Over the last few days I have been considering writing a critique of Republicans and conservatives who went after the President for his trip to Copenhagen and cheered his defeat once Chicago was eliminated. Not that there aren’t legitimate criticisms, but many of the attacks have been petty, unhelpful to the country at large and even embarrassing. I was still deciding until yesterday morning, when a guy I ran into at the Americans for Prosperity ”Defending the American Dream” summit- I’ll write about that later today or tomorrow, it was REALLY cool (note the emphasized “really”)- told me, unprovoked, to write about how bad it is for Republicans to be cheering that Chicago was not picked for the Olympics. Since I agreed with his assessment, here I go.
As is well-known by now, President Obama took a trip to Copenhagen last week to make the case for Chicago to be the host of the 2016 Olympics. From the start, the trip was a public relations disaster. President Obama was under fire for taking time away from important legislation such as health care reform, the threat of Iranian nuclear weapons, the released 26-year high of 9.8% unemployment and for seeming ambivalent about his only months-old strategy in Afghanistan and a severe lack of communication with his chosen general on the ground, General McChrystal (update: the president and the general met Friday. Worse, multiple jets were used on the trip (only a PR disaster, though a legitimate one, to the chortling right- global warming, anyone?) and First Lady Obama mentioned “sacrifices” she, her husband and TV host Oprah Winfrey had made in taking the trip. Lastly, a teenage boy was beaten to death in a violent gang fight recently, underscoring both the dangerous atmosphere in Chicago (click to see the number of children killed in gang violence in Chicago compared to past years as well as Los Angeles) and the fact that many residents either were against the Olympics being held in Chicago or had a myriad of concerns regarding the event’s presence.
Unfortunately, many of the critiques and post-result reactions were unnecessarily inflammatory and completely unconstructive. I wouldn’t be writing this if the majority of Republican and conservative pundits and others were quoting the above violence in Chicago, or the concerns that its presence would increase corruption in the city’s politics or even the concerns that costs will be added to the citizens’ taxes (I can’t find the source where I read that particular concern- sorry). However, this is not the case, by and large. A few examples: The Heritage Foundation went after the President’s arrogance in its blog; Drudge Report had one offensive headline for an article about the Chicago boy’s earlier in the week and one ridiculous headlining article after the IOC’s decision; and people at the Defending the American Dream Summit I mentioned above cheered when the news came in. (I had not arrived at the event at that point.) Too, Redstate and Michelle Malkin were quite out of line in some of their comments in reaction to the IOC decision.
It pains me to criticize RedState, Malkin, Heritage and attendees at the Summit- I’m a huge fan of Heritage and AFP, and a middle-sized fan of RedState and Malkin. However, some things are just tiring, petty and over the line. I’m not trying to say that red meat shouldn’t be taken advantage of by conservatives- after all, they’s why we are conservatives. We can make fun of just about everyone, including ourselves. I seem to remember enjoying many of Laura Ingraham’s comments about the Olympic vote at the Summit, where she was one of the keynote speakers, and Townhall posted a great video showing utter, humorous shock by a CNN anchor when Chicago was eliminated. However, zealous reaction to red meat should be tempered by the fact that were a Republican being criticized by liberals for the same, we would be incensed, and liberals and Democrats should remember this situation in the future and not critique a Republican president just to get back at us, as is too often defended in Congress and influential media voices on both sides. The President SHOULD be making a strong bid for the Olympics, as Heritage notes, and should not necessarily be blamed for Chicago’s not making the cut (we can debate the merits of that point at a later date), given the anti-American biases by the IOC and the various political concerns such as not holding the Summer Olympics in two English-speaking countries twice in a row (the 2012 Olympics will be held in London).
I know this piece won’t be popular with this site’s readers and Republicans in general, because there are many legitimate reasons to oppose the President’s trip. Let’s just make sure we keep our eyes on the bigger picture and not criticize for the sake of criticizing. Michael Steele tried the latter…and flopped. The President can’t succeed at everything- Ronald Reagan ran deficits despite his wish to balance the budget, according to Dinesh D’Souza’s Letters to a Young Conservative, and President Bush tried to pass immigration reform that failed, for two examples. Given that President Obama probably did some work while traveling (that’s what Blackberries are for, similar to the work I’m certain President Bush did while on his Democratically-criticized vacations), and he WAS only gone for 18 hours, are we opposing President Obama’s trip because he is ignoring bigger issues such as Afghanistan, Iran, health care reform, the unemployment rate and general economic circumstances…or are we attacking him because he’s a Democrat, and therefore not worthy of our support in any situation?
For my part, I do think President Obama should have stayed put. The appearance of taking time away with the circumstances our country finds itself in was unwise both politically and practically, especially with the prospect of losing. As Heritage pointed out, “Either the White House knew where they stood and arrogantly thought the President could change minds, or they didn’t know, meaning the White House had little or no ability to use dozens of high-profile insiders to gage the temperature of less than 100 IOC voters. Both scenarios are hard to believe.” What is not hard to believe is that the President ignored the political risk of losing, and while political courage is to respected, it is also unwise to spend it too quickly, particularly in the difficult times we are in. Too, spending it in the wrong areas, such as a non-critical trip overseas, is also unwise.
One last note: I am pleased that Chicago was not picked, as the opposition to the 2016 Olympics made great arguments against it being held there and thus convinced me it was not a wise location, and I am pleased that President Obama personally lost because it weakens his foreign affairs political strength and therefore strengthens conservatives and the Republican Party. However, personally, as an American citizen, I am not pleased that an American president was embarrased on the international stage. Not in the least. I hope most conservatives and Republicans can see the difference and agree.
October 4th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
You don’t like the Olympics here? So why are you bashing the people who are against it also? “Aww I hate this Olympics, but I want Obama to succeed in bring them here.” Does that make sense to you? Pointless post is pointless.
October 4th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
It’s not a big deal that the IOC smacked down Chicago.
It’s also not a big deal for conservatives to revel in it a bit. Why not? Murtha and Reid did everything they could to make “We lost in Iraq” a self-fulfilling prophesy. And the Dems are going to whine when conservatives gloat about the Ego In Chief getting knocked down a few pegs?
Eff the Dems. Attack attack attack. It worked for the other side in 2006. It will work for us.
October 4th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
I usually don’t respond to comments, but what the heck:
Adam, That’s my point. Tit-for-tat won’t win it for us. See this piece here as to why: http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/politicalconnections.php
We might win next year off of attacking, but the mainstream media doesn’t call out Democrats like it does us. Therefore,
we would be setting ourselves up for defeat in the long term. We have to have coherent policy viewpoints IN ADDITION to attacks.
No problem in reveling- I just don’t think it was done correctly by many conservatives. (I also agree the rejection
wasn’t a big deal.)
Right, I’m glad to see you are as closed-minded as most liberals. Conservatives have to be the mature ones, and how we do what we do
is incredibly important.
October 4th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
October 4th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
It’s a sports competition. Who cares?
October 4th, 2009 at 5:37 pm
“You don’t like the Olympics here? So why are you bashing the people who are against it also?”
I don’t think he’s so much attacking those people in Chicago directly who feared adverse effects – I think he’s upset with those who revel in the fact that Obama lost out on trying to bring the billions in investment and international attention (in a positive light) to the United States. And I agree. Its in poor taste to root against your own country on anything.
As for being a sports competititon, this is true – but its also (apart from the UN) the only global event, and it bring the opportunity for the host country to showcase itself to the world in the best way possible.
October 4th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
I usually don’t like Knepper’s (5#)snacks, but he is right. It’s a good will sporting event. I am a staunch conservative, but if I were a democrat I would put together a video portraying the challenges president Bush faced, and then pictures of him at the Olympics when he posed with some of those volley ball babes. The commentator would say “When your sons and daughters, as soldiers were dying…….etc etc. president Bush was checking out a little R&R at the Olympics, but today when President Obama goes to bat to get the Olympics here, the republican party attacks him for promoting America.” I Think Rush,Hannity,Ingraham and the like provide a valuable service, but they discredit their arguments when they attack him for even supporting America’s Olympic bid. If they or we scream the same amount of outrage for anything this incompetent president does, then what is the difference when his policies deserve a real outrage. Congrats to Huckabee and Romney for choosing the real battles.
October 4th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
#5. I guess if your not into creating jobs and boosting the American economy, than I guess it is just another sport.
October 4th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
The stupid thing is that it has totally backfired on the republicans. Obama would have been embarrased even if we have kept our counsel. Now the story in the republicans over-reaching again. Obama can’t believe his luck with the opponents he has drawn! His term has been one failure after another and he is still winning clearly! Imagine if he had been successful! The sooner we get a grown up leading our party (Mitt Romney) the better.
October 4th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Justin:
Conservatives have to get a grip. This is not bringing people to the GOP, it is chasing people away while causing divisions within the party. If we’re not careful and this movement grows, I could see some republicans breaking away to form in a third party, and then what, more yelling and screaming!
I suppose we’ll know what effect this had after the 2010′ elections.
October 4th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Heath:
Yes, Obama’s presidency has been an epic failure but his support remains high…What those republicans who were in a feeding frenzy over Obama not bringing home the olympics only reinforced his supporters belief in him. Isn’t that psychology 101….
October 4th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
The Olympic Facts Obama Missed
America received the Summer Olympic Games of 1984, held in Los Angeles, the same city has hosted the games in 1932. America then received the Summer games held in Atalanta in 1996 & 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City. Both the Atlanta & Salt Lake City became embroiled in IOC bribery scandals.
Certain critics of the IOC 1996 decision noted, (most especially Melbourne Australia where I was living at the time) it seemed too soon after the 1984 games to be awarding them back to America after only 12 years. Based on these IOC scandals, any games awarded to American so soon after Atlanta & Salt Lake City would rekindle the old allegations. Since IOC President Jacques Rogge stepped into the role, he has tired to clean up the Games and would be eager not to reopen old wounds.
South America have never hosted the Olympics, the closest was Buenos Aires – Argentina coming 2nd in 1956 and making occasional unsuccessful bids thereafter. The IOC also are known to award/expand the Games to counties or regions that have not had them prior meaning Africa and the Arab Nations are next in line. It is not unusual for world leaders of Olympic biding nations to attend the IOC Decision Ceremony. Prime Minister Paul Keating of Australia was on hand for the winning Sydney 2000 Olympics Bid.
I’m not high fiving over the Chicago loss. I always knew any American bid for the Olympics so close to the 2002 Utah & 1996 Atlanta Games would be a long shot. The fact that Obama threw so much into the mix was a blunder. Sending Oprah and the 1st Lady with a Video Message from Obama would’ve been suitable. But the fact that The White House was buying the Hype and generating it’s own, showed how out of touch they are.
Lately the GOP have been the Opposition Party, and when a party is in the Opposition, having the opposing view helps position yourself as a de-RINO the party.
October 4th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
In short, because they are the opposition party, and their job is to oppose what the majority party tries to do, particularly when it backfires.
To call it “cheering” is to include only the loudest part of the minority.
When you’re in the opposition, you’ve got the luxury of the second guess. You can be the greatest critic, and rate each performance after the fact.
It was the fact that Chicago was downed first that leaves a mark. No matter what you think of the Olympics.
Personally, I think the Olympics are a scourge that devour public funds with little positive effect. And I don’t care whether a Republican or a Democrat manage the affair.
And without regard to party affiliation, Obama’s failed effort does raise several questions:
- Would he have made such an effort on behalf of, say, Dallas?
- Did he stake his domestic stature (via the Office of the Presidency) on the outcome (the risk-for-gain measure)?
- Is he aware that his “persona” cannot dilute the international spirit of anti-Americanism, no matter how much he apologizes for American actions cited by the anti-Americans?
- Did he forget that the small-stature, anonymous bureaucratic executive board of the IOC would enjoy taking down the biggest game available to them — the only head of state ever to have made a personal appeal, the President of the United States?
October 4th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
Well, we are the party of NO. (as in No new ideas). Hopefully, we’ll change that soon?
October 4th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
I think it’s George Bush’s fault. All that bad karma built up by libs hating on Bush, it’s going to haunt them for at least a decade.
October 4th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
“Yes, Obama’s presidency has been an epic failure but his support remains high”
HIs support remains high? 50% is high?
Nearly every president since WWII has had the same, if not greater, support than Barack Obama does at this point in his presidency.
Why is that the case? Because nearly everyone wants to give the President a chance to succeed. The fact that Obama is at 50% approval is what is surprising to me. I would not have guessed that he’d be at this level at this time. Only two other presidents have been in his position at an equivalent time: Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton.
October 4th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
By the way, did anyone hear that McLaughlin allegedly said on his show that Huckabee would announce in the next four months that he’s running for President?
October 4th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Ugh, the Rombots here are pathetic. That dumb stuff is something American Ideals and any of our resident leftard trolls would say. People should always keep in mind that there is no larger worshipper of left-wing anti-conservative spin in this site than the Rombots. Shoo!
October 5th, 2009 at 12:56 am
WTF if the race is between Mitt, Huck, Sarah and Timmy then Romney is clearly the most conservative candidate in the race. Left wing anti-conservative are you for real?
October 5th, 2009 at 12:56 am
the same thing that made obama believe that he would bring the olympics to chicago – his overinflated Ego – is what makes him believe that if HE talks to iran, they’ll give up their nuclear program.
the sooner his ego gets deflated a little bit- the safer we’ll be.
October 5th, 2009 at 6:53 am
“the sooner his ego gets deflated a little bit- the safer we’ll be.”
BINGO, the fact that Boy Wonder failed to get the Olympics serves as a wake up call.
October 5th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Look, the whole message of the Obama Administration is that the United States is nothing special, doesn’t want to be a Super Power, has nothing really to offer the rest of the world, which is much more knowledgeable and sophisticated and erudite then our little backwater “New World” could ever hope to be. The message of the Obama Administration is that Americans have no right to hope that we have the capacity to host something as large in scope as an Olympic Games. Some Republicans are simply supporting the President’s idea, and “cheering” the fact that a backwater Third World nation will finally get a chance now that the U.S. has metaphorically and rhetorically withdrawn from the national stage.
October 5th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Because they are dumb and do not want America to ever have another Olympics.
October 6th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Dustin, you sound ridiculous. Your articles are contrived at best, downright phony at worst. Please drop the high and mighty rhetoric and the “c’mon guys, we’re better than this!” nonsense that you continue to peddle. It’s B.S. You have absolutely no serious conservative credentials to brandish or even remotely earned pedestal to opine from. Not on GOP politics, not any politics at all. Your articles, including this one, are little more than showcases of platitudes and pandering. And, by the way, you are pandering to the wrong corners of the political world. Your sophist whining is earning you no points with anyone. Let it go.
October 6th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Dustin, you sound ridiculous. Your articles are contrived at best, downright phony at worst. Please drop the high and mighty rhetoric and the “c’mon guys, we’re better than this!” nonsense that you continue to peddle. It’s B.S. You have absolutely no serious conservative credentials to brandish or even remotely earned pedestal to opine from. Not on GOP politics, not on any politics at all. Your articles, including this one, are little more than showcases of platitudes and pandering. And, by the way, you are pandering to the wrong corners of the political world. Your sophist whining is earning you no points with anyone. Let it go.
Oh, and conservative Americans have every right to chuckle at President Obama’s humiliating missteps. Remember when the Left howled with laughter when President Bush was the target of an Iraqi flying shoe? It’s eye for an eye, it’s politics. Don’t make up reasons for why we shouldn’t act on the obvious. Get over yourself.
October 6th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
I’m a conservative from Chicago, and I am more disappointed to see my fellow conservatives rooting against America than at Rio getting the games.
Rightnow, it’s always easier to attack the guy you’re debating than to refute him. The libs have been doing it for decades.