Rio for 2016

Rio 2016Rio de Janeiro was selected as the host city for Summer Olympics 2016. Of course, in the United States, the news made more splash not because Rio won but because Chicago lost. What’s so special about yet another American city losing the Olympics bid after the fiasco at Atlanta, you ask? Well, this time President Barack Obama made a last-minute flight to Copenhagen to make a pitch for Chicago. So when Chicago got kicked out in the first round, it was naturally Obama’s fault because after all, Obama is considered a messiah not by his ardent fans but rather by his fiercest critics who expect him to churn out miracles because he speaks of hope. In fact, one IOC member from Kenya even voted for Nairobi after Obama spoke.

After all, why wouldn’t the IOC members vote for Chicago after being hypnotized by the magic of the black president regardless of the fact that the bid process started more than two years before Obama even started running for office. After all, George W. Bush was vilified by everyone after New York City with all its 9/11 memories lost the bid to London in 2005. Katrina wasn’t Bush’s watershed moment, no pun intended, but it was the rejection of the NYC bid. After all, how can a country recover when your Olympic bid is rejected? That’s why India takes part; the pain is simply unbearable and governments are toppled over the decision of 95-odd randomly selected sports officials of the IOC.

But of course, Obama didn’t know the perils of this rejection and was the only head of state who was in Copenhagen for support. King Juan Carlos and Prime Minister Hatoyama will not comment and insist they were hiking the Appalachian trail when asked where they were on that day. President Lula Da Silva only teleported to Copenhagen after the decision was announced. He wouldn’t want to stake his political future on such an important decision.

Back in the U.S., Obama’s critics were disappointed that he could not do what Hitler successfully did in 1936. If only the Olympics were held in black-dominated Chicago, a white man could sweep the track races and adorn the walls of uninspired white surburban kids in dorm rooms of Harvard and Princeton. The news channels suddenly discovered the high crime rate of Chicago before told that perhaps Rio has a higher crime rate and of course, seeing Cidade de Deus (City of God) on the weekend helped. But as the obviously obese Bill Bennet on CNN said it best, it is better to see girls in bikinis at Rio than fat men eating in Chicago. He followed it up by stuffing his face in a deep-dish pizza and commenting on healthy eating as the only healthcare reform we should adopt.

In order to silence the cheering in the Weekly Standard offices post-announcement of Chicago’s elimination and to respond to the general glee from conservatives, Barack Obama should immediately resign from the Presidency as atonement for his sins. Forget the economy, healthcare, immigration, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the disappointment of not seeing synchronized dances at the opening ceremony in 2016 with people shouting USA! USA!! is crime enough.



  • http://disjointedlaptop.wordpress.com Arby K

    By the way, the Japanese Emperor Akihito was not in Copenhagen. I wonder if Tokyo would have won it, had he been there. :)

    • Patrix

      I doubt it. Japan didn’t win World War II when he was in control; kamikaze and all.

      • http://disjointedlaptop.wordpress.com Arby K

        That was his father, Hirohito. But I was just referring to that the Japanese Head of State was missing in the list of Heads of States vying for Olympics.

        • Patrix

          The Japanese Prime Minister, who for all practical purposes, is the Head of State was present although you’re right, the Emperor is technically the HoS.

  • http://www.suyogdeshpande.net/blog/ Supremus

    You take Obama way too seriously :) – Not to mention touchy :P – I doubt you’d get as touchy about yourself as much as you get about Obama he-he :) :)

    I am glad for Rio though. Its about time Olympics became a sporting event instead of a “The Rich and The Famous” show that its become.

    • Patrix

      Me? Touchy? What do you think I am? A Catholic priest?

      And well, I’m allergic to stupidity. Heck, even I am glad for Rio; surprising South America still hadn’t hosted the Olympics. But it is adorable of you to think that it still will not become a “The Rich and the Famous” show, as you call it :) It is the nature of the beast; no escaping it now.

  • http://www.rpsam.blogspot.com Rhucha

    hahaha..Yes, who cares about economy and immigration and war in Afganistan! Most important thing is Olympics :)

    • Patrix

      Oh no! Killing grandma is far more important.

      • http://www.rpsam.blogspot.com Rhucha

        Yes, I forgot about the death squads!

  • Sakshi

    You are right that people should not blame him for Chicago not getting the Olympic deal but for the fact that he went there in the first place. At a time when the big problems that Obama is handling, are taking a turn for the worse – going to put “a good word” for the bid was a BAD idea.
    And he is rightly being criticized for that.

    Now let him get back to imp. business – Health care, economy and Afghanistan – those are going to be more imp for the elections. Not Chicago’s failed Olympic bid.

    • Patrix

      You’re right. It may not have been the best use of his time but considering other heads of state were present, he would have gotten the blame just because he wasn’t there in spite of being asked to. It was ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’. But yeah, winning an Olympics bid has nothing to do with the country’s reputation or anything sports-related. The IOC has its own political environment.

  • Sakshi

    Comparing Obama to the Japanese PM and King Juan is really stretching the logic, dont you think? Surely, there is a big difference between Obama(the leader of a free world) and Juan Carlos?
    I get that the right wing nutters would have criticized him regardless but at least the sane critics would have applauded his restraint. And that should be the focus of not just this White House but also the rest of us too. Its as if we all either live in a Fox world or a MSNBC world when it comes to criticizing Obama. Nuance has left US for saner worlds.

    • Patrix

      “Oh, the heads of states of other nominees have arrived to plead their case? Heck, I’m not coming because I’m the leader of the free world.” Yup, we ought to try that next time; how can they refuse?

      And sane critics have applauded his decision to go to Copenhagen as well. So it goes both ways; there is no way out to keep everyone happy, is it? Nuance has long gone from the political discourse in the US when the center is now the crazy left. I try to keep mum but this was too much for me ignore.

      • Sakshi

        Oh come on! Every one was happy with Michelle Obama going to make a case for the bid. This was a puddle Obama shouldn’t have stepped into, especially when Chicago itself was divided about hosting the Olympics. It was that simple. Except Obama did step into the mess and now there is hell to pay.
        Though I dont agree with the nutters, Obama should be criticized about the action. This is not what he has to focus on, especially now.

        • Patrix

          Hindsight is 20/20. There are plenty of things Obama should be criticized for (see last week’s SNL) but not bringing the Olympics to Chicago or making a speech in Copenhagen is not one of them. The nutters will criticize anything; even a night out with his wife so I don’t take them seriously.

          • Sakshi

            Ah well, the lefties HuffPo were equally out there with Bush. The loony fringe always gets the attention. Does not mean that we have to indulge them, right?

            My point was that while the nutters are crazy and should be ignored, their contention that Obama should not have gone to Copenhagen is actually right. The White House initially made all the right noise about this not being a time to go to put a word for the bid in the beginning. This was acceptable to all concerned. But then Obama, for whatever reason, decided to go there. This was wasting political capital. And a stupid mistake for an astute politician to make. He should be criticized for it. May be not in Beck’s stupid ass way. But in a reasoned manner like a lot of people have done.

            The sad part is that the loony wing’s crazy accusations makes all Obama supporters to become equally frenzied in mocking them. And the main point is lost, especially when it is valid!

            Then again, that the criticism was valid is my humble opinion. It may be not work for you. I guess, I am tired of seeing Obama in campaign mode 9 months after coming to office.

            • Patrix

              I agree it was a bad decision in hindsight. It was a difficult decision to make. If he was the only HoS to not be present, it would look arrogant and not serious about the bid. The nutters would blame him too. Like I said, there are hazaar other more serious places where he could be criticized; I just find the attention on this issue to be a time-waster. But then political discourse in the past few months should have prepared me better.

              Trust me, I rather see him in governing mode but everything is politically motivated these days even when it isn’t thanks to the ratings-hungry media whipping up the two side so hard to tell.

              • Sakshi

                The political discourse is pretty much turf fight and has been for the past ~9 years. I mean the Bush-Gore election debacle was raked up each time the left talked about his presidency! Talk about beating a dead horse. Same is going to be the case with this headless Repub party and its pet peeve, Obama in the white house. But that’s the way politics always has been. But that does not mean we have to jump in on this bandwagon.

                While you defend Obama quite passionately, I dont see you criticize him for the mistakes he has made (and he has made quite a few):) That’s where I was going for. I hardly pay attention to the likes of Limbaugh/Hannity/Beck on the Right or Olbermann/Maddow on the left. They are amusing but they have picked a side and they mouth the same ole’ talking points. But shouldn’t we (the outsiders here) have a more reasoned debate? Why is it necessary for us non-citizens to be so partisan?

                If you think Obama is wrongly criticized here why not make a case why [b]his[/b] (and not Michelle alone) going to Copenhagen was important on a bid that was not something his city was exactly rooting for. And why this would have helped US in the long run – I mean security and the economy would be some of the easy concerns for not hosting an event. But I dont see any obvious plus in the current scenario that would be an easy sell, can you?

                And I agree with the commenter above, blogs are far better than twitter for trying to make a case. Twitter is just for news blurbs (or to tell the world what you are doing right now coz everyone has to know!)

                • Patrix

                  Although I had a post in draft on Obama’s failures after watching the SNL skit, I don’t see why I HAVE to criticize Obama just because I “defend him passionately”. I don’t insist you to praise Obama’s policies that you agree with. Like every blogger, I write on the issues that I feel compelled to not because I’m expected to strike a ‘fair and balanced’ position.

                  Comparing the left Bush bashing to the current wing nuttery is ridiculous. Six months down the Bush presidency, he was still clearing brush across half of Texas and post 9/11, he had a 90% approval rating. All the Bush-bashing and ratings slide started post -Iraq and Katrina. The left crazies weren’t adopted by mainstream as the Tea Baggers have been by the GOP.

                  I can’t comment on Chicago’s decision to bid on the Olympics because I don’t know the details but I assumed Obama was asked to speak at Copenhagen because he is the President. Although it was his hometown, I’m sure he would have gone if asked strongly enough by any other U.S. city official. As I said before and will say again, it was one of those ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t’ decisions. Like I said, there are plenty of things to criticize Obama about (DADT, continued rendition policies, reluctance to give up on wiretapping, maintaining higher levels of executive powers, etc.) so in the long run, a simple speech is not worth the national discourse. See, even we have spent far more time on it than I envisioned.

                • Sakshi

                  Patrix,
                  Well, since you are not going to take a “Fair and balanced” position (or rather you are taking one wrt how FOX uses the phrase), there is little point in arguing.

                  And yes, left wing nuttery is just as bad as right wing is. Or are you saying Huffington Post is not mainstream? :)

                • Patrix

                  rather you are taking one wrt how FOX uses the phrase

                  Nice try. And likewise.

                  And Drudge Report, Powerline, Red State, Instapundit, Michelle Malkin, NRO, Time’s ThePage, Wash.Times, WSJ, WaPo Editorials, and of course, the grand daddy of all, Fox News = “mainstream Huffington Post”. Yes, it is indeed a liberal media out there.

  • http://windyskies.blogspot.com Anil

    Spirited.

    Completely Unrelated: After reading this post and the comments, I’m glad blogs exist and that they still have a future :-)

    • Patrix

      And I thought no one read my blog any more :)

  • Prasoon

    “it is better to see girls in bikinis at Rio than fat men eating in Chicago. He followed it up by stuffing his face in a deep-dish pizza and commenting on healthy eating as the only healthcare reform we should adopt.” – so true! Indian newspapers wouldn’t have got a proper pic for the next day news had it been Chicago instead of Rio.