Olympic rejection?

[MMDad (Premo)]

Wirelessly posted (Change we can believe in!: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows CE; IEMobile 7.7) 320x240; VZW; Motorola-Q9c; Windows Mobile 6.0 Standard)

Originally Posted by Alexa

What does my age have to do with anything?

I'd bet it's something to do with your naiveté.

[TurboK9]

Originally Posted by Alexa

What does my age have to do with anything?

I guess he couldn't ask.

Age is a demographic. It can explain a lot about how you think and feel towards things, perhaps?

[TurboK9]

Originally Posted by Alexa

I can appreciate your dissatisfaction with the POTUS and his job performance. Being happy that the U.S.A. lost out of hosting the games because Obama lobbied the committee for it, is another animal altogether.

It'd cost us a lot of $$ to put it together, and it's likely we wouldn't recoup the expenses... we are having a financial crisis... they don't go well together. How's that for a reason?

[otter (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Alexa

What does my age have to do with anything?

It might explain your overly idealistic views and your snarky holier-than-thou attitude. Most here have life experience, you don't appear to. Forget I asked.

[Alexa]

Originally Posted by bcp

1: obama needs to be slapped down a bit, his ego is getting in the way of his doing anything productive
2: what do you expect the world to do, he has been telling the world how bad the U.S is since he took office. Guess they listen to him. He should be happy
3: Chicago is a crime pit and it would have ended up being the biggest crime spree in the history of the games
4: I also have no idea of the revenue, however I did hear on the radio this morning (america left Bill Press I think) that no city has ever recovered enough revenue to cover the cost of preperation for the games.
5: I get a bit of a chuckle when I think of obama sulking over his newest loss.

1, 2 & 5: Your basically saying that your hatred for Obama is so great, you would rather see any attempts he makes fail, even if they do not involve party politics at all or are for the betterment of the country. And you don't see anything wrong with that?

3. Opposed to what? Salt Lake City and their bribery scandal when they went for the bid? Speculation. They speculated a lot about China and they were basically good hosts, but had their fair share of scandals also.

4. I am unsure about this also. I am speculating, but would assume that both federal and local government costs would not be covered. But I can see local economies and private businesses profiting off of it.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by MMDad

I'd bet it's something to do with your naiveté.

Let's don't say "naivete" - let's say "generational outlook".

[TurboK9]

Originally Posted by Alexa

4. I am unsure about this also. I am speculating, but would assume that both federal and local government costs would not be covered. But I can see local economies and private businesses profiting off of it.

Which is precisely why I personally feel that the pres and his lady gave the rest of us the bird by being the first whitehouse ever to personally go....

All they cared about was bringing money into Chicago at the expense of everyone else.

President and First Lady of the Kingdom of Chicago, Barack and Michelle Obama...

[Sonsie]

Coming soon from Maureen Dowd: "IOC to Obama: No Olympics for you, boy!"

[aps45819 (Premo)]

The IOC made a good choice.
What kind of security could be expected from a country that can't control it's borders or the children in the host city

[Beta84]

I felt bad for the option with no votes, so now it has one. Take a guess which one that is!

Rio having the Olympics is actually a fantastic idea.