Stewart mocks conservatives' reaction to Chicago's failed Olympics bid: "Yeah, F*** America!"
October 06, 2009 8:55 am ET
From the October 5 edition of Comedy Central's The Daily Show:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
-----------------------------------------------------------------
And I don't find that the least bit depressing.
The last Olympic WINTER games in the U.S. were in Salt Lake City, Utah, in 2002...and Mitt Romney was the head of the U.S. Olympic committee which ran the games.
the operative words are right-wing and nut, the push against the Olympics are right-wing and nuts.
thats all i was pointing out.
I guess the gays, the blacks, the crooked politicians, the crooked nose guys and all those other people living in Chicago just didn't offer enough of a bribe. Damn, they should've had better sense than to try to secure the games by the rules. ACORN should have been involved.<>
If Salt Lake City of all places would have corruption surrounding the Olympic games, just imagine what would take place in Chicago, home to famous people such as Barack Obama and notorious gangster Al Capone...
Chicago is such a cesspool that nothing good would have come out of hosting the Olympics there...
this was also a Conservative savior moment, with Mitt Romney playing the hero, riding in on his white horse, saving the Utah Olympics.
-----------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
Maybe Chicago calling one of their own to help was just a wise thing to do....nah, it would call for common sense to think that way.
Maybe we'll see conspiracies linking the Genna Brothers to Obama as well...
-------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Mum Is The Word
Now were the happy America lost out or Obama tried and did not succeed and we still didn't get the Games? Which one?
Is it always about race for you guys? It gets redundant after awhile.
Here let me clue you in: They were cheering against Obama. Just like they would have cheered against Bill Clinton, a big ole White boy last I checked. They would have cheered against Carter. Another White guy. Are ya picking up a pattern here? If you guessed they are cheering against Democratic Presidents...you win a prize...to be named later ;-)
Come on, the Right hated Clinton as much if not more than they do Obama. Have you all forgotten? Or do ya just have selective memories when it's convenient & more fun to yell..It's cause Obama is Black!!
Now these right-wing idiots in cheering against Obama ended up actually cheering against the USA. But I guess seeing a Dem/Lib fail is more important to them because they are basically idiots.
But every time you bring race into it...you all sound just as clueless.
B) Pushing a national healthcare system, run by the government, that will drive many doctors out of the field. A healthcare system that will provide mediocre care for all and cost twice as much as present healthcare.
C) Pushing a worldwide 'diplomatic' effort that insults our allies and rewards dictators.(one on one 'talks' with the president of Iran while condemning Israeli settlements. Scrapping a European defense shield already in place, protecting Eastern Europe while opting for a scaled down, mobile defense which won't be ready until 2013, rewarding Putin and abandoning Czecoslovakia).
D) Constant rhetoric from the Whitehouse that wants to "reshape America"--- WTF does that mean? Reshape America. In Obama's utopian vision of America, the freedom to inovate will be lost to regulations and tax burdens. The desire to excel will be lost to "redistribution" of assets. The sense that America is the greatest nation on earth will be lost to a genuflecting Obama, more interested in being 'liked' rather than respected.
B.Where did you get these facts? Betsy McCoughy(sic)...she was dispelled on the Morning Meeting MSNC show this morning for refusing to answer questions.
C."Pushing a worldwide 'diplomatic' effort that insults our allies and rewards dictators" as opposed to what? Blowing them up. Part C. is just ChickenHawk verbage customized to fit anything...no real facts
D. "Redistribution of wealth"..."Obamas' Utopian vision", "the freedom to innovate" all nice phony phrases which mean nothing unless you drink the tea and think inside a teacup. These are mythical talking points of the Right without substance.
If I was computer savvy enough, I would post the definition of a Republican/Consevative Think Tank
A Picture of that Magic-8 Ball witht he answer being showing through the window....NO.....
Hm, sounds like somebody was asleep when Dubya started a war costing $12 BILLION/month and tried to fund it with tax cuts for the rich . . .
Yes, how terrible:
Our "current apologist" isn't apologizing for America, he's apologizing for his predecessor.
And his predecessor did a few other things besides bowing:
"I looked the man in the eye...I was able to get a sense of his soul..that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship"
His successor continues to spend funds that must come either from thin air or out of our pockets. Any change that has actually taken place is a shift of ideology, based on a longer extant hysteria over different illusory issues.
The insanity of the far right, be they "Fundamentalist Christians" (that cannot seem to read the words of (Christ/Yeshua/that nice man(?) whose name they appropriate) or the everpresent jingoist (Dr Samuel Johnson had a few things to say about false patriotism, around three centuries ago), or the latent racist riding genuine issues to deride the purely incidental fact that Mr Obama has a different skin colour than they do.
Word from the historian. There's only just been a government facilitated bailout of two of three remaining major US auto companys. This was immediately followed by a sudden and extreme increase in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard - when those firms had not yet recovered from those imposed after the false gas crisis of 1972/3. Yes, false. The price raise demanded by OPEC, backed by an embargo, trigerred all the then radical notions of environmentalism into widespread hysteria.
The right wing Republicans have their pet issues, the left wing Democrats have theirs. The only dishonour we're jumping on at the moment is the venom implied or directly vomited by the false patriot - the usual rhetoric devoid of any factual basis.
So, all we know is that neither of the very vocal tails (fringes) or the opinion distribution (a statistical map of congregate notions derived by subcultural behaviour) know very much about the things they ask for in a very loud voice.
Thank you.
OMG! Wow, that certainly is a radical policy compared to bombing, shocking and awe-ing, which really worked out well for us during 2001-2008.
You avoid addressing responses. Classic!
you do also realize that your children and grand kids were all ready in debt thanks to the last admin right?
went did he insult one of our allies?
and whats wrong with freedom?
Gosh, republicans are like the people in the mental institution who think everyone else is insane for not recognizing the alien conspiracy.
That's what I mean when I say "aversion to human rights". Furthermore, how many republicans have taken a brave stand against China's human rights abuses? I know of noone in the last administration who did. Mr. Murdoch, who has major business ties with China, seems to have by and large muzzled criticism of China on the right. And if you recall, the last adminsistration was not particularly keen on attacking Uncle Vlad's numerous abuses.
It's one thing to lecture other countries about their shoddy human rights records. Its another thing entirely to not look over the human rights abuses of our "buddies", such as Ethiopia, Georgia, Columbia etc. And it is still another to take an honest look at our own abuses. This is where Repubs fall short, I'm afraid.
No radical agenda there and virtually no truth . . . you are just parroting what the folks who are being PAID to trash the president are saying.
No radical agenda there and virtually no truth . . . you are just parroting what the folks who are being PAID to trash the president are saying.
And please stop whining about being called out on forwarding talking points and parrotting nutjob lies disguised as arguments.
And about bigotry - not all Republicans are racists, but most racists are Republicans.
But when someone makes a mistake like including O'Reilly as one who opposed the efforts to get the olympics for Chicago, they say nothing. Very typical.
'Nuff said. Republicans are the party of racists. Polling proves it time after time.
------------------------------------------------------------
FAIL
A - Nothing radical about the debt. Unless you consider Reagan radical. Is he a radical to you? Then this one is nonsense.
B - This is important. You believe we should deny care to those who cannot afford it? Have the courage of your convictions and at least say it. Either we socialize costs (which we already do, just at the highest rate possible) or we deny care. Which idea do you believe is radical, healthcare for all or denying healthcare to your fellow citizens?
C - This is also important, the Republican party is now offically against diplomacy. I find it remarkable. It also an example of the anti-intellectualism on the right today. Diplomacy is bad and tough talk is good. We should be the bullies of the world. Great plan. How did that work out for G-Dub? And Czechoslovakia? WHAT?
D - What in the world are you even talking about here? What are we re-shaping? Is this a shot at Palin and Joe the Plumber's "redistribution of wealth" nonsense? If it is, then I can only assume you are against a progressive tax system. If you need a lesson to explain to you the importance of a progressive tax system, I suggest you read a little Teddy Roosevelt.
And, finally, Czechoslovakia? Are you f-ing kidding me?!
. . . and hilarious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_pYLKHNReU
You can forward the video 1:48
And why do you want Obama to fail? Because you disagree with the policies accepted by over 69 million Americans.
Just because you have tagged them "radical policies", sorry, just because the Cons, the losers, have called them radical don't necessarily make them wrong.
If you can't accept CHANGE, then just hustle and get the vote out. Do not try to create a ConWorld where everything your President does it wrong.
By reading your post, you show what the losers of the last election have become good at doing..being able to read the future without any insight. And their logic is as well developed as the answers you get from a Magic-8 Ball.
The Republicans and their leeches, the NeoCons, keep insisting that Obama owes the Chicago connection something. That would be like me saying that Bush owed big business the opportunity to drain America of its riches and give it to the wealthy. Now you could possible disagree with that, couldn't you?
Escape the cold dark world of the Cons and open your eyes, everything isn't a conspiracy. Not even the people following you or your phone being tapped or the posters here just out to get Republicons. This is the REAL world and the Dems are running the show. Don't worry, this country survived Carter, Reagan, 2 Bushes and a Clinton. It'll survive again so quit being AFRAID. You'll mess yourself my fine puppity-friend.
BTW, if Obama fails . . . the country fails. Is that what you and the rest of the idiots who are listening to the crap on Fox and hate talk radio want?
Not the previous President, it was the 2006-2008 class of Republicans that did nothing..don't just blame Bush, which is the newest fad for the Cons..
If you want to win the election.."DON'T NOMINATE AN OLD CLUNKER AND AN IDIOT FROM ALASKA TO CARRY YOUR WATER". Of course, no Republican or Cons will admit they did this..it was by sheer magic that McCain and Death Palin were nominated.
An underachieving democrat is light years ahead of an advanced Republican. When you can only vote NO why do you need any brains?
Give the Dems credit..they don't all agree with everything their own puts out. Name me 4 Republicans willing to vote outside they teacup.
According to WHO, puppy? The voices in your head talking to you again?
Soo -- just WHY did the GOP push Sarah Palin, again?
FAIL again, pup . . .
You LOST, puppies, that's all. There is no "radical agenda." You just LOST and the reason is because people were sick of the status quo. That's what elections are FOR . . . . YOU LOST. Accept it and let go of the unreasonable and totally illogical hatred.
Grow up. Read more. Learn.
I wonder how you handle that level of cognitave dissonance. How can you hold these two beliefs in your head at once? Do you get a lot of headaches?
The above sounds like OPINION -- OPINION is NOT "common knowledge" . . . no matter HOW many voices in your head tell you that, pup . . .
You have no idea what you're talking about. Carter is a man of faith. A navy veteran. A man of peace.
Dismissed.
Personally, I voted for Obama because I refused to vote for John McCain after he chose and INEXPERIENCED AND INCOMPETENT loon for his vice president . . . I would have possibly voted for McCain, but once he chose Caribou Barbie . . . no chance. I was a McCain supporter in 2000, puppies . . . guess why? Because I didn't want to vote for an INEXPERIENCED AND INCOMPETENT candidate for President.
You have NO idea what you are talking about, puppies. Just parroting something you heard on Fox or on hate talk radio doesn't mean you are informed, in fact, it's more likely that you are extremely UNINFORMED.
BTW, you are aware that Obama's PROPOSED budget is, in reality, less than Bush's 2008 budget when you add in the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan. See, Bush paid for those little expenditures OFF budget so that his already outrageous budget wouldn't look so big. Inform yourself, puppies, before you start hating.
WHen you say that you want Obama's policies to fail, that's equivalent to saying that you want America to fail. There's no argument you can make that refutes that.
Cutting off your nose to spite your face. The old expression fits.
That should hurt, Puppien. Those "radical policies" that you pretend to see in Obama just got BLOWN OUT OF THE WATER.
Silly me, I thought that's what the President was doing by trying to bring the Olympics to America.
The ConWorld is a dark, cold, angry place. In this place, one cannot see, hear or express anything without the guiding light....the Fox Channel..they just follow the small dim light called Fox.
You LOST, puppies, that's all. You LOST. Actually, if Obama fails, our country fails. We lost serious financial ground and diplomatic ground under GWB. Our standing in the world took a HUGE hit. It's going to take serious diplomatic efforts to get us back on track.
Research what you post.
To be fair,bintx, puppy only lost in the sense that his paranoia and blood pressure will increase in the short term.
While he was busy falling in love with Sarah Palin's coquettish winking and folksy charms, the Americans who were paying attention elected a president who is most likely going to be better for Puppy than the continued GOP occupation of the White House that he wanted.
Republicans seem to be gluttons for punishment,but it's good to put them on a diet once in a while, no matter how cranky it makes them.
But it wasn't personal for Bush...
"They say that the Olympics will come to Chicago if we're fortunate enough to be selected, but really it's coming to America, and I can't think of a better city to represent the United States than Chicago. "
Wow, pictured next to no less than two of Obama's "cronies".
Next time, try giving us a plausible reason for rooting against Obama.
Hm -- "the appearance of pandoring for Chicago rather than America" . . . well, last time I checked, Chicago was part of America.
" . . . it was a cheer for Obama, Michelle and the Oprah and Chicago, not America and Americans" . . . and, the last time I checked, Oprah, Michelle, and Obama {despite the afterBrithers' claims to the contrary} were Americans.
And pup, I guess that can only mean that Dumbya's support of that SAME olympic bid wasn't a "cheer for America," either . . .
Maybe he should have thrown his weight behind another U.S. City.
Goodness, Puppy, do you think that the Obamas were talking about some other Chicago (the one in France, perhaps)?
If someone is from Chicago, his home address finishes with the city, state, and ZIP. There's no need to tack "USA" or "America" on the end, any more than you have to add "North America," "Western Hemisphere," "Earth" (or wherever wingnuts come from), "Solar System," "Milky Way," etc.
In other words, talking about Chicago is enough. Your point is weaker than watery skim milk.
Well, let me try and be a little more clear, just for you, pup.
Chicago is a city in ILLINOIS.
Illinois is a STATE in the UNITED STATES.
Thus, by mentioning the city of Chicago, which was the ONLY US city in the running, they were by extension mentioning AMERICA.
Apparently, geography isn't a strong suit of wingnuts any more than basic mathematics is . . .
Excerpts of the speeches from the President and First Lady in which there were "little or no" mentions of "America":
That's why I'm here today. I'm asking you to choose Chicago. I'm asking you to choose America. ... I am dreaming of an Olympic and Paralympic Games in Chicago that will light up lives in neighborhoods all across America. ... It's about our responsibility as Americans not just to put on great Games. ... That's not just the American Dream. That is the Olympic spirit. That's not just the American Dream. That is the Olympic spirit. ... That's why we see so much of ourselves in these Games. That's why we want them in Chicago. That's why we want them in America. ... And so I urge you to choose Chicago. I urge you to choose America. And if you do, if we walk this path together, then I promise you this: The city of Chicago and the United States of America will make the world proud.
My response to Puppy was based on the assumption that his statement was actually correct. You have proven that not only was his logic poor, so were his facts.
Any neocons out there willing to take up Puppy's banner now? Or will you agree that his is a lost cause?
It's not our fault that you're so blind that you can't see/admit that wanting Obama to fail is equivalent to wanting America to fail.
Jew was for the Nazis in the 1930's. They are feeding off a sentiment that exists whether we want to believe it or not.
all the power comes from the suggestion and how "suggestible" the listener is...
Did they cheer against Bush? He's a big ole white boy last I checked...
President Bush Meets with Chicago 2016 Bid Committee and United States Olympic Committee Members
I pointed out Republicans cheer against Democratic Presidents. No matter their color.
Seems like you missed my point there Pete.
Should I give ya a big "Duh!" or would you prefer to give that to yourself?
Right wingers are hypocrites, every one of them.
Sorry Pete you had no point you just made no sense.
I wrote the Right cheered against Obama just as they would any Democratic President. Race had nada to do with it. I used Bill Clinton as an example. The Right was harder on him than Obama. Clinton is White.
You're just doing what typical Left-wing moonbats do. Trying to change the subject when you can't refute a point.
There were several posts at the top of this thread that blamed it on purely racism. I was simply pointing out that they would have cheered against Clinton, a White man.
Of course racism still exists in this country, & not just in the South. But always assuming that anyone who disagrees with Obama, or even cheers against him is doing so based solely on race is, IMO, a tad ridiculous.
Obama took a plane ride to Denmark to push the Chicago bid.
Bush hobnobbed with the committee members.
Obama hobnobbed with the committee members, but now they are "cronies".
When Bush pushed the Chicago bid, Chicago was an American city.
When Obama pushed the Chicago bid, Chicago was Chicago.
Right wingers are hypocrites, every one of them.
Once again Pete what does this have to do with my original post? Or with the point I'm making that the Right cheering against Obama, or attacking him doesn't mean it has to do with his race. The Right also cheered against & attacked Clinton. A White man. This has to do with politics. Pure & simple.
Now if you wanna continue to try & change the subject, talk to yourself. I'm not interested in playing moonbat circle games with ya.
He's pointing out the rank hypocrisy of your political party and he's doing it without mentioning race. Seems ok to bring it back to race if you're the one bringing it back to race. Why is that?
Ok Gov aka Victor? Was that easy enough for ya?
So simple even you should understand. But you won't.
Go take a nap.
Um Jeter, he DID -- when he posted the following at 2:18 pm:
Bush took a plane ride to Chicago to push the Chicago bid.
Obama took a plane ride to Denmark to push the Chicago bid.
Bush hobnobbed with the committee members.
Obama hobnobbed with the committee members, but now they are "cronies".
When Bush pushed the Chicago bid, Chicago was an American city.
When Obama pushed the Chicago bid, Chicago was Chicago.
Right wingers are hypocrites, every one of them.
See? No mention of race.
Because it's not about Obama's race, remember?
They're not telling us that they're against the bid because Obama's a Democrat.
They're telling us they're against the bid because of Obama's cronies, the same cronies that Bush stood along side when he pushed the Chicago bid. Funny how the cronies weren't worth the outrage back then.
They're telling us they're against the bid because Chicago is riddle with crime. The same crime that Chicago had when Bush pushed the Chicago bid. Funny how the crime wasn't worth the outrage back then.
For these reasons, I don't buy the political party excuse.
When we watched the Tea Parties, they claimed it wasn't about racism, but they didn't object with rallies across the nation when Bush waged a voluntary war with Iraq. They didn't rally against the tax cuts for the richest of the rich, or against the huge deficits that Bush was running up. They didn't rally against his keeping the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan off the books!
And when Bush was pushing the Olympics in Chicago, they didn't raise the same objections they are now trying to claim as righteous objections.
They can give a thousand reasons...but it comes down to partisan politics. It always does. No matter what excuses they might voice publicly.
My point once again & for the final time to you....was that several posts at the start of this thread placed racism as the reason the Right cheered against Obama concerning the Olympics. I said that was BS. That they would have likely cheered against Clinton, a White man. I based this opinion on the Right's hatred Of Bill Clinton.
She's a big ole white girl last I checked. Where was the outrage back then?
When did we establish that you blacked out for 8 years? How about when you wrote this:
"The lesson is: DON'T ELECT AN INEXPERIENCED PRESIDENT BECAUSE OF AN OVERZEALOUS HATRED FOR THE PREVIOUS PRESIDENT!" - puffinrainbows
And bintx had to explain this to you:
"Did you vote for GWB? If so, you voted for an INEXPERIENCED [and INCOMPETENT] PRESIDENT BECAUSE OF AN OVERZEALOUS HATRED FOR THE PREVIOUS PRESIDENT!
Personally, I voted for Obama because I refused to vote for John McCain after he chose an INEXPERIENCED AND INCOMPETENT loon for his vice president . . . I would have possibly voted for McCain, but once he chose Caribou Barbie . . . no chance. I was a McCain supporter in 2000, puppies . . . guess why? Because I didn't want to vote for an INEXPERIENCED AND INCOMPETENT candidate for President." - bintx
While the right has indeed been unhinged for a long time, the attacks on Clinton and Carter were not at all focused on their backrounds. There is a reason for that. Do you even know who Clinton's parents and grandparents were? Why do you think that is? Was the paranoia Clinton ever channeled into theories that he was raised from birth as a secret Muslim?
I'm not saying that all of the Obama derangement syndrome is race related, but it's clear enough to me that some of it is.
The Right always looks for an opponents weakness [hell the Left does this too]. With Bill Clinton, it was his womanizing, draft dodging & a number of other things my almost 54 yr old mind can't think of this second ;-) And then they attack it.
Now with Obama, they went looking for some weakness to go after. What they came up with was a bunch of nonsense. Like the questioning about his birth certificate & US citizenship. And Obama's "radical" acquaintances/friends. But they went with it anyway.
Are there folks out there that only hate him cause he's Black? No doubt in my mind there is. But every time someone attacks Obama it isn't always about race. Sometimes it's just politics.
Sorry no more a draft dodger then your ex VP right?
there were call deferments while attending collage.
but i bet you know this any ways.
I think you said it best, repubs are hitting Obama's weak spot, one of which is the exotic "otherness" of his backround, just like they used to attack Clinton for being fast with the ladies.
Well, Jeet -- the rightwingnuts may indeed have hated Clinton as much as they do Obama . . .
. . . but, AFAIK, they never came with such inventive products for Clinton as these:
"Conservatives love their country the way a four-year old loves their mother. And anyone who says anything bad about 'Mommy' is therefore BAD. Liberals love their conuntry the way adults love each other: We recognize and accpet the flaws in one another, and work to make the relationship better, despite our mutual imperfrections."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Where is this wisdom from the right, huh Cons?
Though Franken wouldn't be the only person to make such an observation.
Excuse me, Senator Al Franken.
(That explains why I couldn't find it in Wikiquote, anyway!)
Here's the actual quotes:
"If you listen to a lot of conservatives, they'll tell you that the difference between them and us is that conservatives love America and liberals hate America.... They don't get it. We love America just as much as they do. But in a different way. You see, they love America the way a 4-year-old loves her Mommy. Liberals love America like grown-ups. To a 4-year-old, everything Mommy does is wonderful and anyone who criticizes Mommy is bad. Grown-up love means actually understanding what you love, taking the good with the bad, and helping your loved one grow. Love takes attention and work and is the best thing in the world."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the correction!
I guess elections have a tendency to induce selective amnesia in the weak minded.
They wouldn't say "F*** America," they'd say "F*** Americans."
There's a difference. They have all kinds of love for this vision of the Land of Liberty they cling to, but they're not particularly fond of the people who live here.
Not the rocks, trees, wildflowers, lovely valleys and rivers, except what they can mine, log, trample and pollute...
Certainly not the working class folk they claim to represent, since they work for the oligarchs in all policy.
Not for the poor, because they demonize them at every turn.
What DO they like about America???
The Flag[pins].
They'd rather see us disintegrate as a nation than see this man succeed. That's how blind their intense hatred has made them. They actually seem to want to see our country go down in flames.
Maybe they see a "scorched earth" strategy as the only last resort to preserve their rapidly waning power. How else would you explain this self-destructive behavior?
What we're seeing from the Right is 10% politics and 90% racism.
Clearly, many Americans were just not ready for a black president.
The big lie is that they don't attack his policies, they attack him. And the Olympics was the latest attack, because bringing the Olympics to the US wasn't a Presient Obama policy... this process started years ago and we were fortunate to be among the 4 finalist.
Yet, because President Obama supported it (something I believe any American President supports) the right created a campaign against and were openly rooting for him to fail.
This wasn't a policy failure, this was a failure of the US getting the Olympics, yet they cheer because they can try to brand it as his failure.
It's truly a sad state.
Where does this end?
Pretty soon they will openly celebrate and cheer everytime a company has a layoff or the DOW drops 100 points.
I never supported the war, but I didn't cheer everytime an American soldier was killed, it made me sad. How sick have we become as a nation when the other side cheers.
OW! OW! Hey, you guys! Quit it out! Uncle!!!