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

« Read All About it! Michael Vick Hero in Eagles First NFL Game

Penny Wise, Pound Foolish »

Conservatives are the real losers in the Olympics race

Posted by JAZZ SHAW, Assistant Editor in Politics, Society.
Oct 3rd, 2009 | Comments

I’m going to have to take exception with the premise put forth by my colleague, Dalitso Njolinjo, who earlier opined here that the losers in the recent Olympics bidding kerfuffle were Chicago, Obama and America. It was an interesting analysis and sparked a spirited and useful discussion in our comments section, but it simply doesn’t ring true for me. The real losers in this battle, if there are any to be found, are among some of my conservative brethren around the web. In particular I would point to Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard, among others.

To be sure, there were plenty of valid arguments against having the Olympics in Chicago, and those of you scoffing at them should take a good look in the mirror. Public support (crucial to such an endeavor) was luke warm in the Windy City at best. There were also very valid concerns about Olympic funds being channeled into the pockets of corrupt, bad actors, and Chicago is a poster child for such activities. (Though, truth be told, as a New York native, I could take exception to their claim to the title.) Above and beyond all that, though, is the fact that cities which host Summer Olympics events generally wind up far in the hole financially. Yes, many jobs are created initially (along with traffic congestion and related headaches) but it winds up being a sugar rush, providing short term stimulus while leaving a big debt in its wake.

(Please note that I specify the summer Olympics here. Winter Olympics tend to run a bit less to finance and leave behind a ski resort, such as is found in Lake Placid, New York, which dwarf their mountain competitors and actually make money.)

No, the real losers here are opponents of the Obama administration who got caught doing an end-zone celebratory dance as soon as the news came down that Chicago had been eliminated. It’s nobody’s business but Chicago’s in the end, and even if it might not have been a good idea, they still came off as rooting against America. You may be used to rooting against President Obama, no matter what he does, but this was a flat out bone headed maneuver. There simply is no way to paint any good lipstick on that pig. When you cheered for the loss, you cheered against America. End of story.

This is political blundering at its worst, and the conservatives who took part in it all have a big helping of egg on their faces today.

  • This was a no win for Obama. If he had not gone they would have been saying Chicago lost out because he didn't go.
  • shannonlee
    Sadly, Reps tend to do this on a daily basis. It appears that their only purpose in government is to tear down the President. I'm tired of it, tired of the party. As someone that voted Rep a little over 50% of the time, voted for McCain and Arnie...I find myself completely turned off by the party. They've become an embarrassment, sickening, borderline disturbing.
  • TheMagicalSkyFather
    Great post Jazz, personally I am one that liked the idea due to jobs. I know they are short term but to be honest I think our recession will not outlast the jobs it would have created which would have given a boost when needed though you are correct it would have created a sink hole of debt to make up for as well.

    I have been a little more than irritated by the "he demeaned or damaged the office of the presidency and the US as a whole" meme since it is basically saying if you cant win dont try. Sorry that is a losers statement, if you do not try you always lose. I will not fault someone for trying and failing but I do fault those that do not try, in fact I think it was Reagan's voice that beat this into my head in my grade school years though I could be mistaken since many of his believers seem to feel differently. Either way good post and again thank you and many others here for restoring my faith in Repub's/Conservatives by showing me that not all are suffering from ODS and actually have valid reasons against it. The debt and to a point even corruption are understandable, demeaning or debasing the office yea for those people they are just suffering from ODS I suppose. Also if this would have been Bush I would hope he would have tried as well for the same reason, we are in a recession and we need bandaid jobs. Real jobs would be better but bandaid jobs are better than nothing and may just get us some start up capital for a few small businesses and the local economy from funds (mostly speaking of the tourists here) coming from all over the world.
  • DaGoat
    This was a no win for Obama.

    I think this is true. Even now people are saying he should have spent more time in Copenhagen, of course if he had he would have been criticized for taking time away from more important matters.
  • Leebot
    Good post Jazz, I agree with you entirely. I lived in Denver during the time that city was considering a bid to be an Olympics host site; there was spirited and reasonable debate from the public so I know what legitimate "issue" debate looks like. What I'm seeing from these conservatives now is a mean-spirited and juvenile begrudging attitude, a gleeful rush to equate the IOC decision as a referendum on the president they love to hate. What is this -- high school? Are these the same people who scream at their kid's Little League coaches when something doesn't go their way? And -- big surprise -- this churlish response to the IOC selection completely upstages media coverage of the latest potentially encouraging developments with Iran talks.

    What they could not accomplish at the ballot box, the conservatives seek to redress in the court of public opinion. But becoming the party of Neener-Neener, as symbolized by John Boehner's perpetual sour puss, or the verbal underarm-flatulence of Beavis and Butthead (Beck/Limbaugh), the conservatives increasingly alienate those who are looking for some grown-ups to represent them.
  • Good post Jazz. Leebot, I too was in Denver when we derailed the Olympic games here. I doubt we'll ever get another chance. Ironically, our investment in upgrading our sports facilities happened anyway, happened at our expense anyway. We just lost the prestige, the exposure and the ability for our own citizens to be host to the world's elite athletes.

    Olympic athletes themselves say one of the greatest lessons they learn from Olympic competition is "the value of teamwork." Now they see that "team America" is not behind them. We're playing political football with the games.

    I hope we never try again and never host the games again. Let countries that truly want this prestigious event have it.
  • Leonidas
    Rio vs Chicago, anyone who chose Chicago should get their head examined. I don't think Chicago ever had much chance and I think Obama was dumb to go, but I can't fault him for trying if he thought there was a chance. At least he got to speak with some military folk on the trip.

    As for losers...only one stands out, Ed Schultz http://newsbusters.org/blogs/jeff-poor/2009/10/...

    Hanoi Jane? come on....
  • Great post.It really doesn't matter what President Obama does -- nothing will please certain commentators or bloggers. It's always negative and always a turn off. I think that video of the conservatives in Virginia cheering when they heard the news should be used generously by the DNC for next years election. And maybe lots of footage of Bill Bennett from CNN -- another face of the bitter conservatives who already know the President can't do anything right.
  • DaMav
    The Chicago Tribune did a poll last month and found an even split among Chicagoans whether they wanted the Olympics there or opposed it. It had a budget in the Billions, much of which would have spilled into the pockets of the Daley machine and its cronies. And Federal, State, and local taxes would have picked up a major chunk of that, to say nothing of budget overruns. Several Chicago aldermen were calling for an audit of the budget because they didn't trust the numbers.

    The other big source of funds of course is the organizers (i.e. Daley Machine) running around shaking down private businesses for their "contribution" -- a means of grabbing private sector money without having to raise taxes.

    This is a victory for people opposed to big government boondoggles. What's the downside for conservatives expressing their enthusiasm for that? If it had been of Bush's hare brained Big Government projects that got shot down, many conservatives would still have been cheering -- but they would have been drowned out by the wild celebrations on the left.
  • superdestroyer
    There is no prestige from hosting the Olympics. Does anyone think that having an incompetently run Olympics help Atlanta at all given the higher taxes, the fraud, the waste, and the legacy of wasted facilities. Atlanta is still paying off the costs. And since then the security requirements have gotten much worse.

    The U.S. should give up on the idea of ever hosting the Olympics again. Leave it to the corrupt third world and dictatorships of the world who do not care what hardships are created from hosting the event.
  • tagimaucia
    You can make a strong case that the Olympics are ultimately a net negative to a city that hosts them and that Chicago is better off with the 2016 games, but to pretend with a straight face that all the celebration in the right-wingosphere on Friday was because of that or generalized opposition to "big government" or corruption is laughably dishonest. It was raw partisan fervor and joy at something that they thought might nick Obama politically, period. And pretty silly, because a week from today, the focus will be 100% on health care, Iran, Afghanistan and the economy again, and no one will remember or care.
  • tagimaucia
    On another note, is it possible that the media simply has no idea what they're talking about when they declare that so-and-so is the favorite, and are just indulging in idle speculation? Every example I can actually remember went against the media predictions. Paris was heavily favored over London and lost. I lived in Atlanta in the late 80s and when they were awarded the games everyone was shocked-- even in the local media, no one thought they had a shot until it actually happened.
  • mlhradio
    One very important thing I should point out is that nearly all of the hatred, seething and anti-American fervor on display after America lost the Olympic bid is coming from the non-elected republican *commentators*, and not from the elected officials. Folks like Be(c)k, Limbaugh and Drudge, not folks like Boehner, Cantor or Pence. There was some whining from them before he left, but I haven't heard anything out of the elected leadership on the issue after. (Feel free to correct me, anyone).

    Glad to see that, in large part, the elected republicans are smart enough not to joint in the anti-American fervor.
  • superdestroyer
    If President Bush had been making the trip four years ago to help Houston get the Olympics and would have failed, my guess is that every progressive blogger would have celebrated the failure. The difference is that conservatives were not shown trying to get such a pork laden event. Just look at how Salt Lake City was treated by the left in 2002.

    Also, look at the green house gas emissions spent on travelling to Europe to make the pitch. Progressives want everyone to live in highrise inner city apartments and ride a bicycle to work while Oprah takes a private jet anytime she wants.

    If progressives were consistent, they would have been leading the opposition to the Olympics.
  • garyknowz1
    True, but silence is tacit approval, especially when these radio personalities claim to speak for the popular base of the party. Luckily there are some Republican leaders out there usually willing to denounce the claptrap from these folk like Sen. Graham and Sen. McCain.

    Oh, where is the party I belonged to years ago? Come back, please!
  • We have just made it abundantly clear to the IOC that the Olympics are a hotly debated political football in America subject to sniping and attacks and probably demonstrations and teabagger style rabblerousing. Kiss those games goodbye forever.
  • JSpencer
    Yeah, I don't think most people really care that much about whether we host the Olympics at this point. It's almost more trouble than it's worth. Maybe some day in the future after we get our act back together again. (see how optimistic that was? ;-) Anyway, as has been observed, the only real losers in this Olympics bizz were (once again) the GOP when their wingnut contingent decided to act out again. Kind of amusing... in a sadly predictable way.
  • super, you and I both know that this 'what if' type of argument is nonsense. And Houston didn't get as far as Chicago did, so that makes it double nonsense.

    As far as that tired old argument about progressives and the whole climate change thing, dude. It is tired. Your bringing it up shows weakness.
  • imavettoo
    Salt Lake was rife with bribes & everything the LDS could bring. Bad example dude.
  • Pug
    If President Bush had been making the trip four years ago to help Houston get the Olympics and would have failed, my guess...

    I suppose you are entitled to your guess.

    The right wing nut who set off a bomb in Atlanta didn't exactly help to make that Olympics a huge success for America, either. I'm pretty sure the IOC hasn't forgotten that when they held the Olympics here there was a terrorist attack.
  • JeffersonDavis
    I personally like Chicago. The food is awesome, the people are friendly, and there's a lot to do.
    But it's no secret that the crime rate is extremely high and the government is corrupt. I'm certain that both were involved in the IOC decision. I'm glad President Obama tried to get them in Chicago. He tried. If he hadn't, the partisan right would have complained as well. It indeed, was a no win situation.

    I guess now the liberals now feel the way conservatives felt when the left attacked Bush even when he did something right. The swamp is full on both sides, isn't it?
  • If President Bush had been lobbying for Houston, it wouldn't have made sense -- since Houston's not his hometown.

    Related to that -- Houston in the summer is about as miserable as it gets. Even if it had been his father lobbying for Houston (since he does actually live in Houston), it would have been a dumb idea.

    He'd have been hassled badly for it on those grounds alone.

    And c'mon SD... greenhouse gases arguments about the Olympics? Do you not see how ridiculous it sounds?
  • JeffersonDavis
    I love your comments, Polimom. You strike me as a well thought, intelligent woman.

    But in all fairness.....
    Chicago isn't Barack Obama's hometown either. He was born in Hawaii, and move around from there.

    Bush lived outside of Houston, but he claimed it as his hometown, like Obama did with Chicago. He even owned the Texas Rangers at one point.
  • JeffersonDavis -- Bush has lived most of his life outside of Dallas, not Houston. In fact, the Rangers are based in Arlington. (Houston has the Astros). Bush returned to Dallas to live as well.

    Barack Obama spent most of his adult life in Chicago, and his childhood elsewhere. If childhood is what counts, then Bush also lived in many places: Connecticut, Midland (TX), California, and Houston. But as soon as he was an adult, Bush moved back to Midland.

    This reminds me of the New York City conversations I've had with people. When people say "New York", first thoughts tend to be of only one city. Same, evidently, is true of Texas.

    Editing to add: If the opportunity had come up during his presidency, I'd have been totally unsurprised to see George W. heading off to make his case for Dallas as an Olympic site.
  • Well just chalk up another one for the Republicans. How do you guys think athletes and those who love to watch the games feel about the GOP shooting our athletes in the foot, so to speak. "Team America" is not on their side. It would rather play politics with the games they feel so strongly about.

    Athletes, sports lovers? Remember at election time who cares about you and your games, and WHO DOESN'T! Republicans don't EVER want you to have "home field advantage."
  • kritt11
    When it comes to the Olympics we should really be above the red state, blue state thing. I mean when the Summer Olympics were in Atlanta--- I never stopped to think that Georgia was a solid red Southern state. I enjoyed the gymnastics and the diving regardless.

    The US athletes are from all over---red AND blue states and deserve better than this petty politicking. Obama campaigned as an American and has brought in D's and R's into his administration. He knows that politics poisoned the Bush administration-- which even Laura Bush now admits.
  • superdestroyer
    Kritt,

    do you think that Obama would have gone to Denmark is Houston had been the North American finalist instead of Chicago. Since Michelle Obama and Valerie Jarret do not give a rat's ass about Houston, my guess is that President Obama would have wasted a minute on the topic. President Obama cared about the Olympnics because it was his adopted hometown and all of his black friends would have made millions of the pork, corruption, and set asides. Until the U.S. gets rid of minority set asides, then every action of a black politician must been seen through a political lens.
  • kritt11
    SD

    I'm sure he felt the pressure from local pols who had helped him throughout
    his career, and responded to that, but that is just the nature of politics.

    I just think we need to support the Olympics and our athletes no matter
    where they are held. Cheering because we lost our bid is about as
    unamerican as you can get.
    BTW- some white people might have benefited too.
  • superdestroyer
    Kritt,

    If conservatives are going to set a new direction, then having the government get out of the business of building sports arenas and other private sector ventures is a good start. Opposing a tax payer supported Olympics ina corruption crony-capitalism deep blue city makes complete sense. Not giving a group of very liberal black Democrats control of billions in tax payer dollars in consistent with real conservative politics. Having President Obama put in own credibility on the line was just the icing on the cake for conservatives.

    Also, if the U.S. really wants to lower green house gas emissions, the eliminating large sporting events would be a good start. The fuel use of having tens of thousand of people driving to events is a huge energy waster and creates a huge amount of carbon emissions. (just like flying to europe and back on multiple plans does).
  • JeffersonDavis
    You are correct on all counts. I was tired when I wrote that. My main point was that he could have represented "Texas" for the games. And truth be told, any president should make the case for any city in America. I had no problem with Obama going to Copenhagen. I'd have no problem with Bill Clinton going, Bush going, etc...

    I would venture to say that Chicago is Barack Obama's politcal hometown, since all of his adult life there was in the political arena, or within community organizing, or both. Same could be said of George Bush.
  • JeffersonDavis
    "Remember at election time who cares about you and your games...."

    They should remember the PARTISANS who wished this to fail, not the entire GOP party. They should also remember the Democrats that rubber stamp Pelosi and Reid politics against their constituents' wishes. And trust me, we blue-dogs will remember.
  • Uh huh. I know that, JD, but it doesn't matter. Olympic athletes know who cheered "Chicago fails !!!" Republicans -- not Democrats -- did. And they did ( I know. Not all of them.) because they want Obama to fail so much that it's ok if it means America failing. It is, to a team player, a clear pronouncement by the right that they are not on the side of "Team America." They'd rather our Olympic team fails than for Obama to be seen as having succeeded at something. (And before I get a bunch of denials for that statement, home court advantage is very real and athletes know it. The loudspeakers of the GOP don't want them to have that advantage because "Chicago is corrupt" or "it costs too much" or "Obama should stay at his desk").
  • JeffersonDavis
    Green,

    As usual, you and I are saying the same things but from different sides of the room.
    Those GOP scumbags that cheered the failure should not be reelected. They are partisan morons who don't deserve to serve the American people. There are just as many partisan morons in the Democratic party as well. I just wish you'd call them out too.

    The statement you made was a partisan generalization of an entire party, based upon the actions of a few jackasses. That's what I was pointing out.

    You and I agree on everything you said, other than the partisan portions.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC