It's Tea Time

So Barack and Michelle head out to Copenhagen to spread the word on Chicago, the city of opportunity in the land of opportunity. They're pumped up man, they're ready to go. This is going to be a street fight and they're bringing home the goods.

Or not.

We came in dead last of all the locations up for a vote. That's right, dead last. What a joke.

For those of you who may try to spin this in such a way that vilifies George Bush, blaming the "animosity" the world has for America for this blow out decision: you might want to think twice.

If you think back to the bid for the 2012 Olympics, which were eventually held in London, you'll come to a realization. There was another real contender in the bids, and it was New York City:

London Great Britain 22 27 39 54
Paris France 21 25 33 50
Madrid Spain 20 32 31 —
New York City US 19 16 — —
Moscow Russia 15 — — —

Now, NYC was defeated in round two of the voting but there's a deeper story. Michael Bloomberg, mayor of NYC, had planned to build a new stadium complex in concert with the NY Jets. The Jets were to contribute a sizable amount, but another $600 million would be required in public funds.

Bloomberg made the argument then, and I happened to agree with him, that the new complex would make coming to NYC much more attractive to those orchestrating events such as the Olympics. This in turn would lead to a new stream of revenue moving forward from the completion date of the project which would pay back the investment and then some. New jobs, new opportunities, you get the idea. The IOC (International Olympic Committee) wanted assurances this deal would go through, and it's likely if it had gone through the outcome of the voting would have been quite different.

Now the point to all this is that Obama went over there with nothing to sell. There was no shiny new stadium, no clean streets, no top of the line police force with boat loads of experience handling large crowds. All he had was himself, his wife, Oprah, and his pretty speeches. Chicago is and always has been a mess. The worst thing that could have happened for our country is if the IOC had temporarily lost their sanity and actually given us the Olympics.

We can all breathe a sigh of relief however, because the Olympics are in Rio (pronounced hee-oh, thank you Brazilian girlfriend). Could you really ask for a more beautiful place? Throw in the fact that Rio has to deal with Carnival each year and you've got a recipe for one of the greatest Olympics in the past century. And that's saying something, because China's Olympic debut was spectacular.

There has been a follow up post. Original follows.

A situation somewhat close to me brought me to question this. A woman I know of, on welfare, has six children. One of those children, a 17 year old girl, already has two children of her own. Obviously those are also both on welfare. There are no signs this will stop anytime soon.

There is very little talk of this on the net that I can see, which really surprises me. This discussion is obviously very important to have. Here is a bit of what I was able to find:

Birth Rate 3X Higher for Women Receiving Welfare

For the nation, in 2006, 10 years after passage of the Act, the birth rate for women 15 to 50 years old receiving public assistance income in the last 12 months was 155 births per 1,000 women, about three times the rate for women not receiving public assistance (53 births per 1,000 women).

If people on welfare or in the lowest income brackets are producing the most children, we are on a dangerous road. It is guaranteed, not likely, guaranteed that this trend will lead to a complete failure of our social and economic system. Those of us who make money and can sustain our own lives can only take on so much of a burden. At some point, more and more of us will fall below the black line into the red, as the increase of these governmental dependents cause tax hikes that exceed our ability to pay.

Someone, somewhere, has to start talking about the real issues here. The mathematical, logistical issues. Caring about people is very important, but the poor have a responsibility to care about others as much as those who can fend for themselves do. Reality is not capable of being circumvented by an emotional need for things to be OK. We need a strong, courageous, intelligent, intellectually honest, charismatic man or woman, and we need them fast.

How did we become such sheep?

This man lives like a king and doesn't play by rules he himself helps to create. He and his cohorts squeeze us for every penny of production we can stand to part with while he lives like American royalty. How can we take such insult? How can we allow his political kin to pull the wool over our eyes? It seems the ruling elite have little to fear from us now. They have beaten it into us: We, up here on our perches, are apart from the rest of you. We are special, and you will accept this fact.

Unfortunately it appears we have done just that.

Squealer, please pass on my most sincere apologies to our great leader Napoleon. I am quite sure he did what he did with the best interests of we, the lowly workers, at heart.

This old Russian propaganda poster says all that needs to be said. The translation: "Build like you would for yourself". Wait, you mean to tell me people work differently depending on whether they or someone else will reap the rewards? Weird...

This is what those on the left cannot work out in their minds. They assume that "from each according to his ability" will just occur. What they do not understand is it is not only ability, but passion, drive, and the willingness to work like a man or woman obsessed. That is what is killed when the ultimate goals of Socialism/Communism are realized, and that is why it cannot ever succeed.