Posted by: Rick | Friday, October 2, 2009

The Right-Wing Conspiracy: Still Vast, But Even Stupider Than Before

In the car today I was listening to CNBC (satellite radio rules!) when the news broke about Chicago not getting the Olympics in 2016.  I was a bit surprised to then hear my boy Larry Kudlow go on at great length about what an unmitigated disaster this was for Barack Obama.  Larry’s rant seemed out of all proportion to the event itself, so much so that his CNBC co-hosts (card-carrying wingnuts themselves) were taken aback.  The whole thing just sounded. . . strange.

But the situation became clear when I learned that all the right-wing media heavyweights got the same stupid memo last night:

When the International Olympic Committee voted against Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Olympics this morning — after the President and First Lady flew to Copenhagen to push for it in person — the Weekly Standard newsroom burst into applause.

“Cheers erupt at Weekly Standard world headquarters,” wrote editor John McCormack in a post titled “Chicago Loses! Chicago Loses!” . . .

Do yourself a favor and read the rest of the link above.  Beck, Limbaugh, Drudge, Gingrich, FOX News — they’re all there, all celebrating (on cue!) a setback for a great American city.  And they don’t sound too bright doing it.

Oh, well.  It’s not like Illinois is an important state or anything.  Fuck ’em!  It’s home to Barack Hussein Obama.  The Republican base will be well-pleased.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. A disaster for Chicago and Obama? I think it’s a great moment for Chicago. Chicago wins more for not holding the Games then they would if the ‘won’. Instead of wasting billions of the bloated corrupt institution that is the Olympic Movement, they can enjoy balanced budgets and a balanced lifestyle.

  2. So the Olympic Movement is a “corrupt institution”? That may come as news to the rest of America.

    Does this mean that Republican front-runner Mitt Romney is going to renounce his starring role in the Salt Lake City Winter Games of 2002? Somehow I doubt it.


Categories

%d bloggers like this: