Rachel Maddow is a nonentity. Like the entire staff at MSNBC, she has been bought and paid for by the DNC and has no agenda other than to enflame lunatic lefties. That said, maybe the Weekly Standard was celebrating a loss for Chicago and Mayor Daley’s corrupt political cronies, many of whom are in the White House.

Personally, I am fine with Rio winning the bid. I identify myself as a conservative, did not vote for Obama and disagree with him on almost everything. I had no problem with him going to Copenhagen.

I am skeptical about the positives of hosting the Olympics as I’ve heard more stories about host cities left with debt. I am concerned about security of bringing the bullseye into our country for terror attacks at a high profile event like the Olympics. I recall lots of drama with Salt Lake (not remembering the details, but just remembering it wasn’t all happy days). I am skeptical of the Chicago politics involved here.

Someone clearly miscalculated because all along this was toted as a two horse race between Chi-Town and Rio. I think the story here is who missed that. Expectations could have been lowered. The failure, if one is celebrated by opponents of the President, is in another political gaffe in miscalculation and arrogance, but this is small potatoes. Most commentators have been on target with this – it looks back but in the end, is a mere footnote. Only the polarized types Maddow on Left and folks like Malkin on Right, are going bananas.

Good for Rio. Congrats to them and folks in South America. The USA’s real chance to shine at the Olympics is athletically, regardless of where they are held. Let’s go out, compete honorably and fairly, and bring back the gold!

Chicago would have lost no matter what Obama said or did. His advisors should have told him to stay home and save the taxpayers the one million dollars, that the trip cost.

@Facebook User: I’m sure your fuzzy memory of something you think that you may have heard about a Winter Olympic seven years ago is a much firmer foundation than the real world experience of every city and every government, who has ever hosted an Olympic.

I mean, it was nice of Rio to let us foist the game upon them;
They must have drawn the short straw.

From the Vancouver Sun via http://www.no2010.com/node/684

“The Olympic Games will always turn the world’s eyes to a host city but they won’t necessarily bring gold to the city coffers, according to an Olympic scholar.

Except for the Los Angeles Olympics in 1984, cities — including Montreal and Athens — generally don’t make a profit hosting the Games, said Kevin Walmsley, co-director of the University of Western Ontario’s International Centre for Olympic Studies.

Most are left holding the bag, which for Vancouver could be an $875-million-plus debt for the Olympic Athletes Village. In Montreal’s case it was a $1.5-billion debt and a white elephant Olympic Stadium dubbed the Big Owe, which was built in 1976 for the Summer Olympics and just recently paid off.”

@Magister: It’s just one source, but I wanted to defend myself after you put words in my mouth. My reference to Salt Lake was only part of my concern (which was a bribery scandal to get the Games). Apparently prosperity for the host cities isn’t as certain as you think.

Another concern with the Chicago bid from my reading was the balance of private/public funding. We are a country with debt problems and didn’t need to take this on, IMO. Hopefully it will be better managed for Rio than it clearly has been in some places.

All that aside, the more interesting story to me is, “Who let the President look like a failure?” The reaction of many folks (like the CNN reporter linked yesterday here @mediaite) showed arrogance (“CHICAGO IS OUT!?! MADRID IS SITLL IN!!?!?!”). It was portrayed as nearly a sure thing and when it played out with the first round exit, it seems that it was anything but. It’s not Mr. Obama’s fault Chicago didn’t get selected, but it’s someone’s fault that it was misrepresented, expectations were too high, and now he looks bad in all this.

@Facebook User: The linked article says that LA was profitable because it already had the infrastructure, while the cities it says was unprofitable had to build a lot of stuff from scratch. I haven’t really paid that much attention to Chicago’s specific proposal, but I don’t know why a major American city with multiple colleges and professional sports franchises wouldn’t already have a lot, if not most of the infrastructure and if they were to build something, it would be something they could keep.

There were several cities in the running to get these Olympics and other cities who hadn’t gotten this far. If hosting the Olympics had somehow become bad, why would anybody want them and why wouldn’t the games cease?

@Magister I agree with you on expecting Chicago to be able to handle it with their infrastructure. However, it seems maybe we both underestimate the needs. There was talk about Chicago transportation being inadequate and building temporary a temporary stadium that I was surprised about considering Soldier Field had just been renovated. I guess that’s why they chose a different city!

Obviously there can be positives to hosting. Money can be made in some industries even while debt piles in others. The financing/debt issue is only one part, but I think for the USA right now it comes at a bad time (even though the games are in 2016, we can probably agree the financial impact begins immediately). Another driving factor to host is prestige, clearly something the folks in Rio are passionate about. Look at their enthusiasm for winning the bid! There was enthusiasm in Chicago for many folks, but nationwide this is low on the radar. I’m not saying hosting the Olympics is all bad, just it’s my opinion that it’s not good for the USA right now. I think the loss is a blessing in disguise. Agree to disagree?

I blame Bush.

As a citizen of the world, I too was very disappointed. Maybe if president obama would have mentioned how “diverse” Chicago is a couple thousand more times we could have won.

That said, the IOC was smart not to hand the games over to a gangster like Richard Daley.

@Johnny ScrimShaw Don’t worry Johnny, corrupt Blago appointee Roland Burris already used that one.

There are now two Americas. This happened because the Obama administration ran a campaign that promised a more centrist approach and more inclusiveness. Instead, we’re getting a Leftist approach and a bunch of big-dollar spending that isn’t bearing fruit. What the hell did Maddow THINK was gonna happen? I mean, just because conservatives always seem to bend down and grab their own ankles doesn’t mean there’s not a tipping point somewhere along the line.

We’re all paying too much attention to Rachel Maddow. Of all the voices out there today, her’s is the most insignificant.

I’d love for America to get the Olympics… but not as an effort to feed Obama’s ego. His “last minute decision” to go reeked of egotism and bravado. I think he sees the left’s constant chanting of “Yes We Can,” as more than just a political slogan, but a personal motto… of course, I also believe he hears it as “Yes I Can.” And occasionally, it would be important for him AND the country, for him to hear “No, you can’t,” instead… if only to keep him from believing his own hype.

You guys hate America. I was rooting for America. Love it or leave it, bitches.

>His “last minute decision” to go reeked of egotism and bravado.

He’s the god damn President of the United States. He was told that at the last minute that going could tip in Chicago’s favor. Is there anything that can’t be politicized by you guys? Do you hate Obama so much that you’re willing to cheer for America’s failure? You guys sicken me.

“He was told that at the last minute that going could tip in Chicago’s favor.”

Yes, him and his team of egotists thought they were so big that they could march in last minute, throw together a speech, and swing it Chicago’s way. But they were wrong… and not just a little wrong… a lot wrong.

Also, lets get one thing straight here… for the past 8 years, the Liberal and Democratic left has been openly routing for failure. Whether it was Harry Reid or Jack Murtha talking about how “the war is lost,” the media fixated on Cindy Sheehan’s misguided protests outside the Bush ranch (of course, they don’t cover her anymore these days), or Keith Olbermann gleefully talking about the latest casualties and the number of days we’ve been fighting, they have made it SOP to root against America. And now, you have the nerve to whine about Republicans (along with the majority of Chicago-ians) who didn’t support the President jaunting off across the globe to pitch the Olympics for his home town?! REALLY?!

If you want to think that they were routing “against America,” fine… but let’s compare: The entire Liberal/Democratic establishment routing against American in a WAR TIME situation, and applauding the death of young men and women… versus routing against America for who gets to host a sporting event. “Ooooh… those nasty Republicans and their anti-sports mentality. Always rooting against the volleyball team, when they should be rooting against soldiers… wouldn’t that show their patriotism.”

It makes you sick? Yeah… it make me sick too.

Liberals are somehow “traitors” because they oppose an invasion based on fabricated falsehoods – spilling the blood of more than 4000 of our proud troops, all just to ensure that a 50 year old wahabbi gets to barter goats for his fourth 13 year old wife.

You’re a true patriot.

@m Do you hate Obama so much that you’re willing to cheer for America’s failure? YES THEY DO

it is hard for me to believe that Obama hasn’t done just ONE thing that any of these posters could agree with. OH WAIT maybe being conserative means the same as being negative I sure wouldn’t want to live in any of your heads for a minute.

m says:
October 4, 2009 at 2:47 pm

“…all just to ensure that a 50 year old wahabbi gets to barter goats for his fourth 13 year old wife.”

Nice racist comment… good to see your true colors. So much for the “humanitarian left” we’re always hearing about… I guess to them, certain people can be gassed, raped, and murdered, and it’s no big deal. Nice.

But back to the Olympics… when a sitting congresman says that soldiers killed people the dead of night, even though there’s no evidence of that… he’s actually just thoughtfully opposing the war?! Is that what you’re suggesting? Way to go Mr. Murtha… you slandered soldiers, potentially cost others their lives… but shame on those Republicans for not wanting the Olympics… that’s what’s really important.

Do you even listen to yourself, M? Opposing the war before it began was fine… opposing it once it began was fine… but suggesting that soldiers committed murder, while they’re in harms way, not acceptable. And if you can’t see the difference between the two, you might want to invest in a new pair of glasses.

Pam1151 says:
October 4, 2009 at 4:15 pm

OH WAIT maybe being conserative [sic] means the same as being negative I sure wouldn’t want to live in any of your heads for a minute.

No, you wouldn’t… because then you might have to question “the One,” or those Democrats you’ve put your unquestioned faith in. Reducing this discussion down to, “They hate America,” is just about the dumbest thing possible, and shows a complete lack of ability to debate an issue on it’s merits. The Olympic failure has plenty to talk about, but if you (and the wacky left) is just more interested in foolishly attacking those who disagree with you, so be it. But don’t pretend like you’re better, smarter, or more ethical than anyone else… you’re not. You’re playing the same game you’re railing against, and your hypocrisy is clear as day.

Oy! I remember when America was somewhat civil