You can speculate all you want, but you can't prove these claims either way. Like the philosophers said, unless something can be proved either true or false, it must be counted as meaningless. Examples:

  • They claim that even though unemployment is going up, it would have been worse without them, so they count that loss as a victory.
  • They claim that the stimulus is keeping the economy going, because it would have been much worse without them. 
  • "Healthcare is imploding, but if you like yours, you can keep it of course." That's meaningless.
  • The White House set a new Afghan strategy in May. Now, he claims that it would be foolish to employ a strategy without examining our assumptions. Shouldn't he have done that in May?

Obama is all talk. He's the teleprompter king. Remember his complaint when he was accused of doing nothing but speeches? "Just words?" Well, now we see that all his talk is meaningless, too.

Meaningless

The libs cannot be proven true, thus they are false, liars. And that is not meaningless.

JDW

DAILY WAVE

I didn't know ACORN was getting a lot of money

Katie, If getting the

Katie,

If getting the Olympics is so bad why was he involved with it in the first place.  By your logic he would have been an idiot for actually getting the games to come to Chicago. And if public support was already lukewarm on this and it is good that he lost, just think how great it will be when he loses healthcare reform.

 spoordrdr

Observation

My wife and I watched Obama's presentation to the IOC on behalf of his cadre of crooks in Chicago and the audience was almost silent.

I asked my wife if he was speaking in a vacant room it was so quiet.

I think the party's over for the O, and Chicago's own Big O is now Big Over. 

Miss Pork USA

It is Oprah's fault.   He should make her do 100 sit ups and 100 push ups.

This story should have had a

This story should have had a warning to take some Dramamine before reading it...talk about making one dizzy with the spinning.

I'm paying more in taxes...

 ...it stemed from a bill Obama signed about a week after Obama took office.   My wife is a smoker.  Obama signed into law a huge tax increase on cigarettes around Feb. 6th (I think.)

And we don't make anywhere near $250K.

So, Obama lied.  

(Sorry about the placement -- this was meant as a reply to an "I love Ted Kennedy" comment above. 

 

"Luge strategy? Lie flat and try not to die." C. Boyle (Olympic Luge Gold Medal winner 1996)

Olympic FAIL

As Mark Levin pointed out, this is something that shows The One is not invincible, nor is The One loved all over the World.

Someone forgot to serve the

Someone forgot to serve the Kool-Aid to the IOC. Damn!

Losing the Olympics Bid Is Good for Obama

In spite of herself Katie Connolly is actually right this time, but for the wrong reason (of course).

“Losing the Olympics Bid Is Good for Obama” because it is a teachable moment for the Narcissist in Chief  to take stock of himself  and to realize who he really is and what he should really be doing.

Unfortunately that this opportunity will be lost is far more likely than the big Zero’s bid for the Olympics.

- Relying upon the State Run Media for your information is like relying upon an embezzler for your portfolio management.

- I didn't leave the Republican Party; the Republican Party left me.

Losing the election would

Losing the election would have been good for America...oh, and THE REST OF THE WORLD!

Hopefully we'll be merely shorn and not served up with mint jelly.

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.