Michelle Obama's Olympic Plea

Michelle Obama pleaded to the IOC for a Chicago Olympics in 2016 and walked away empty-handed as they were sent to Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. Her speech was much more of a plea than a confident assurance that Chicago was the right place. Michelle tried to shift the focus of the IOC from why Chicago was the right place for the Olympics to why the Olympics would be right for Chicago, “Chicago's vision for the Olympic and Paralympic movement is about so more than what we can offer the Games -- it's about what the Games can offer all of us.” Rio understood what the IOC wanted and, “convinced Olympic officials that the city would keep spectators and athletes safe with an increased police presence and other measures.” Rio continues to show that they will increase security in order to alleviate the fears of the IOC. In literature shifting the focus of an argument to something of much less relevance is called a red herring. The application process is explained here. The cities answer questionnaires about how the athletes will arrive. Will they be safe? Are there enough hotels? Can the city handle the huge crowd? What about traffic and food? Is the atmosphere ideal for such a big event? Instead of answering these types of questions, Michelle focuses on other issues.

For example, Michelle tried to create emotional appeal by telling us the stories of how the Olympics impacted her life. The problem with her logic in this area is that it was in direct opposition of her emotional appeal. She tells us that watching Olympic greats like Nadia and Carl Lewis inspired her to believe that she could accomplish something great as she watched from her father’s knee. She follows this by saying, “today, I can dream, and I am dreaming of an Olympic and Paralympic Games in Chicago that will light up lives in neighborhoods all across America and all across the world; that will expose all our neighborhoods to new sports and new role models; that will show every child that regardless of wealth, or gender, or race, or physical ability, there is a sport and a place for them, too.” This hasty generalization never explains to us how the other cities will be lit up by an Olympics in Chicago. In the previous sentences she had just convinced us that it didn’t matter where the Olympics were, children across the world would be impacted. Nadia go her perfect 10 in 1976 in Montreal and it apparently affected Michelle a great deal. Carl Lewis first competed in 1984 in Los Angeles, which isn’t exactly Chicago’s back yard. We’ll just send the Olympics to Rio Michelle, it’s the same to you.

Michelle again tries to create sympathy in the reader by talking about Chicago’s poor inner neighborhoods, ““Ours was a neighborhood of working families -- families with modest homes and strong values.” I’m sure the homes in South Chicago are modest by American standards but in most other countries they would be considered mansions. Some voters at the IOC come from third world countries where most people would do anything to be a working family with a modest home. She didn’t get sympathy from the IOC on that one. Let’s compare the average downtown Chicago home with the downtown Rio home and Chicago might just win. In fact let’s pull up the “pathetic rating level” statistics for major cities. In Africa AIDS is a rampant epidemic in almost every country. Russia is still behind decades economically compared to the US. A lot of people in Paraguay still live in huts. People are willing to risk death crossing the border between Mexico and the US in order to have a shot at a better life. People are starving in Ethiopia. If the IOC were principally concerned with helping a city out, they would have the Olympics in sub-Saharan Africa every 4 years. Instead they choose cities like London, Atlanta, Turin, and Barcelona to host.

Here’s another example of how she tries to paint Chicago as the victim of the world. She says that her dad from Chicago had a really hard life but never gave up. By sending the Olympics here you’ll be helping people like him. My dad could have seen the Olympics and it would have made him happy. Michelle, I doubt your dad would have gone to every event, if even one. The poorer people in Chicago, that she feels so bad for and that will receive so much help, won’t have money to attend the games. He would have watched from home if they were held in Chicago or Beirut. I bet there’s some people in the world with rougher lives than your dad Michelle. Maybe a 50 year old from Cambodia who has worked in a sweatshop since he was 5 and no longer has his right hand because it got ripped off by unsafe machinery. Should the Olympics go there to make up for his hard work and sacrifice too?

Michelle never explains why the Olympics should come to Chicago. She talks about poor neighborhoods needing something to cheer for, something to motivate them. She never connects that need to why the Olympics should be sent to Chicago. Chicago is sad so the Olympics should come here is her entire argument. She needs to connect Chicago’s struggles with the Olympics really supplying that help to the struggling town. That would be much more effective.

This is what we learned from Michelle: she was born from Chicago, the Olympics changed her life and will impact the lives of the whole world no matter where they are held, the Olympics can offer a lot to Chicago just like it could to every other city in the world, her dad taught her how to fight, her dad had a hard life, and some people have small homes in Chicago. To sum up everything into one phrase, “Chicago is so bad and hard that we need the Olympics, therefore the games should be in Chicago.” Or maybe she thought they were supposed to go to Chicago because it doesn't matter where they go but because she was born there they should be there. There’s no logical connection in there at all is there? Michelle tried to make the IOC feel like the world owed her and Chicago the Olympics. She tried to reason with us but came up to no sensible conclusion. She tried to get votes for Chicago, but instead got the least amount of votes and a quick exit from competition.