An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« The Ecstasy and Joy Of Victory

I Don’t Care Who Letterman Has Sex With »

Chicago’s loss is Obama’s loss is America’s loss

Posted by DALITSO NJOLINJO in International, Media, Politics.
Oct 3rd, 2009 | Comments

Wow, I can’t believe that Chicago isn’t part of the United States anymore. How did that happen?

The bizarre coverage of “Obama’s embarrassment” or as I like to call it Rio’s and South America’s triumph only goes to show the state of politics in America. Polarizing.

I have always been told that America and Great Britain are very similar- two peas in a pod if you will. We share the same language, share an unfair hatred of the French and Germans and we have that thing they call “the special relationship”.

But with all our similarities I don’t believe that anyone here in Britain of any political stripe would have reacted with joyous refrain had London not won the 2012 Olympics. I truly don’t believe it. This reaction from the GOP truly puzzles me. Are they not American? (UPDATE: Go here to see some conservatives cheer Chicago not getting the Olympics.)

I understand the politics of such a strategy. Taking away Obama’s shine on the International stage, a stage in which he has performed to the highest of standards will make him weaker and bring down his poll numbers – but it will also make America (the country which Chicago was once situated) weaker.

Let me try and put it another way.

Britain is bidding for the 2018 Football World Cup (soccer to Americans, a change of phrase which I have never understood- if anyone can be so kind as to explain to me why you call football “soccer” and a game which people hardly use their foot “football,” I would be very thankful) – a bid which is likely to be unsuccessful for the fact that London (a City located in Britain…I think) already has the 2012 Olympics. Now it is expected that the Prime Minister of Britain, who ever that may be at the time, takes the time out of his schedule to support the country’s bid. It makes sense right? Shouldn’t the leader of the country make the pitch for a major International event and explain why it should be held in his back yard?

If Obama did not go and support Chicago, a city in the state he served for so many years, and the city still lost, what would have been made of Obama then?

Obama is the US International Spokesperson, it was only right that he was there– that’s what leaders do. I do not believe that this is a liberal or conservative position, I believe this is just common sense – a moderate position if you will.

UPDATE II: Read Andrew Sullivan.

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

DaMav

It is certainly America's loss that the Office of the President of the United States was used in a manner more fitting to the head of the Chamber of Commerce, and embarrassed before the world by coming in last place. No question about it, Obama demeaned the office and embarrassed the whole country.

What next, the President showing up at Miss Universe contests to lobby for Miss USA?

TheMagicalSkyFather

Why lookie, we have already found someone happy that Chicago got knocked out, now repeat until 2016 how he "demeaned the office of the presidency" and its like the Repub talking point for the Clinton years all over again. Except I would bet that the Repubs cant even win in 2016 due to the demographics, how very sad.

DaGoat

Dalitso I see where you're coming from, but I don't agree this is necessarily Chicago's loss. Chicago was heavily split on whether they wanted to host the Olympics in the first place. Like most cities, Chicago has financial problems right now, ones that won't be solved by building sports facilities that will only be used for a couple of weeks. The big question was if the tourism from the Olympics would warrant the money spent, not only prior to the Games but also for continuing upkeep ad infinitum.

Add to that the always shady nature of Chicago politics and the potential for graft and cronyism, and the Olympics may not have been the panacea some think they would have been.

I think many Americans are looking at it that the US "lost" the Olympics, but not looking at the financial realities. The usual suspects are making this into a partisan topic, which really has no bearing on the discussion.

DaMav

Other than the humiliation, I think America dodged a bullet despite the best efforts of Obama to maneuver us into its path. It's an open question whether the IOC itself is more or less corrupt than the Chicago machine. And the track record of the Olympics event itself is that the whole public pays for it through taxes and government grants while only a few financially benefit. Just what we need, another big spending government project that runs over budget and sticks the taxpayers after its purveyors have exited the scene.

Are the 45% of Chicagoans who opposed the Olympics in the Chicago Tribune poll are all unpatriotic right wingers too? Were the Alderman calling for an audit of the multiBillion dollar budget from Daley for the games not supporting America because they undermined the bid -- how dare they ask questions?

This was not about America, it was about a corrupt machine seeking more public funds and support, and a President paying off a political debt. A President who ran down America before the IOC in his sales pitch is hardly in a position to play the patriotism card. Too many of us see through the flim-flam.

superdestroyer

Until there is major reform in the International Olympic Committee, there should be no Olympic games held in the U.S. The local community ends up losing billions, the selection committee is corrupt.

Unless a country is an authoritarian dictatorship willing to commit billions of dollar and take control of the entire country, there is no way to have a successful games. An Olympics in Chicago would have made Atlanta look like a well run Olympics.

GeorgeSorwell

Plenty of so-called conservatives would have found something to complain about in this no matter what the outcome.

Ric Locke

There are very few people on the Right who are either glad or sorry that the United States didn't "get the Games". What we are celebrating is yet another instance of a foreign policy based on ignorance, ideology, and the hubris of an extraordinarily self-centered con man getting slapped down. If you can't or won't figure that out and comment on that basis, you are either ... or deliberately trying to mislead.

Regards,
Ric

garyknowz1

“Are they not American?”

American? Where’ve you been? There are no Americans anymore. There are only Republicans and Democrats in a perennial civil war for supremacy over this nation now.

Other than that, I'm in agreement with you, Dalitso.

Pug

There are very few people on the Right who are either glad or sorry that the United States didn't "get the Games".

This would be called starting from a false premise. Of course there are plenty on the Right who are glad the United States didn't get the Olympic games in Chicago. That's what all the cheering is about. They don't like the president and they don't like Chicago and they don't like many other parts of the country, either.

That's what the Right has come to these days.

mlhradio

If this is not a classic example of Obama Derangement Syndrome, then I don't know what is. Seriously. I know that "ODS" is a term that is bandied about so much that it has lost meaning, but this is a perfect textbook example. This is very much like the morbid display that occurred on the left suffering from "BDS" when they practically cheered a record number of soldiers getting killed in Iraq as an example of Bush's failure - I see a similar sort of thought process going on here.

I am so ashamed that so many conservatives hate America so much that they are letting their political biases damage the entire nation. I don't know how they can live with themselves.

Leonidas

Gotta face it, Rio simply is a very attractive venue for the Olympics. How many folks here would rather visit Chicago than Rio?

superdestroyer

Fiscal conservatives should, for a policy point of view, always oppose the pursuit of the Olympics along with publicly financed stadiums, and other forms of race and corruption based pork.

Since the Chicago Olympics would have represented corruption on steriods and costs the tax payers billions, I can see why most conservatives would be against the pursuit of the Olympnics whether Obama was involved or not. it was just the idea that a bunch of corrupt Chicago politicians pursuing the Olympics because of all of the potential graft than was the real killer.

TheMagicalSkyFather

Is there anything that does not go back to race for you? I mean I have heard about the "race obsessed" my entire life like Sharpton for example who I have actually seen discuss things that do not involve race, you on the other hand work it into every debate. Do you split up food items and give them regional/racial nicknames to continue this joy at the dinner table as well or is the internet exclusively where you get to groove to your racial stylings?

DLS

"The bizarre coverage of 'Obama’s embarrassment'"

The only thing bizarre is (yet again) the bogus mischaracterization of normal reaction to this event, in which Obama shamelessly debased the Presidency, engaging not only in more silly appealing-to-the-childish-and-stupid perpetual post-election campaigning, but in actual lobbying. (And cheap celebrity)

DLS

"It's an open question whether the IOC itself is more or less corrupt than the Chicago machine."

Chicago machine -- a municipal government sewer.

As for Rio de Janeiro and also importantly here, Brasil, it's interesting not only insofar as it involves the nation along with Indonesia most logically suited to join the Olympic club next, as well as being a more famous world-class city than Chicago (a regional capital in the USA, arguably less important for years now than Atlanta is, and certainly less than Los Angeles for decades not years). We have in "Lula" another lefty leader of note currently, and insofar as the corruption of the Olympic Committee goes, when I heard Rio de Janeiro was a candidate, I had to think back to, ahem, "Volkswagen executives" and go fast forward to today and wonder who accompanied "Lula" (as in "skimpy attire").

DLS

"Since the Chicago Olympics would have represented corruption on steriods and costs the tax payers billions"

No wonder the Usual Suspects wanted it so much, while it was a divisive thing in Chicago, notably among those who would have to live with the resulting events and their consequences(!). I still say it is not just Blue Nation trying to recapture years-lost glory, but corrupt interests that may have been involved (property interests that stood to make a big payoff if tax dollars improved the properties both before and after the Olympics, selling cheap land at a profit later, or being able to raise rents in revived slums, etc.). All that was missing in the Chicago 2016 appeal (joined by Obama possibly at the cost of failure of health care "reform" by lib Dems in Congress) was Blagojevich going there to say that the Olympic officials as well as Chicago insiders would enjoy a "fuckin' golden" opportunity.

TheMagicalSkyFather

But the childish reaction by the kiddies on the right cheering a loss of jobs in the midwest is perfectly fine by you since it is coming from the childish side you like. Sorry DLS I have decided from now on when replying to you to be just as demeaning and insulting as you are since being nice seems to have done nothing and at least this way I get to make myself laugh.

Debased I thought the new talking point was demeaned not debased? We will need to get it straight if we want to start a meme to rival Clinton's dis-honoring of the presidency line, looking back at that after 8 yrs of Repub rule always makes me laugh about Clinton "dis-honoring" anything in comparison.

mlhradio

Best comment I saw on another blog:

"No matter how much the right loves their country, they hate Obama even more."

Country First...indeed.

DLS

The cheering was not limited to political operatives, obviously, but included people in Chicago, notably traders. As to if the truth is harsh sometimes, it wasn't my decision to have Obama debase himself and the Presidency (and deal another setback to the existing poor state of affairs the lib Dems have engineered themselves with health care "reform"). The truth is the truth, even if some can't (or won't) face it or the related cynicism it spawns.

StockBoySF

DaMav, "Obama demeaned the office and embarrassed the whole country.... What next, the President showing up at Miss Universe contests to lobby for Miss USA?"

So I suppose you were online posting your disappointment with Bush for going to Beijing last year to support and cheer on the American athletes. At least Obama was trying to bring the world's most prestigious athletic event to the US (which is good for America overall) and create jobs. All Bush did was spend all those days in China being the cheerleader he was, like he was in college.

As far as embarrassing the whole country... why? I'm proud that Obama put himself out there to go for bat for the US. A vote was taken and unfortunately we lost. But that happens sometimes, especially in a democracy. It's not the end of the world.

One of the criticisms about Obama by the conservatives has been that the whole world is enamored with him. This proves that the whole world is not enamored with him. Prior to going to Denmark, people said Obama must have been told that Chicago was the choice, and that Obama just wanted to take the credit for bringing the Olympics to the US. Well... this proves them wrong, too. Why can't these people understand that there are other people in this world who do love their country and are willing to put themselves at political risk by trying to bring international attention and fame to the US?

StockBoySF

DaMav, "A President who ran down America before the IOC in his sales pitch..."

So what exactly did Obama say in his sales pitch in which he "ran down America"?

DLS

"Chicago was heavily split on whether they wanted to host the Olympics in the first place."

Interestingly, not all of Detroit was lockstep-stuck in the 1950s and 1960s "Fortress Detroit" bubble, either. Many, many people here in Detroit metro rightly did not, repeat not, want a bailout of the local auto makers (and the UAW) and were quite vocal on the radio about this, and many were wary from the start, as astute people everywhere were, about the federal takeover of GM and Chrysler and the problems of political manipulation of the companies and environmentalist silliness ruining the future of these companies, for example. I'm not surprised that many Chicago people were wary of the Olympics and related problems like road construction and political corruption.

superdestroyer

If you are really interested in jobs, then raising taxes and condemning proporty in order to build sports arenas is the last thing you want to do. Hosting Olympnics create few long term jobs and actually most business that are not near the venues since everyone not involved leaves town and the visitors do not venture far from the venues.

If you are interested in creating long term, private sector jobs, then the way that Chicago is run is not the way to do it.

Also, virtually every government program in Chicago involves racial set asides. The black power structure in Chicago, represented by Valerie Jarret, were eager to get their hands on as much government and private sector set asides as possible.

DLS

"So I suppose you were online posting your disappointment with Bush for going to Beijing last year to support and cheer on the American athletes. At least Obama was trying to bring the world's most prestigious athletic event to the US (which is good for America overall) and create jobs. All Bush did was spend all those days in China being the cheerleader he was, like he was in college"

Don't you understand that this is indeed the difference between making an ordinary appearance (as Bush did) and the shameless lobbying (in addition to more post-election "campaign" degeneracy) that Obama has engaged in? The election was last November! Not everyone is so childish or stupid as to be susceptible to propaganda or continued campaigning, like a leftist dictator exploiting a personality cult (which Obama still has among some) and speaking on behalf of a never-ending perpetual revolution (years or decades after the actual revolution, itself), as in Cuba or Venezuela, to name two worse examples of this. We have Chicago-area-based Senate seat-selling and seat-buying attempts, and now, in addition to sickening continued Campaigns for pet lib-Dem controversial causes, lobbying outright on behalf of Chicago to try to get the Olympic Games. (That it was an appearance in Copenhagen prior to the "climate change" meeting later this year loses Obama and his office more respect if it was meant to look good prior to this politics-disguised-as-"science" nonsense to come.)

DLS

"the Chicago Olympics would have represented corruption on steriods and costs the tax payers billions"

Note that in the news today is a repetition of the concerns many people have with the biggest bridge project in people's minds for the past several decades, the Messina Strait crossing. In addition to some bizarre environmentalist objections (typical toward anything representing true progress, as a rule) there is widespread concern that a giant public works project for a Messina bridge would be a huge gift to the Mob.

It made the news today because among other things, problems involving the Mob and public works involve shoddy construction, which has been exposed during mud slides currently:

http://www.euronews.net/2009/10/03/anger-grows-...

http://www.ansa.it/site/notizie/awnplus/english...

Silhouette

Olympics, sports, Letterman, Don't Ask Don't Tell, Texas executions...all these subjects have one thread in common, to whip up the right or left elements of this website into different directions other than the Public Option and our crappy world standing courtesy of Cheneyco.

They serve the purpose well..

StockBoySF

DLS: "Don't you understand that this is indeed the difference between making an ordinary appearance (as Bush did) and the shameless lobbying (in addition to more post-election "campaign" degeneracy) that Obama has engaged in?"

I didn't realize that the president, in trying to raise America's image in the eyes of the world to host such a prestigious event was engaged in "shameless lobbying".

If I were president I would do everything I could to create jobs, raise the image of America abroad (as long as it didn't present a threat to national security) and protect America. If some people saw it as shameless lobbying, then so be it. At least it's for the good of America. And Obama took a political risk in going to Denmark to root for America.

Could you imagine what the Republicans would be saying of Chicago HAD been selected? They would be saying that Obama knew all along that Chicago would be selected and that he just wanted the credit.

But Obama was willing to put himself out there for this event, with no inside track of what the outcome would be. That takes more balls then most politicians have these days.... politicians who would rather do something safe to be popular than take risks which have the potential for huge payoffs.

DLS

"If you are interested in creating long term, private sector jobs, then the way that Chicago is run is not the way to do it. "

Or the way Michigan is run, for that matter. [scowl]

* * *

"I didn't realize that the president, in trying to raise America's image in the eyes of the world to host such a prestigious event was engaged in 'shameless lobbying'."

Who says he was trying to raise the US's image? It's commonplace understanding he was acting specifically on behalf of Chicago. There was no raising of the US's image here, and certainly the opposite was done insofar as the reputation of the Presidency, and of the President, with his lobbying.

"Could you imagine what the Republicans would be saying of Chicago HAD been selected?"

It's what all but die-hard Obamaniacs and lockstep Dems would be saying: this was on behalf of Chicago, and there would be open speculation on who would benefit illegitimately from having the one-shot money infusion (and real estate development) the Olympics would bring to Chicago and Chicago insiders. Slums owned by favored people or syndicates, upgraded or replaced as Olympic Villages? Businesses benefiting? (All revenues and expenses reported? False reporting is a staple there.) Etc.

Almoderate

"Chicago machine -- a municipal government sewer."

Spoken by someone who has obviously never been to Jefferson County, Alabama. Chicago just gets more press.

Jefferson County makes Chicago look like the promised land of honest politicians. And don't get me started on Montgomery.

shannonlee

Snore....

Conservatives using any excuse to attack the President. This thread is a perfect example of exactly why Republicans are polling so poorly. America is getting sick of your childish attacks. Is this really all you have to offer?

Father_Time

Why do Republicans hate America?

DLS

Actually, I've been to Montgomery before, a number of times. (That's pronounced "M'g'm'r'")

T-Steel

You are WAY off-base DLS. Yes, there are corruption problems in Chicago (many big cities have corruption problems). But to turn this into a "Presidency demeaned and/or debased" is just political opportunism and piling on. ANY and I mean ANY USA president that wants to stump for his/her country for the Olympics (an international event) is WELL within their rights. I can only assume that the ONLY reason President Obama "brought down" the office is because America went "somewhere" and was told... NO! So Obama has debased the presidency because he has to pitch for an international event that America is supposedly too good for. News flash, America is a just another country (albeit a powerful one) in the grand scheme of things. A country that can't win all the time. You, DaMav and some others are acting awfully immature about this.

Regardless of the American city, nothing demeaning or disrespecting for a country's leader stumping for said country for a very large international event. But hey, the Left blasted President Bush for many things (no matter how harmless). Eye for eye, right?

Babies....

KNicoll

"Soccer" is from a shortening of "Association Football". Apparently it got written down in little schedules as "Assoc." and got expanded out from there.

(In case anyone really cares.)

KNicoll

"Soccer" is from an abbreviation for "Association football". The UK abbreviated "football" and the US said "It says 'Assoc.' in the time spreadsheet."

Father_Time

I think its pretty clear that the Republican party cannot creat anything, much less long term quality jobs....of ANY sector.

ROTFL

Father_Time

That’s NOT corruption!

In America we call that Business!

TheMagicalSkyFather

To create long term jobs you need start up capital. Short term jobs offer a way for some that save and invest what they make to have some start up capital during a recession. Yes it will need to be paid for and that will hurt but the money coming in from tourisim alone into an area that will keep it in their local economy is much needed in the midwest at this time. Also how exactly do you get private sector job creation without jobs AND when banks are not giving out loans? Thats right you dont which is what situation we are currently stuck in. This could have been a good thing at an opportune time is all I am saying, any other year I would not have cared but the jobs were needed and short term jobs are better than none.

On the race thing that is a valid reason to inject it into this debate I suppose but keep in mind that Sharpton and his type always have valid reasons as well. They are very rational and well thought out and barely hanging on by their fingernails to the fringe of the debate until they can be brought up by the "race obsessed." I am merely noting that the reverse is just as off putting and just as valid/invalid and of course race obsessed. It even stems from the same outlook on the world one sees racism everywhere and feels marginalized because of it and therefore must speak out and the other side sees reverse racism everywhere and feels marginalized because of it and therefore must speak out. They are both morally equivalent and though I regularly agree with the validity of their rationalization of why they inject race into everything it still does not take away my belief that they are at least a bit race obsessed and therefore ignored. So yea I am saying thats kool and a good argument but if you are ever looking for Al Sharpton while you inject this everywhere(I have seen it in more of your comments than not though I may have missed a good deal of your posts due to the articles that I read) you need only look in the mirror.

GreenDreams

So the US will not host the games again. Big deal. At least we won't "debase" ourselves for even trying. Way to go, wingnuts. The only sport you're good at is "political football."

kritt11

The organizers of the DNC should use the footage of these conservatives cheering the loss of the Olympic bid at Americans for Prosperity during the 2010 campaign to show how many in the GOP have chosen to put party first, country second.

DaMav

@StockBoySF

Here you go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wbW5bIzAWU

Juan Williams characterized the clip by saying Obama "seemed to take a shot at the US ... while overseas".

Perhaps Williams is just one of those far right radical America-haters from that hotbed of conservatives at NPR?

superdestroyer

Why shouldn't conservative cheer the idea of Chicago, one of the most liberal cities and most corrupt in the United States, not getting billions of dollars of tax payer dollars in order to line their pockets and create mischief. Why would any conservative support any program that is more interestedin making sure that blacks get their share of the spoils instead of delivery good value.

Any cost-benefit analysis study will show that the Olympics are not worth it. I thought that progressives were claiming to be the reality based community, yet today they are telling me that using tax dollars to build sports arenas is good value when every study says the opposite. I guess that bucket just keeps getting heavier.

ReaganiteRepublican

What a shame the racketeering scum of the Chicago Machine won’t have this windfall to milk, LOL

And aren’t things going great since Valerie Jarret has been running the country?

http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com

Silhouette

The question is, what does this have to do with the Public Option? ..lol..

Let's focus on the lost olypmic bid! DADT! Letterman! Anything but that...

garyknowz1

“We have Chicago-area-based Senate seat-selling and seat-buying attempts…”

DLS, have you not studied Brazilian politics? Look up former Chamber of Deputies member J. Alves of the infamous “budget mafia” or Deputy Roberto Jefferson’s bribery case. Due to the electoral system in Brazil, the inner echelons of the Brazilian federal Congress make Chicago look relatively honest.

So if you are going to argue that the IOC correctly decided on ground of corrupt Chicago politics, you might want to broaden your scope a tad.

Polimom

Wow. We're talking about an elite sporting event, right? As in... sports. Athletics. Young people. The "international games". Comraderie. Good sportsmanship. Friendly rivalries.

Etc. ad nauseum.

From where I sit, it's just as well the games aren't coming to Chicago... or anywhere else in the country in the near future. We clearly don't have the right frame of mind to host such an event anyway.

Truly pathetic.

shannonlee

"Why would any conservative support any program that is more interestedin making sure that blacks get their share of the spoils instead of delivery good value."

I didn't know your wrestling mask was really a klan hood.

First, what is wrong with blacks getting their share of the spoils?
Second, why are blacks incapable of delivering good value? Which race of people do you believe delivers good value and is that what gives them higher value than other races?

I think you really exposed yourself with that statement.

garyknowz1

Not only that, but the logic he uses is faulty. The summer Olympic are almost always held in major urban areas where the infrastructure is already built up (major airports, security venues, mass transit, etc…). Thus, it makes logistic and economic sense to hold them there. However, urban areas also happen to be the place where historically minorities tend to congregate. Ergo, if the games incidentally disproportionately help minorities, it isn’t due to some spoils system. It simply makes the most sense.

superdestroyer

Olympic committees in the U.S. have minority set aside contracting requirements just like other wasteful city contract. Chicago is an extreme example that even things like Ohare airport concessions are handed out of the basis of race. Why would any conservative be interested in supporting an Olympic bid that seemed designed to maximize the amount of pork spending and race based contracting.

And no, cities usually do not have enough stadiums. Soldier field would probably not work as an Olympic stadium. However, there are arenas for basketball, gymnastics. etc. A swimming venue would have had to been built and probably everything that does with bicycling. Of course, the infrastructure, the security systems, etc would have to built with the accompanying minority set aside contract.

shannonlee, I take it that you have never worked with minority set aside contractors. They get to charge above market rates and usually subcontract all of the real work to non-minority companies. Minority contracts and especially the type used in Chicago is pure rent seeking. So, by definition, it is not a good value.

garyknowz1

“And no, cities usually do not have enough stadiums.”

It’s not a matter of “enough”. It’s a matter of degree. Urban areas have vastly more resources and infrastructure to cater to such large events than do non-urban areas. Of course some venues would have to be constructed, but necessities such as a large nearby international airport, mass transit, large-scale accommodations for athletes and dignitaries, etc… already exist, and many of the large existing sports venues could be retrofitted for other uses.

I too am not in favor of contract quotas per se---so here we agree. But with or without such quotas, the games would still disproportionately help minorities in ANY urban area simply due to the fact that they comprise a high percentage of the population and have a higher than average rate of unemployment. Even open-bid contracts would disproportionately help minorities. I see that as a product of circumstance, not social welfare.

Anyhow, I just think it is irrational to argue that conservatives should not support Chicago or other “dens of liberalism” (otherwise known as metropolitan America) hosting the summer Olympics. They are the only places capable of doing so without requiring a massive infrastructural buildup. Fight against contract quotas if you wish, but to reject the games altogether based on them is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

JeffersonDavis

First, the word "soccer" is a completely British-coined term. It is an abbreviation of "Association Football):

From www.wordorigins.com:
The Football Association was formed in London in October 1863 when representatives of eleven clubs and schools met in an attempt to standardize the rules of the game. One of the rules prohibited the carrying of the ball, a rule that would lead to the Rugby-oriented clubs leaving the Association several months later. The name “Association Football” was coined to distinguish it from Rugby.
By 1889, the abbreviation socca’ was in use, and the spelling soccer had made its appearance by 1895.

As far as anyone cheering the failure of an American city's bid for the Olympics, it is shameful.
Of course, the reference given comes from that gem of anti-spin, The Huffington Post (sarcasm intended), so it's hardly representative of true conservatives. For the partisans, however, it was a joyful time apparently. If they don't "slow their roll", their gonna screw up a golden opportunity next year to regain seats in Congress.

I for, one, am saddened that Chicago did not get the games.

JeffersonDavis

Wait a second, Green.....
Political Football is really fun.....especially when the other team fumbles!

LOL
:)

Or should I say, "Politcal SOCCER"?

blog comments powered by Disqus