So word on the street is Chicago lost its bid for the Olympics in the first round of voting. To which I say, that's a relief! The amount of money they'd need to spend to build the facilities, the losses in commuting time and additional security necessary, not to mention the opportunity costs (consider if such money and effort could be put into something useful, like a giant sign that reads "show us your tits" and can be read from outer space by aliens)--who needs it! The estimates on the costs were also laughably conservative, especially considering this is Chicago we're talking about. Even the parking meters have special slots for inserting bribes for the meter maids.
Of course, some are making political hay out of it since President Obama went and made his pitch for Chicago to the Olympic Committee, as if that had anything to do with it. (After wearing President Bush's acrimonious relationship with other international officials like a badge of honor, you'd think conservatives would be proud of Obama getting "snubbed" here) More likely, the choice between the beaches of Rio and the backdrop of TV's "Good Times" was the determining factor.
That said, it's always the case that they have to practically construct an entire city for the Olympics every time they hold them--stadiums, facilities, athletes quarters. Seems it'd make more sense to just hold the Games every year in the same city, so they wouldn't have to keep up this building and tearing down. Seems simple to me, people!
That said, Chicago will just have to keep being famous for a pot-pie that they call pizza, Al Capone, and Walter Payton.