Conservatives Revel In America's Olympic Defeat

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ACS

October 2, 2009 4:43 PM in reply to BlindBat

All this Republican elation strikes me as very un-American.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 5:12 PM in reply to ACS

Yes, imagine just how loudly they would cheer if there were another terrorist attack here. Seriously.

-- ARG

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

3star2nr

October 2, 2009 5:14 PM in reply to ACS

thats because it is.

first they were against bill clinton going to NK to rescue those two americans, then they were against the captured soldier.

Now they are against the olympics comingto the US a move that would have helped the economy significantly.

if there was ever a doubt that republicans and conservatives are fucking fascist traitors, they just removed all doubt.

Too bad the dems are too fucking stupid to exploit the hell out of this. Id be running so sec ads with thios shit from now to 2012

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

DaddyD

October 4, 2009 9:06 AM in reply to 3star2nr

They don't need to. This stuff speaks for itself. See mJJ's post below. I know a lifelong Republican who quit the party just before Obama's speech to students. She couldn't live with the vicious insanity of her own party anymore, and specifically, attacking a president for encouraging students to study hard and stay in school.

The best strategy is to stay on task, get the work of the nation done, and leave the Republicans to hang themselves with their own rope.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

marty9957

October 4, 2009 1:48 PM in reply to DaddyD

I know some democrats who did the same. They couldn't see a president taking the lead in the indoctrination of our youth. The NEA already does a good enough job at that. The right will win out in the end. It's called the right for a reason.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Heron

October 5, 2009 11:50 AM in reply to marty9957

I sincerely hope you are joking, because that is ridiculous and insane. Anyone who actually believes that because political conservatism is called "the right" it is naturally correct in all things is simply not a sane individual.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 5, 2009 8:34 PM in reply to Heron

Very good post, the only sane response to such an insane and arcane concept.

Not to mention, simple minded - I guess Marty just isn't very sharp, is he?

~Johnny-O

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

lousgirl84

October 5, 2009 5:44 PM in reply to marty9957

You lie!!!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 5, 2009 8:31 PM in reply to lousgirl84

YOU GO, girl!!!

Their own words, right back at 'em!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

HopefulPatriot

October 2, 2009 6:24 PM in reply to ACS

I really hope that Republicans make this a sticking point. It will solidify their identity as Anti-American. Anybody else keeping score?

Against Stimulus to help Families during Recession
+Against American Car Companies

+Against Improving American Health Care System to improve the health of Americans

+Against America hosting the Olympics.

I love it when they do all the dirty work for us!!!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

OhSoBlue

October 2, 2009 8:57 PM in reply to HopefulPatriot

Can we now call them for their unpatriotic attitudes? I mean seriously, how much further do they have to fall before we just call them on it.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

trblmkr

October 3, 2009 11:21 AM in reply to OhSoBlue

IOC members rejected us because they are still pissed off about BUSH! 9 months was not enough time to salve the wounds. see my post: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/trblmkr/

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

marty9957

October 4, 2009 1:58 PM in reply to trblmkr

I suppose the left will still be blaming Bush for Obama's failures at the end of his fourth and final year in office. Whatever floats your boat.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

trblmkr

October 4, 2009 8:36 PM in reply to marty9957

What failures would those be?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mJJ

October 3, 2009 6:04 PM in reply to OhSoBlue

Actually, you need to add "racist pigs" to your question. I have heard the most bizarre racist comments about President Obama coming from my own Republican Party. It is humiliating and it is enough to drive me away from the party. I conclude that God's leadership prompots me to leave the ungodly party that keeps on perpetrating this racist swill. I have tried staying in in order to make changes but the tide is too great. The sort of things on hears are simply too outrageous to listen to. So let the bigots run the party into the ground. Their base will get smaller and smaller and the trend away from Republicans will get more and more obvious. God has a way of making insulting behavior obvious and so disgusting and behold, the Republican blabbers have reached that point. their conversation on this issue is nauseating and I am a life long Republican but no longer. As a Christian, I simply have to get out.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 4, 2009 9:13 PM in reply to mJJ

I know just what you mean. I am a life-long Truman Democrat, but I learned my forbearance and discernment from my mother, who was such a truly pious Christian that she did not have a mean bone in her entire body.

I remember Watergate very well, and that one of the two reporters who broke the whole thing open, James Woodward, was a Republican, but that in the end, he did the right thing, he went for his country - and the story that destroyed a presidency that had almost led the country over a cliff.

I remember my mom, who had always had Richard Nixon's number since before I was even born, saying, "Now, I know God doesn't want us to judge, but I just don't like the things that man is doing to this country - or the GOP (which she called 'Graft On Parade', hahahaha)."

She was right, and both of my parents agreed with my dad's assessment that "If they give ol' Tricky Dick enough rope, sooner or later he'll hang himself!" And of course, ultimately, he did.

Now, as you may have picked up, I've been a Nixon hater for decades, and I never will dismiss the importance of his resignation, but I will say this: Richard Nixon was a brilliant politician. Nor will I begrudge him the credit he so rightfully deserves for all the good things he did, some of which were ahead of his time - like the EPA, for example - giving 18-year-olds the right to vote, opening up China to the West, moving all government holidays to Mondays, OSHA. Lots of very important things.

But that does not change the choices we have to make, then or now (btw, I doubt if history will be so kind to W Bush, and rightfully so!); my mother was right, sometimes, by the light of one's own faith, you have to decide where you come down on.

I don't know what is to become of the GOP, in the very near future; I hear from Chris Matthews that only something like 22% of register Republicans self-identify now as Republicans, and that is a damn shame...22%.

May I suggest that there needs to be, as unpalatable as it may seem to true fiscal Conservatives (many pro-choice, small-government, strong-defense traditional 'Ike' Conservatives as I percieve you to be), a sort of rebellion or re-taking of the GOP by members such as yourselves, led by the few like-minded souls who still remain (Snowe, Gov Crist of Florida, perhaps Ron Paul, etc), kicking to the curb the Neo-Cons and the Radical Evangelicals who think they own God and God's Bible (and would, if they could, own the whole country, for that matter - hell, they already own the GOP), and eventually out of the Party altogether; perhaps they could form a third party, let's call it the 'Christian Conservative Party', which could be marginalized until they finally went away. We can only hope!

Speaking as an unrepentant 'yellow dog' Democrat, I would hate to see the dissolution of the Republican Party, if for no other reason than for its historical value; in order for true conservatism to survive, I feel it's important to remember that the term 'Radical Conservative' is counter-intuitive and an oxymoron.

Think about it: How can you be a Conservative and embrace anyting of a radical nature at the same time?

How can you be a Radical and have any part of you that is still consrvative?

Wouldn't one school of thought cancel out the other?

There is hope for the GOP, but those of you who remember what true Conservatism is must act, and soon before the only working party is the Democrats - we don't want that, and that is no way to run a democracy!

As I understand it, true conservatives believe in three essentials, if I'm not mistaken:

1) A limited federal government,

2) A robust defense, and

3) Limited federal intrusion into our personal lives.

Correct? We may not always see eye-to-eye, but none of these are elements Democrats cannot work with.

Unfortunately, things have gone far beypond that now. We've got to restore the balance, or the Party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Gen Eisenhower will become just a political joke, or worse yet, a thing of the past.

No one wants to see that, least of all Obama Democrats.

~Johnny

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Heron

October 5, 2009 11:53 AM in reply to mJJ

Amen to this. How can someone who values courtesy listen to the malice in the words of a Michelle Malkin or Bachmen and still feel comfortable associating one's self with them?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

marty9957

October 4, 2009 1:42 PM in reply to HopefulPatriot

The only reason Obama went to pitch for Chicago was because he got some bad advise. He needed a feather in his hat and his advisers told him this was a sure thing. Kinda like the CIA and a "slam dunk" in the Bush administration. That is the truth of it. Politics.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ivy22

October 5, 2009 9:08 AM in reply to marty9957

Except trying for the Olympic bid did not plunge us into a war of choice in Iraq and nobody died.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Dogger

October 3, 2009 11:29 AM in reply to ACS

Actually, it's worse than "un-American", it's anti-American.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 2:42 PM in reply to Dogger

The more I read about the spontaneous joy so many conservatives felt that Chicago's bid "failed", the more it seems they were already scared that if they had won, Obama's popularity would soar even higher.

They and their toady MSM have desperately tried to bust Obama's chops on every issue, in order to diminish his popularity, so they might turn this whole thing around and retrieve their heady delusion of a "permanent majority" (ala Karl Rove). From the teabaggers to the birthers to these gleeful anti-olympics psuedopatriots, their desperation has been blatant, but has yet to make even a minor dent in the Obama popularity.

So when Chicago "failed", their worst fears of an Obama popularity surge were assuaged in an instant, and their glee was exposed. Clearly, they were more concerned with Obama growing more popular, than they were with Chicago getting the Olympics.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

marty9957

October 4, 2009 1:15 PM in reply to JEP07

You mean the plummeting image. No chance.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mJJ

October 4, 2009 12:05 AM in reply to ACS

Yes it is amazing. But no surprise. Actually it is a obvious that with far right wing Republicans, their ego comes way before the good of their fellow Americans are concerned. But alas as a Republican who will be leaving the party, I am sasd to say that this attitude is par for the course. Amazing that any Republican can gloat over the Chicago population losing this chance to improve their lives. Never in many years have I seen people in my party acting so obviously un-American. It's the economy, you stupids and if some Americans lose we all lose. Amazing that so many let political stupidity get in the way of what is good for fellow Americans. But alas, Republicans are so eaten up with jealousy and racism about the Obama win that it is driving them crazy. No more evenhandedness or patriotism left in the Republican party these days. Sad, sad day for our country.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mJJ

October 5, 2009 11:30 PM in reply to ACS

Just reinforces the fact that Repoblicans have no interest in trying to win jobs for workers who could benefit from having the Olympics in Chicago. It was a long shot but great that Obama showed his concern for workers so he went, even when the outcome looked dim. You can be sure, that Hanity and Gingrich cares less about the common people of Chicago that would have benefited greatly if they could have gotten the Olympics. Only the really 'unsure of themselves' folks do not have the guts to try for the benefit of so many even though the odds are small. I can hear it now from the lips of this crabby bunch, "Let the poor eat cake". And they wonder why their ranks are shrinking!!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

coltraning

October 3, 2009 7:55 PM in reply to BlindBat

The game is so obvious - this little dance between the right wingnuts and the toady MSM who can't wait to let the haters drive the story. You can be damned sure the haters have a negative spin ready for ANY eventuality. If Obama gets it, we hear nothing but talk of cronyism and the fix is in and dirty Chicago-style politics. If he doesn't go, Obama hates America and cannot even be bothered. The same game with Health care...if he fails, it is his waterloo, he is done. If it passes without a public option it is a combination of we beat him back from his attempt to take over health care AND it is a government take over of health care. If there is a public option, he is a combination of Pol Pot, Hitler, Mao, Stalin and Jon Gosselin. It is utterly predictable the fat, racist white hater males manning the mics don't believe a single word they say, and the MSM is being f**ked like a three $ whore is hoping Beck, Limbaugh, Drudge and company don't hit her if she cooperates...

There is a real ray of hope, though, and, of all people, David Brooks nailed it: The right wing is like the wizard of oz, they have no real power. Remember when they were going to finish off McCain? When they were going to fix it so Obama couldn't beat Hillary? When Obama was toast and done in the general? When Sotamayor was sunk? It is a fraud. My best advice (and I give this as much to myself as to anyone else.) Turn off cable, even msnbc, stop reading sensationalist and hysterical blogs like the Huff Po and take a breath. Obama will pass some form of health care, an incremental improvement, and that will be lesson number 3876 that the right wing noise machine is sound and fury signifying precious little...it's like the guy who has one move on the court, and keeps going back to it, no matter that everyone has figured it out. Because of the money behind the haters and the complicity of the beltway boys, these stories will continue to spew out on politico, WaPo and other sources of conventional tedium, but they will lose their sting...

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Penelope

October 4, 2009 3:53 PM in reply to BlindBat

Most Chicagoans didn't even want the Olympics to be hosted by their city. They didn't want the expense or the hassle. With the state of the current economy, why would anyone wish this humongous expense on the citizens of Chicago?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

October 5, 2009 6:00 PM in reply to Penelope

It's true that not all Chicagoans were in favor of hosting the Olympics -- it's an enormous undertaking, and not without risk, so it's only to be expected that not everyone would see it as a good thing -- but according to the poll numbers posted in the clip from Rachel Maddow's show elsewhere on this site, the support was around 75% in favor (I don't recall the exact figure). Most Chicagoans did support the bid.

That said, it may be just as well for them that they did not win it. Hosting the Olympics is a decidedly mixed blessing.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

happycozy

October 2, 2009 3:26 PM

Wow! Just--wow!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

rynato

October 2, 2009 5:15 PM in reply to happycozy

"As a citizen of the world who believes that No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation, I'm glad that the Obama White House's jingoist rhetoric and attempt to pay back Chicago cronies at the expense of undermining our relationships with our allies failed," he wrote.

How THE FUCK does any right-winger get off:

a) saying they are a citizen of the world (right-wingers typically sneer back at that one, 'does the world protect your freedoms?');

b) that America shouldn't try to dominate other nations? Hello, Iraq? Bush Doctrine?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Partisancheese

October 2, 2009 5:55 PM in reply to rynato

Just what I was thinking...I thought that was the motto of the right. Mindless "domination"

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Doug in Mount Vernon

October 3, 2009 1:00 PM in reply to rynato

And apparently he doesn't understand what the term "jingoist" means....

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Juble

October 2, 2009 3:31 PM

Wow! So called Americans revealing cuz an American state was denied abid to host the Olympics.Well,sure seems like Repukes are trying their best to destroy America at all cost.How sick wow!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

iamwil

October 2, 2009 3:31 PM

I guess it is time for Chicagoans to take names and roll up the welcome mat appropriately to make those taking joy in Chicago's loss as host to the 2016 Olympic Games feel unwelcome there.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 4:18 PM in reply to iamwil

Some of the events were going to be held in my state, Wisconsin.

So, hey, my fellow Cheeseheads - how do you feel about this? Are we feeling warm and friendly to Republicans?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

marty9957

October 4, 2009 2:04 PM in reply to iamwil

Who in their right mind would want to go to Chicago. Please.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ivy22

October 5, 2009 9:15 AM in reply to marty9957

What rock did you crawl out from under? You have some of the creepiest logic I have ever tried to understand. Why do you hate America and your fellow Americans? Time to take a long, hard and honest look in the mirror, marty995.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Walter Mitty

October 2, 2009 3:32 PM

Rush ripped off Drudge word for word.

I'd hope somebody would make a story out of this - the radical right were elated that Chicago lost it's Olympic bid - a bid that 84% of Americans supported - for nakedly partisan reasons.

I'd LOVE if Gibbs led off his presser with these wing nut quotes.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

justperceptions

October 2, 2009 4:11 PM in reply to Walter Mitty

Seriously,
Why not explain that there's a political agitator movement in America that's out of their minds and will be provoked into inflammatory rhetoric anytime they imagine it up. They call it satirizing, but really, it's just channeled hatred. Sad, really.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 2:22 PM in reply to Walter Mitty

"Rush ripped off Drudge word for word."

Reconsider this; where did Drudge get his latest talking points?

From the same source as The Lump?

Why do I smell a Rove somewhere in all this?

Especially with this type of evidence of a common source that all these not-very-original wingnuts get their talking points from.

Rush may not have dredged drudge, they may both have taken their words from a common source.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

DaddyD

October 4, 2009 9:12 AM in reply to Walter Mitty

It'll be on the Daily Show. Guaranteed.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

human

October 2, 2009 3:32 PM

sad--wingnuts root against America just because Obama supports our Olympic bid.

I guess the world rejected Bush when NYC lost the Olympics as well. Of course, they had rejected him long before anyway.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Tres

October 2, 2009 3:33 PM

Which is the bigger, more resounding rebuke? The IOC eliminates Chicago as a candidate for the 2016 Olympics, despite Obama's personal appeal, or MOST of AMERICA elects Obama and ousts a Republican majority in congress in 2008 despite widespread assinine braying from the right?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Bullsmith

October 2, 2009 3:36 PM

At first I wonder how so many on the right can so openly take glee in the failure of their fellow Americans, at the jobs lost if nothing else. But reading comments elsewhere it quickly becomes clear many don't consider Chicago worth caring about. Like New York and San Francisco.

They really are separatists. They're just too dumb to know it.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

cwnidog

October 2, 2009 5:10 PM in reply to Bullsmith

I heard it explained very succinctly this morning: No matter how much the Right claims to love America, they hate Obama more.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

rynato

October 3, 2009 4:02 AM in reply to cwnidog

Then he must be doing something right.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 5, 2009 8:40 PM in reply to rynato

Yeah, I've been sayin' that for a year!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mJJ

October 4, 2009 12:21 AM in reply to Bullsmith

You are so right! Imagine sny American that could be gleeful because Chicago lost the Olympics. You have to be totally un-American and filled with hate to rejoice with this news. Amazing and so Anti-American to boot!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ivy22

October 2, 2009 3:37 PM

Real Americans would root for America.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

teemunney

October 2, 2009 3:38 PM

Has anyone seen FoxNews's homepage over the past couple of hours (I'd upload the pic but I'm at work and most image uploading stuff is blocked). Anyway, the page has the Obamas hugging juxtaposed with letdown people in Chicago with the tagline on the pic: "'O', What a Letdown". A bit earlier, it said "'O' What a Failure" instead. I'm guessing they got complaints or (gasp) someone there realized they went too far.

Seriously? Why is the right so happy about a defeat? Why do conservatives hate America?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 1:36 PM in reply to teemunney

We will see the MSM putting the words "Obama" and "failure" together often in the near future. The harder it gets for them to manipulate his popularity ratings, the more they will heat up the rhetoric.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

maybeyeah

October 2, 2009 3:38 PM

Remember, when Atlanta hosted the Olympics in 1996 there was a home-grown terrorist attack at it. One of the Fringe Right's secret folk heroes, Eric Rudolph. 2002 had already been promised to Salt Lake City (amidst a huge bribery scandal), otherwise they would've never gotten it, not after Atlanta. And think of how many enemies the United States has today, both inside and out, how much crazier we've become. Surprise surprise they didn't give it to Chicago, the IOC is worried about another Munich or Mumbai. Maybe another "pro-lifer" will set off a bomb in the middle of a crowd. You'll notice none of those "suicide bomber" countries are ever considered, are they? A lot of the world sees us as being just another one of them.

So that's a victory for the Republicans, right?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

3star2nr

October 2, 2009 5:20 PM in reply to maybeyeah

also why would the olympics want to associate with a country that tortures and doesnt punish war criminals.

We have the republicans to thank for this awesome legacy as well

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Duck Stab

October 2, 2009 3:45 PM

Well given that the entire wingnutosphere has been throwing a perpetual temper tantrum since last November, I suppose they can get all worked up over this if they want.

It just goes to show how stupid and hyper partisan they really are. Their hatred for Obama knows no bounds at all, and this wasn't a personal rebuke against Obama, but they are trying to make it out like it is.

Oh well, little children need to crow every now and then.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

pinson

October 2, 2009 3:47 PM

This whole thing is really bizarre. Says a lot about how infantile these people are.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

A Missouri voter

October 2, 2009 4:01 PM in reply to pinson

My thought exactly. I guess I am glad that they are so easily pleased, because I like for people to be happy. Nevertheless, they sure look very childish.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

LeaningLeft

October 2, 2009 3:47 PM

Here in Indiana the stories were about how Chicago getting the Olympics would help bring money into our state as well since we pretty much border Chicago. I'm sure the same could be said for parts of Michigan. So, the Republicans are cheering that businesses in 3 states are going to lose out on millions of dollars of sales. Sounds like it would have been a pretty good economic stimulus to me. Republicans, once again, prove they are against anything that would help out the economy.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Maritza

October 2, 2009 3:49 PM in reply to LeaningLeft

It would have brought more than $20 billion to the U.S. and >300,000 full thime jobs.

It would have been a good thing for Chicago, Illinois, the mid-west and the United States.

Cheering that the United States didn't win surely is NOT patriotic.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 4:20 PM in reply to LeaningLeft

Let's not forget Wisconsin, which would have hosted some of the events.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Virginia

October 2, 2009 3:48 PM

As somebody pointed out on another website, this may be the best possible outcome for Obama. If Chicago had won, BO would have "owned" the Olympics as far as the righties were concerned, so any hint of a scandal, cost overrun, tax increase, etc. connected with the Olympics would have been layed at Obama's feet. At least we will be spared that. The right's schadenfreude will go on for a week or so, but the lasting image will be their rooting against American jobs.

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2009/10/02/losing-the-olympics-bid-is-good-for-obama.aspx

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Maritza

October 2, 2009 4:10 PM in reply to Virginia

Exactly!

There is a great article on TIME which basically said the same thing.

"But ultimately, it’s a good thing for him. As I wrote on Monday, the Olympics are notorious for running massively over budget. The organizing committees are always rife with infighting and power games as all manner of colorful cronies badger members to get their paws on some of those coveted Olympics dollars. Public support for the Olympics in Chicago itself was already lukewarm. Residents would have been facing seven years of disruptive construction and roadwork as their city raced to prepare itself. It’s a recipe for serious disgruntlement."

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

gizmo

October 2, 2009 3:49 PM

A good measure of the sorry state of the Right these days is the small "victories" that they celebrate. Cheering the fact that the Olympics will not take place in Chicago makes them look anti-American and very, very small. Worse, they thought that Rep. Joe Wilson did a heroic thing when he stood up during Obama's address to Congress and blurted out an insult. Their horizons are set pretty low.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

TaraV

October 2, 2009 3:52 PM

I really keep waiting for the moment that their antics will stop shocking me. I read this article with my mouth completely agape. Rooting against America?!? Really? That's what you're going to go with? I have never been sure about Olympic bids...they frequently don't work out well for the host city. But that's not the argument they are making. They are just happy Obama didn't get what he wanted regardless of the potential good consequences.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

October 2, 2009 4:19 PM in reply to TaraV

And yet, this was the party that was screaming "America First!" all last summer and fall. I knew it was a sham at the time, but I'm still always astonished at how blatantly they have dumped it.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

rbeats

October 2, 2009 3:54 PM

What do expect from people who glorify mediocrity and vilify those who strive to push the human potential?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Schmed

October 2, 2009 3:55 PM

So, Republicans are rejoicing that all of the thousands of jobs that the Olympics bring will now be unavailable to the unemployed in Chicago (particularly ironic since that's what Newt is harping on) and all of the tourist and projects $$$ for the local economy will flow to leftist Rio. Why do the Republicans hate America?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Bullsmith

October 2, 2009 3:57 PM

You know if you ask a Republican to list their achievements since the election, they will respond with a small number of what are, in fact, failures. The party of "No" has currently redefined success for themselves as failure by others.

Wasn't very different under Clinton, and the worst thing is that while he did achieve some significant things by 'triangulating' he also moved the center right as he did so. And now a significant portion of the Republican party seems to have gone so far Right they've lost contact with reality.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 2, 2009 3:58 PM

Clearly the right is off the wall, and we can ourselves revel in their idiotic reveling.

But to be honest, as one of tens of thousands who have been fighting for real health care reform, it's clear to me that the President's priorities were massively confused in going abroad to fight for this while the public option was left to fend for itself.

While he was there, there was a Senate Fin Comm vote, as we all know. And as we all know, a little pressure from the White House might have swayed a few more senators.

I'm sorry guys, but this onus is on our guy.

The fact that the right is idiotic doesn't change the fact that Obama had larger responsibilities which he has largely abandoned. It doesn't mean I don't want to piss on the right (I do) but I'd rather not have to... I'd rather a President who fights for the things he initially proposes. Let's not forget he was once smartly for single payer, and abandoned that, too, perhaps wisely, for the public option. But at this point to have let a strong public option to fade is inexcusable.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

TaraV

October 2, 2009 5:08 PM in reply to again

Sorry, but you sound a lot like a concern troll with that post. Obama leaves for how many hours to make a pitch in Copenhagen while also meeting with McChrystal and somehow he's abandoned his post? Good lord, people are capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time - especially this guy. You may think he should have been more actively involved in twisting arms in the Senate Finance committee but his going to Copenhagen has nothing to do with that.

And, no, he never has been for single payer. He answered a questionaire onece that he liked the idea in theory. He has never believed it would actually work here. The man is very much a realist...incredibly pragmatic...much to the dismay of liberals. That's the man we elected and if folks didn't recognize that then now you have plenty of evidence.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

cwnidog

October 2, 2009 5:20 PM in reply to TaraV

To tell the truth, I think Again was just just judging by the standards of 2001- 2008, where the occupant of the Oval Office couldn't even do one thing at a time.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 2, 2009 5:24 PM in reply to cwnidog

cwindog,

That's not my point. I didn't work for Obama because he was Bush! The fact that 2001-through 2008 was the lowest point in US history doesn't mean that I don't hold my President to his promises.

I didn't support Obama because I wanted an icon. I voted for Obama because I agreed with his policies and believed that he would fight hard for them.

But I don't see that happening with the public option.

It's not healthy for him or for us to withhold sane judgment. That doesn't mean you run around depicting him in awful ways like the right has, but it does mean you hold him to the standards and promises he presented.

He needs to be held to his promises. A fan club, he doesn't need.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 2, 2009 5:21 PM in reply to TaraV

Sorry, Tara, but disagreeing with the majority doesn't necessarily make anyone a troll.

And while I clearly noted that it might have been a wise move to push for the public option instead of single payer, Obama has very clearly left the public option to fend for itself.

I worked for the Obama campaign, and I knew it would be difficult after he won office, not only because there were big fights ahead, but because there were so many willfully naive followers who wouldn't hold him to ANY of his promises.

If that makes me a troll in your eyes, so be it, but that is a very shallow conclusion.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

TaraV

October 2, 2009 5:33 PM in reply to again

By all means hold his feet to the fire on the public option. But don't succumb to the right wing meme that somehow going to Copenhagen equates to abandoning duties at home. He's not an arm twister, OK? Even if he'd stayed here instead of going, he wasn't going to do that. That's the man you worked to get elected....always was.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 2, 2009 5:39 PM in reply to TaraV

I'm not succumbing to a "right wing meme" and I understand your concerns. But I'm also aware on the week he went, the Senate Fin Comm had a vote. An important vote.

And if he had been supporting the public option all summer, instead of popping up only once in a while (and I can't say there's been real support this fall, either!) then I wouldn't feel so upset.

I'm not one of those people who thought he was diluting the power of the Presidency by doing all those Sunday talk shows - I wanted him blasting from every radio and TV at least once a week this summer in support of health care reform with a strong public option. So I was glad he did that.

But I wasn't happy that he went to Copenhagen - the Olympics cost cities more than they bring in, so it made him look frivolous. Yes, I know it was only for a short visit, and he flew overnight to get there.

But if that much energy had been expended on Monday for the Sen Fin Comm vote... well, you either do or do not understand why Copenhagen grates on me.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Stroszek

October 2, 2009 11:32 PM in reply to again

Obama was overseas for a couple of hours. He left more than 24 hours after the Senate Finance Committee held a vote. In fact, he left after the Senate Finance Committee had completed the mark-up process altogether. You are woefully uninformed.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 2:05 PM in reply to again

Again, I have to add my own voice to the suspicions that you are either a very subtle troll, either that, or you are a naive leftist, who imagines your opinion should be the law of the land, and Obama's supposed to dictate that law somehow into reality..

While I would probably agree with your ideology, and that it should be the law of the land, I would never assume to blame Obama for any of this, nor would I call his style anything but masterful chessmanship, in the face of historic odds.

Blaming Obama for the failure of Congress to support the public will is a very lazy approach to these problems, if you AREN'T a troll.

The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 3, 2009 2:57 PM in reply to again

Yes, he just totally abandoned his duties. What with Air Force One having absolutely no communications facilities and being so small he had to leave the staff behind and all, it was just a totally lost day, like when all of us fly coach.

Seriously, just stop it. Presidents always talk about how much more work they get done on Air Force One than they do when their in the Oval. The plane just about has better communication and data facilities than the White House does and getting everybody into closer proximity seems to improve the working environment. There wasn't a goddamned thing he could have done on any issue in DC that he couldn't get done on the trip, so just give it a rest.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

AJM

October 4, 2009 7:52 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve

Chill.

I suppose that it would be a little much to ask Obama to share the secret of how he walks on water but do you think you could get someone to get him to share his miracle cure for jet lag?

If the presidents as a group say they get more done on Air Force one they are not controlling their work environment in the Oval Office optimally.

The point of more effectiveness when in closer proximity is true and is the basis of the complaint by those who would rather that he had stayed home and lobbied the Senate on health care reform.

It is clear that President Obama was spending time and energy on working for the Olympics. It is fair to argue about whether the expenditure was well chosen -- it is absurd to argue that it didn't take time and energy away from alternative activities.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 5:23 PM in reply to TaraV

Yes, the idea that Obama took his eye off the ball to go over to Copenhagen is complete bullshit -- again.

-- ARG

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 2, 2009 5:26 PM in reply to ARG in Chicago

Be that as it may, arg, but is it true or not that Obama has not given sufficient support for the public option.

If not Obama, then it should be Rahm.

But both have been absent.

Like I said, criticizing the President on just cause doesn't make you a troll, or a right-winger. It simply means you think it's better for him and everyone else if he hews as closely to what he promised as possible.

And I think he's failing in substantial measure in support of the public option.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

TaraV

October 2, 2009 5:38 PM in reply to again

Here's the thing. Obama promised healthcare reform. As part of that, he advocated for a public option. What if (and I don't know if this is true of not) but what if the two are mutually exclusive? They have better sight of this than I do. I think the public option is a great idea but clearly the man we elected is an incremental realist and he will not abandon health care reform as a whole for the public option in particular.

I don't know. I reserve judgement on it. I certainly don't know how to sheppard legislation through. There are times I wish the Dems would just shove it through the way the Rs did - but then again, I knew when I supported Obama that that wasn't his approach.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 2, 2009 5:45 PM in reply to TaraV

Of course, I too knew that it wasn't his approach to ram anything down anyone's throats.

That's not my point, and if I didn't make it clear, it's my fault. Please let me try to explain.

66 to 76% of the US public, and over 3/4 of physicians, support the public option.

Had Obama been more vocal and supportive of the public option in the spring and summer, it would be seen for what it is - an incremental change.

Instead, he lay down and let the right take over. And how convenient was that for the insurance companies?

But don't take my word for it - ask Dr. Marcia Angell of Harvard, or Robert Reich of UCB, or Ellen Shaffer of EQUAL.... Or check the August 6 cover story of BusinessWeek "The Health Insurers Have Already Won."

Look, FDR ran into opposition, too. And he reveled in fighting it. That's not to be expected of Barack, I understand, but neither is lying down and letting them run over you.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 2:59 PM in reply to again

"Had Obama been more vocal and supportive of the public option in the spring and summer, it would be seen for what it is - an incremental change."

"it would be seen" by whom?

You have an interesting opinion here, but you speak it as certitude, not opinion. You assume a great deal of authority, and thereby risk a loss of credibility, by stating it as a fact, rather than an opinion.

It is certainly worth consideration, and I tend to agree with you, but not everyone else would agree with you, too many brainwashed people would not likely "see" it the way you do, especially if they're in the teabagger school of political disinformation.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

AJM

October 4, 2009 6:29 PM in reply to JEP07

Once President Obama gave his health care speech support of the public option did go up. QED.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

coltraning

October 3, 2009 8:00 PM in reply to again

actually, FDR backed down and cut spending in 1937 and, according to Nobel laureate Paul Krugman, that choice gave us another 4 years of recession. he did it to pay back his rich friends...FDR was very much a split the difference guy. Many were calling for bolder action, and he had enough of a majority in both houses that he could have passed just about anything he wanted in 1937. Instead he retrenched. I know he has been lionized in retrospect, and certainly did many good things that we still benefit from, but he was an incrementalist and a triangulator in many ways...

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

AJM

October 4, 2009 6:31 PM in reply to coltraning

And the policy outcomes were better when he didn't do this.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

truthspeaker

October 3, 2009 1:25 PM in reply to again

I don't know what to make of your complains. Again I will ask, have you ever heard of 'FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE'. How much have you done to influence those senators, who for reasons known only to them, that the public option is what Americans want?. Did you collect some of the horror stories from your fellow citizens and fax them to the 'august' panel, or is this just about BO?. I swear, if you're not a closet republican, then you are just a shit disturber. Contribute to the dialogue in a constructive way and leave the pettiness to the republicans. Thank you

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

impik

October 2, 2009 6:53 PM in reply to again

Seriously? He was away for 20 hours, on a Friday, including night-time, where he would probably be SLEEPING in the White House. That's a ridiculous argument.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

bluesplashy

October 2, 2009 9:29 PM in reply to again

Give it a rest again. The man can talk on the phone can't he. He slept on the plane, talked to McCrystal and came home. Next your be whining he stopped to eat and sleep and shit while the Senate Finance Committee was meeting.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Stroszek

October 2, 2009 11:29 PM in reply to again

Obama went to Denmark more than 24 hours after the Senate Finance Committee voted on the public option amendments. You are full of it.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Stefanie

October 2, 2009 4:00 PM

Definitely a ridiculous thing to be cheer about. So what if Obama is from Chicago. The Olympics is not a political race, it's race of international cooperation. This is really pathetic if people are really cheering this disappointment as a victory. Do these people even realize it 2016 is seven years away? As in Obama would may not be president then? Sad, truly sad.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

GTFOOH

October 2, 2009 4:05 PM

It is hard to believe that grown men act they way they do in the Republican party. They have got to be some of the most immature people on the planet! Nothing wrong with being partisan, nothing wrong with wishing your advisary ill will. But the manner in which in manifest itself in the Republican party is beyond childish. It's scary to think that some of these people actually have kids and are responsible for teaching them right from wrong!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

The Old Grouch

October 2, 2009 4:06 PM

I'll say it: Republicans hate America. And I hate Republicans.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 4:16 PM in reply to The Old Grouch

My thoughts exactly. Why do conservatives hate America?

Hey, Rush, Glenn, Michelle, Erick -
America. Love it or leave it.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

BrewhouseBob

October 2, 2009 4:09 PM

The crazy right will oppose anything and everything Obama endorses with complete disregard for the consequences. This pleases the Republican base - that 20% of citizens who are too stupid to think for themselves. But I have to hope that the remaining 80% of Americans recognize this for what it is.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Chesire111

October 2, 2009 4:09 PM

I am stunned - honestly stunned that these guys simply have no idea how this looks to the rest of the country. I get that they hate Obama. I get that they hate Obama more than they love America. I just can't beleive they could possibly be so completely oblivious not to realize how the public is going to react to them rooting against the United States!

Why do they hate America?

Simply breathtaking!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Seeryer

October 2, 2009 4:17 PM

I really wish the IOC would say the reason America was not picked is becasue of the danger presented by the domestic terrorists who try to make poltical statments by setting off bombs in the Olympic village. Eric Rudolph was a right winger who tried to embarass his country becasue of Roe vs Wade. Congrats Eric, I am sure your ilk played no role in this decision. It was becasue Obama is so hated around the world. Right wingers are fukcing jokes.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 4:18 PM

This is why Right Wingers will never hold on to the majority. They are so full of hate, and so proud of it, they can't help themselves. Whether it's African-Americans, Muslims, Mexicans, Jews, whatever ... They reveal themselves at every opportunity, they speak out like Tourette's Syndrome kids.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

drion97

October 2, 2009 4:19 PM

The funny part of this is how short sighted this is. Let's say Chicago won, and Mitt Romney is the President in 2016. Now picture the opening ceremonies that are really cool and big and America, and every crazy conservative would be drooling over the patriotism of the US hosting the Olympics.

Are these guys rooting for us to lose in Afganistan too?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 4:21 PM in reply to drion97

Are these guys rooting for us to lose in Afganistan too?

Yes. It will justify the military coup.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Seeryer

October 2, 2009 4:22 PM in reply to drion97

2016 Summer games will be going on while the campaign for the election of 2016 will be under way. Regardless, Obama would be months away from leaving office in a lame duck status. In the mind of a right winger, "if Obama supports something it must be un-American becasue he is un-American, therefore, opposing anything he supports is the patriotic thing to do."

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Matt Jones

October 2, 2009 5:30 PM in reply to Seeryer

Heh - makes you wonder; if Obama stated a preference for a capital gains tax cut, would the Rethugs attack it? Would their entire party collapse in on itself like a black hole?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Brooklyn Democrat

October 2, 2009 6:04 PM in reply to Matt Jones

I've been thinking along those same lines. If Obama said that every American should carry an assualt weapon in public, do you suppose that the Repbulicans would want to ban assault weapons? Obama hatred First! America Second!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Chesire111

October 2, 2009 4:22 PM in reply to drion97

Short answer...Yes.

Slightly longer answer...As long as there's a Democrat in the White House - Yes.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Cool Blue Reason

October 2, 2009 4:26 PM in reply to drion97

Yes.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

TrivTriv

October 2, 2009 4:20 PM

Is it possible this will hurt the Republicans in next year's Illinois Senate race? Supposedly they have a shot at Obama's former seat, but perhaps this will make trouble for whoever the GOP candidate is.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Schmed

October 2, 2009 4:38 PM in reply to TrivTriv

The only chance they had for that see is if Burris were to run for re-election.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

DanF

October 2, 2009 4:24 PM

What a Rorschach test for the right this was. Actively rooting against an American city. I shouldn't be surprised though. They didn't root for New Orleans either.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 4:25 PM in reply to DanF

New Orleans and Chicago are Blue America. Not Real, Red America.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

October 2, 2009 4:35 PM in reply to DanF

Republicans aren't too keen on large cities of any kind. New York, Boston, San Francisco, Los Angeles ... they'd just as soon see them all disappear.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Schmed

October 2, 2009 4:39 PM in reply to slb

What about Dallas? I wouldn't miss Dallas.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

RocketEngineer

October 3, 2009 11:30 AM in reply to Schmed

Or Houston.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

October 2, 2009 4:24 PM

Of course the Fox anchor saw it coming -- she already had her marching orders from Roger and Rupert.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 2:45 PM in reply to slb

Roger and Rupert.
Sounds like a slapstick comedy team.

"The News Molesters"

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Jolie Blonde

October 2, 2009 4:27 PM

The right's reaction is typical. But as a citizen of Chicago, I can say that most of us did not want the Olympics, which were being rammed down our throat by Daley and is big business pals. And it's a myth that it would have been some huge bonanza. Chicago would have been on the hook for billions and billions.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

happycozy

October 2, 2009 4:41 PM in reply to Jolie Blonde

I'm sure it would've been a headache for Chicagoans, but I think you're wrong about the cost to the city. The Olympics would've brought billions of dollars to the city starting immediately.

I'm glad that Brazil got it, though. It's shameful that a Latin American nation hasn't been allowed to host the Olympics until now.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Capitalist War Machine

October 3, 2009 9:54 AM in reply to happycozy

Not to be nitpicky, but Brazil isn't part of Latin America. Colonized by the Portuguese, it remains culturally and linguistically distinct from the rest of Latin America. It is great that South America has finally gotten an Olympics, but Latin America's losing streak unfortunately remains unbroken.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

happycozy

October 3, 2009 4:33 PM in reply to Capitalist War Machine

Actually Brazil is part of Latin America. I've taken several graduate classes about Latin America, from history to cinema. So trust me--I know this. The region's called Latin America because the Romance languages (Spanish, Portuguese, and on some islands, French) are spoken. However, as someone noted in this thread, Mexico hosted the Olympics in 68, so I should've said South America instead of Latin America.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Capitalist War Machine

October 3, 2009 9:55 AM in reply to happycozy

Not to be nitpicky, but Brazil isn't part of Latin America. Colonized by the Portuguese, it remains culturally and linguistically distinct from the rest of Latin America. It is great that South America has finally gotten an Olympics, but Latin America's losing streak unfortunately remains unbroken.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

trblmkr

October 3, 2009 11:46 AM in reply to happycozy

Jolie Blond: "most"? really? I doubt that. Prove it.

HappyCozy: Mexico City (decidedly Latin) 1968 Summer Games.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Schmed

October 2, 2009 4:43 PM in reply to Jolie Blonde

It would have paid for itself over time. Very few Olympic cities don't see an eventual return on investment. Montreal is still making money off its Olympic venues and that was 33 years ago.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mk3872

October 2, 2009 4:28 PM

In other words, conservatives are very, very patriotic ... USA! USA! ... unless there is a Democrat in the WH?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Partisancheese

October 2, 2009 5:55 PM in reply to mk3872

believe so.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

RustyDarbonne

October 2, 2009 4:31 PM

I bet Obama is secretly very relieved. That would just be one more headache for him to deal with.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Elizabeth2

October 2, 2009 4:47 PM in reply to RustyDarbonne

I've had that thought as well and I'm sure that to some extent it's very true. Like he doesn't have enough to worry about and he wouldn't even get the fun and glory of the event during his time in office. NEVERTHELESS, **he** supported and stood behind/beside his country to the very best of his ability, taking flack for it all the while, trying to get 100s more jobs for our economy and prestige for our nation. Meanwhile, ... (read article above).

It occurs to me that if Michelle Bachman really thinks there should be some sort of test to separate out those who hate America from those who love America, she might want to consider rating them on their reactions to this situation. It's very informative. ------- PLEASE someone ask her to make a comment on this!!! Please, please. I admit it will be hard to do better than meandering on about abortions in school (and home again by 3:30, with parents none the wiser) or asking Bernake about ACORN, but, heck, I have faith in her! (In fact, if there were an Olympics event in Idiocy, I think she might have the gold medal all locked up.)

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 5:20 PM in reply to Elizabeth2

Um... Are you assuming Obama will serve only one term as President?

When the Olympics are held in the summer of 2016, Obama will still be President, if he gets re-elected in 2012. It might have been a victory lap for him to attend the games in his home town.

And why would this have been a "headache" for the President? What on earth would the President have to do with the games, aside from possibly attending them seven years from now?

-- ARG

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 2, 2009 5:29 PM in reply to ARG in Chicago

Arg,
It's well-known that hosting the Olympics often costs cities more revenue than it brings in.
Athens and Atlanta are but two examples.
I feel badly for Rio.
There are far more important sources of revenue we should be looking in this country besides tourism.
Rebuilding the infrastructure is one of them, getting manufacturing back is another.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 4:39 PM

The Right howled he went to Copenhagen for a whole day when Obama should have been in America winning the war and creating jobs. But when Bush spent a whole month at his "ranch" ignoring the memo telling him Al Qaeda was "determined to attack the U.S. using passenger planes" that was OK.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 5:11 PM in reply to traitorjoe

Let's take a walk down memory lane and recall Bill Clinton's stellar performance regarding Al Qaida. http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009001

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

brewmn61

October 2, 2009 6:44 PM in reply to The Reluctant Conspiracy Theorist

How many world Trade Center towers fell, and how many thousands of Americans died at al Quaeda's hands when Clinton was president, you disgusting, cynical, lying, drive-by troll?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

brewmn61

October 2, 2009 6:45 PM in reply to The Reluctant Conspiracy Theorist

How many world Trade Center towers fell, and how many thousands of Americans died at al Quaeda's hands when Clinton was president, you disgusting, cynical, lying, drive-by troll?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 7:19 PM in reply to brewmn61

If Clinton had done his job it would have been a moot point and if you had a good argument, you would not need to resort to name calling.

BTW, it's politicians in general who have made me cynical.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 11:00 PM in reply to The Reluctant Conspiracy Theorist

You are a lying sack of garbage. Bush was told about Al Qaeda want to hijack planes and he ignored the warning. Then he was told Al Qaeda was responsible to ordered his staff to make up a non-existent link to Iraq. Disgusting behavior, and your defense of that makes you stupid and immoral. Did I mention you are garbage?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

trblmkr

October 3, 2009 12:02 PM in reply to The Reluctant Conspiracy Theorist

You wanna play parlor games RCT? OK
1) Gore wins Bush v. Gore, assumes presidency. 2)Keeps counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke. 3)Knows that "al-Qaida will be your biggest security threat" (as Clinton told Bush in transition briefings). 4)Gore holds REGULAR cabinet level meetings re: counter terrorism and al-Qaida. 5)Encourages communication between CIA and FBI, FAA. 6)Two 9/11 terrorists living in San Diego that were on CIA watch list get apprehended. 7)Gore pays attention to August 6 al-Qaida memo, "shakes trees". 8)Finds out Arizona FBI agent has been warning about flight schools. 9)Gore and FBI investigate all flight schools. 10)Apprehend Atta and other 'pilots'. NO 9/11!

So, with all due respect RCT, blow it out your ass.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 5, 2009 4:36 AM in reply to trblmkr

Trblmkr, I have been saying that for eight long, frustrating years! Good synopsis!

I consider Bush/Cheny directly responsible for what can only be described, IMHO, as criminally incompetent mismanagement and negligence that is nothing less than HUBRIS!

As far as I am concerned, the blood of thousands is on their hands - I won't even get into Cheny's shredding of the Constitution...

~Johnny

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

TaraV

October 2, 2009 5:14 PM in reply to traitorjoe

IOKIYAR

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Roti2001

October 2, 2009 4:40 PM

While these right wingers are morons, it is actually a great decision for the City of Chicago.

These games would have been heavily subsidized by taxpayers and all the promised amenities would likely hurt low-income communities.

Talk to Montreal, Athens, Atlanta, Vancouver, etc... about what the Olympics have wrought--nothing but cost overruns and questionable boondoggles.

This is a great day for Chicago.

Maybe this will help the US snag the 2018 World Cup--it is a much more prestigious sporting event and the event-specific infrastructure investments are a fraction of those from the Olympics.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Jolie Blonde

October 2, 2009 4:42 PM in reply to Roti2001

Couldn't have said it any better myself. This is a blessing for Chicago

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Schmed

October 2, 2009 4:46 PM in reply to Roti2001

I was in Montreal a few years ago. They're very proud of their venues and have activities running in them year-round. Their only problem was the Expos not drawing enough to keep up the stadium full. No surprise since soccer is more popular in Candada than baseball.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

TaraV

October 2, 2009 5:16 PM in reply to Roti2001

Now that is a sensible objection. Why can't we have debate like that in this country? This hyperpartisanship is so tiring.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

LBJs Brain

October 2, 2009 4:40 PM

Wow. THey really *don't* have much going for them, do they?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Duck Stab

October 2, 2009 4:43 PM

It's like watching some dumb old dog chase a bus, and when the dog finally gets a piece of the rusted tailpipe, he thinks he got the whole bus.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

xargaw

October 2, 2009 4:43 PM

It would have helped our lagging economy so it is disappointing. As for the GOP talking heads, you simply cannot underestimate these people. The walk around looking like human beings, but they are not of the same species. They are a lower form of life.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

rbe1

October 2, 2009 4:48 PM

For an american living in europe, it's becoming increasingly difficult to view the antics on steady parade from my homeland without an acute sense of embarassment and incredulity.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Pete Bilderback

October 2, 2009 4:48 PM

I hope they enjoy this huge "victory." I also hope the rest of their "victories" over the next seven and a half years (and beyond) are equally inconsequential and petty.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

GregorZap

October 2, 2009 4:49 PM

This is the gift that will keep on giving!!!

I am disappointed that Chicago and, therefore, the US, did not get these Olympics. The news is GOP does not want the Olympics, so they will NEVER get the Olpympics when they are in office, God Forbid they should ever return to the WH, anyway. 2016, the Olympics the GOP declined.

When the party starts in Rio, the Republican Party will die in the USA.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Ricky

October 2, 2009 4:50 PM

where is the victory in America not getting the Olympics? really ?? is this what they are reveling in .. they are unpatriotic and anti-america... Conservatives are hypocrits

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

GregorZap

October 2, 2009 4:51 PM

Obama fought to get the US the Olympics, and as is the typical GOP habit, the GOP stayed home, having other priorities.

GOP, did you fight for the Olympics? No, we never go to war, we just start them.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

21stCenturyMan

October 2, 2009 4:55 PM

Change the headline: Conservatives revel in America's olympic defeat.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 4:57 PM

The irony is that the wingnuts ensured this loss 6+ years ago.

The world hates us! To the rest of the world we appear as arrogant and aggressive and threatening. Most of the rest of the world wouldn't vote for the Olympics to be held anywhere in the United States, and probably won't for another decade or more. At best.

I think this is Bush's loss, much more than it is Obama's. But it will never be spun that way over here.

-- ARG

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/trblmkr/

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

trblmkr

October 3, 2009 12:08 PM in reply to ARG in Chicago

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 4:59 PM

If our 1500 meter champion - who voted for Obama - was about to cross the finish line and win the gold medal, these Right Wing whackos would trip him.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

MadDM

October 2, 2009 4:59 PM

The conservative response to this is hardly surprising. Republicans have a well-known affinity for things Brazilian.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ohyeathatsright

October 2, 2009 5:01 PM

In other news, congratulations to Rio, they deserved it more then we do imho. First Olympic games in South America, that's huge.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

3star2nr

October 2, 2009 5:03 PM

wow so happy to see america fail.

I bet these unpatriotic pricks masturbate to the iraq and afghanistan casualty reports.

These traitors should never ever be near any form of public office

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

CareyInLA

October 2, 2009 5:09 PM

This crystallizes the essential truth about the right in America today: hating is more than a reaction, more than a tactic, more than a strategy, more than a philosophy, it has become their way of life, their very reason for existing.

The demonization of all that is not right-wing (and white) stretches back to the "conservative revolution" in the late 1960s, was legitimized by the cheerful hater Ronald Reagan (with his "welfare queen" and "welfare young bucks" fantasies), became the lifeblood of the right with right wing hate radio in the 1980s, and Gingrich "contract on America" shutdown of government, spread to Fox hate TV, and has now completely consumed the very being of the right.

The odd thing is that there is nothing "conservative" about the right any more. Right wing radicalism has exterminated any truly conservative movement. It has consumed them.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

TaraV

October 2, 2009 5:25 PM in reply to CareyInLA

Just talk to Andrew Sullivan about it...

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 5, 2009 4:46 AM in reply to CareyInLA

Precisely correct, CarolynLA! I couldn't have said that better myself!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

whoffman

October 2, 2009 5:13 PM

Glenn Beck quote from 2004:

"I read a poll that stated that 60 percent of conservatives thought the economy was good and getting better, while only 35 percent of those on the Left reflected that hope. How is that possible? The facts are what they are, the economy is good and getting better. This type of pessimistic thinking is the Achilles' heal of the liberal Left. They believe themselves to be in the majority when in fact they are not."

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

AJM

October 4, 2009 7:39 PM in reply to whoffman

Reality checks are always telling. The Republicans have been so wrong about so much for so long that it is even embarrassing for those of us who are not Republican.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JohnMcCSF

October 2, 2009 5:18 PM

USA! USA!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 5:22 PM

Oh brother, conservatives are happy to see Obama fail, not America. Seeing slumlords like Valerie Jarret get the shaft is just icing on the cake.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 5:32 PM in reply to shooter242

First, how is Chicago's loss Obama's failure?

Second, why is it okay for "conservatives" to be happy to see Obama fail? I didn't like George W. Bush one bit, but I didn't root for him to fail.

I didn't cheer on 9/11/2001, when the President failed to protect our country from attack.

I didn't cheer when Iraq turned into an embarrassing debacle while "W" strutted around on a carrier sporting a cod-piece.

Cheering for our President to fail? Seriously?

-- ARG

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 6:24 PM in reply to ARG in Chicago

Obama put his personal imprimatur on the Chicago bid, and was dismissed in the first round. That's how he failed.
As for not rooting for Bush to fail, good for you. Sadly, you may be in the minority for commenters on political blogs.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JohnMcCSF

October 2, 2009 6:50 PM in reply to shooter242

Goddamn America

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JohnMcCSF

October 2, 2009 6:56 PM in reply to shooter242

We're all Chicagoans now!

What a bunch of phonies

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Stroszek

October 2, 2009 11:36 PM in reply to shooter242

Once again, shooter relies on mysterious strawmen to justify his own repulsive psyche.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

AJM

October 4, 2009 7:44 PM in reply to shooter242

Shooter, so according to you, if the team's in trouble the star quarterback should sit on the bench so the loss doesn't go down to him?

I'd picked Rio as the winner before Obama announced that he would go. There is a real tendency for the Olympics to try for geographical balance and Rio had made it to the final four which meant that it had an acceptable bid.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Bullsmith

October 2, 2009 5:37 PM in reply to shooter242

But Shooter, Obama didn't put in a bid for the Olympics, Chicago did. Obama just tried to help. And the IOC didn't reject Obama, they rejected another Olympics in the U.S. I understand this is above your pay grade.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

hewhohasnoname

October 2, 2009 5:44 PM in reply to shooter242

LOL... What a lame statement! As much as you guys can't accept it, Barack Obama is President of the United States. He was representing our nation today, and every other day that he holds the Office of the President.

Also, it's funny that "conservatives" were fine with Bush supporting Chicago's 2016 bid -- it was all about America then -- but, now you oppose it? Talk about "logical" contortions.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

OhioMan

October 2, 2009 6:22 PM in reply to shooter242

Jerk.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JohnMcCSF

October 2, 2009 7:14 PM in reply to shooter242

That's the Ole 9/12 Spirit!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Ann Arbor

October 2, 2009 5:26 PM

As a citizen of the world who believes that no one nation can or should try to dominate another nation...

How can an editor of the Weekly Standard -- those wonderful folks who helped bring us the Iraq War, supported Bush's unilateralism every step of the way, think Obama is a wuss for wanting cooperation, and complain that we should have bombed Iran last month -- write this with a straight face?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 5:31 PM

Or just maybe conservatives did not want to cause MORE financial problems for an American city as predicted in the following article. http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=35576&seenIt=1

Stop a liberal from spending money they don't have and they really go off the deep end.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

maybeyeah

October 2, 2009 5:45 PM in reply to The Reluctant Conspiracy Theorist

I know, lets have $1.7 trillion in tax cuts and not bother paying for them. And then invade a nation that poses no threat to us at a cost of $1 trillion dollars more and not bother with paying for that, either.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 5:56 PM in reply to maybeyeah

And then let's turn that into 3 Trillion. Keep the presses rolling' Ben!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Bullsmith

October 2, 2009 5:47 PM in reply to The Reluctant Conspiracy Theorist

The Conservative response was amazingly uniform in being pleasure at Obama's failure. When Chicago did come up, very little love was expressed. I'm from Montreal and know a thing or two about Olympics that lose a ton of public money, but the real arguments are only being found belatedly on the right. The 'conservative' reaction is about hating Obama. Point final, as we say up here.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 11:04 PM in reply to The Reluctant Conspiracy Theorist

"Stop a liberal from spending money" ? Is that what you said, Troll? Who took the biggest surplus in history and turned it into the biggest deficit in history? Who spent $1 trillion on a completely unnecessary and ineffective war in Iraq? Who spent all that money, Troll? An extreme right wing conservative. Being smug is no defense for stupidity, ignorance and arrogance. I would say, "Have you no shame" but that assumes you have the intelligence to understand shame.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 1:49 PM in reply to The Reluctant Conspiracy Theorist

"Stop a liberal from spending money they don't have and they really go off the deep end..."

Well, the Cheney no-bid branch of the Republican party knows, you CAN'T stop a Republican from spending the money they don't have, (Iraq) even when they are already OFF the deep end (Afghanistan.)

And the main reason we don't have the money is because Bush gave the billionaires and corporations that biog tax cut.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

biffo

October 2, 2009 5:36 PM

Let's say President Obama didn't go to Copenhagen then he would have been blamed for being un-American and not supporting his country in time of need.These guys are moronic proved today by Limbaugh saying he would never have sex with a co-worker because he has "higher standards".Errr excuse me obese , 15 times married drug addled loon

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

bluesplashy

October 2, 2009 9:48 PM in reply to biffo

Yeah, I think you got that right. Here is a link to Brooks in the NY Times today talking about Beck et al. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/opinion/02brooks.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper
The only thing that matters to these guys is that Obama fails. I wonder how long they will be able to keep this line of attack going?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

maybeyeah

October 2, 2009 5:42 PM

Seriously folks, who cares? Like a cat toy this will distract the whackos, now if the Dems could only get their act together we could get something accomplished while the Pubs are all off playing with themselves. Of course the Dems are too stupid to enact their own programs even when there's no one around to stop them...

Idiots all around.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 1:59 PM in reply to maybeyeah

"now if the Dems could only get their act together.."

As the bluedogs identify their true loyalties, the rank and file voters in the Democratic Party will take note, and start looking for better candidates, more representative of their constituent majority.

But until these turncoat redcoats masquerading in blue are ousted, getting that "act" together means overcoming the millions of dollars in campaign contributions the corporations are tossing at the 'dogs and their moderate Republican cohorts, to bribe them into defying their own public majority.

If you expect 60 Dems to vote together an anything yet, you are in for serious disappointment.

And all of this is certainly not Obama's fault, he's as much a victim of this profane conspiracy of greed as any common citizen, except they, the real guilty parties, can unashamedly blame him for it.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Bungy

October 2, 2009 5:44 PM

And so how does Obama respond?

With recognition that the selection of Rio is an historic selection and with congratulations to Brazil. In other words, with class.

And if there is a note of regret that "we" didn't get the games, there was certainly no shame in the effort.

As for the conservative response? It is the party of 'No" after all. There is no evidence that they actually believe the Olympics in 2016 would be bad for the US economy in 2009. They just want any defeat for the current President.

So I say we appease them: Pssst. He Glenn, hey Rush. Hey Weekly Standard. I heard the President lost a game of "Chutes and Ladders" with Sasha and Melia. Now go exhaust yourselves with paroxysms of glee.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Rich in NJ

October 2, 2009 5:53 PM

If these guys were contestants on a reality tv show, it would be called: "In search of a penis."

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

candideyam

October 2, 2009 5:56 PM

It would be great if all the people weeping for Chicago were actually from Chicago, or cared what Chicagoans thought. The majority of us, myself included, were opposed to the games. I know it's fun to reflexively defend any Dem politicians regardless of their merits, but the bottom line is that Dem-run Chicago is a political sewer, and Obama was crazy to dive back in.

The Olympics would have bought Chicago nothing but six years of corruption scandals, patronage hiring and wasted taxpayer funds, and every last bit would have been hung around Obama's neck. Not getting the Olympics is the best thing that could have happened to Obama.

And yes, I'm a liberal, OFA member and spent a year working for Obama. But I know intractible corruption when I see it, and as galling as the conservative glee is, they're right.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

brewmn61

October 2, 2009 6:53 PM in reply to candideyam

As a fellow Chicagoan, I agree with this comment. There was a small part of me that would have like to have it for reasons of civic pride, but this doesn't feel like much of a loss at all.

Daley's cronies would have gotten even richer the construction contracts and the vending licenses, the south shore of Lake Michigan would have been cleared for gentrification, and the working class black people in thoses neighborhood would have been permanently displaced.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Capitalist War Machine

October 3, 2009 10:14 AM in reply to brewmn61

The only problem is, this is EXACTLY what is going to happen to the poor of Rio now, instead of Chicago. Rio possesses one of the most chasm-like wealth distributions on Earth, packed into a small area. The Brazilians don't want international tourists (much less the international media) to see the horrible shanty towns that makes up most of the city (the part that tourists, especially that gushing brain-dead Fox commentator, never see). Most likely, the poor of the city will be told to hit the road, to make room for the olympic stadiums and host villages. Clears up that nasty sky-high crime (police in Rio kill more people than U.S. cops do nationwide, then multiplied four times over http://odia.terra.com.br/rio/htm/policia_do_rio_matou_25_1_a_mais_em_2007_158976.asp), makes the city prettier, and moves all the poors down the road, nice and out of sight.
Sorry about all this, I'll go choke on my own bile now.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

maya89

October 2, 2009 6:00 PM

You know, I have to say, I wasn't rooting for this to happen or anything (although as a native of South America I AM excited the next Olympics will be hosted there), but I do think a lot of it has to do also with the world being of tired America's mess-ups and arrogance (we single-handedly messed up the world economy due to the greed of folks WHO WERE ALREADY RICH; our attitude/approach to global warming; having taken our country to war based on LIES; Guantanamo, renditions, torture, etc..) most members of the Olympic Committee probably felt the U.S. doesn't deserve the Olympics in light of all these things...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

SocialistScum

October 2, 2009 6:03 PM

There's always a silver lining and its name is YouTube...

Another one of those You Lie/Macaca moments...

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 9:34 PM in reply to SocialistScum

Great how these mf's were caught on tape. LOL.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

theone718

October 2, 2009 6:08 PM

If you wanted to know if they put Country or Party first, now you know.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Stefanie

October 2, 2009 6:16 PM

Obama might still be president in 2016, I am just saying some people overreact in my personal opinion. Happy for Brazil.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Powkat

October 2, 2009 6:17 PM

Forget the tiny detail that Obama got Iran to agree to international atomic energy inspectors - they can't stand that because it sends their, "Obama is a weakling, we need regime change" to the crapper.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

SocialistScum

October 2, 2009 6:19 PM in reply to Powkat

A seven-year temper tantrum over the US not going to war with Iran. One can almost hear the spoon banging against the edge of the high chair.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

OhioMan

October 2, 2009 6:21 PM

republicans will continue to hate America as long as a black man is president. Watching Limbaugh bounce around in his chair exulting at our loss turned my stomach. These people are the enemy: it's Americans vs. the republicans now. I side with the Americans.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

SocialistScum

October 2, 2009 7:11 PM in reply to OhioMan

Don't worry. One of these days Rush will bounce himself into a massive infarction and it'll be the Big Adios...not to mention good riddance.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 5, 2009 9:09 PM in reply to SocialistScum

Brother, from your lips (and my prayers) to God's ear!

I'm not sorry I said this, Rush is a disease, and the sooner his cholesteroll level gets to unsustainable levels, the better off we'll ALL be!

~Johnny

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

HopefulPatriot

October 2, 2009 6:23 PM

I really hope that Republicans make this a sticking point. It will solidify their identity as Anti-American. Anybody else keeping score?

Against Stimulus to help Families during Recession
+Against American Car Companies

+Against Improving American Health Care System to improve the health of Americans

+Against America hosting the Olympics.

I love it when they do all the dirty work for us!!!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

par4

October 2, 2009 6:57 PM

The question is why would anybody with the money want to go to the Olympics in this batshit insane country? I don't think the rest of the world is convinced another Bush/Cheney type govt. won't get elected again.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 3, 2009 8:50 AM in reply to par4

I'm not convinced either. Maybe, if the worst happens, I can get some cheap land in Paraguay.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JohnMcCSF

October 2, 2009 7:01 PM

Joe Scarborough

Count me as one conservative who is disappointed that President Obama's hometown will not be hosting the 2012 Olympic Games.
Chicago is a beautiful city that would have made a perfect backdrop for the Olympics. The President was right to fly to Copenhagen to try to land the games, not for the sake of his city, but for the good of his country. The fact President Obama failed makes me respect him more for taking the chance, and the fact many right-wing figures opposed the President's mission shows just how narrow-minded partisanship makes us all. [...]

[W]hat we saw from some conservative corners regarding the President's failed Olympics bid was just plain stupid.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

DestinyofAmelie

October 2, 2009 7:51 PM

Chicago needs jobs. How can any American cheer this decision? What small minded jerks these people are, and Chicago won't forget.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Chris Weagel

October 2, 2009 8:03 PM

I could care less about the Olympics.

Obama might as well have wasted his time securing the location for next year's Pine Wood Derby FInals.

Why isn't he nationalizing the health insurance industry and prosecuting its CEOs?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

DestinyofAmelie

October 2, 2009 9:09 PM in reply to Chris Weagel

Talk to Congress, the Senate, he is only one man.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Chris Weagel

October 2, 2009 10:58 PM in reply to DestinyofAmelie

I contact congress on a near daily basis.

Obama is one man, but he also happens to be the President. That gives him a much larger bullhorn than me. If he really cared about getting people health coverage, he would stop cowering before the insurance industry and push forth a Single-Payer system. I can only assume he's another Clinton that talks a good game but is ultimately beholden to the same corporate monsters that run the rest of this system.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ru4862

October 2, 2009 8:05 PM

Conservatives hate President Obama more than they love their own country. Pathetic! Conservatives a bunch of treasonous a$$

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ru4862

October 2, 2009 8:12 PM

Chris Weagal,

I agree. The Olympics hasn't been interesting since 1996' Atlanta.
The president wasted valuable time trying to persuade a bunch suits why the Olympics should come to Chicago. If he would put the same effort into the health care/ Public Option like the Olympics.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

dnifdoog

October 2, 2009 8:29 PM

Anything? Secret service, knock knock

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Joe Markowitz

October 2, 2009 8:45 PM

You don't cheer when an event as prestigious as the Olympics chooses another country over your country. It's just unseemly. It just isn't done. It is just plain unpatriotic. At most, you might say, oh well, it's too bad for Chicago because Chicago would have done a beautiful job, but it's nice for Brazil, and Brazil probably deserves a turn. The people who are gloating about this obviously hate America.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mikedrevguy

October 2, 2009 9:27 PM

This sounds like the bullies in school who laugh when someone trips and falls down? Shows real maturity!!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mikedrevguy

October 2, 2009 9:30 PM in reply to mikedrevguy

And oh so dignified, and honorable, and full of integrity -
and oh so Christlike of those who would purport to be of the "Christian" persuasion.
POSERS!!!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 9:28 PM

"Country Last"

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 9:29 PM

"Party of No" takes their hatred to a whole new level. Do they hate America so much because America rejected them?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 2, 2009 9:39 PM

Wouldn't be surprised at all if some of the drop in support for the war in Aghanistan comes from Repugs who now don't support the troops?

I think it's a real possibility that some reject the war simply because they refuse to have Obama as CinC?

GOP = truly repulsive to a level that is hard to articulate.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

dmspeech

October 2, 2009 10:02 PM

Pathetic old white men who are proving Jimmy Carter correct

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

SaintGenesius

October 2, 2009 11:21 PM

This will backfire on the GOP and their conservative masters. Americans hate this kind of thing.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

celldumceen

October 2, 2009 11:22 PM

This is further proof of what is at the center of the Republican heart! Hate, hate and more hate!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Marietz

October 2, 2009 11:42 PM

Hate-triots, every one of them. Each of them making a living off of self-promotion. Only one has actually ever served in any capacity for this country, and then did it really badly. Three of them completely irrelevant people who are more interested in listening to themselves talk and then heaping praise on themselves. And one, well, one who is just a war-monger.

The right can keep them. We don't want them. However, if we could connect a pipeline to each we could have enough natural gas to heat Minnesota for the next 100 years.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Marcellus

October 3, 2009 12:59 AM

Is it as dreadful as it looks and sounds? Is the republican party committing suicide in public?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 5, 2009 5:16 AM in reply to Marcellus

Marcellus, we can only hope!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Verified

October 3, 2009 1:01 AM

If the President had not done anything to promote Chicago's bid, they would have accused him of not caring about American jobs and
"throwing Chicago under the bus." What did anyone expect? If Chicago's bid had won, they'd be finding fault with that decision, too. It doesn't matter what they say - they're ridiculous. And we need to keep reminding people not of their nastiness but of their irrelevancy.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#33148233

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

igotmyreasons

October 3, 2009 1:39 AM

Maddow had a nice clip of BUSH talking about how good Chicago getting the Olympics would be for America:

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Anasazi

October 3, 2009 1:54 AM

The Dark Side claimed these Jedis. Yoda said that fear and anger will also pull us into the Dark Side. Believe in what is good, and they will fail.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

rerutled

October 3, 2009 2:22 AM

Hitler got the Olympics in Berlin. Obama didn't get the Olympics in Chicago.

Does this mean Obama is no longer Hitler?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 3, 2009 8:41 AM in reply to rerutled

That makes too much sense. The GOP line would be more like this: "Hitler knew Jessie Owens, and Mr. Obama, you're no Jessie Owens."

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

justaguy

October 3, 2009 2:49 AM

Confederate bigots -- the whole, disgusting, anti-American, party-first-last-and-always lot of 'em.

And for all you folks from Chicagoland -- do you honestly think that Rio or any other city bidding for the Olympics doesn't engage in the same kind of strong-arm tactics and shameless cronyism that characterized the Chicago bid?

And does every other town that gets the Olympics suddenly see a decades-long, self-sustaining economic boom as a result?

The point here is that, all other corrupt local political scenes and Olympic consequences being equal, Chicago is in America, damn-it! Not a single one of these sanctimonious conservative jack-asses has any real concern for the people of Chicago -- whether they get the Olympics or not.

They just want the duly-elected and appointed representatives of the United States of America to fail -- across the board -- because those representatives don't pledge allegiance to the GOP!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

blairza

October 3, 2009 4:44 AM

They have nothing but spite. No programs, no agenda, other than hoping Barack will fail at anything. Frankly Chicago can pride itself in joining the great cities like New York and Paris that have recently been disappointed. I'ts pretty hard to argue with South America's right to host and Rio's a great city. I'm so sick of the constant chant of negativity coming from the right.
As far as I'm concerned if they hate America so much why don't they all just move to Dubai like Bechtel did.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Winston Smith

October 3, 2009 8:36 AM

Maybe Reid should seek a bipartisan agreement on whether Obama's ego is too big.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 3, 2009 8:37 AM

Bush was from Texas, so liberals were elated when a busload of Texans died while evacuating Hurricane Rita. Right? Broke out into cheers, as I recall. /snark

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

blairza

October 3, 2009 9:23 AM

Official A wrote
"Bush was from Texas, so liberals were elated when a busload of Texans died while evacuating Hurricane Rita. Right? Broke out into cheers, as I recall. /snark"

You can't recall what never happened, did you want to cite this incident or are you farting your brain gas?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 3, 2009 10:36 AM in reply to blairza

It never happened. That's the point.

snark: noun,Combination of "snide" and "remark". Sarcastic comment(s).

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 9:58 AM

.Hypocrites never know when they are exposing their hypocrisy, they always assume the vast majority agree with them, despite any evidence to the contrary. SO they spout as if their opinion is truth, no matter how obvious it's partisan hackery really is.

As usual, the Obama haters simply hate him more than they love America.

But, in the wake of the Republican's moral bankruptcy over the past couple election cycles, their self-righteous indignation has fizzled, their patriotic fervor replaced with treasonous sneers, and their delusional assumption of moral authority has faded with their shrinking minority.

Their old "'America right or wrong" banners no longer "fit" because they are openly trashing The President, no matter what city he's from and what his race might be, they have been forced to abandon all their traditinal tools of divisiveness because their hypocrisy is now so blatant, especially considering how indignant they all were when WE quite rightfully came out in opposition to Bush's war of foreign aggression.

Hatefulness seems to be their only remaining tool for fomenting their lemmings into mass lemmingness.

But, then, we must all use the tools we have. And Beck, Malkin, Drudge, Gingrich, et al are, without even a smidgen of doubt, TOOLS. Their obsession with trashing Obama and dogpiling on every strawman they can build between them, far outweighs their patriotism.

They prove it every day. They shame the name of America.

HYPOCRITES!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 3, 2009 12:35 PM in reply to JEP07

".Hypocrites never know when they are exposing their hypocrisy, they always assume the vast majority agree with them, despite any evidence to the contrary. SO they spout as if their opinion is truth, no matter how obvious it's partisan hackery really is."

Most people I know are hypocrites - it's not based on partisanship, but on the foibles of humanity, as everyone from Euripides to Shakespeare has tried to instruct us.

"As usual, the Obama haters simply hate him more than they love America."

I'm not an Obama hater, and I the level of invective I see directed toward him has lost me many a night's sleep. At the same time, I'm not an Obama "lover", even though I worked for his campaign in the fall and I support him with some major reservations. I think he's failed on no small number of points, and has been largely derelict in his biggest campaign promise = health care reform with a strong public option. And how am I supposed to regard his failures with regard to the promised transparency (which has not happened) or the promise to close Gitmo, or torture. What about the utter failure to address the risk in the financial markets? And what about the failure to crack down on AIG when the counterparty list was released?

What about the fact that an absurd number of Americans are unemployed and receiving unemployment checks - while infrastructure sits and rots?

Where's the larger vision? I still use (on a daily basis) monuments that the Roosevelt administration built with American labor through the WPA! Meanwhile, it's "cash for clunkers" instead of high speed rail! Give me a break! Some of these new cars people were able to buy through the program have embarrassingly low gas mileage! 20 mph should not have qualified you for cash for clunkers!!!

"But, in the wake of the Republican's moral bankruptcy over the past couple election cycles, their self-righteous indignation has fizzled, their patriotic fervor replaced with treasonous sneers, and their delusional assumption of moral authority has faded with their shrinking minority."

Yeah, sure, but so what? We keep dumping on them, not realizing the risk in not meeting any of our promised objectives. Or even trying to.

"Hatefulness seems to be their only remaining tool for fomenting their lemmings into mass lemmingness."

I'm afraid they're not the only political lemmings these days. If we have to continue to hype ourselves as merely better than the execrable GOP, instead of making good on our promises, we're in worse shape than you think.

"But, then, we must all use the tools we have. And Beck, Malkin, Drudge, Gingrich, et al are, without even a smidgen of doubt, TOOLS. Their obsession with trashing Obama and dogpiling on every strawman they can build between them, far outweighs their patriotism.
They prove it every day. They shame the name of America.
HYPOCRITES!"

And where does that leave us Democrats? When we can't even use our 60 vote majority, aren't we also massive hypocrites? Is Max Baucus a Republican? Was Tim "Goldman" Geithner appointed by a Republican?

Let's face it, stroking ourselves as better than republicans is self-defeating - if the comparative standard is always the GOP, we doom ourselves to several levels below execrable.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 12:54 PM in reply to again

"how am I supposed to regard his failures"

How on Earth can you call them "HIS failures?"

At every juncture, blue dogs and their Republican cohorts have defied their own constituents, to blatantly uphold the corporate conspiracy.

Here's how you should regad the failure of the public option; not as an Obama failure (you sound like something of a concern troll, either that or you are an ideologically naive liberal who still believes your correctness (which I probably would agree with) will somehow become the law of the land.

So you express "concern" over "Obama's failures" but fail to recognize the multi-trillion-dollar obstacle (corporate America) that he has to contend with.

Obama tried to reach across the aisle and open lines of cooperation with at least SOME of the R's, but even those vaunted moderates have taken their party line in undisguised obeisance to their corporate campaign contributors.

The blue-dogs are worse, but the moderate R's rank second in the book of sheer hypocrisy. They contend they are patriots, but they represent a very small, wealthy minority, not their majority constituents.

Obama is hardly to blame for everything you attribute to him. But, like so many others, you seem quite willing to pose your personal opinion as some unachieved nirvana, and Obama is the reason your delusions have not been realized.

I've said it before, it is a deeper thought than you might consider, ponder carefully that "compromise is never desirable, but it is always necessary."

You want giant leaps when baby steps are the only course.

Blaming Obama is the lazy way out, instead of searching for the reason why.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

truthspeaker

October 3, 2009 1:36 PM in reply to JEP07

I turn to 'our site', and see all this crap from the person "AGAIN' talking all manner of crap, is it just me, or are others aware that he is obviously an Obama/liberal hater?. Perhaps we ought to not reply to his baits anymore. I have listened to many evangelicals trying to persuade others of their rightness and he sounds exactly like someone using those techniques. 'AGAIN', please take your right wing crap elsewhere. Thank you

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 3, 2009 4:13 PM in reply to JEP07

The public option, favored from everywhere from 66 to 76 percent of the US public, is not a "giant leap," and those of us in the HCR community are right to be disappointed with the President's curtsying first to PhRMA, and then to the insurance companies.

Don't agree with me? Ask Dr. Marcia Angell of Harvard. Or Andrew Weil. Or Robert Reich.

Not convinced that both the admin and the Senate sold out to health insurers? Try the August 6 Businessweek cover story "The Health Insurers Have Already Won." Or better yet, before you start calling other people naive, put some work time into a local emergency room. Or read Maggie Mahar's "Money-Driven Medicine."

Are they "naive"?

No. What is naive is rubberstamping everything the President does, even when it's in error, and justifying it by comparing it to the execrable Bush administration.

Our job isn't to be better than the Bush admin. Any idiot could do that. The job is to make good on the promises - and none of those promises have yet been met, and given the lackluster performance by Obama's administration so far (Geithner, Rahm, etc) those promises will not be met.

Obama does have influence over the senate blue dogs, and he doesn't use it. And you do have influence over the President, if you would stop idolizing him as a hero incarnate, and start acknowledging that he's there for a purpose.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jegan

October 3, 2009 10:31 AM

Are there any adults left in the Republican Party?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 1:00 PM in reply to jegan

You mean like Allen, Frist, Lott, Craig, Foley, Santorum, Hastert, and Cunningham?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ConservativeinWI

October 3, 2009 10:53 AM

I wish they would have gotten the olympics and am let down not happy, while i do not think Obama is totally responsible i do think that sending Oprah and the Obamas was not the best move to secure the games.

I think some olympic athletes and business leaders may have worked better.

Yes i am a republican an no I am not cheering this one!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 1:11 PM in reply to ConservativeinWI

The chance of Chicago getting those games, after what Bush did to world opinion, was negligible, at best, and impossible at worst.

Obama's pitch was standard fare, and no one assumed his part in it guaranteed ANYTHING. SO when the 'nuts callit another Obama failure, they are suggesting we expected the world to be over Bush's Imperial America legacy. War and torture, by any name, tends to make the perpetrators very unpopular with the world at large.

That might take a few more years, at best, to assuage the negative world view that the Cheney/Bush junta has achieved so violently over the past 8 years.

If anyone is to blame, it is Cheney. He's the one who almost single-handedly pushed us into the pit of world condemnation. Chicago, and the people of America, will continue to suffer for all those years of power abuses and international bullying that the Bush administration committed in the name of the USA.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 3, 2009 11:48 AM

Hey libs, don't like the snark? Too bad. Conservatives are just following in your footsteps, disrespecting the President. Thanks for giving us permission to be snide in return.
In that vein, we also appreciate the boost in cronyism and personal enrichment as in Harry Reid, Dodd, Rangel, Feinstein, UAW, rating agencies, Fannie and Freddie, AIG, so forth and so on.
You're setting a wonderful example, keep up the good work.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 1:40 PM in reply to shooter242

"disrespecting the President."

You equate dissent against the Bush/Cheney junta for illegal electioneering, unprovoked war, the lies leading up to it, and torture as foreign policy, with dissing Obama for trying to bring world-class competition and commerce to Chicago?

HYPOCRITES!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

happycozy

October 3, 2009 4:40 PM in reply to JEP07

And I don't recall liberals cheering (on camera, I might add) when Iraq went horribly wrong and American soldiers and Iraqi civilians started dying. Conservatives are openly cheering for this president's failure.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 3, 2009 4:34 PM in reply to shooter242

Fuckwad.

(To be followed by a comment from shooter like, "you liberals, all you can do is call names". Well, it's all you understand, and all you're worth, fuckwad.)

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 5, 2009 5:27 AM in reply to Minne sconsin

I honestly don't know how Shooter can possibly respond to that - I think you've got the fuckwad!

~Johnny-O

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jbcracker

October 3, 2009 12:08 PM

Sad to realize that so many conservatives are small minded and mean spirited. If only they loved our nation as much as they love their ideology.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

pcameron

October 3, 2009 12:21 PM

This post pisses me off, but not because these neocons are celebrating the loss of the Olympics. I'm pissed every time I read a liberal blog I have to read about these people. Can we PLEASE STOP obsessing over everything these losers say? It's as if Bush is still in office or something. Seriously, who the hell cares? These people are insane but they now only represent a sliver of the voting public. Obama won as big as Reagan. These neocons have been throughly discredited and almost brought America to ruin with their horrible ideas. WHY ARE WE STILL PAYING ATTENTION TO THEM? Can we please move the hell on and start coming up with some original ideas of our own? Hating on neocons is so easy, and lazy, and it makes us soft.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

again

October 3, 2009 12:39 PM in reply to pcameron

pcameron wrote:

"Can we please move the hell on and start coming up with some original ideas of our own? Hating on neocons is so easy, and lazy, and it makes us soft."

I've been trying to say the same thing since yesterday. Thank you.

I'm deeply concerned that continuing to compare ourselves to the GOP is setting a very, very low bar. And not coming through on our promises is EXTREMELY risky when we have a 10 percent unemployment rate.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

rbe1

October 3, 2009 1:44 PM in reply to again

Amen !

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

johnk

October 3, 2009 12:45 PM

Conservatives are hypocrits. electronic cigarette

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

davidal66

October 3, 2009 12:48 PM

Didn't many on the left so eloquently describe the crimes of Cheney and company? Didn't Obama himself so eloquently decry said crimes? Hasn't the left so eloquently depicted the mass tortures of the Bush regime? Didn't Bush invade Iraq for oil? Wasn't Bush selected instead of elected in 2000?

I am happy for Rio. Wasn't the populace of Chicago evenly split on Chicago's bid? South America has never had an Olympics before. I think they deserve it. According to the liberal elite, America is not deserving anyway. Perhaps we should do penance. Maybe Obama should apologize again.

Viva Rio! Yes we can....

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

davidal66

October 3, 2009 12:51 PM

Didn't many on the left so eloquently describe the crimes of Cheney and company? Didn't Obama himself so eloquently decry said crimes? Hasn't the left so eloquently depicted the mass tortures of the Bush regime? Didn't Bush invade Iraq for oil? Wasn't Bush selected instead of elected in 2000?

I am happy for Rio. Wasn't the populace of Chicago evenly split on Chicago's bid? South America has never had an Olympics before. I think they deserve it. According to the liberal elite, America is not deserving anyway. Perhaps we should do penance. Maybe Obama should apologize again.

Viva Rio! Yes we can....

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

rbe1

October 3, 2009 1:43 PM in reply to davidal66

That is such a stupid comparison. As far as I'm aware, Obama has yet to lie his country into a war, killing 4000 and seriously wounding 25000 more americans into the bargain. His administration has yet to turn the justice department into an arm of the democratic national committee. His administration has yet to deny that we have a problem with emmision of greenhouse gases. There is more, but if you think the buffoonery being displayed by the boys in the backroom of the republican party is being matched anywhere else in the USA, you are in trouble.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

truthspeaker

October 3, 2009 1:07 PM

Morn: Do I really need to turn to my favourite political site and see FIVE morons all in the same picture?. I can tolerate one for a brief glance, but FIVE. I wouldn't let my children look at dirty pictures, so why show these guys together. Get with it TMP, you've been doing a little too much for these haters. This site should be about 90% liberal thinking, and 2% conservative thought. If in the future, they show themselves to be patriotic then they can be invited to the discussions on how to make your country better, but until then TMP, please don't spoil my day. Thank you

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

rbe1

October 3, 2009 1:35 PM

Love the faces ! You know, these guys remind me of a bunch of high school sophmores, sitting around and cracking each other up with fart jokes.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 3:06 PM in reply to rbe1

about as diplomatic as a whoopee cushion at a funeral....

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JimmyBobby

October 3, 2009 1:36 PM

And if Obama hadn't gone to Copenhagen on behalf of Chicago, the talking sphincters would be all about how he couldn't be bothered to stand up for America...

They really are SO tedious.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

colbito

October 3, 2009 2:03 PM

Doesn't understand why some conservatives are happy Chicago didn't get the Olympics...do they hate America that much?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

BeeClone

October 3, 2009 2:04 PM

Cons are the people that live in the penthouse but want the rest of the building to fall down.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Ricky

October 3, 2009 2:20 PM

CONSERVATIVES ARE ANTI AMERICA.. they are not patriotic , totally shameful

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Valiant8

October 3, 2009 2:28 PM

So Obama's biggest failure will be the failure of convincing the world of a Chicago olympics in the last minute of a long application? Well my, I'm sure he will go down as the worst president in history.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

davidal66

October 3, 2009 2:43 PM in reply to Valiant8

Carter takes that spot, but it's still early.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 3:00 PM in reply to davidal66

Carter is a Presidential saint compared to either Bush.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

davidal66

October 3, 2009 2:41 PM

"As far as I'm aware, Obama has yet to lie his country into a war, killing 4000 and seriously wounding 25000 more americans into the bargain. His administration has yet to turn the justice department into an arm of the democratic national committee. His administration has yet to deny that we have a problem with emmision of greenhouse gases...."

If your child was hit by a predator on the Pakistan border, you might feel different, or is 'that' the 'good war'? Why was dissent so patriotic under Bush? I seem to remember press coverage of Cindy Sheehan outside of Crawford, not much coverage anymore. Why? How about the protests of Bush in Hitler-face?

If conservatives are faux, what of progressives? Do they support predator strikes on the heads of children? Is this policy Bush' fault; then why has Obama expanded this program? Because it is the 'right war' then why not expand and surge the troops?

The point: of course Obama has no good options on the Pakistan border, and of course at his core, he knows it never ends well for foreign troops 'over there' but withdraw would open political as well as consequential questions about America. Is that state craft? Maybe yes, perhaps not, but from the bail out(s), continuation of occupation of Iraq and Kabul(with possible escalation), what policy difference is there between the evil Bush and Obama? Oh, I forgot, Obama would never sell out the left for the public option. LOL. And, he closed, or will close Gitmo. He's ended rendition. Seems to me there is abundance of hypocrisy on the left as on the right.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JEP07

October 3, 2009 3:04 PM

"Seems to me there is abundance of hypocrisy on the left as on the right."

There is an abundance of hypocrisy in each of us. But as a political party, Garrison Keillor said it about as simply and succinctly as possible.

"Republicans made their peace with hypocrisy long ago."

That's one the few scales these days that tips quite favorably towards the Republicans (or conservatives, as you so fearlessly call "them"), they win the hypocrisy battle on every front, despite the fact the bluedogs are desperate to even the odds.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

davidal66

October 3, 2009 3:13 PM

JEP07, is Obama correct to escalate the Predator program in the tribal regions of Pakistan? Is that an example of liberals making peace with hypocrisy? Where is the liberal rage, protest? Not very liberal(or progressive as the fearless call "themselves")to me, except in a Wilsonian construct.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

davidal66

October 3, 2009 3:21 PM

I am not a Republican, but loved Reagan, JFK, and especially Teddy Kennedy, FDR and Lincoln. All great men who took a stand for their beliefs, no matter what the consequences. I doubt they would have folded over the public option. Was there adoration of these figures? Yes, but deserved. If ya catch my drift... W was bad, O appears to be worse. Aside from running down our country(to the glee of our enemies), are there any core principles?

The only saving grace for Obama and the democrats, is the Palin crowd may be worse and nuttier. Small consolation for our country.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

DaddyD

October 4, 2009 10:37 AM in reply to davidal66

"I am not a Republican, but loved Reagan, JFK, and especially Teddy Kennedy, FDR and Lincoln. All great men who took a stand for their beliefs, no matter what the consequences."

If that is your #1 measure of greatness, then this begs the question why Bush II isn't on your list. No doubt, the man stood by his beliefs "no matter what the consequences." He never waivered in his beliefs about the Iraq war, stem cell research, nor in his authority as the supreme executive.

Could it be there is a better measure of what makes a good president? Certainly that is a question worthy of debate. But, as I consider the list of leaders you admire, I see other shared qualities, among them: leadership and the ability to inspire, a list of accomplishments, tremendous drive and focus/self-discipline, and exceptional intelligence. Would these all not apply to Obama... even if he had to compromise on the public option, for example?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jfields

October 3, 2009 3:40 PM

I have one simple comment about this. Rancher W spent 487 days of his Presidency at Camp David, and a whopping 490 days at his "ranch"...you know, the ranch he has mysteriously forsaken for a mansion now that he's out of office? That one.

Three hours in Copenhagen, while multitasking, to try to bring a multi-billion-dollar event to the US? We're supposed to be upset?

This doesn't even pass the laugh test.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

lapdogs

October 3, 2009 4:29 PM

Hope you five clowns will now realize you can no longer complain about the unemployment rate on your programs or internet sites.

Oh and Beck, since you use Vicks under the eyes to force yourself to cry, what did you use to force your smile or laugh?

You chumps are such frauds it's pathetic!!

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

fitsol

October 3, 2009 8:05 PM

en⋅e⋅my :a person who feels hatred for, fosters harmful designs against, or engages in antagonistic activities against another; an adversary or opponent.

Is Al-Qaeda splinter of the GOP? I'm just askin'.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

MantisBot X

October 3, 2009 11:35 PM

Seems to me that the Republicans are excited about something they had absolutely no control over. Is this the only "victory" they can cling to?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 4, 2009 5:20 AM

The RWNJs (right wing nutjobs) are all nuts!

Their behavior at the news of Chicago losing its Olympic bid convinces me more than ever of what I have believed for more than a year - that as the GOP dies, the rats are not deserting a sinking ship - they're gnawing more holes in the hull!

They call themselves 'real Americans' but when you cheer against a great American city getting seven fat years of jobs, prestige, and pride in America, no matter how much it may reflect positively on a president you may not like, that is just UN-patriotic! I saw on here people who live in adjacent Indiana and even Wisconsin, where some of the events would have been held, that even they would benefit as well? I didn't know that but it just adds to the argument FOR Chicago!

What is wrong with these people?

I remember, in the days of my youth (I'm 56) 'real' Americans who were Conservative Republicans did not act this way - we may've disagreed, even stridently, but there was always respect - afterwards we remained friends, and no one called the President a Communist. No one. But things are so starkly different now...

I honestly believe these bastards would take it as a sign of hope for themselves if American were attacked afresh my Al Quaeda again, with the magnitude of 9/11 - seriously, just like Ed Schultz said about Darth Cheny. He was right, but it isn't just Cheny, they just proved that with their gleeful reaction at Rio getting the nod instead of Chicago. Whatever would make President Obama look weak. They really are that stupid.

I hope to Christ we never have to find out again.

~Johnny-O

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 4, 2009 8:52 AM in reply to Johnny-O

Johnny-O, welcome to the fallout from eight years of Bush-bashing. Obviously you and the majority of commenters here have had no idea how vituperative your side has been, from even before Bush took office. Your response here just shows how tone deaf you have been. You're incredulous that Obama is called a communist? After years of Bush being called "fascist", "murderer", "liar", or worse? At best that marks you as an enabler.
Meanwhile in Chicago, Youtube video of children killing, a disgraced Governor, famously corrupt politics, and egocentric celebrities, denotes a failed city not a great one. Add in that the Olympics are notoriously costly and it's a great thing it went to Rio.

Our response is called schadenfreude. Look it up. Conservatives in your day may have suffered in silence, but that day is gone. Every liberal dirty trick, turn of phrase, and duplicitous dealing is now part of our playbook, thanks to our watching libs use them to great effect. We appreciate the teaching moments and you may look forward to even more of the same "coming home to roost."
Keep up the good work.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

DaddyD

October 4, 2009 11:51 AM in reply to shooter242

And was 8 years of Bush-bashing the fallout of 8 years of Clinton-bashing? You see where this goes. When does it stop?

If, as you so disingenuously suggest, that all this righty-wingnut B.S. is really the Dem's fault, then I guess that means the R's are relegated to following the Dem's leadership, as they have no ability to plot their own course and take a higher road. Republicans are followers, not leaders. I'm not saying it, no. This is the logical extension of your statement.

Politics is full of nonsense... that's part of the game. The issue here is not about Hitler mustaches or name calling, but about extremism. Did you ever hear about any of the "liberal media" outlets cheering in their newsrooms on word that W choked on a pretzel, or Democratic leaders reveling in Bush's failures as the catastrophic bungling of Katrina unfolded? Political showmanship, schadenfreude, and chicanery are nothing new, but the current batch of Republican extremists are not merely imitating what they've already observed, they're inventing new ways to lower the bar. Did Bush ever get heckled in his speeches to congress? Can't pin that one on the liberals, can ya?

And, one has to ask the basis for which each side's more extreme elements link their criticisms. Bush was likened to a dictator because of secret domestic spy programs which he then attempted to mislead the public about. Obama is likened to a dictator because... what? He bailed out the economy? Or wants to make sure all Americans get healthcare? (Hmmmm... if I have to choose a dictator, I'll go for the one that saves the economy offers healthcare, thank you.)

Let's see, Bush accused of lying? Well, gosh, WMD's were supposed to be in Iraq but they weren't. Voices claiming otherwise were squashed, including an American spy who was outed in retribution. Oh, but Bush insisted that if anyone in his administration was involved in the outing of Plame (a crime of high treason by the way), there'd be hell to pay... but then he commuted Libby's sentence. Was that a lie? Ah, and then all the doctoring of EPA reports. Not lies, really. Just less than honest. And then the DOJ... there's a doozy! (Who did the Republicans learn that one from, by the way? I do seem to recall Clinton got his ass handed to him by his own AG.) There's a point where collective bamboozlement and deception qualify someone as a liar. I fail to see an adequate comparison between Obama and Bush on the honesty and integrity front, but I will grant that Obama has only been in office mere 8 months, so he needs a bit more time to catch up to Bush.

8 months. Hey Shooter - were liberals calling W a lying fascist less than 8 months into his presidency? Really?

On the flipside, anyone questioning the war in Iraq, or questioning the president during wartime was considered by mainstream Republicans to be treasonous. Yet, elect a black man president, and suddenly we've got conservative columns openly supporting a military coup, and prominent conservative media figures who proclaim with pride that they oppose the president and hope he fails at everything he does. (We're still at war, aren't we?) Either you have principals you stand by, or you don't. "Country First"? Meh, Maybe not so much.

You need to sort out your priorities, dude.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

October 4, 2009 3:56 PM in reply to DaddyD

When does it stop?

I'm guessing it won't. But if libs would like to set an example of decorum, I'm sure conservatives will give it a look.

then I guess that means the R's are relegated to following the Dem's leadership, as they have no ability to plot their own course and take a higher road.

Heh. Turn the other cheek? You first. I have no problem letting libs set the rules of verbal engagement. I also have no problem labeling the Dems as more activist than conservatives. But the days of conservatives being reticent has passed. Deal.

Did you ever hear about any of the "liberal media" outlets cheering in their newsrooms on word that W choked on a pretzel, or Democratic leaders reveling in Bush's failures as the catastrophic bungling of Katrina unfolded?

Apparently your ears need cleaning. Here's a whole page of late night jokes about the pretzel. Politicians and newsies are too busy developing gravitas. http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blpretzeljokes.htm I'm also sure that Moveon, Kos, and FDL laughed long and hard about Bush choking and then cursed their bad luck that he survived.

Did Bush ever get heckled in his speeches to congress? Can't pin that one on the liberals, can ya?

Where have you been for the last eight years? Of course I can. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/09/10/flashback_democrats_boo_bush_at_2005_state_of_the_union.html

8 months. Hey Shooter - were liberals calling W a lying fascist less than 8 months into his presidency? Really?

LOL. Oh sure, nobody at all thought the 2000 election was irregular. Obviously you're just another victim of BDS, who thinks they are never wrong. My priority is watching Obama pursue every liberal myth and promise possible and then seeing rational American reject those policies. I voted for Obama, just to see that happen.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 4, 2009 9:50 PM in reply to shooter242

"After years of Bush being called "fascist", "murderer", "liar", or worse?"

Absolutely Goddamned right, and there's a very sound, historically verifiable reason for that: George W Bush really WAS a fascist, a murderer, a liar, and worse! By his own admission, a wannabe Dictator! I stand by that with, as I say, facts that are indisputable, as far as the whole Bush/Cheny administration was concerned.

And he WAS worse: George W Bush was a fuck-up, pure and simple. He had in his possession a file prepared by Dr Condoleeza Rice's National Security Agency labled "Osama bin Laden plans to attack the United States" on it's cover, and W just stuck it in a drawer in the Resolute Desk, likely unread.

Anyone who bothered to learn the significance of the date of September 11th would have known beforehand that as the date of the Balfour Declaration, allowing Jewish immigration to Palestine in 1914, this date was one of the 'educated guesses' named in that file, and at the time he recieved the report (Aug 6th, if I'm not mistaken), this was only a little more than a month away.

I therefore consider George W Bush as responsible as anyone, including Osama bin Laden himself, for allowing the attacks on America and the people under out protection on that fateful day, and in my humble opinion he has their blood - and the blood of more than 4,000 American soldiers in Iraq, which had nothing whatsoever to do with that attack - on his hands, and along with 'Darth Cheny', whom I consider to be guilty of nothing less than shredding the Constitution, ultimately responsible for allowing it to happen.

Oh, and Shooter - I don't need you to lecture me on the meaning of 'Schadenfrude', fuck you very much, I know exactly what this German word means: Deriving happiness from someone else's pain.

I won't stoop to that level, the level the Far Right-wing nutjobs now occupy; I take no pleasure out of anybody's pain, not even those who may actually deserve it. Such base emotions are beneath me - but since you brought it up, may I aassume, not so much YOU?

I wouldn't rejoice over anyone's misery - not even Dick Cheny's...well, maybe Cheny's.

Maybe.

But if you're smart, you'll abandon this whole sicko concept of Schadenfrude, enjoy what little you get out of this little setback (it may actually help Obama, btw), and get on the side of history and work with us and this president so we can rebuild out poor besotted country to something like what it was before ol' Georgie Boy got his paws on it - maybe even better!

~Johnny-O

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

marty9957

October 4, 2009 1:33 PM in reply to Johnny-O

I would request to see your Republican registration card before I could believe the garbage you are posting here.

As for being attacked again, it would be directly attributable to the current administrations policies. Therefore, it would only be right that they receive full credit.

If I were as unhappy with my party as you appear, I would just jump ship as you put it. Find one with better fiscal and moral values or perhaps the opposite but I would definitely leave.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jjcomet

October 4, 2009 2:08 PM in reply to marty9957

So if DaddyD was a former Republican you'd believe his claims, but if he's not, you won't? That's about as good a summary of the right-wing's devotion to facts and logic as I've ever seen. Thanks for admitting that the conservative worldview is driven completely by partisanship, truth be damned. I'd long suspected it, but it's nice to get confirmation from the horse's mouth (or it's other end, as may be more appropriate).

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 4, 2009 8:16 PM in reply to marty9957

"I would request to see your Republican registration card before I could believe the garbage you are posting here."

Whay I posted was not 'garbage', just my opinion, borne out by the facts I see on the news, and online.

And I am afraid you misunderstand me, Marty, I am not a Republican! I would never be a Republican because they are, gratefully, a dying breed, but as a Truman Democrat not only would I never jump ship from my Party but I do miss true fiscal Conservative Republicans who were centrist enough (like me) that they can be reasoned with instead of calling us all who support President Obama names and characterizing the President as a 'Usurper', a Communist, a traitor...these are not the words and attitudes of reasonable men and women who love their country!

I never wanted any harm to come to W Bush, I merely considered HIM a usurper, because Al Gore got 1.5 million more popular votes in the 2000 election than he did, and then five politically motivated (and if you ask me, politically corrupt) members of the Supreme Court installed this moose twit into the Oval Office; four years later, after the most adroit character assassination I have ever seen of John Kerry in the 2004 election, typing him as a 'phony hero', in the whole swift-boating fiasco, the American people unwisely re-elected W as their president...

Last November 4th, I voted for Barack Obama, not just because he was black (although that was huge, and he was a Dem!!!), but mainly because he seemed like the smartest politician we had before us in a long time - the comparison to George W Bush notwithstanding. Anybody would be an improvement over that moron, but even a good man like John McCain sold out to his own party, having to pick an even bigger moron like Sarah 'Failin' Palin, so I could not vote for him - and neither could 54% of the American electorate.

But getting back to his first term...

For seven months, George W Bush sat there in his office and did little to justify being a Chief Executive, and then one day in August NSA Chief Condie Rice hand-delivered a file to him which said on its cover "Osama bin Laden plans to attack the United States". It was all there, the names on the watch lists, the flying schools, the missed signals - all of it, laid out as natly as you please.

According to Richard Clarke, testifying before a Congressional subcommittee, our 'president' thanked Dr Rice, dismissed her, and then promptly dropped this file into a drawer in the Resolute Desk, probably unread - he was only angling on how to invade Iraq, and was NOT intersted in pursuing bin Laden or his dastardly plan.

Osama bin Laden remains free to this day.

No matter what happens, you can bet President Obama will be damn sure such an attack on America never happens on his watch; all I was saying is that if somehow it made it through the excellent net now in place by the CIA and FBI and the other information gathering apparats of this government (unlike the last one) you can be Goddamed good and sure that not only would the Obama Administration take full responsibility for it, but the perpetrators of such a monstrous crime would be swiftly broght to justice, and unlike the last fool who occupied the Oval Office, would not leave an unholy mess for the next president, SEVEN YEARS FROM NOW, to clean up...

Geroge W Bush was a complete, epic failure, and anyone who still defends him is a fool, following a fool. Simple as that.

As for the GOP, they are now at this time a Party with no real leadership, no new ideas, no program for the future and nothing of any consequence to say to this new president and his Democratic Pary but "NO!" They are dying, and a couple of more disasterous elections like the last two, and they will no longer have anything to offer the American Body Politic - hell, they don't now, if you ask me! Rush Limbo and Glenn Beck are their shrieking, pathetic titular leaders, and no one amongst them even has the guts to stand up to them and tell them "Stop hel-ping ussss?"

They are useless, as are your comments, 'Marty'. I am not surprised you got me wrong, even though I made myself unmistakably clear.

Please feel free to respond, if you dare; but at least have the decency to read my entire post, and try not to misunderstand me this time, will you?

I am a Truman Democrat who supports Barack Obama because I love my country, and I believe he will succeed - what's your excuse?

~Johnny-O

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

W.C. Varones

October 4, 2009 9:43 AM

Guilty as charged.

I'll admit, I cheered loudly in my workplace when Chicago lost.

But what's the big deal? The Olympics is a silly sporting event, and the last thing we need is more debt to build more excess capacity.

And we didn't politicize the Olympics. The President did when he decided to inject his partisan self into a process that Presidents traditionally are above. And the fact that Jarrett and other cronies stood to make millions off the Olympics made it even worse.

On the merits, Chicago doesn't need the Olympics (locals were evenly split on whether they even wanted to win). Obama making it a partisan issue was just icing on the cake.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

DaddyD

October 4, 2009 10:49 AM in reply to W.C. Varones

"Obama making it a partisan issue..."

Not.

"Partisan" refers to party politics (note the same root "part" at the beginning of the word). There was nothing "partisan" about advocating for the Olympics to be in Chicago, U.S.A. If anything, as others have noted above, even your Supreme Leader, Bush II, advocated for and supported the Chicago bid. Wouldn't, therefore, Obama's actions actually be "bipartisan", if they were political at all?

The only partisan players here were the wingnut conservatives pissing on themselves in an overblown fit of schadenfreude.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jjcomet

October 4, 2009 1:14 PM in reply to W.C. Varones

"And we didn't politicize the Olympics. The President did when he decided to inject his partisan self into a process that Presidents traditionally are above."

OK, you're officially an idiot if you believe that drivel. In January 2008, then-President George W. Bush met with the Chicago 2016 Bid Committee and U.S. Olympic Committee members about bringing the 2016 summer games to the city. But don;t let facts or history get in the way of your fantasies - that would cause you to lose your good standing as a right-winger.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

W.C. Varones

October 4, 2009 2:08 PM in reply to jjcomet

GW Bush met with the IOC in January 2008! The horror!

But he didn't make a media spectacle of himself and his wife flying to Europe in separate jumbo jets to give make-or-break speeches, now did he?

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

pamdixon

October 4, 2009 11:40 AM

Small, that was what I thought too. It didn't help when some reputable rag chose to frame the question in terms of Obama's fatal lose-lose situation. I don't know, maybe I'm the one who is small. I keep thinking of a man I once knew whose penis was so small it hid in his pubic hair.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

serr8d

October 4, 2009 12:01 PM

Barack Obama made this all about him. Michelle Obama made this all about her.

They should have made it about swaying more than 16 members of the IOC.

Don't put all the blame on the Republicans (if you can help yourself, good luck with that!); this failure was simply the rejection by the IOC of the massive super egos that tried to storm in and make it about...themselves.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jjcomet

October 4, 2009 12:54 PM in reply to serr8d

And your proof for this is what, exactly? Are you a member of the IOC panel that made the decision. No? You mean you're just pulling this out of your ass, the source of all right-wing talking points? Quelle suprise! Seriously, jerk-off, when you can support your argument with more than your uninformed opinion, get back with us. Until then, keep eating those Cheetos...

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Penelope

October 4, 2009 3:56 PM

Most Chicagoans didn't even want the Olympics to be hosted by their city. In today's dismal economic climate, they didn't want the expense or the hassle.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

kernel

October 5, 2009 12:43 PM in reply to Penelope

"Some" is not the same as "most."

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Johnny-O

October 4, 2009 8:12 PM

"I would request to see your Republican registration card before I could believe the garbage you are posting here."

Whay I posted was not 'garbage', just my opinion, borne out by the facts I see on the news, and online.

And I am afraid you misunderstand me, Marty, I am not a Republican! I would never be a Republican because they are, gratefully, a dying breed, but as a Truman Democrat not only would I never jump ship from my Party but I do miss true fiscal Conservative Republicans who were centrist enough (like me) that they can be reasoned with instead of calling us all who support President Obama names and characterizing the President as a 'Usurper', a Communist, a traitor...these are not the words and attitudes of reasonable men and women who love their country!

I never wanted any harm to come to W Bush, I merely considered HIM a usurper, because Al Gore got 1.5 million more popular votes in the 2000 election than he did, and then five politically motivated (and if you ask me, politically corrupt) members of the Supreme Court installed this moose twit into the Oval Office; four years later, after the most adroit character assassination I have ever seen of John Kerry in the 2004 election, typing him as a 'phony hero', in the whole swift-boating fiasco, the American people unwisely re-elected W as their president...

Last November 4th, I voted for Barack Obama, not just because he was black (although that was huge, and he was a Dem!!!), but mainly because he seemed like the smartest politician we had before us in a long time - the comparison to George W Bush notwithstanding. Anybody would be an improvement over that moron, but even a good man like John McCain sold out to his own party, having to pick an even bigger moron like Sarah 'Failin' Palin, so I could not vote for him - and neither could 54% of the American electorate.

But getting back to his first term...

For seven months, George W Bush sat there in his office and did little to justify being a Chief Executive, and then one day in August NSA Chief Condie Rice hand-delivered a file to him which said on its cover "Osama bin Laden plans to attack the United States". It was all there, the names on the watch lists, the flying schools, the missed signals - all of it, laid out as natly as you please.

According to Richard Clarke, testifying before a Congressional subcommittee, our 'president' thanked Dr Rice, dismissed her, and then promptly dropped this file into a drawer in the Resolute Desk, probably unread - he was only angling on how to invade Iraq, and was NOT intersted in pursuing bin Laden or his dastardly plan.

Osama bin Laden remains free to this day.

No matter what happens, you can bet President Obama will be damn sure such an attack on America never happens on his watch; all I was saying is that if somehow it made it through the excellent net now in place by the CIA and FBI and the other information gathering apparats of this government (unlike the last one) you can be Goddamed good and sure that not only would the Obama Administration take full responsibility for it, but the perpetrators of such a monstrous crime would be swiftly broght to justice, and unlike the last fool who occupied the Oval Office, would not leave an unholy mess for the next president, SEVEN YEARS FROM NOW, to clean up...

Geroge W Bush was a complete, epic failure, and anyone who still defends him is a fool, following a fool. Simple as that.

As for the GOP, they are now at this time a Party with no real leadership, no new ideas, no program for the future and nothing of any consequence to say to this new president and his Democratic Pary but "NO!" They are dying, and a couple of more disasterous elections like the last two, and they will no longer have anything to offer the American Body Politic - hell, they don't now, if you ask me! Rush Limbo and Glenn Beck are their shrieking, pathetic titular leaders, and no one amongst them even has the guts to stand up to them and tell them "Stop hel-ping ussss?"

They are useless, as are your comments, 'Marty'. I am not surprised you got me wrong, even though I made myself unmistakably clear.

Please feel free to respond, if you dare; but at least have the decency to read my entire post, and try not to misunderstand me this time, will you?

I am a Truman Democrat who supports Barack Obama because I love my country, and I believe he will succeed - what's your excuse?

~Johnny-O

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

ivy22

October 5, 2009 9:03 AM

Real Americans love America and what the best for all of her citizens. Real Americans don't rejoice over the loss of tens of thousands of jobs and economic stimulus. Real Americans don't cheer at the lost chance to showcase the best of America. The right wing media monster that the Republicans have engineered is eating our country alive and enjoying it. How sad.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

lousgirl84

October 5, 2009 6:22 PM in reply to ivy22

"the Republicans have engineered is eating our country alive and enjoying it. How sad."

Couldn't agree more or said it better.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

buckheaddad

October 5, 2009 6:13 PM

Hell! Under Bush-Cheney you'd be arrested, water-boarded and deported to some CIA hush-hush prison if you as much as "looked
funny" about those Holier-than-Holy S.O.B.s

Send Rush another prescription, and let him root-and-hoot.

Buckheaddad

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

jjdjjd

October 6, 2009 10:21 PM

as don imus says 'i'm not happy till you're not happy'. the ONE got his clocked cleaned, along with the big mouth oprah and the 'take no prisoners' wife. too many high 5s and 'yeah,we got this locked up' before the IOC did them in. no one likes to be swindled, and the ONE is just a bit too slick for this type of duty. and i love it.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JON M. STOUT

October 7, 2009 11:02 AM

The president showed poor judgment in demeaning the office in front of a bunch of IOC criminals. Let's hope he uses better judgment with Afghanistan but I'm worried that his inexperience will surface again.

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Tosh

January 30, 2010 1:25 PM

carter will take that spot but its too early to decide http://www.m65jacket.com

wizard of oz books
snow cone syrup

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Fred

April 24, 2011 7:19 PM

That is genuinely helpful. I would like to ask if it would be Okay if I mentioned some of that on my own blog. Of course, I would credit you, and link back here also.