home

Rio Wins Olympic Bid, Chicago Eliminated In First Round Voting

By Jeralyn, Section Off Topic
Posted on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:50:00 AM EST
Tags: Olympics (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Update: 10:49 MT: Rio takes it.

Watch announcement live here.

The 2016 Olympics will not be taking place in Chicago. The city has been eliminated from consideration in the first round of voting. President Obama was flying back to the U.S. when the vote took place.

Chicago spent $50 million on the failed bid. The delegation was led by Michelle Obama and Oprah Winfrey, with a personal visit by President Obama. Did our over-strict airport policies play a role in the rejection?[More...]

In the official question-and-answer session following the Chicago presentation, Syed Shahid Ali, an I.O.C. member from Pakistan, asked the toughest question. He wondered how smooth it would be for foreigners to enter the United States for the Games because doing so can sometimes, he said, be “a rather harrowing experience.”

Tokyo was eliminated in the second round. The finalists: Madrid and Rio de Janeiro. The winner will be announced this afternoon.

I'm not sorry Chicago won't be hosting the games. I can think of a lot more enticing American cities. I've been to both Madrid and Rio and think both would be excellent choices. We'll know soon which it will be.

< Friday News And Open Thread | Wyden Plan Not Considered By SFC, Neither Was Medicare For All >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Rio Wins Olympic Bid, Chicago Eliminated In First Round Voting | 164 comments (164 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    flying in and out of the usa (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by pukemoana on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:27:02 AM EST
    is a pain in the a$$--long queues, surly officials, broken luggage-moving equipment and general chaos.  There've been so many complaints from New Zealanders and Australians, who used to have an obligatory US stopover when flying between the Southern hemisphere and Canada/Europe, that Air NZ and Quantas now give us the option of stopping in Vancouver instead (and you don't have to leave the plane . . .).  I'm heading home in Dec with 3 young kids and you can be sure we're not flying via the US

    Gotta agree with this. (none / 0) (#17)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:45:55 AM EST
    Even 20 years ago, when I went to Australia and New Zealand, the officials down under were smiling and happy.

    I can't think of one return to the US, from anywhere, where the agents checking my passport, etc., made me feel welcome.

    That said, the officials in many other countries were also pretty surly, so I'm not sure it's entirely a US issue.

    Not that that means it's OK for ours to be surly...

    [ Parent ]

    My Customs experience... (none / 0) (#26)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:55:19 AM EST
    ...has been much different.  Long lines?  Sure, to be expected.  General choas?  Nope.  Surly agents?  Not nearly as bad as some of the TSA agents I've come across.  

    I've always been welcomed home in a pleasant manner.  Even though there is someone else with my name (or close to it) that triggers a little extra scrutiny.  

    Maybe I'm just lucky or perhaps they can just sense that I'm a fellow Government employee, but my experiences coming back to the US have been no better or worse than going through Customs anywhere.

    [ Parent ]

    Remind me to tell you (not) about (none / 0) (#37)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:07:04 PM EST
    the professional courtesy extended to me once by a customs person at JFK.  Quite a humorous exchange.  

    [ Parent ]
    Well, if it is going to... (none / 0) (#39)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:10:25 PM EST
    ...make me LOL, of course I want to hear about it.  

    So, consider yourself reminded...

    [ Parent ]

    Can't do it after yesterday's Facebook/ (none / 0) (#45)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:15:47 PM EST
    e mail thingee.  Suffice it to say it was about an old Turkish carpet.  And for whom I worked and specific questions about what my job entailed.

    [ Parent ]
    I always worry... (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:30:59 PM EST
    ...they're going to bust me on my Customs declerations.  I always forget to declare something (what fun is traveling if you don't buy stuff!) or I have something that I'm not sure if I have to declare and/or is illegal (like that jar of real Polish dill pickles or other tasty local treats) or just plain ol' forget what I paid for stuff.

    [ Parent ]
    This guy pretty much did all the (none / 0) (#58)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:41:20 PM EST
    explaining for me.  Meanwhile, my friend has sailed right through and is looking at me in secondary and mouthing:  are you ok?  

    [ Parent ]
    I came back from South America with (none / 0) (#93)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:21:33 PM EST
    three Cuban cigars in my shirt pocket... I had sort of forgotten about them...got asked about drugs, gold and emeralds, not the cigars.

    I had some emeralds, but small, not high quality... the customs agent kind of smirked at me before asking how much I paid for them. When I told him about eight dollars, he had to thin whether to charge me or not-- they were worth a decent amount more than 8 bucks.

    Just glad I didn't get fined for the cigars!

    [ Parent ]

    I won't say what. . .my friend. . . came back with (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by andgarden on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:25:38 PM EST
    and from where--if anything--but I think "hidden in plain sight" is pretty effective.

    [ Parent ]
    heh. (none / 0) (#109)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:32:18 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Canada was so mean to me once (none / 0) (#47)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:20:52 PM EST
    And one of the male Canadian customs officers told me to stay out of the lines female custom officers and I won't have such problems.  My second time through, I specifically chose a line being conducted by a guy.  I didn't care what it took, I didn't want that kind of meana$$ friggin shake down again and I didn't get it either.

    [ Parent ]
    Canada was fine (none / 0) (#49)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:26:00 PM EST
    I had a really easy time in Vancouver. Much better than I had in Vegas, where I was pulled from the line, put in air machine and then made to stand against the wall for a half hour waiting for the supervisor to OK everything! When I asked why, no one gave me an answer.

    [ Parent ]
    In LV just after 9/11, one of my friends, (none / 0) (#60)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:42:59 PM EST
    when asked if her bag was with her since she packed it sd.:  no.  All three of us were thoroughly searched when we reached the gate.  At random, per gate agent.

    [ Parent ]
    Nobody gave me an answer either (none / 0) (#67)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:50:23 PM EST
    I just stood there like a deer in the headlights.  It was as if I had actually ticked someone off or something.  I was driving in.  But I was alone, maybe that had something to do with it.  Once she had "fingered" me though my car had to be completely stripped down.  The dudes doing it saw the military sticker on the car and whether I like it or not law enforcement throws extra respect toward the military.  One of the guys talked to me for a bit about the Army as I was trying to get my car back in order again and he was the one who told me to stay out of the lines conducted by female customs officers.  I too had to be cleared by some administrative person after I put my car back together and went inside some administrative building for that to happen.

    [ Parent ]
    Yep, in college (none / 0) (#85)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:09:01 PM EST
    me and a car full of friends got detained at the border.

    We chalked it up to being college kids, after all, we certainly weren't crossing the border to go to Canadian museums or anything...

    [ Parent ]

    Concur on that advise (none / 0) (#64)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:45:27 PM EST
    re which line to choose.

    That, and make sure you pack the car so they can see the fishing rods and tackle boxes without getting out of their chair.

    [ Parent ]

    scribe, can you tell me why (none / 0) (#70)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:53:19 PM EST
    the female officers do the shake downs?  Do they only do it to American women or just Americans in general?  I'm not sexist.  It was bizzare and unpleasant though, and I will probably always follow the advice I was given after that too :)

    [ Parent ]
    They do it to Americans in general (none / 0) (#87)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:10:53 PM EST
    and they usually are the crankiest people there.

    Why is it the women officers?  Who knows - I sure don't.

    [ Parent ]

    My experience too... (none / 0) (#128)
    by NWHiker on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:23:01 PM EST
    I drive to Vancouver BC to visit my aunt often, and I try to avoid the female custom's officers as well. I've travelled in and out of third world countries, to places many think are scary, the only time I cried after a border crossing was Blaine.

    It could be that part of the reason I've had more problems with female officers is that I often have my kids with me, and not always my husband. It could be that male officers would be as bad with me under those circumstances.

    Travelling with the whole family (dh, me, kids) we've had less problems as a whole.

    [ Parent ]

    Sadly, the Australian "welcome" (none / 0) (#27)
    by Cream City on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:55:28 AM EST
    this summer when I went there was not so nice.  After 33 hours! of travel, we had to go through quite an obstacle course -- including being sniffed by two sets of dogs, both drug dogs and "flu dogs."  And so many Australian officials wore masks that it made me wonder just what I would catch! (it turned out that they were especially fearful of fluful Asians, among others).  Once past the airport, of course, we loved Australia.

    But I do agree that the U.S. hassles to visitors are nuts -- and we are paying for it elsewhere.  London's Heathrow now is infamous for hassling Americans, as many of the airport workers are Muslims getting an opportunity for payback (I found out about this from reading a parliamentary probe on the Heathrow problems after one of my children was given quite a hard time there).

    [ Parent ]

    British customs and immigration (none / 0) (#95)
    by andgarden on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:23:56 PM EST
    has always been very friendly to me. US immigration is the worst I've experienced. Once I few back from Italy with my little sister, and I filled out a customs form for both of us. The woman at immigration was skeptical that we weren't married. It was a very strange experience.

    [ Parent ]
    A US immigration officer (none / 0) (#119)
    by vml68 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:53:01 PM EST
    after determining my aunt was not married asked her if she was "available"! She just smiled sweetly at him while digging her incredibly long fingernails into my forearm so I would keep my mouth shut. At that point I wanted to scream at both of them!

    [ Parent ]
    Customs in and out of Saudi (none / 0) (#134)
    by Inspector Gadget on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 03:43:48 PM EST
    was always entertaining....the Muslim men, of course, are reluctant to touch ladies garments, so we simply put all my lace delicates as the top layer of each suitcase. Breezed through without incident.

    Enjoyed tremendously watching a less than nice traveling companion get hassled by Indian customs when leaving Trivandum, though. Then, her husband almost got removed from the plane by security after our layover in Bahrain. We never traveled with them again :)

    [ Parent ]

    Not just US (none / 0) (#54)
    by dissenter on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:31:02 PM EST
    I travel around the world on a pretty regular basis. Europe is going to the same system for  entry/exit for non-EU nationals. Finger prints, long lines, 10,000 questions etc. The worst place is London. You can literally stand in line at immigration for hours if you are not an EU resident.  

    The brave new world is not contained to the US.

    [ Parent ]

    Heathrow photo thing kind of surprised me. (none / 0) (#62)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:43:58 PM EST
    Photo at first check point is on the computer screen when you reach the next one.  

    [ Parent ]
    I'll be taking my elderly mother (none / 0) (#96)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:24:30 PM EST
    to England either next summer, but more likely the year following... glad to have some idea of what to expect.

    [ Parent ]
    Seems like the best way to try and (none / 0) (#99)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:26:15 PM EST
    ensure the person w/the passport and boarding pass is the same at each checkpoint.  Probably wouldn't "fly" in U.S. but probably should be implemented.

    [ Parent ]
    I thought the idea (none / 0) (#102)
    by andgarden on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:28:10 PM EST
    was to make federal, instead of airline, employees responsible for security? How many gate agents do you think can spot a fake ID?

    [ Parent ]
    This was before getting to the gate. (none / 0) (#105)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:29:47 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    What I'm told and hear a lot (none / 0) (#100)
    by Cream City on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:27:11 PM EST
    is to fly in to some airport other than Heathrow.

    [ Parent ]
    I haven't had any trouble there. And (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:28:44 PM EST
    the Heathrow Express from Paddington Station is quite convenient.

    [ Parent ]
    Me neither. (none / 0) (#108)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:31:25 PM EST
    And I love the Express.  No muss, no fuss.

    [ Parent ]
    Although the first time the ticket seller (none / 0) (#113)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:45:34 PM EST
    talked me into entirely unnecssary first class ticket.  Expensive!

    [ Parent ]
    Stansted is a bit out of the way (none / 0) (#104)
    by andgarden on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:28:56 PM EST
    but it tends to work just fine.

    [ Parent ]
    Travel recommendation: go to (none / 0) (#146)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 09:37:05 PM EST
    the Cotswolds.  Broadway is a good town to stay in.  Beautiful.

    [ Parent ]
    That was the number one question (none / 0) (#61)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:43:53 PM EST
    the IOC threw at Chicago, and those chickens have come home to roost (in the words of the post at Balkin's place).

    [ Parent ]
    Rio (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by jbindc on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:30:37 AM EST
    is the logical choice - never been an Olympics on the South American continent.  It also would promote the idea of sportsmanship for the whole world to participate in and not just rich cities.

    I also think Barack, Michelle, and Oprah sweeping into town actually hurt Chicago's chances because I think most of the rest of the world is over the celebrity-ness.

    I thought Chicago would get stiffed (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:38:31 AM EST
    for any number of reasons in the voters minds:
    1.  US security-uber-alles making entering and being in the US difficult for even internationally-famous people.
    2.  No change in the US empire-building project in the MidEast/Central Asia.
    3.  No change in the US policies of torture and covering up torture.

    As to all these 3, the Europeans (in particular)saw Obama come to Berlin last summer, and he sold them into believing great things - changey things - were going to come when he came to power.  They have now seen that nothing has changed - it's the same old Bushco USA - and they aren't buying what he's selling any more.  This is a foretaste of what he will meet in the US once the HCR deal he's made with the insurance companies goes through, regardless of what the electorate really wants.

    1.  The continuing fallout from the 2002 Salt Lake winter games and the investigations and indictments (later dismissed) over how the Organizing Committee "induced" members to vote.  Them IOC members like the perks they can get, perks which others might be inclined to call "graft".

    2.  A general dislike among the internationals of the US as an Olympic venue, which really came to the fore in the 1996 Atlanta games.  Remember that the then-head of the IOC, on closing the Atlanta games, called them "one of the best ever", as opposed to the traditional "the best ever".

    3.  A recognition that the US is over-the-hill as a great power and the US' century is over, too.  That, and Brazil is recognized as a coming, rising power of the 21st Century.

    4.  Rio - for all its crime, violence and poverty (and there's a lot of all of them) still has an aura of being a place where people with money can have a lot of fun without a (lower-class) cop busting you, or busting your head.  Chicago, OTOH, (and rightly or wrongly) still bears the burden of Al Capone and '20s gangsters.  Play a game of "first thing that pops into your head" with foreigners, particularly Europeans, and say "Chicago".  You'll be shocked how many will say "Al Capone".

    5.  The IOC got offended by a hard-sell from the Obamas - if it needs a hard sell, it ain't worth buying.


    Don't you think Obama was just fulfilling (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:42:50 AM EST
    a campaign promise to his Chicago bundlers.  They got him lots of campaign funds.

    [ Parent ]
    I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. (none / 0) (#16)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:45:36 AM EST
    "Sure, we'll support the bid.  If the IOC turns the US down, it won't be for our lack of trying."

    I don't know whether, from Obama's perspective, it was a wise expenditure of political capital, but it may have been one he was obliged to make.

    [ Parent ]

    I wish the Obamas (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by Spamlet on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:58:18 PM EST
    had not accepted a mission of Chicago boosterism that should have been left to the local grandees. And now that the mission has failed, the trip just seems cheesy.

    [ Parent ]
    Worse than cheesy. (none / 0) (#151)
    by oldpro on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 01:37:50 AM EST
    It totally undermines the notion that Chicago's politics are 'can-do!'  

    Jeez...if they can't even fix an IOC vote, what the Hell has this country come to?  So much for the Hoffa/Obama political savvy.  NEVER should have made the trip unless the votes were sewn up.

    I suppose this is the end of stories like that of the lady who said she wanted to be buried in Chicago after her death, although she wasn't from there, because (she said) she wanted to continue being active in politics.

    [ Parent ]

    Not only political capital... (none / 0) (#29)
    by oldpro on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:58:31 AM EST
    who paid for two trips by the first family?  

    Air Farce One ain't cheap.

    [ Parent ]

    Well, he can write his trip off (partly) (none / 0) (#50)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:26:09 PM EST
    to "going forward to meet with a commander", i.e., McChrystal.

    Mrs. O - not so much.

    [ Parent ]

    Not in this day and age... (none / 0) (#66)
    by oldpro on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:49:17 PM EST
    doesn't pass the smell test.

    Obama and McChrystal both have telephones, not to mention video conferencing...

    [ Parent ]

    Nevertheless (none / 0) (#132)
    by prittfumes on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:46:15 PM EST
    from what I am hearing, that's the way O and his msm buddies are already spinning it.

    [ Parent ]
    Heard they spent an entire (none / 0) (#150)
    by oldpro on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 01:29:33 AM EST
    half hour together.

    Whoopee.  Strategic.

    [ Parent ]

    Maybe Oprah picked up the tab (none / 0) (#156)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 09:38:51 AM EST
    for Chicago.

    It's pretty obvious the O's have no real sense of appropriate as it relates both to the office, and to the economic plight of the people. What budget gets cut to keep the presidential frivolous travel budget coffer filled?

    [ Parent ]

    I'm not an Obama cheerleader (none / 0) (#153)
    by cawaltz on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 04:33:29 AM EST
    and I agree this should have been left to the locals(Hello? Focus on health care or the econmy President Obama)but I really don't understand how anyone could conflate this as a "big" use of political capital being wasted. It isn't like it was negotiations with Iran or trade relations with China we are talking about. We are talking about negotiating to host games that are in the spirit of good will. Just because we didn't get picked doesn't mean it was a snub. Was the IOC anti everywhere else except Brazil. I mean c'mon we lost a bid we'll get a shot at again later on down the line. In the spirit of what this hosting is supposed to represent the thing to do isn't to cry sour grapes/ Anti Americanism and waste of political capital but to congratulate Rio and wish them luck, then move on to the other pressing business our country faces.


    [ Parent ]
    Wise? (none / 0) (#157)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 09:45:34 AM EST
    I think we just saw evidence that all the propaganda we hear on how beloved our WH occupants are around the world is just a sales pitch.

    [ Parent ]
    I don't think it's that complicated (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by jbindc on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:46:10 AM EST
    The 2010 Winter Games are in Whistler-Vancouver - on the North American continent. The US has hosted the 2002 Winter Games and the 1996 Summer Games - 2 games in the last 20 years (by the time 2016 comes around).

    But I do agree the Obama-Oprah hard sell was probably off-putting.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm sure that has something to do with it. (none / 0) (#19)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:49:22 AM EST
    When you come down to it, you can easily come up with a dozen reasons, any one of which is enough for a voter to toss Chicago from the mix.

    Given the relatively large number of IOC people voting, I suspect someone has had each of those reasons as their reason.

    [ Parent ]

    congrats, Rio (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by Jeralyn on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:53:59 AM EST
    great choice.

    Well, it is YOUR blog! (none / 0) (#122)
    by ChiTownDenny on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:05:32 PM EST
    So I'll be mindful of what I type.  A lot more enticing cities than Chicago?  Really?  Perhaps Salt Lake City is what you have in mind?  I've been to Denver (snore), Breckenridge, and Vail.  No reason to go back.  I don't pack a bible when I travel.  
    And the (partial) Balkin quote you provide speaks loudly to the point I made at KOS:

    It smacks of Anti-Americanism!  
    by ChiTownDenny [Subscribe] [Edit Diary]
    Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 09:22:25 AM PDT
    The International Olympic Committee has voted to eliminate Chicago as a host city to the 2016 Olympics in the FIRST round of voting.  Maybe I live in a bubble, being a Chicagoan and and American, but by all accounts, local and national, Chicago had the most economically feasible bid presented by a potential host city, perhaps ever.  Yet it was eliminated through a vote in the FIRST round!

    The International Olympic Committee has voted to eliminate Chicago as a host city to the 2016 Olympics in the FIRST round of voting.  Maybe I live in a bubble, being a Chicagoan and and American, but by all accounts, local and national, Chicago had the most economically feasible bid presented by a potential host city, perhaps ever.  Yet it was eliminated through a vote in the FIRST round!

    It doesn't take a "rocket scientist", which I am definitely not, to take the leap and draw a conclusion that the voting by the International Olympic Committee that resulted in Chicago being eliminated in the FIRST round of voting smacks of anti-Americanism.  After all, our imperialist dollars, supplied by our media outlets and our multi-nationals' advertising budgets, that quite literally provide significant revenue to  the Olympics for the rest of the world to enjoy, don't mean we actually get anything for those dollars.  And, the opportunity to deny America to display its wealth, it seems, proved to great for the green-eyed voters of the International Olympic Committee.  
    One could certainly understand if Chicago did not win the bid to host the 2016 Olympics.  The fact that it was eliminated in the FIRST round of voting boggles the mind.  Well it would if you didn't exercise anti-Americanism!

    [ Parent ]

    By all means... (5.00 / 1) (#123)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:12:47 PM EST
    ...feel free to stay on your side of the Mississippi.  Somehow I don't think that will be a great loss for us.

    [ Parent ]
    All, uh, 29,000 of you. Ha! (none / 0) (#125)
    by ChiTownDenny on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:14:18 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Kos has just posted (none / 0) (#131)
    by ChiTownDenny on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:40:57 PM EST
    that anti-Americanism played a part.  He didn't state Chicago isn't "enticing".  

    [ Parent ]
    You mean Kos had an opinion (none / 0) (#152)
    by cawaltz on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 04:23:33 AM EST
    Well color me shocked(not). You do realize though that him taking this position does not make it fact right?

    [ Parent ]
    Paranoid? (none / 0) (#159)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 10:16:49 AM EST
    Sheesh - anti-Chicagoism can be found right here in the US, too.

    Or, whining?

    Is it so unreasonable to think other countries should have their cities and cultures showcased?


    [ Parent ]

    I agree Jeralyn (none / 0) (#154)
    by cawaltz on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 04:34:50 AM EST
    I'm sure it's a beautiful country and I wish them luck hosting the event

    [ Parent ]
    Eagerly anticipating... (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:59:53 AM EST
    the opening ceremonies...if anybody knows how to put on a show its Brazil.

    Yessss (none / 0) (#35)
    by trillian on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:04:40 PM EST
    My favorite part of the Olympics.

    [ Parent ]
    Think they'll have (none / 0) (#38)
    by jbindc on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:09:44 PM EST
    string bikinis for costumes?

    [ Parent ]
    Rio,Olympics, & Obama Hubris (5.00 / 4) (#46)
    by norris morris on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:19:56 PM EST
    Why did Obama fail to bring the IOC to Chicago?

    Over 50 million spent for Olympics presentation when Chicago's crime scene is currently horrific, the internal politics are seriously corrupt, and from what I'm hearing on CNN Obama's presentation was a clunker. Corporate, dull, poorly executed.

    We never stood a chance as anyone clued in to the politics of the IOC knew. Rio and Spain were the favorites from the get go.

    Obama used poor judgement to go without understanding the dynamics. Chicago is hardly the joyous youth quake that we see from Rio.  Brazil will be challenged no doubt regarding security and infrastructure. More importantly Obama had far better ways of spending his capital. Afghanistan. Healthcare, where he's been MIA.

    I am  watching Obama's  naive lack of experience, combined with considerable cluelessness and hubris.

    He needs to get off TV and begin to engage in handling  our real problems. The ambivalence we see from Obama on heavy lifting issues is not heartening.

    Agreed; I've never seen (none / 0) (#56)
    by mg7505 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:39:54 PM EST
    him care this much about anything -- if this really was because of campaign donors etc, how sad is it that the people controlling the President care more about the Olympics than any sort of real reform?

    [ Parent ]
    Really (none / 0) (#120)
    by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:56:47 PM EST
    you honestly think that Chicago is worse for corruption and crime than Rio, are you serious, I can go down the line on virtually every major social science statistic and Chicago comes out ahead.

    [ Parent ]
    This really merits repeating: (none / 0) (#158)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 10:00:38 AM EST
    Obama used poor judgement to go without understanding the dynamics.

    As does this:

    I am  watching Obama's  naive lack of experience, combined with considerable cluelessness and hubris.

    Those observations were the centerpiece for the voters who just could not get onboard the O-express.

    [ Parent ]

    What some are saying in Chicago (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by jbindc on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:28:35 PM EST
    Chicago Sun Times:

    We stayed up to watch Chicago's presentation live, and it wasn't, in truth, as polished or as on-point as was the presentation from Rio de Janeiro, which many observers -- at least in private -- have long suspected had the edge in this entire process. If Rio indeed had an advantage going into Friday's final presentations, Chicago final pitch wasn't likely to sway many votes. Our presentation was obviously tightly choreographed, but for the most part it lacked that vital, sustained spark that would have galvanized the minds -- and hearts -- of the IOC. The videos shown did little to further the city's cause. The first of them used a bluesy "Sweet Home Chicago" musical underscoring , which probably didn't touch many IOC members, though it is a song  reflective of Chicago's music scene. The rest of the videos leaned on the sweet imagery of children against various Chicago backdrops. But in the end, this work felt far from fresh or emotionally-wrought.

    In the end, Chicago's final pitch depended on the power of the speakers there in the meeting hall in Copenhagen to close the deal.  And three of the key performers, Mayor Daley, Chicago 2016 Chairman Pat Ryan and, yes, President Obama, simply didn't have the touch when it was most needed.  Everyone knew Daley and Ryan could never be charismatic speakers, but President Obama surprised us with a speech that never took off.  He seemed a shadow of his typically forceful self -- only half there in the Copenhagen and never fully committed to the message he was delivering.

    Only Michelle Obama came through for Chicago. And she was extraordinary -- talking with great emotion and simple eloquence about Chicago, its people and, most importantly, her father's love of sport.  But she alone couldn't seal the deal
    my impression (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by TeresaInPa on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:18:58 PM EST
    was that their presentation was all about them and how cool it would be for them personally to have the Olympics in Chicago.  Are people really supposed to care about Michelle's father?
    But I think the real problem is the animosity between the IOC and the US OC.

    [ Parent ]
    What they're saying over at (none / 0) (#59)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:42:13 PM EST
    Balkin's place.

    [ Parent ]
    Seems to me the worry isn't about (none / 0) (#65)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:47:14 PM EST
    once the traveller/athlete reaches U.S.  Will the athletes and others be able to get visas at all or in time.  Big problem.

    [ Parent ]
    A good link; thanks (none / 0) (#71)
    by Cream City on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:54:19 PM EST
    and just today, my marvelous newly immigrant daughter-in-law -- a highly skilled renewable energy expert who ought to have been begged to come here -- is having to take a day to deal with yet another inane hassle and yet more costs because our immigration service lost another set of documents.  So now she is being treated like some sort of disease career without inoculations, although she comes from a more advanced country than ours in health care and had provided, already at costs, complete records of vaccinations and more.  So now she must give time and money to get those records replicated here -- or be deported within weeks, so our fine immigration officials say!  This sort of thing keeps striking fear into all of our hearts -- and also keeps slowing down my own progeny's search for work as he helps her cope with all of the paperwork, calms her (and us), etc. . . .

    The question ought to be why she was given the first visa to come into the country, if the immigration idjits didn't have the documents then.  Of course they did.  Frankly, after so many thousands of dollars and now more such stuff in the mail over and over, I smell corruption.

    [ Parent ]

    And just to make the connection clear (none / 0) (#73)
    by Cream City on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:55:23 PM EST
    this all is part of the same outfit now, with immigration -- temporary, permanent, visitors, new residents, customs, etc. -- under your fine feds at the Department of Homeland Security.  Idjits.

    [ Parent ]
    is it still taking 2-3 years (none / 0) (#107)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:30:26 PM EST
    for the actual 'green card' to get to the recipient? My wife had to use the letter from INS (at the time) for almost 3 years until one day, miraculously, her (already expired) photo ID showed up. We then had to go to Atlanta with the letters, the ID, etc., to get the 10 year card, which was really a 7-year card based on the time of receipt.

    [ Parent ]
    Oh, Jeff, please don't say it's so (none / 0) (#112)
    by Cream City on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:41:05 PM EST
    and I'm not going to say that to my marvelous daughter-in-law, as she and my son still are believing the time spans posted on the INS site.  They're young, they're in love, so they believe anything now.  I'll tell ya, only love could make this incredible obstacle course worthwhile.

    Add to it all the other obstacles that you must know about from other federal agencies, which have offended my very businesslike d-i-l who had built a great credit history at home but now is being treated like a newborn babe with no work or credit history at all, no identity at all as we define it here.  And add to it the great differences in other laws from state to state (because they may move for employment) re driver's licenses and more. . . .

    And add to it that my d-i-l from a far more advanced country with national health care -- and with a requirement that all adults must vote -- watches the current debates here and wonders how democracy has survived the stupidities she sees.  (Btw, she also is very politically aware and was a great Obama fan from afar but doesn't seem to have much to say about that now.)

    [ Parent ]

    good luck to them. (none / 0) (#114)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:46:58 PM EST
    but from personal, painful, experience, have them discuss and decide on worst-case-scenarios now, such as when the children are with mom in her country, when with dad in his, property issues, etc.

    I don't want to rain on the love train, but these issues, if faced now, will either lead to more accomodation, or at the least, set up a framework for amicable parting (not that they will wind up that way).

    [ Parent ]

    One of the reasons I mention this (none / 0) (#115)
    by jeffinalabama on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:48:28 PM EST
    has to do with the outright ethnocentrism and racism found here in the US-- when you go shopping, or need to buy tires, etc., somebody might decide 6 month with mom or in the home country is better than 6 months or a lifetime here. It is difficult.

    [ Parent ]
    She's married to a US Citizen and they are (none / 0) (#160)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 10:27:49 AM EST
    threatening to deport her?!!

    Do you have a decent senior Senator?? I had to use the assistance of mine recently and got through an overly confused government agency in less than a month. A neighbor of my dad's had the same situation come up when his wife died 2 years ago and it's never been resolved.

    I recommend bringing in the paid public officials.

    [ Parent ]

    The presentation was (none / 0) (#63)
    by mg7505 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:44:50 PM EST
    a let-down, but I do wonder how much the presentations actually matter. Various newscasters are crying foul about 'backroom deals' that predetermined the outcome, but that makes it even more shocking that Chicago lost -- who can twist arms and trade favors like the US?

    But on the bright side, if we are losing our edge, maybe American politics became a little more honest today.

    (thinks about it)

    Nope, still the same.

    [ Parent ]

    'a rather harrowing experience' (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Illiope on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:29:49 PM EST
    what no 'land of the free, home of the brave'?

    i think the comment by Syed Shahid Ali should give even the most vocal hawk pause about what we turned ourselves into, and how the rest of the world views the country.

    BTW (5.00 / 4) (#68)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:52:28 PM EST
    The theory that it was the airport hassles or Obama big footing that decided this is naive beyond comprehension imo.

    The IOC is perhaps the most corrupt organization in history. Votes are purchased, Cash on the barrel.

    Do you mean Obama should have set aside some (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by steviez314 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:24:36 PM EST
    TARP money for this :)

    [ Parent ]
    Heh (none / 0) (#106)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:30:06 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    rare agreement. n/t (none / 0) (#78)
    by bocajeff on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:00:20 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    X2. (none / 0) (#86)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:10:24 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Well then (none / 0) (#80)
    by jbindc on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:02:35 PM EST
    Chicago should have won hands down - they have some of the most corrupt people in politics there and they know how to throw cash around.

    [ Parent ]
    Here (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:10:54 PM EST
    From the Times account:

    "Chicago's leaders said they had been worried about the first round, when I.O.C. politics often come into play the most, with some members simply wanting to keep some cities in the running even if they do not want them to win. Still, they said they were surprised at the result."

    Got to pay for the first round vote especially. The Chicago Way was unaware apparently:

    "Stephanie Streeter, executive director of the United States Olympic Committee, said she believed it was the country's best Olympic bid but that it was undone because bid and U.S.O.C. leaders were not seasoned enough in the ways of I.O.C. politics. Both Streeter and chairman Larry Probst have taken their posts in the last year and have already run into problems with the I.O.C., most notably over their now-stalled plan for an Olympic network that the I.O.C. opposed."

    It turns out Obama was a Hail Mary pass:

    "The appearance by the Obamas was hoped to overcome some of those problems, but former I.O.C. member Kai Holm told the Associated Press that the brevity of his appearance may have hurt. Holm called it "too business-like. It can be that some I.O.C. members see it as a lack of respect."

    Obama should have passed on the show.

    [ Parent ]

    Apparently not (none / 0) (#81)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:04:28 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Very true... (none / 0) (#83)
    by trillian on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:07:47 PM EST
    ....however I doubt any of the finalists fell short in the bribe area.

    [ Parent ]
    I think Chicago clearly did (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:11:31 PM EST
    The first round loss tells you that.

    [ Parent ]
    Well (none / 0) (#164)
    by Randinho on Sun Oct 04, 2009 at 11:32:07 AM EST
    And you know this how?

    [ Parent ]
    Nah (none / 0) (#92)
    by dissenter on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:17:15 PM EST
    It is second to the United Nations:)

    [ Parent ]
    Ah (none / 0) (#94)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:22:59 PM EST
    I stand corrected.

    [ Parent ]
    It WAS very corrupt. (none / 0) (#126)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:19:40 PM EST
    Thanks in large part to the bribery scandal over the 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City, the IOC has instituted many reforms regarding how host cities are selected, and the process is much more transparent. Gone are the days of such lavish "gift"-giving.

    People and organizations can and do change for the better, you know. Stop living in the past.

    [ Parent ]

    Ha! (none / 0) (#130)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:26:55 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Oh please (none / 0) (#135)
    by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 03:53:13 PM EST
    it might not be as blatant but if you don't think being an IOC member is one of the sweetest gigs around I don't know what to tell you.

    [ Parent ]
    I can't help but wonder (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by lentinel on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 04:47:51 PM EST
    if Chicago could have spent the 50,000,000 dollars more wisely.
    From what I read, they have problems.

    I thought the same thing. Youth programs (none / 0) (#139)
    by Cream City on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:03:14 PM EST
    and school financial aid and all the things that could have been done, all the lives that could have been saved and turned around, with $50 million. . . .

    [ Parent ]
    It's RIo (4.33 / 6) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:11:19 AM EST
    London 2012 basically precludes Madrid 2016.

    Beijing 2008 virtually eliminated Tokyo 2016.

    Eliminating Chicago early makes it easy to pick Rio.

    I disagree with you however on the wisdom of the choice. I think it is not going to be a particularly successful Olympics in Rio imo. I do not believe that holding a World Cup in 2014 will leave Brazil in a great position to do what is necessary for an Olympics in 2016. There is a huge crime problem in Rio.

    I think the IOC made a mistake today.

     

    There is a huge crime problem in Rio. (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:02:28 PM EST

    Not to be confused with the huge crime problem in Chicago.

    [ Parent ]
    Or the crime problem in Atlanta ... (none / 0) (#117)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:52:17 PM EST
    ... that was exemplified by the Olympic Park bombing during the '96 Games.

    It's time we as Americans collectively face facts - in the eyes of the world, the United States is not all that. Thanks in no small part to the rank bellicosity and immaturity of the previous administration, "them darned furiners" have developed a decidedly low opinion of our country, and it's going to take a while to repair the damage done to our nation's reputation.

    [ Parent ]

    I knew (none / 0) (#127)
    by Wile ECoyote on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:22:09 PM EST
    it was Bushes fault.

    [ Parent ]
    I wonder if he blames the other 3 failed (none / 0) (#133)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 03:37:40 PM EST
    Chicago Olympic bids on Bush too?

    [ Parent ]
    Thank you (none / 0) (#137)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 04:58:36 PM EST
    SUO and Wile....

    LOL

    You beat me too it.

    [ Parent ]

    I think it was more (none / 0) (#138)
    by Jen M on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 05:37:00 PM EST
    Atlanta's fault.

    No more Coca Cola summer games. Corporate sponsorship  Made the Atlanta games way too ... well, commercial.

    [ Parent ]

    How does a terrorist act (none / 0) (#145)
    by coast on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 09:33:09 PM EST
    perpetrated by someone from NC have anything to do with a so called "crime problem" in Atlanta?  By that measure, I guess Stoneycreek Township, PA must have a "crime problem" as well.

    [ Parent ]
    What was their mistake? (none / 0) (#8)
    by oldpro on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:26:44 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Choosing Rio (none / 0) (#36)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:05:15 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Mistake??? (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by christinep on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:06:45 PM EST
    Rio leaves an indelible imprint. My husband & I were more-than-fortunate-enough to spend a few days there about 2 years ago. The husband--normally quite reserved in dress and demeanor in public--found his personal shangri la in Rio; as did I. At first, we moved with extreme caution because of all the tips about the crime reality there (and, I did see plural purse snatchings almost up-too-close & personal.) But, Rio has a beauty & softness & brashness at once.   Enchantment.  Even what the brain knows gets re-arranged because the senses are involved at every possible level.
    Of course, I would have wanted to see the Olympics in Chicago...for many practical and political reasons.  That is what my head says.
    But, of all the places I've traveled, my heart smiles at Rio. And, again from my more rational part, I hope that the selection impels some real Brazilian response to the entrenched, obvious economic disparity problems (aka: pools of wealth surrounded by oceans of poverty.) The challenges confronting Rio in preparing for this event may almost be overwhelming; yet, there are many of us
    in concert with their hopes. Meanwhile, my husband just looked at the old samba video with a big smile on his face.

    [ Parent ]
    Happy for you (none / 0) (#91)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:13:13 PM EST
    Were you attending the Olympics or the World Cup there?

    Because that is what I am talking about, not whether a trip to Rio would be lovely or not.

    [ Parent ]

    I understand (none / 0) (#110)
    by christinep on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:33:13 PM EST
    I do understand the difference between the sense of a city and the reality of a complicated event/series of events. Certainly, Brazil now has to deliver. Promo only takes anyone or any country so far. The infrastructure, the programming, the transportation, the special lodging, etc. must be top-notch.  I also realize that the background--the city & its people--can well deliver that qualitative enveloping experience that defines the difference between good and wonderful.  Ah well, we will eventually know one way or the other.

    [ Parent ]
    Do you think South Africa is prepared for the (none / 0) (#23)
    by steviez314 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:52:44 AM EST
    World Cup next year?  Or was when they were selected?

    Sometimes, the international sports bodies think with their hearts, not their heads.

    At least time zones won't be too much of a problem..It's RIO!!!!

    [ Parent ]

    No (1.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:04:39 PM EST
    I think the World Cup is going to be a mess next year.

    I think the Olympics in Rio are likely to be a mess too.

    Hell, I think the World Cup in Rio is going to be a mess.

    Think Seoul, but worse.

    [ Parent ]

    At least they have 5 years (WC) to 7 years (Olym) (none / 0) (#41)
    by steviez314 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:11:22 PM EST
    to clean up.  Look how well their economy has done the past 5 years.

    [ Parent ]
    Baselines matter (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:33:19 PM EST
    And Brazil ain't China (i.e. - not a police state)

    [ Parent ]
    It ain't a banana republic, either. (none / 0) (#124)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:13:07 PM EST
    Brazil is a burgeoning economic world power, the world's tenth largest energy producer, and is the second largest producer of commerical and military aircraft after the United States. Consumer purchasing power is up, with over 25 million Brazilians encompassing a strong middle class, and poverty is markedly down. Even in the current downturn, its GDP is still growing at about 4%.

    Seven years is a long time, and Rio is more than capable of pulling this off. I've been there, most recently two years ago, and I've seen it for myself. Have you?

    [ Parent ]

    That, and they had the Pan Am games (none / 0) (#57)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:40:39 PM EST
    in 2007 without serious incidents.

    [ Parent ]
    The problem with S. Africa (none / 0) (#118)
    by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:52:26 PM EST
    is simple- its not the crime (though that's bad) or the venues (some look incredible) it the transit infrastructure- the reason France and Germany worked is due to the trains, S. Korea and Japan- the same, the US had/has the most well developed air infrastructure in the world as well as a good-to-great interstate highway system, I don't think a lot of people realize how large S. Africa is and how bad some of it travel infrastructure is today- its going to be a nightmare for anyone trying to go to multiple venues instead of just hitting Capetown or J'burg.

    [ Parent ]
    With Respect (none / 0) (#144)
    by Randinho on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 08:38:15 PM EST
    With respect, BTD, you need to consider recent events. South Africa hosted a successful Confederations Cup three months ago and Brazil hosted the Pan Am Games sem problema two years ago. So what exactly do you base your opinion on?

    [ Parent ]
    Whoa wait I forgot about the World Cup (none / 0) (#116)
    by Socraticsilence on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:48:44 PM EST
    Man, Brazil might be pushing it- I mean the US was able to 1994 WC and 1996 Olympics- but let's face it Atlanta wasn't Rio- I don't mean this in some sort of deragotory way its a simple recognition of facts- Rio's crime rate is insane.

    [ Parent ]
    Pan Am Games (none / 0) (#143)
    by Randinho on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 08:17:17 PM EST
    Did you not know that Rio held the Pan Am Games without any significant issues? This was one of the major reasons why they got the 2016 Olympics.

    What makes you think that with seven years to prepare they won't do equally well, especially with the entire world watching?

    [ Parent ]

    I'm (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:10:08 AM EST
    willing to bet it's Rio.

    I'm surprised (5.00 / 6) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:14:53 AM EST
    I have this President who doesn't go out on a limb for anything other than this, and he doesn't bring home the gold.  But I'm glad that the committee isn't concerned with tarnishing someone's delicate rockstar status.  Now hopefully Obama will grow out of desiring such a thing over good policy.  Because good policy tends to breed a longer lasting rockstar status than well run political campaigns do.

    [ Parent ]
    The Ego has landed! (4.00 / 4) (#20)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:50:32 AM EST
    This must be quite a blow for His Ego.  

    I'd love to see the Olympics in Madrid.  I'd love to go.  Not that we could afford it.  

    (I just realized, my health insurance bills won't be going up until AFTER the Olympics.  Maybe we could afford it.)

    [ Parent ]

    Maybe you and I are just a bunch of (none / 0) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:55:33 AM EST
    clucking ole gossips, but I think the ego has landed as well.  I'd love to go to the Olympics in Madrid too and I think that's who will get it.

    [ Parent ]
    Well I need to catch up (none / 0) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:00:15 PM EST
    Cuz we are going to Rio.  Why does BTD always have to be right about political negotiations?  It gets annoying sometimes. He's like a bratty brainy kid brother spying on everyone.

    [ Parent ]
    That's a Drudge headline (none / 0) (#141)
    by WS on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:23:23 PM EST
    you used BrassTacks.  Why use Republican talking points?  Shame on you.  

    [ Parent ]
    Drudge? (none / 0) (#148)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:08:08 PM EST
    Sorry, one of my son's said that today.  I didn't know where he got it. but I thought it was funny.  

    Are you reading republican websites?  Shame on YOU!  

    Actually, I do read some of those websites, like instanapundit.com, know your enemy and all that.  

    [ Parent ]

    Assuming you're telling the truth, (none / 0) (#155)
    by WS on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 07:57:03 AM EST
    than that's fine.  Remember, this is about Chicago and America not Obama.  You showed a bit too much glee for someone who views the right wing as an enemy.    

    [ Parent ]
    All is not forgiven (none / 0) (#4)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:18:39 AM EST
    I think our travel policies had to be factored in. In addition I'm not sure the international community has recovered from GWB and his arrogance. Hilary has a lot of fences to mend.

    As a Chicago resident, I'm disappointed. I think it would have been a boom for the local economy. Also, I admit I'm prejudice! I think Chicago with it's lakefront is a great city. (If only we could put a dome over the city. I really dislike winter)!

    Chicago is a great city (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Cream City on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:23:45 AM EST
    and I agree, it would have done a great job -- plus those of us in nearby cities were looking to benefit, too.

    But the IOC must have wanted to see more than celebrities, whether Obamas or Winfrey or others.

    [ Parent ]

    Oprah (none / 0) (#10)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:29:12 AM EST
    With all her money and production companies, Oprah could foot the bill herself!

    [ Parent ]
    I don't think too many people outside (none / 0) (#14)
    by scribe on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:42:55 AM EST
    the US and Canada even know who Oprah is.

    [ Parent ]
    Her checks are still good, (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:51:56 AM EST
    Even if they don't know her.  I heard Dr.Phil say that he's on in 60-some countries.  Surely Oprah is on in even more.

    [ Parent ]
    Dr Phil... (5.00 / 6) (#43)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:14:00 PM EST
    ...is aired in 60 countries?  Good gawd, no wonder the World hates us.  

    [ Parent ]
    People must watch it, (none / 0) (#69)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:52:58 PM EST
    Or it wouldn't be on.  But I agree, it's not the best representation of Americans.

    [ Parent ]
    It's not even the best representation of (none / 0) (#74)
    by steviez314 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:55:57 PM EST
    doctors.

    [ Parent ]
    Dr. Phil isn't a doctor, (none / 0) (#149)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:10:40 PM EST
    He's a psychologist.  One of those PhD types who calls himself  ''doctor''.   I'm sure you know the type, some campuses are filled with them.  

    [ Parent ]
    Ahem, the D in Ph.D. (none / 0) (#163)
    by Cream City on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 08:16:46 PM EST
    is for doctor, just like the D in M.D.  

    It is a correct usage, absolutely -- everywhere but in American journalism aka the Associated Press stylebook.  It is a more common custom on some campuses than others in this country, of course.

    But for those who want precision, it can be better to use than an occupation, i.e., "Professor" -- as only some professors actually are professors (the rest, if faculty, are associate or assistant professors . . . and then there is the faculty rank of instructor).  And there are many Ph.D.'s on campuses who are not faculty, so it can be safer to call them Dr. than Professor.  (Or you can use job occupations for others, such as Plumber Smith or Carpenter Jones.:-)

    For some of us who worked in jobs in which it is crucial to do this correctly -- and especially in intercultural situations, dealing with people from other countries that prize intellectual achievement instead of dissing it -- you can get promoted for making the boss look good, making sure correspondence is addressed correctly.  Or you can get demoted for making the boss look like an American boor.

    [ Parent ]

    Well...maybe a few in Africa. (none / 0) (#21)
    by oldpro on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:51:19 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Chicago is a wonderful city. I love it. (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:24:48 AM EST
    Of course I don't live there.

    [ Parent ]
    I would have liked Chicago for this too (none / 0) (#15)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:44:34 AM EST
    I'm still surprised it didn't happen.  

    [ Parent ]
    Me Too! (none / 0) (#32)
    by BrassTacks on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:02:05 PM EST
    I am totally shocked that between the three of them, Obama, Michelle, and Oprah, they couldn't make this happen.  Perhaps His Ego isn't as persuasive as we had thought.

    [ Parent ]
    Barcelona hosted the Olymics. Not (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:25:22 AM EST
    Spain's turn.  

    Of course, (none / 0) (#25)
    by bocajeff on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 11:54:22 AM EST
    For the "Blame America" crowd all these reasons make sense. Except for the fact that Chicago got further than other cities.

    Personally, I think it'll be Rio just for the fact that it has never been in South America before and the U.S. has hosted Olympics in 1960, 1980, 1984, 1996 and 2002. Not to mention Canada having the Olympics in 1976, 1988 and 2010. That's a lot on this side of the world without taking into consideration the lower part of the hemisphere. Go Rio!

    And there was Mexico City in '68. (none / 0) (#129)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 02:24:29 PM EST
    Prior to this morning's announcement, Mexico was the only country in Latin America to have ever hosted the Olympics.

    [ Parent ]
    Well how about that! (none / 0) (#40)
    by Steve M on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:10:29 PM EST
    A little video for the occasion.

    I'm glad. (none / 0) (#42)
    by Ben Masel on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:12:06 PM EST
    Had Chicago's bid been accepted the cycling events would have been held here in Madison, which would have meant a small army of federal 'security experts' camped out for 4 years corroding the generally pretty good culture of our local Police and Sheriff's Depts.

    Sell them Snapple when it's hot (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:14:41 PM EST
    and t-shirts to take home to their kids Ben.  Do I have to teach you everything?

    [ Parent ]
    Lights coming on..... (none / 0) (#161)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 10:34:04 AM EST
    Obama going over there to sell Chicago to the IOC would have given him kudos for bringing jobs to the area....short-term, but jobs. As a bonus, he and his family got another free trip to an interesting location whether he was successful or not.


    [ Parent ]
    Check out Brownie's take on Huff Post. (none / 0) (#162)
    by oculus on Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 11:57:34 AM EST
    Now he is an econ expert!

    [ Parent ]
    I posted a diary, (none / 0) (#48)
    by ChiTownDenny on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:22:00 PM EST
    a rare occurrence for me, at the Orange Satan.

    OK, this may be a silly question... (none / 0) (#72)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:54:24 PM EST
    ...but I've got a headache and am heavily medicated so I'll ask anyway.

    Is not "summer" in the Southern hemisphere the opposite of what it is here?  And, if so, doesn't that not pose a problem with the scheduling?  

    It's summer in Rio (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:59:08 PM EST
    all year round.

    Look at your map.

    [ Parent ]

    I wondered the same (none / 0) (#75)
    by nycstray on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:58:43 PM EST
    aren't they at the beach while we're freezing our a**es off?

    [ Parent ]
    Brazil winters are pretty nice...65 degrees or (none / 0) (#77)
    by steviez314 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 12:59:52 PM EST
    more (in the northern parts).

    [ Parent ]
    No... (none / 0) (#79)
    by trillian on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:00:57 PM EST
    It will be comfortable as opposed to blistering hot

    http://www.ipanema.com/rio/basics/e/climate.htm

    [ Parent ]

    Thanks! (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:08:28 PM EST
    That link is much more helpful than someone's "look at your map" comment.  

    [ Parent ]
    When the Hawks go down (none / 0) (#101)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:27:48 PM EST
    I will be gloating.

    [ Parent ]
    Tell me something... (none / 0) (#111)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:35:45 PM EST
    ...I don't know.  And right back at you should the FLA LaCoste's go down.

    Oh, there will be gloating--and taunting.

    [ Parent ]

    Sydney.. (none / 0) (#90)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 01:12:56 PM EST
    ... had the Summer Games in September, if I recall. I would think Rio could do the same. It's pretty warm even in the middle of their winter, but if they schedule it in their spring it should be quite nice.

    [ Parent ]
    Rio is a sucker (none / 0) (#142)
    by diogenes on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 07:40:56 PM EST
    The Olympics is such a big money-losing nightmare.  Let Rio have it.

    Ah, Athens comes to mind (none / 0) (#147)
    by Cream City on Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 10:06:25 PM EST
    for you, too? :-)

    [ Parent ]
    Rio Wins Olympic Bid, Chicago Eliminated In First Round Voting | 164 comments (164 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment