Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston



Trump Sides with the Kremlin, Against the U.S. Government.

(If that isn’t sitting in the lap of Treason, I don’t know what is.)

Friday, October 2, 2009



That's too bad, but I appreciate our POTUS and FLOTUS's  efforts on behalf of America.  This will be blown out of proportion by the Right as some sort of evidence of something or other.  But I would like to point out to those who will come here and revel in this setback, that while President Obama was in Denmark--and during the many times he's been in foreign countries in his young administration, no one has thrown shoes at him.

Here is what we'll be seeing from certain people on the Right over this president's willingness to take a chance to win one for America:

October 2, 2009 8:35 AM

Blogger StevensOpinions said...

October 2, 2009 8:40 AM
Shaw Kenawe said...
Let Steven's comment stand for itself: He's happy to announce that he is anti-American. Happy that America lost out. Now there's a real patriot. He hates President Obama more than he loves his country. I salute President Obama for making the effort! Good going. And thank you. But look at it this way folks: No one threw shoes at our president when he was in Denmark.
VIDEO: Conservatives Erupt In Applause Over Chicago's Olympic Bid Failure

Read more at:
Conservative Americans are cheering because the Olympics will not be held here.
In 2005, when NYCity lost out on the Olympics, no one cheered and no one blamed George W. Bush for not getting the IOC to bring the games to New York.
But we now know that certain elements in the GOP are Republicans first--not Americans first and have actually cheered for Brazil's win over America's.

Rooting against America: Beck, other conservatives cheer elimination of Chicago's Olympic bid

Conservative media figures have celebrated the International Olympic Committee's elimination of Chicago's bid to host the 2016 Summer Olympics and used the event to bash President Obama, who flew to Copenhagen to lobby IOC members on behalf of Chicago's bid. For instance, Glenn Beck called the news that Chicago's bid had failed "so sweet," Rush Limbaugh declared himself "happy" and "gleeful" with the results, and Matt Drudge proclaimed: "World rejects Obama."

Keep it classy, GOP.


Arthurstone said...

Good old Steve.

Personally I 'elected' President Obama in hopes he'd bring troops home from the battle field. The safest step he could take. Time will tell.

On the other hand I'm just as glad the Olympics will go elsewhere. I vote for Rio de Janeiro. Given the incredible bloat, incredible expense and sheer scale of the enterprise I think that the global corporate types behind the Olympic 'movement' would best further their goals by awarding the event to a second or third world city which can ill-afford the enterprise. That wouldn't preclude Chicago of course but I think a billion dollar Olympic stadium rising in view of the favelas is truer to current Olympic ideal of unfettered corporate welfare..

Let's keep the poor nations poor!

dmarks said...

I did not 'elect' Obama, but I have wanted him to realize that the best exit strategy is the defeat of the terrorists. That is the safest step. So far, he has not done anything rash on that front. Good!

If you want a second or third world city that could ill afford the enterprise, perhaps consider Detroit.

Dave Miller said...

Great points Arthur. I always felt it was an uphill climb for Chicago.

I mean let's think about for a few moments. Most of the IOC big wigs are men.

Now I don't want to slam Chicago, but really.

Did anyone think they were going to go for the windy city and urban life over Rio de Janiero and Ipanema beach, complete with the famous Brazilian women, all legal?

Probably not.

But to Shaw's point, I have already received text messages from my conservative friends mocking Obama for this.

One said "Obama did not get the Olympics. Ha! He's such a loser. Out in the first round. Love it!"

Are people rooting against America simply because Obama is President?

I think so.

Gordon said...

The opinion of many on the right was that the fix was in; there was no way a savvy pol like Obama would risk his prestige on something like this without knowing that Chicago was likely to win.

The new wisdom is that if a bunch of fixers like Jarrett, Axelrod, Emanuel and Obama can't manage something like this--well, then Chicago's fearsome reputation for insider politics is shaky.

Jetting off to Denmark while parking Afghanistan policy on a back burner is looking like a bad decision.

TAO said...

I for one was cheering for RIO!

I have seen what Rio can do for a Carnival....and the thought of THAT opening ceremony! Whew!

Going to have to get the BIGGEST FLAT SCREEN TV I can find!

Besides Chicago traffic is a mess just when the Bears have a home game...

Arthurstone said...

Seven and one half more years of mewling.

Any action President Obama takes (at any level) over that period will be broadcast, analyzed, mischaracterized, exaggerated and misinterpreted by right-wing bloggers and their associates in the allegedly 'Liberal' 24/7 wall to wall MSM.

Gordon hits it pitch perfect with his post expressing the 'new wisdom' and 'looking like a bad idea'.

Hey kids! Play pundit!

It's fun! It's easy!

No experience required!

Shaw Kenawe said...

Excuse me Gordon, but Gen. McChrystal was with President Obama on his trip to Denmark. Do you or does anyone know what passed between the President and his General while they were together?

So "The Fix Is In" meme wasn't true, as the chief dittohead stated, and the Chicagoans aren't such crafty, nasty "win-at-any-cost" pols as the Right has made them all out to be?

The president did what he could to help Chicago win the Olympics. It didn't work out for him, nor did it work out for Japan, whose Prime Minister lobbied in person in Denmark as well.

The difference is here, people on the Right are happy that America didn't win because they see it as some sort of defeat for President Obama.

Mr. Obama is still president, and, as I said, no one threw shoes at him while he was in a foreign country.


Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
TAO said...

Obama did a 45 minute speech, did not socialize nor smooze...and apparently some of the IOC folks felt that they were not shown a high enough level of they got even...

Obviously, Obama was working on something else the whole trip to Denmark....

Lets see, after the screw up of Salt Lake City and the bombing in Atlanta...kind of makes you want to think twice about the good ol' USA!

But what do I know...RIO was my first choice!

Gordon said...

Newsweek says that this is actually a good thing for the president, since the result would have been seven years of construction tie-ups, corruption and cronyism. All of it would be laid at Obama's feet.

Gordon said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Shaw Kenawe said...

I think the reports from the far Right of Mr. Obama's political demise are a bit premature.

He's still the president and has more than 3 years to go in his first term.

This was a disappointment, but will be forgotten in their next round of manic blatherings.

What I'm shocked at is the fact that so many of them are cheering the defeat of America because of their hatred Obama.

I think he was quite brave to go and risk what he did for Chicago and America.

It takes a really well-grounded man who is not afraid of failure to put himself in the position of losing and knowing that his detractors will rejoice in the loss.

Not one of the yawping gloaters here and over at TRUTH's blog would have the cajones to do what Obama did.

[Gordon, I deleted your duplicate comment.]

Shaw Kenawe said...

And I refer to the guy in my original post and the ones I had to delete, not to Gordon.

Arthurstone said...

Could Newsweek be right?

The 'new wisdom' just said 'losing' the Olympics proved the 'Chicago fixers' couldn't 'manage something like this'!

Which just goes to show that everything President Obama touches, in this hyper partisan era, is a "lose-lose" proposition.

TRUTH 101 said...

I hate to admit this but I'm glad Chicago didn't get the Olympics. My state's (I live in Illinois) budget is a mess. Prisons may be closed. Big layoffs are on the horizon. I'd just as soon preserve the funding for jobs I know exist rather than ones that may or may not be created with Olympic construction and related ventures.

Gordon said...

T101, that comment just shows how much you hate Obama! Why, if the president is brave enough, and if Michelle is willing to sacrifice for the children, then you should step up and bear higher taxes, corruption and cronyism and endless traffic snarls for the greater glory. What kind of a traitor are you, anyway?

Gordon said...

One thing we have learned from this episode: The IOC is raaaaacist!

Hunkus Munkus said...

"...then you should step up and bear higher taxes, corruption and cronyism ..."

I already suffered through that for the last 8 years.

Anonymous said...

Wow! The GOP are anti-American? I thought only the dirty fucking hippies in the Democratic Party were the anti-Americans. Who knew.

GOPers hate America that much. They CHEERED America's losing???

What amazing assholes!

Shaw Kenawe said...

This is looking worse and worse for the GOP. It's really sinking into our national psyche that a group of malcontents in the GOP actually cheered on America's defeat.

The president did the right thing, he risked a lot, but he put America before his political capital.

At some point intelligent Americans will understand this and be driven farther away from the crazies of the GOP.

dmarks said...

All: Regardless of all the buzz going around overreacting "Obama is a miserable failure who can't even do this", I had no problem with his effort to try to secure the Olympics for Chicago.

Gordon said: "Newsweek says that this is actually a good thing for the president, since the result would have been seven years of construction tie-ups, corruption and cronyism"

Have you ever been to Chicago? From the existing results, perhaps they are being awarded the Olympics every four years, and we do not know about it.

Arthurstone said...

Heh. Heh.

Ok. Ok.

I'm a sucker for a poster with name like 'Intellectual Ammo' who would regurgitate such reactionary boilerplate.


Screams the blog heading.

In his 'canon' of recommended books is Upton Sinclair's 'The Jungle'.

I haven't the heart to break it to him...

TAO said...

Arthur, Be nice!

Remember most of them believe that Ayn Rand was writing about them...

So, they read a blurb about "The Jungle" being about Chicago and horrible conditions and right off they tied Chicago to Obama...

So it makes the list!

The 'Cliff's Noting" of America...

Shaw Kenawe said...

Congratulations to Brazil, they've earned it. I'm sure they'll put on a great show--Intellectual Ammo

Hey! Congratulations on being such a HUGE anti-American! Good on you for cheering for Brazil and NOT America!

TRUTH 101 said...

Chicago's loss does give Righties like my friend Gordon achance to rejoice over something other than milliopns of Americans with no health insurance for today anyway. How long can you shout "socialism" without getting bored? They don't mind sounding like fools. But God forbid they get bored. On behalf of Gordon and the rest of the right, thank you IOC and President Obama.

TAO said...

I just returned from our Friday Night Dinner at a local restaurant, and our resturant of choice this evening was packed full of the local Republican dignitaries.

When one of the officials made a snide comment about Obama "blowing it" in regards to the Olympics I was and HE REALLY WAS SURPRISED by the general response in the restaurant...

Kentucky maybe a very Republican state but America comes first and the majority in this restaurant that heard the comment voiced their approval of....

OBAMA! They approve of him trying! They approved of him giving it his best shot!

So, let the negativism continue because it can only help Obama...

One diner brought up the fact that maybe the Republicans need to spend alittle less time being cute and a little more time developing a healthcare plan...

I think people are starting, in this little very conservative neck of the woods, to recognize Obama as OUR PRESIDENT...

Shaw Kenawe said...

I've already observed that the craven behavior of the rightwing fringe over President Obama's efforts to get the Olympics in Chicago will work to discredit them and make them look like America-haters.

Trust me. No one likes to see any group in this country cheer AGAINST their president and America.

The Right used to remind everyone of this over the last 8 years.

Jim said...

Well, they should have called the homies in LA, where I live.

After the financial problems of 1976, only Los Angeles bid for the right to host the 1984 Olympic Games. The bid was criticised for depending heavily on existing facilities and corporate sponsors. However, the Games produced a healthy profit of USD 223 million and became the model for future Games.

Led by chairman Peter Ueberroth, the baseball commissioner, it was run as a business and made a profit and made America proud.

Maybe Mr. Obama should have taken Mr. Ueberroth instead of Oprah. Or the Obama's could have stayed home, saved Americans all that money to fly them overseas, and let Peter go alone. Just a thought.

Jim said...

Los Angeles Times Articles

Lawrence Probst is named chairman of U.S. Olympic Committee

Barely two weeks after being named to the board of directors, he is elected unanimously to a four-year term.

By Philip Hersh, Special to the Times|October 03, 2008

Barely two weeks after being named to the U.S. Olympic Committee board of directors, Lawrence Probst is its new chairman.

Probst was elected unanimously to a four-year term by the 10-member USOC board in a Thursday teleconference.

Probst, of San Francisco, is the chairman of the board of Electronic Arts (EA), the world's leading video games company.

That he has no previous connection to the Olympic movement or sports management is another example of the USOC's ongoing effort to operate more like a corporation by emphasizing significant business success as credentials for being chairman.

Probst will officially succeed Peter Ueberroth, a multimillionaire businessman, as chairman at an Oct. 12 meeting in Orlando.

"We need to shore up and expand our partnerships with major corporations in the United States, and Larry walks those halls better than I do," Ueberroth said. "And with the new media and network [the USOC is trying to create], Larry's skills in that area are better than mine."

Ueberroth, 71, the former Major League Baseball commissioner and CEO of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, will remain with the USOC as honorary president through the 2010 Vancouver Olympics. He will continue working closely with Chicago's 2016 Olympic bid and likely will have a much larger role in that area than Probst.

"Obviously, I along with everybody in the United States is interested in seeing Chicago successfully compete, and I foresee myself making every effort I can to help with that process," Probst said. "I think that's a team effort, and I am happy to join that team."

So, I must ask, why weren't these two very successful businessmen making the pitch for Chicago? Huh?

BTW - Chicago was apparently split evenly on the question of even hosting the games in the first place. Seems the taxpayers are just a little jumpy.

Gordon said...

Oh, gawd yes! America's psyche is stunned, shocked, traumatized! And it's sunk in so quickly! Barely six hours after the announcement, and we're suffering from deep, deep Elephantine angst!

We'd better gnash our garments and rend our teeth!

Geez, it's the Olympics. It's not like we were wishing America to lose a war, or something.

And the truth is, we'd have been just fine if Chicago had been selected. What we didn't understand is why it had to be about Obama. We don't understand why every speech he gives is about me, me, me. He hasn't gone to third-party references yet, but it seems he might, soon.

To paraphrase someone: We understand you folks have a crush, and it's really deep and wonderful and transformative for you. But we don't, and we're tired of hearing about yours.

Shaw Kenawe said...

"Geez, it's the Olympics. It's not like we were wishing America to lose a war, or something."--Gordon

Oh, but the Right is doing exactly that. Undermining every action this president takes, while the US is still at war in two countries.

What can America's enemies think when her own people call their duly elected president a Commie/Marxist/Socialst/Fascist during a time of war?

The Right becomes apoplectic at every single action--including talking to children about being successful in school--that this president takes.

Members of the GOP reacted to criticism against GWB all through his presidency--by calling it anti-American.

But we've seen now that it's anti-American, and unpatriotic only when the Left does it.


And when that is the 24/7 message coming from the opposition, we on the Left understand that the GOP hates President Obama more than they love their country.

If the shoe fits; wear it.

[But don't throw it.]

BetteB said...

Chicago lost the 2016 Olympics for a couple of fairly simple reasons, imo. First — the US has hosted the Olympics more than half a dozen times already (both summer and winter events). It was somebody else’s turn. South America has never hosted Olympic events. It was their turn.

Second – the US is currently involved in two wars (and who knows when they’ll actually end); the US does not enjoy huge international popularity (despite the fact that other countries truly admire Obama, they’re still not too sure about Americans per se) and for visitors to the US, border entries are tough to cross. Can you just imagine Iraqi or Iranian athletes trying to get past border crossings? Ordinary Americans would be screaming about terrorists, from one side of the country to another … it’d be nuts.

If you don’t think the Olympic Committee folks weren’t thinking about all this, you’re just not thinking. Obama put on a good show, but Christ Himself couldn’t have convinced them to choose Chicago. Not right now, anyway.

Arthurstone said...

Actually the better question Gordon is why do YOU make everything about Obama?

Jim said...

Oh, but the Right is doing exactly that. Undermining every action this president takes, while the US is still at war in two countries.


Just change Right to Left and think of GW. Except the Democrats even went after our military then.

Jim said...

What can America's enemies think when her own people call their duly elected president a Commie/Marxist/Socialst/Fascist during a time of war?

It would probably go something like this:

Allah Akbar! Chop off the Infidels heads! God is Great! Wooo Hooo!

Gordon said...

When Chicago is considered the favorite--and it was, apparently; that's why the news anchors were so stunned, and the Obama team was also--and the president, at the last minute, shows up to accept the prize, only to come in last:

It's about Obama.

When the French, of all people, are more hawkish on Iran, and the French president is openly contemptuous of the US president:

It's about Obama.

When the Democrats have fillibuster-proof control of Congress, yet the president's signature policy--health care--is staggering:

It's about Obama.

Arthurstone said...


Take an event in the world. Any event. Attach Obama's name to it. Put the worst possible spin on it and presto, the tenor of the times. Yawn. It;s what right-wingers do.

For one thing, most serious observers figured from the get go the 2016 Olympics would be awarded to Rio. They haven't been held in South America yet and Rio has made a big push over the past couple of years to win the competition. Secondly, the other favorite was Spain where Juan Antonio Samaranch (might have to Google that name) headed up a very, very serious bid from Madrid.

For another it's good to hear you speak on behalf of the French people (and their President) these days Gordon.

The royal 'we' becomes you.

Thirdly, the Democrats 'filibuster-proof control of Congress' speaks to a timidity on the part of far too many alleged Democrats to do what they should do.
Sadly enough, reactionary politics, know- nothingness and sheer ineptitude are not limited to one side of the aisle.

They are, however, far more common on the right.

Seven years three or four months to go.

So I do understand your frustration.


Shaw Kenawe said...

Gordon has a man-crush on President Obama and is too shy to admit it, so he uses circumspect language to share his secret feelings with us.

Read how many times he says "It's about Obama!" All the rest of the text is just filler so that he could type his favorite words:

"It's about Obama!"

Oh, yes! Oooooooh, yes! I'll have what he's having...

Jim said...

The only thing America lost was paying for Valerie Jarret's slum tear down. Interesting article from SK's hometown newspaper. Google Valerie Jarret to discover the tie in to the Obama's.

In one of those endless Chicago coincidences, Grove Parc Plaza Apartments—now targeted for demolition as a result of years of neglect by Obama’s developer friends—sits in the shadows of the proposed site of the city’s 2016 Olympics Stadium. Valerie Jarrett is vice chair of Chicago’s Olympics committee.

Arthurstone said...

First Van Jones.

Valerie Jarret is next on the reactionary hit parade. Cronyism. Communism. Community activism. Isms I haven't even thought of will be unearthed, examined, spun, amplified and turned into grenades to lob at the Obama administration. I hope they show more cajones than they did with Mr. Jones.

Funny how little this sort of thing Jim mentioned registered with 'Conservatives' when the Texas Rangers built their ballpark in Arlington, TX. I guess that was just old-fashioned pull up your sleeves, free enterprise.

Har. Har.

dmarks said...

It would have been a mistake for President Obama to have kept Van Jones, whose idea of community improvement was carried out by Pol Pot in Cambodia. Van Jones was the result of a mistaken/sloppy vetting process by the White House staff. That is all.

Shaw Kenawe said...

When Republicans practice cronyism, it's patriotic; when the Dems do exactly the same thing; it's a scandal.

We understand the process going on here:


Arthurstone said...

Smears never, ever stop from the right.

Now Van Jones is a big fan of Pol Pot and his involvement in STORM was intended to replicate the killing fields of Cambodia.

Except that he isn't. He wasn't and they didn't.

dmarks said...

There have been no smears coming from me. Check into Maoism, the inspiration for STORM.

Again, you do no service to liberals by claiming they are in lockstep with the far left.

He did, they did, and they were.

Shaw: Thanks for pointing out an actual smear of Van Jones earlier when you pointed out that Beck said Jones served many years in prison. Another Beck whopper.

But otherwise it is not a smear to point out the extremist views of Jones (Maoism), which are ejected by Republicans and Democrats alike. It is nothing more than being accurate.

It is not a smear of Jones to point out the fact of his membership in such organizations, exactly like it is not a smear to point out the same of David Duke.

Arthurstone said...

Thanks for the chuckle dmarks. Your consideration for 'Liberals' is touching. And it's illuminating how, for you, once a 'Maoist' always a 'Maoist''

Of course Jones would be 'forgiven' in a heartbeat if he took up the reactionary politics of someone like David Horowitz but as he continues to operate from a leftist perspective he might just as well be a mass murderer. His own actions aside (completely non-violent ) his past associations and the exaggerations surrounding their various manifestos and calls to action will always be used by reactionaries to attack him. Just as that ilk has always done with progressives.

dmarks said...

Arthur said: "Thanks for the chuckle dmarks. Your consideration for 'Liberals' is touching"

Not quote marks are necessary on Liberals.

"And it's illuminating how, for you, once a 'Maoist' always a 'Maoist''"

"Of course Jones would be 'forgiven' in a heartbeat if he took up the reactionary politics of someone like David Horowitz"

I don't know about others, but from my point of view he would be "forgiven" if he completely repudiated Maoism and joined the other 96% of us.

At least until someone completely repudiates the terrible mistakes of their past. Has Jones done this yet?

"His own actions aside (completely non-violent ) his past associations and the exaggerations"

David Duke, last time I checked, also had a non-violent past. And there are no exaggerations. I have condemned the actual smears against Van Jones, such as Glenn Beck saying that he was a convicted felon.

"Just as that ilk has always done with progressives."

Again and again you link the far left (the hatemongers, the Maoists, the kooks, the racists) with progressives.

It's not right when you OR Rush Limbaugh do this.

However, there is nothing wrong with pointing out the truth about a very bad man, as I have done.

Arthurstone said...

dmarks typed:

Again and again you link the far left (the hatemongers, the Maoists, the kooks, the racists) with progressives.

No. That's you dmarks. The one size fits-all term "Maoist" is most telling. The current regime ruling China are "Maoist" for crying out loud yet Republicans are lined up to earn money from the regime while slandering people like Van Jones.

Should we perhaps reconsider our special relationship with Great Britain. When we talk about mass murderers...

dmarks said...

The current Chinese regime has drifted a lot from Mao's original regime. However, the more pure method, as practiced by Mao himself as he killed tens of millions and Chinese, and Pol Pot with his "Killing Fields" is the "academic" Maoism of Van Jones and his "STORM" group.

"Republicans are lined up to earn money from the regime while slandering people like Van Jones."

Beck is the only person who appears to have slandered Van Jones, when he called Van Jones a convicted felon. Otherwise, Van Jones has gotten in trouble because the truth has been told.

Try again with the link. The end was cut off. Hint: learn how to embed links in your blog posts.

I am guessing that the link is about Britian in colonial India. Which makes it a completely invalid comparison, since no one is talking about justifying or supporting the ideology of old colonial Britain.

Anonymous said...

I consider, that you commit an error. I can prove it. Write to me in PM, we will discuss.