Roy Edroso's Rightbloggers: Exploring the right Wing Blogosphere appears courtesy of our sister paper in New York City, Village Voice.
Last week rightbloggers were outraged when President Obama struck a conciliatory tone in his address to the U.N. General Assembly.
They didn't like that, nor did they like Obama's warm reception there,
and predicted this love-fest would only encourage our adversaries, with
dire consequences for the United States.
Time will tell. But this week a different international organization to
whom Obama applied rebuffed him and the United States. This
rightbloggers celebrated as a triumph.
We speak of course of the International Olympic Committee decision to
stage the 2016 Olympics in Rio rather than in Chicago, for which Obama
worthwhile endeavor to promote and boost the United States of America
and invite the world to see what we're all about," Obama said
before the decision. In response, rightbloggers rushed to warn the IOC
that Chicago was a seething criminal hellhole. "2016 headline: Violence
greets Chicago Olympics," predicted Don Surber,
citing a recent incident of youth violence. "The group of Chicagoans
who want to give the Olympics to Rio de Janeiro just got a boost
courtesy of the Third World gangs that rule -- and have ruled for
decades -- large swaths of the gun-controlled city," said the Poca,
said that the First Lady came from "a relatively high crime
neighborhood," though he generously allowed that "it is a testimony to
Michelle and her parents that she emerged relatively unscathed except
with a huge, but somewhat understandable, chip on her shoulder."
Chicago was only their secondary target, chosen because it had
been the home of Barack Obama, whose advocacy of the Games was, in
their view, the real crime.
was outraged that Obama brought former U.S. Olympians, Paralympians,
and D.C. schoolkids to the White House to promote the Chicago bid,
complaining that the event "wasted public schoolkids' time as junior
lobbyists for their Chicago cronies' Olympics bid." (We were surprised
that she didn't focus on the Paralympians, for an
Obama's appearance before the IOC, the first by a sitting President,
was judged a disastrous precedent. "A cursory key word check of the
United States Constitution failed to turn up a match for 'President as
Olympic Games Salesman for Chicago,'" sniffed American Conservative Daily,
"as a vital responsibility for the individual designated as
Commander-in-chief, a role that Obama has chosen to ignore in
said Obama was only "off galavanting across the world in the hopes that
it will distract the rest of us from his DEBACLE in Afghanistan and his
debacle of an UNCONSTITUTIONAL federal health plan." A legacy-minded Krusty Konservative asked, "Will future presidents be expected to stop and help every American city that is vying to host the Olympics?"
were incensed that a Chicago TV outlet was allegedly "ordered" not to
run anti-Olympics story -- which shows how much credit they were
willing to give Obama's powers for evil, as the station in question was
an outlet of the usually uncooperative Fox News.
A few assumed that Obama had somehow already rigged the process. Black & Right
quoted a correspondent who suggested that "that Obama was picked to run
BECAUSE of the Olympics" -- with his eye on becoming Mayor of Chicago.
But "Daley wouldn't have that and said 'run for Pres.'" "Makes sense,"
judged B&R. "Like most things done in that crooked city, the fix
could be in."
"Some are suggesting the fix is already in for Chicago,"
concurred Holy Coast.
"I'm not so sure that's the case, but given the worldwide swoon over
Obama, it wouldn't surprise me if the Olympic Committee were also
stricken by the Obama virus." "I wonder how South America will feel
about getting screwed over by the world's new dear leader," said Dan Riehl, "combined with the usual arm-twisting done Daley's style."
angrily asserted that the Obamas lobbied for the Olympics because "they
are self-absorbed in their newfound power and attention to their
minority rise." To quote General Turgidson, we're still trying to figure out the meaning of that last phrase.
When the voting was done and the low-crime town of Rio de Janeiro got the honors, rightbloggers were beside themselves with joy. ("All I have to say is "There IS a God,'" said Stop the ACLU.) Some were upfront about the role of personal animosity in their reaction ("When the Obamas got involved, particularly Barack, I wanted it to fail to put him in his place," said Jill Stanek.
"I expect I have bitter motives and must work on that. But someone also
told me it is correct not to want evil people to succeed. The Lord knows.")
But other rightbloggers suddenly saw the loss of the games as a serious
reversal of American prestige with terrible implications for U.S.
foreign policy. Oddly, this seemed to make them happier still.
"Wow, what an embarrassment for Obama," said National Review's John J. Miller.
"If he can't work his personal magic with the Olympians, why does he
expect it to work with the Iranians?" "How does this speak to his
future involvement in negotiations?" asked Scared Monkeys.
"It is emblematic of three things," said neo-neocon,
"[Obama's] poor judgment, his boundless egotism, and the disrespect
he's quickly gaining around the world with his far more vital errors on
the international stage." While "it would be easy to read too much into
the rejection of Chicago," said Rick Moran,
"... this is a disaster for the president," and compared the Olympic
pitch to serious foreign policy initiatives at Camp David and
elsewhere. "Having failed there," he asked, "where does the Obama
presidency go now?"
The committee's vote also showed that the global community, to
which Obama had allegedly pandered disgustingly at the U.N., was now
turning on him. "World Rejects Barack Obama," announced Erick Erickson. "It is kind of like the world community saying to President Obama, 'Not only no, but Hell No,'" said Big Government. "It was a small thing," said the American Spectator,
"but in the context of the day, like Carter's hapless episode with the
rabbit, it became a metaphor for a presidency in trouble."
suggested that Rio was chosen because the Obamas "are on record as
having spent much of their lives not being proud of their country." The Freedom Post
also celebrated the Olympic Committee's love of America: "Could [Obama]
have possibly expected his seven-minute speech to overcome the
magnitude of denigration and vilification he has performed against the
United States?" Gateway Pundit believed "Obama Bashed America Again Today During Plea to IOC. ... He sure hates this country."
National Review's Victor Davis Hanson
imagined IOC judges swayed by even more obscure political tropes: "The
more we hear about Valerie Jarrett, Rahm Emanuel, Bill Ayers, and all
his old Chicago friends ... the more it hurts the president to be
identified as a 'Chicago politician' who tries in heavy-handed fashion
to implement change through the 'Chicago way.'" This was "unappealing"
to "the world at large," he said. Who knew Valerie Jarrett was a big
story in Cameroon?
So for a second straight week rightbloggers were dragged into
foreign affairs, but show no increased aptitude for the subject -- nor
a decline in interest, provided the spice is right: They are still
heavily covering the Roman Polanski affair, and keenly interested to
("Team Polanski has hired a Washington power player and buddy of
Attorney General Eric Holder"). In other words, for them every topic --
foreign or domestic, important or trivial -- is really about Obama, so
long as it contains elements of failure or depravity which they
can, by whatever means, attribute to him.