LOL

Or should I say, “Politcal SOCCER”?

From http://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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com

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.

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?

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.

In America we call that Business!

ROTFL

(In case anyone really cares.)

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….