DRUDGE: The EGO has landed


I’m still laughing at that one! 

Although all is not so funny…. 

While Obama dawdles around about what to do in Afghanistan (at least 43 soldiers killed since McChrystal recommended more troops to his CIC), he felt an intense need, perhaps nudged on by the Daley Chicago machine, to be in Denmark for the big win loss!

(Source: Michelle Malkin reader Ben)

(Source: Michelle Malkin reader Ben)

Obama couldn’t bring the Olympics home….Obama couldn’t “deliver” (us).

The Obama “magic”, Michelle Obama’s “sacrifice” , along with “The Oprah” ‘s presence was just not enough to convince the IOC that Chicago and its cronies should have the Olympics.

I guess the hundred or so countries represented at the IOC just didn’t feel the love or need to give Obama cronies Valerie Jarrett and Richard Daley, along with his wife Michelle Obama, the opportunity to make millions on their land slums in Chicago.

It is heartwarming to see the Obama’s and the Chicago corruption machine (one and the same) be rejected by some of their own tactics.

Congratulations Rio….

Advertisements

4 Responses

  1. The urban Chicago area is indeed in the slums. As such, the massive revenue infusion that playing host to a round of the summer Olympics brings in would have done wonders to help the situation. Instead, status quo is being maintained.

    The heartwarming part is the fact that a city on the caliber of Rio de Janiero has been bestowed the honor of being the first South American city ever to host the Olympics. Pretty neat!

    On that note, I fail to see how sticking it to the man is in any way “heartwarming.” Satisfying in a vengeful sort of way, but not heartwarming.

  2. magsol,
    As such, the massive revenue infusion that playing host to a round of the summer Olympics brings in would have done wonders to help the situation.

    How exactly? I fail to see how building multi-million dollar stadiums and other Olympic-sized buildings will cure the decades-long welfare and slum problems of Chicago….
    Particularly difficult is envisioning results commensurate with the level of massive spending it would take to have the Olympics in that city.

    Similarly, the massive revenue infusion would be on the backs of the citizens of Chicago, a city where at least 45% of its citizens don’t want the Olympics in their city.
    Unemployment in Chicago is around 11.3% and crime is rampant, particuarly with murders of young people in the city.

    What business does a city under those conditions have spending “massive” amounts of taxpayer dollars for an Olympic boondoggle?

    In addition, the massive revenue infusion would also come from picking the pockets of all American taxpayers. (Federal financing was sought by the Olympics committee).

    Instead, status quo is being maintained

    And just who developed the status quo in Chicago? Sleezy liberal Democrats have run that place for years on end. Why can’t THEY fix it? Why does it take the Olympics to (supposedly) save the day for the slums? Democrats have had YEARS to fix Chicago’s problems.

    But you know why they haven’t…? Because they are corrupt and enrich themselves (and their cronies) at taxpayer expense while suppressing those who need help so they continue to be forever dependent upon government.

    ….Very similar to Obama’s plans and policies for the US as a whole.

    If we allow years of Obama’s policies and his cronies in charge, much of the US will begin to look like Chicago when he’s finished.

    Status quo in Chicago is what it is because of people like both Obamas, Daley, Blagojevich, Jarrett, and many more.

    Oh…and a reminder…the Daleys, Obamas and Jarretts of the world weren’t vying to bring the Olympics to Chicago “for the people” and to “help the situation”—they were doing it to enrich their personal fortunes.

    Satisfying in a vengeful sort of way, but not heartwarming.

    It’s not vengeful to see the corrupt go down….it IS heartwarming to see corruption suppressed…if only for a fleeting moment in time.

    So, yes, it is heartwarming to see the Obama’s and other Chicago corruptocrats get told NO in their efforts to rob taxpayers so they can all personally increase their wealth and standing in that corrupt city…..

  3. I wonder how much it really cost to fly the President , the Obama mama, and the associated support / security apparatus?

    Even worse, just think of the greenhouse gasses and HUGE carbon footprint of at least FOUR large aircraft shuttling back and forth across the Atlantic…

    Air Force 1 + backup (that means 2 747s), the First Lady’s aircraft (she went ahead), and at least one large transport aircraft carrying support equipment and security personnel.

    What will become of the polar bears?!

  4. @SRT:

    How exactly? I fail to see how building multi-million dollar stadiums and other Olympic-sized buildings will cure the decades-long welfare and slum problems of Chicago….
    Particularly difficult is envisioning results commensurate with the level of massive spending it would take to have the Olympics in that city.

    Spending increases are inherent to hosting the Olympics. This is due to improving city utilities and public transit systems to handle the massive influx of longer-term visitors, the hiring of new staff to maintain the expanded infrastructure, and the private improvements made across all areas of industry in anticipation of increased demand.

    Similarly, the massive revenue infusion would be on the backs of the citizens of Chicago, a city where at least 45% of its citizens don’t want the Olympics in their city.
    Unemployment in Chicago is around 11.3% and crime is rampant, particuarly with murders of young people in the city.

    I do have to agree (somewhat surprisingly) that quite a few Chicago residents actually don’t want the Olympics in their city. Since that seems to be the case, then so be it, but the revenue infusion wouldn’t be on their backs. Quite the contrary, it would come from all the companies that have branches in the local area for the reasons I outlined in the previous paragraph. Furthermore, multitudes of new grants and government contracts would be garnered to improve the public facilities and infrastructure. Having the city put its best foot forward isn’t a local concern; its presentation will reflect how the US portrays itself to the world, so all manner of public offices will be involved in the funding of the wide-scale improvements.

    I lived in Atlanta for just over 20 years before moving to Pittsburgh, during which time the 1996 Olympics took place. I can say with total certainty that the Olympics brought the city back from rampant decay. Downtown in the mid-90s was much, much different than it was in the mid-2000s when I was attending Georgia Tech in the heart of midtown. There wasn’t a single aspect of the city’s infrastructure that wasn’t touched; obviously some “improvements” weren’t really improvements (mistakes are always made), but 90% of the efforts yielded extremely fruitful results, leading to an inner city revival that continues even to this day. There’s actually green space in downtown Atlanta now!

    As for why those currently in power aren’t fixing Chicago on their own…damn good question. Blagojevich was a veritable plague and unfortunately his effects are still very much present. I don’t know why the Dems have been so reluctant to do anything (or why, if they have taken steps to fix things, why those efforts have been so utterly ineffective), but I do know playing host to the Olympics would have forced them to take action, at the very least.

    Oh…and a reminder…the Daleys, Obamas and Jarretts of the world weren’t vying to bring the Olympics to Chicago “for the people” and to “help the situation”—they were doing it to enrich their personal fortunes.

    I suppose this is a question of ends justifying the means, a debate which we had awhile ago and ended in a stalemate (as they often do) whereby you admitted the ends do justify the means, and I argued the opposite. Here is a case where the end was getting the Olympics in Chicago, and the means was either “for the good of Chicago and the US” or “to improve my personal CV.” Realistically, it was probably some combination of the two; what the ratio was is a matter of speculation and probably dependent on how cynical one is of the current administration.

    @GBS: Yeah, that is one thing I cringe to think about. It’s always expensive to take the President of the US *anywhere*, but apparently since Obama has taken office, death threats have more than doubled relative to the previous administration. That isn’t cheap to counter. I weep for the polar bears AND the penguins.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: