I read an article today about why some officials in Chicago thought they had lost their bid to host the 2016 Olympics: it was Bush’s fault.Apparently President Obama did not have enough time to turn around world opinion about the United States after the previous administration destroyed our reputation abroad. The Rev. Jesse Jackson, U.S. Senator Ronald Burris (Illinois) and other notable names with connections to Chicago laid the blame at the feet of George Bush.
Never mind that the city of Chicago itself was divided in very public ways about hosting the Olympics. Never mind that the news of violence coming out of Chicago was all over the national television (Rio has its own problems as well). Never mind that a US cities have hosted Olympic Games in 2002, 1996, 1984 and 1980 over the past thirty years and eight times over the history of the games (almost three times more than any other country with the exception of France who has hosted the games only once in the past forty years). Never mind the United States Olympic Committee has been in complete disarray since Peter Uberoth left last year and the new leadership, coming from the corporate world, did their best to alienate the international world of sports. These had nothing to do with it. It was because of Bush.
When personal animus towards another becomes one’s world view, it has a way of twisting the soul and bending the mind to see the object of resentment as the cause of any annoyance, trivial or significant. This is not about politics, left or right. This dynamic is not confined to politics either. Anger, which may be justified, if it is unchecked or not balanced with understanding, has a way of distorting our view of the people and the world around us. Anger is not a sin but it is a disastrous motivation for action. “[F]or man's anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires” James 1:20. If we are looking for justice and equity in this life… if we hope to experience love and mercy that heals our hurts… we must not nurse personal resentment. If we do, we will become as ugly as the object of our disdain.
Posts
7 comments:
Good thoughts, Daryl. What was the original article?
It was online and you can read it here: http://www.suntimes.com/sports/olympics/1804170,CST-NWS-olyresent03.article
Good post, Daryl. I would include, however, in all this Olympic controversy, the equally disgraceful high-profile conservative smirking about Obama's "failure" and cheering Chicago's loss. The Olympic choice had little to do with a last minute bid from the current president, and obviously even less to do with lingering animosity over the previous one. That this is being used by two sets of ideologues to snipe at each other is disturbing, but not particularly surprising.
Conservatives Revel In America's Olympic Defeat
Josh... it seems politics becomes more and more about destroying your opponent than winning the argument. It seems like those on the Right were happy to see Obama embarrassed (I didn't note that anyone blamed him but I could have missed something). Not laudable, but understandable given their minority status. If you were talking about the the "Birther" movement run by some folks on the right, I would wholeheartedly agree that this is coming from some twisted worldview where personal animus begins to exchange madness for reason (... a little movie reference there... do you know it?)
I wasn't talking about the birthers, although that is a twisted movement, just the ugly schadenfreude of so many high-profile conservative commentators when Chicago lost the bid. There were a lot of good reasons not to be enthusiastic about the US getting another Olympics, but a desire to undermine the president is not one of them. I don't imagine these people would have found it funny if it had been George Bush lobbying for Houston and losing. (but surely there would have been commentators on the left who did.) My point is I think the same as yours, that political discourse is getting angrier and more personal and irrationally hateful.
I don't know the movie reference, but for some reason I want to say No Country for Old Men?
Gandalf to Saruman in LOTR: Fellowship of the Ring
I should have known that.
Post a Comment