Obama Blows It...

From U.K. The Times online:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6859031.ece

October 3, 2009
Obama’s Olympic failure will only add to doubts about his presidency
Tim Reid in Washington

There has been a growing narrative taking hold about Barack Obama’s presidency in recent weeks: that he is loved by many, but feared by none; that he is full of lofty vision, but is actually achieving nothing with his grandiloquence.

Chicago’s dismal showing yesterday, after Mr Obama’s personal, impassioned last-minute pitch, is a stunning humiliation for this President. It cannot be emphasised enough how this will feed the perception that on the world stage he looks good — but carries no heft.

It was only the Olympic Games, the White House will argue — not a high-stakes diplomatic gamble with North Korea. It is always worthwhile when Mr Obama sells America to the rest of the world, David Axelrod, his chief political adviser, said today. But that argument will fall on deaf ears in the US. Americans want their presidents to be winners.

Mr Obama was greeted — as usual — like a rock star by the IOC delegates in Copenhagen — then humiliated by them. Perception is reality. A narrow defeat for Chicago would have been acceptable — but the sheer scale of the defeat was a bombshell, and is a major blow for Mr Obama at a time when questions are being asked about his style of governance.

At home, it is difficult to turn on a television and not see Mr Obama giving a press conference, or an interview, or at a town hall rally, in his all-out effort to sell his troubled reform the US health insurance system. After three months of enormous exposure, Mr Obama has achieved this: the growing likelihood of ramming a Bill through Congress with — at most — just one Republican vote.

Abroad, Mr Obama promised in his Inauguration address to engage America’s enemies, and he has done just that. He has very little to show for it. Yes, Iran took part in bilateral talks with the US this week over its nuclear weapons programme — but that is something Tehran has wanted for years. There is still a very good chance that the meetings will prove to be an exercise in futility and a time-wasting ploy by Tehran.

Mr Obama also scrapped a plan for a missile defence shield in the Czech Republic and Poland, hoping to get in return Russian co-operation behind new sanctions against Tehran. There was optimism when President Medvedev said “sanctions are seldom productive, but they are sometimes inevitable”. Yet Vladimir Putin, and the Chinese, remain fiercely opposed to sanctions.

Meanwhile, America and its allies are being forced to witness a very public agonising by Mr Obama and his advisers over his Afghan strategy — six months after he announced that strategy.

This has all added to the perception that Mr Obama’s soaring rhetoric — which captured the imagination during last year’s election — is simply not enough when it comes to confronting the myriad challenges of the presidency. His spectacular Olympic failure will only add to that.
 
The president of the United States goes to speak in front of the Olympic committee, for the city that he loves, for the country he is the leader of, and that is a bad thing?

I am with Scarborough, I think he did a good thing, not a bad thing.

What if he had sat at home - would the right be vilifying Obama for not doing enough - I think they would be.

Obama loves his adopted 'home' city - he wanted to have the Olympics - the biggest PR fest in the world - to shine its spotlight on the US. Our opportunity to have one of the best cities in the world show it's stuff.

Other presidents have spoken on behalf of cities they didn't even have any personal ties with, they knew the opportunity to showcase the US under the auspice of the Olympic games is something to work for.

And no, I don't see the difference between Reagan speaking for the Olympics in Anchorage or Bush pitching for Atlanta.

Before the voting - Spain's president Zapatero presented his case for Madrid, personally, in Copenhagen. Japan's prime minister, Hatoyama was in Copenhagen to help Tokyo's bid...

And Silva, Brazil's President, was also in Copenhagen, and accepted the win from the leaders of the IOC

Note - all 4 leaders of the bidding countries were in Copenhagen.

Wouldn't it have appeared odd for our President to not be there? Once again - I am sure the right would have hoisted that petard had Obama not been in Copenhagen, while the leaders from the other 3 countries found the time to appear before the committee.
 
And no, I don't see the difference between Reagan speaking for the Olympics in Anchorage
Appearing in a produced video.

or Bush pitching for Atlanta.
Stopping by for a photo-op showing the proposed Olympic Village after attending a speech.

You're delusional, in denial, or just not being candid.
It's ENTIRELY different.

Note - all 4 leaders of the bidding countries were in Copenhagen.
Right- and the are our equals....

Wouldn't it have appeared odd for our President to not be there?
No.

Once again - I am sure the right would have hoisted that petard had Obama not been in Copenhagen, while the leaders from the other 3 countries found the time to appear before the committee.
Incorrect.
The Olympics are a money loosing proposition.
And the games in Chicago were going to be a corrupt scheme to make the poverty pandering politicians in the city even richer.

However, I'm glad that Obama failed to persuade the IOC. I'm just disappointed in his judgment and his priorities..
 
Fine Cal - you can berate a wonderful city - be glad that they lost their bid...

You're delusional, in denial, or just not being candid.
It's ENTIRELY different.
And yes, maybe the other presidents' involvement was different - because it was indifferent.

The Olympics are a money loosing proposition.

Dollar wise - do you get a great return on your dollar - here is a good article on Sydney's olympics in 2000 - it appears that basically they broke even, barely, and it takes many years... so not a great return at all - but what intangibles are there - lots...

However, I'm glad that Obama failed to persuade the IOC. I'm just disappointed in his judgment and his priorities..

So, gloat in your little 'Obama failed' world - I am sad. I would have loved to see a city that I think is very special be able to enjoy the spotlight of the Olympics. Chicagoans would have done a wonderful job hosting the games, and it would have been great seeing what wonderful things they would have come up with to define the games as uniquely theirs. I feel a sense of loss, not relief. A sense of opportunity missed not crisis averted.

Right- and the are our equals....
And your attitude that maybe the leader of the United States shouldn't 'lower' himself to mix with those 'lesser leaders' like the prime minister of Japan or the president of Spain or Brazil is about as narrow minded as it comes Cal. I am disappointed.
 
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.

--Ronald Reagan in a speech delivered in 1981 in opposition to Medicare​

Note: This quotation is often falsely attributed to Norman Thomas.
 
Saturday, May 23, 2009

America Will Never (Knowingly) Adopt Socialism

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." — Norman Thomas (six-time Socialist Party presidential candidate), Speech [1944]

Could this be happening? Is our country really becoming socialist? Consider this. In the name of liberalism (modern liberalism) our government has fully nationalized Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae. President Obama has assumed controlling interest in the banking industry, the finance industry, the insurance industry, the automobile industry, and the credit card industry. Almost 50 percent of healthcare is already under government control with the remaining portion soon to be assimilated by Big Brother Obama.

Many “fragments” of the socialist agenda (i.e. the” progressive” agenda) are being injected into our society by President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Leader Reid and the Democratic Party majority. With each government intervention our constitution shrinks and our freedoms diminish. President Obama promised hope and change but so far has delivered only bigger government, higher taxes, massive and unsustainable debt, increased regulation, increased government interventionism, increased military interventionism, and many, many, many new socialist policies.

"Every step a government takes beyond the fulfillment of its essential functions of protecting the smooth operation of the market economy against aggression, whether on the part of domestic or foreign disturbers, is a step forward on a road that directly leads into the totalitarian system where there is no freedom at all." - Ludwig von Mises

by Mark Van Schuyver, Ph.D.

http://selfownership.blogspot.com/2009/05/america-will-never-knowingly-adopt.html
 
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."
That statement was made by Ronald Reagan, not Norman Thomas.
 
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." — Norman Thomas (six-time Socialist Party presidential candidate), Speech [1944]

Could this be happening? Is our country really becoming socialist?
That all depends on what Ronald Reagan meant by "the socialist program" and "a socialist nation."
 
That all depends on what Ronald Reagan meant by "the socialist program" and "a socialist nation."

The term "the socialist program" was often used by Daniel De Leon, an American Socialist who died in 1914. Therefore, I shall assume that Ronald Reagan was talking about "the socialist program" of Daniel De Leon.

Daniel De Leon defined Socialism as follows:

Socialism is that social system under which the necessaries of production are owned, controlled and administered by the people, for the people, and under which, accordingly, the cause of political and economic despotism having been abolished, class rule is at an end. That is socialism; nothing short of that.

--Daniel De Leon, from the Daily People (Nov. 2, 1908)

The first fragment of De Leon's "Socialist Program" is ownership of the necessaries of production by the people.

It's been 48 years since Ronald Reagan predicted that the American people would adopt every fragment of the socialist plan, and we haven't even adopted the first fragment of the plan. Furthermore, there is no evidence whatsoever that the people are in favor of assuming collective ownership of the necessaries of production.

Ronald Reagan was wrong. The American people will never adopt his socialist plan.
 
Fine Cal - you can berate a wonderful city - be glad that they lost their bid...
Chicago is NOT a wonderful city. It's a craphole of a police state, and I can say this with enough authority, having been born there.

I'm glad Obama's corrupt slumlords like Valerie Jarrett, who stood to make millions by flipping their Chicago slums into Olympic villages, won't be bailed out by Obama's corrupt scheming.
 
Daniel De Leon defined Socialism...

Again, you cannot "define" socialism. a definition is not at all conductive to understanding and complex idea like socialism. To look to a definition (or a dictionary in general) for an understanding of socialism is like watching the film The Blues Brothers for an intricate and in depth understanding of how an internal combustion engine works.
 
Fine Cal - you can berate a wonderful city - be glad that they lost their bid...
I am.
It just saved the taxpayers of the city, the state, and the country BILLIONS of dollars.

And yes, maybe the other presidents' involvement was different - because it was indifferent.
And on that point, you just reluctantly confirmed that the rest of what you said was crap designed to mislead and distract.

Dollar wise - do you get a great return on your dollar - here is a good article on Sydney's olympics in 2000 - it appears that basically they broke even, barely, and it takes many years... so not a great return at all - but what intangibles are there - lots...
So you pulled out the one modern Olympic games that MIGHT just barely break even if you looked at the doctored figures. Or maybe we can look at the '84 Olympics, they reported a "profit" of a million dollars- so long as you don't consider such expenses as SECURITY (hundreds of millions of dollars).

It's a scam and I don't want to pay for it.

It would have cost more than $6.5 Billion dollars to get Chicago ready for the Olympics. Factor in the weak dollar, the insane corruption in that city, and the fact that the infrastructure is already starting to fall apart there- cost over runs and bail outs would be abundant.

The only real "stimulus" that would have resulted here would have been to the cronies in Chicago who stood to make hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions, of dollars.

No. I hope they enjoy the party in Rio, because I won't be watching.
The Olympics are an internationalist institution from the last century that I have no interest in, and based on the falling ratings, most Americans seem to agree.

So, gloat in your little 'Obama failed' world - I am sad. I would have loved to see a city that I think is very special be able to enjoy the spotlight of the Olympics. Chicagoans would have done a wonderful job hosting the games, and it would have been great seeing what wonderful things they would have come up with to define the games as uniquely theirs. I feel a sense of loss, not relief. A sense of opportunity missed not crisis averted.
Boo-Hoo.

And your attitude that maybe the leader of the United States shouldn't 'lower' himself to mix with those 'lesser leaders' like the prime minister of Japan or the president of Spain or Brazil is about as narrow minded as it comes Cal. I am disappointed.
I didn't say it was beneath him to meet with "lower" leaders, merely to grovel before the IOC next to them.....

But I'm glad he found a few minutes for a photo-op with the general in Afghanistan....... (see the difference here, GHWB had a photo-op related to the Olympics, Obama has a photo-op with the General in charge of Afghanistan who has been URGENTLY REQUESTING MORE TROOPS for over a month!)

It didn't work. And our country took another shot in the groin for it.
If only Obama would speak about our COUNTRY before the rest of the world as he speaks of that corrupt city in the mid-west before the IOC.
 
haha this was funny

111111.JPG
 
So, gloat in your little 'Obama failed' world - I am sad.
You should be sad. Your bumbling idiot of a President embarrassed himself by grandstanding with Oprah and then blowing it in front of the entire world. He's a Chicago thug who couldn't stack the IOC with ACORN votes, and he FAILED. He's an utter fool, and you campaigned for him.

Exit quotation:

"Who is more foolish, the fool, or the one who follows him?"

-- Obi-Wan Kenobi
 
Oh wait! It's Bush's fault!
Senator Roland Burris of Illinois, the Senator who was appointed to fill President Barack Obama’s vacant Senate seat, blames George Bush for Chicago not getting the Olympics in 2016. Burris stated in an interview, shortly after the announcement, that the image of the U. S. has been so tarnished in the last 8 years that, even Barack Obama making an unprecedented pitch for the games could not overcome the hatred the world has for us as a result of George Bush.
 
What I'd like to know is WHY so many of those on the right HATE AMERICA so much they'll celebrate it's defeat. Theres a name that used to be tossed around for people like that....... what was that again ........ oh yeah, TRAITORS!
 
Hey Johnny, Obama wasn't doing this for America, he was doing it for HIMSELF and his cronies in Chicago. I'm celebrating his failure to promote his Messiahship.

All he did the first 6 months of his Presidency was bash America around the world on his apology tour. So why should we be surprised when the rest of the world doesn't like us?
 
What I'd like to know is WHY so many of those on the right HATE AMERICA so much they'll celebrate it's defeat. Theres a name that used to be tossed around for people like that....... what was that again ........ oh yeah, TRAITORS!
LOL

CryJohnny.jpg
 
Chicago is NOT a wonderful city. It's a craphole of a police state, and I can say this with enough authority, having been born there.

OK Mr. dilusional. Chicago ranks much higher than the craphole you live in:

2008 US City Sustainability Rankings
Cities are listed by their 2008 Rankings order. Numbers in parentheses ( ) denote 2006 Rankings.

1. Portland, OR (1)

2. San Francisco, CA (2)

3. Seattle, WA (3)

4. Chicago, IL (4)

5. New York, NY (6)

6. Boston, MA (7)

7. Minneapolis, MN (10)

8. Philadelphia, PA (8)

9. Oakland, CA (5)

10. Baltimore, MD (11)

11. Denver, CO (9)

12. Milwaukee, WI (16)

13. Austin, TX (14)

14. Sacramento, CA (13)

15. Washington, DC (12)

16. Cleveland, OH (28)

17. Honolulu, HI (15)

18. Albuquerque, NM (19)

19. Atlanta, GA (38)

20. Kansas City, MO (18)

21. San Jose, CA (23)

22. Tucson, AZ (20)

23. Jacksonville, FL (36)

24. Dallas, TX (24)

25. Omaha, NE (37)

26. San Diego, CA (17)

27. New Orleans, LA (32)

28. Los Angeles, CA (25)

29. Louisville, KY (35)

30. Columbus, OH (50)

31. Detroit, MI (43)

32. Phoenix, AZ (22)

33. San Antonio, TX (21)

34. Miami, FL (29)

35. Charlotte, NC (34)

36. Houston, TX (39)

37. Fresno, CA (33)

38. El Paso, TX (31)

39. Fort Worth, TX (46)

40. Nashville, TN (42)

41. Arlington, TX (41)

42. Long Beach, CA (30)

43. Colorado Springs, CO (26)

44. Indianapolis, IN (45)

45. Virginia Beach, VA (48)

46. Memphis, TN (43)

47. Las Vegas, NV (27)

48. Tulsa, OK (40)

49. Oklahoma City, OK (49)

50. Mesa, AZ (47)

:bowrofl:
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top