so, the olympics are not coming to chicago. as the title of my last blog stated, less is more, michael. in order to house the games, the city of chicago would likely have bulldozed a number of houses, functioned as a mini police state, and placed a pretty tax on the people of chicago. they tell us there is no money for impoverished inner city residents. they tell us there is no money for crumbling schools. they tell us there is no money for parks, libraries, recreation centers. they tell us there is no money for adult education, literacy programs. and yet, there was billions available for the olympics. private investors had already pledged over 5 billion dollars to the city of chicago. will they now pledge that money to the hungry and poor people of chicago? the obamas strongly advocated for the games to come to chicago. will they now advocate for the people of chicago? why was it more important to oprah and the obamas to have games played in their city than for houses, libraries, and parks to be built for masses of needy chicago residents? this is a question that can only be answered when one understands the class question. the powerful care for prestige. they want "their city" to be considered world class. they want to show off the city they so love. the masses, on the other hand, want to eat. the masses want a decent place to live. they want safe schools for their children. they want health care.

it would have been a crime for chicago to host the games of 2016. instead, rio will get the games. to no one's surprise that has been paying just a wee bit of attention, the big o's were on the wrong side here. the side of wealth. but hey, they are wealthy. we can't expect them to be against themselves, can we?

but what's our excuse for not being on the right side?

now, let us turn our eyes from these so called leaders, and let us lead ourselves.

as for me, i think a game is coming on.

see you around.