Globe to Bostonians: It's not too late for you morons to do the right thing

EXACTLY...

The piece Adam is quoting is a Globe editorial, not a Shirley Leung column.

as anyone that disagrees with anything their masters have told them to blindly support.

and they're a huge city. They should be able to mostly reuse what they already have from the last two times.

Mono- D'OH!

Dunkin replaced the doughnut in their logo with a coffee cup years ago - there's no "emergency brake anchor holder" left in case of a monorail malfunction.

Not to mention we're only on the periphery of the total eclipse coming later this month. - there'll be enough sun to keep it going and not buy us any time.

Let's save the 20/20 hindsight until the olympics actually happen. If LA loses billions, I'm sure the Globe won't be there saying it should have been Boston...

People around here know how to do research and think critically.

Which is something looting politicians of the neocon and neoliberal stripe don't like to come up against when they are trying to pull a con.

Let's just skip the Olympics and fix the T anyways! Win Win for everyone.

I got carried away since Shirley has been at the forefront but it's worse the Globe is taking this view. Look at this.Where are their priorities? Strut our stuff?? How OLD are you people? Get a life. We have a good city, I don't need to hobnob with other leaders and brag.
Don't worry, Globe, we all came together due to the Olympics AND we don't need them.

Transformative power of sports????? What planet are you on? When the IOC is a public transparent group run by the UN, then maybe. They should just be in Greece forever and stop stealing from countries (see link above about Brazil).
"The IOC turning towards Western Democracies.".. that isn't a red flag about how the IOC operates??
Arg.

"The fanfare this week around the selection of Los Angeles as host of the 2028 Summer Olympics provides a taste of what Boston lost when it abandoned its bid for the Games in 2015. .. As a chance for a city to strut before a world audience, the Olympic Games have no parallel. ... The opportunity to .. reintroduce the nation’s oldest big city as the educational and research powerhouse it has become,... The proposal for a walkable Olympics would have left an enduring imprint on the city’s physical form, and held out the promise of bringing together disparate and sometimes fractious communities and neighborhoods through the transformative power of sports. .... a positive turn for the IOC, a signal that it wants to win back the favor of Western democracies. "

Was Shirley on the take from the IOC or Fish?

Whenever someone tells me that "Boston will never be a world class city" because we are the type of people who refused the Olympics I ask them to take a look at the list of Olympic cities in the modern era (let's say 1960) and tell me which cities were not "World Class" before they hosted the Olympics but had their status boosted to that level by hosting the games. It's a completely hollow argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_Games_host_cities#Olympic_...

We're rabid here on UHub? Wow.

Shots for everyone!

Games (both summer and winter) to once and for all be located at PERMANENT venues instead of this charade of choosing a host city every four years through the current wasteful, expensive, and (IMO) idiotic extortion festival selection process.

It's truly unfortunate that the IOC, and their sub-organizations like the USOC, are far more interested in trying to convince cites that hosting the Olympics will be the salvation for their local economy then in waking up and realizing that providing permanent venues for the Games is the only realistic means to insure that the Games will be able to survive in the long term.

And, NO city needs to construct the largest McDonald's restaurant in the chain, which is apparently a condition the IOC agreed to in order to get McD's to sponsor the Games.

LA's hosted before and so actually has enough facilities built for this not to be an insane idea. I have heard other suggest that there ought to be permanent (or permanent set of) locations for the winter and summer games respectively, and that seems like a great idea. The sooner we can starve the parasitic IOC members and focus on what the games are supposed to represent, the better.

And it's the top comment on the globe. Not sure how he got ahead of the other commenters with that!

Full text, at least as can be pasted on a phone.

While I'm on board with moving Boston forward with visionary ideals, I take offense to the condescending, unfounded suggestion that the Olympic bid in Boston fell to NIMBYism, as if the Globe Editorial Board exists at a higher altitude than Bostonians. First off, it's laughable to suggest Boston2024 identified the potential of Widett Circle, Dorchester Avenue and the Fort Point Channel. In the trenches, anyone following development ten years ago (with the exception of the Globe editiorial board) saw the Red Line was heating up past Broadway down to Andrew Square. The US Postal Service's Dot Ave acres were master planned 10 years ago for 12 million square feet of future projects and the Fort Point Channel Watersheet Activation Plan terminating at Widett Circle dates back to 2002.The Globe Editorial Board and a few columnists have a habit of routinely hammering so-called "NIMBYs" to suggest Bostonians don't take that long view. In fact, it's the Globe opinion makers who have been near-completely AWOL in the trenches of city planning, absent on the ground when it matters. A recent story by the Globe's terrific real estate reporter Jon Chesto highlighted how a deficit in public transit options in South Boston is now hamstringing developers. But where were Globe opinion makers when the South Boston waterfront's Transportation Plan was being drafted in 15 months of meetings between 2013 and 2015? Find an editorial or column... Globe editorialists were missing in action. The SBW Transportation Plan focused on car-centric solutions, largely pet projects of MCCA and Massport, with bus rapid transit (BRT) and bike accommodation as a footnote. It's more convenient today for Globe columnists to paratroop into City Point today and blame NIMBYism for opposition to development, rather than to have engaged, assessed and understood evolving, legitimate concerns about traffic and transit as the neighborhood took on an unprecedented amount of new density.Largely without media attention, I and my neighbors attended sixty (60) BPDA-hosted public meetings planning and rezoning our Fort Point neighborhood to ensure Boston's waterfront would evolve as a densely populated, mixed-use urban neighborhood. Yet it was nearly impossible to draw the Boston's Globe editorial board's attention to the long-term impacts of Boston2024's proposed "key venue" in the heart of Fort Point, a sprawling, one million square feet media center, longer than the Olympic stadium. The Media Center was proposed as a permanent "legacy asset," one that would eliminate over a thousand housing units that we had planned on USPS acres. While it's easy to blame NIMBYs today, the reality is the Globe failed to understand impacts, and failed to mention (including in the editorial above) that USPS never provided permission to use its acres.The Globe was hammering "NIMBYs" when citizens in the trenches were raising concern that post-2024 development rights were being ceded to Boston2024 investors, rights valued at upwards of $5 billion for a $1 billion investment in decking. Citizens being pegged as "NIMBYs" by the Globe were raising issues regarding Boston2024's failure to identify a number of sites for key venues. So-called "NIMBYs" cited Boston2024's failure to plan "Midtown" for anything but commercial uses. Again, on the ground when residents were participating in planning the city's trajectory, Globe opinion makers were nowhere to be found. So spare me the visionary talk, editorial board. We've been in the trenches working on long-term trajectories and it's been a lonely exercise. My Seaport zip code is bereft of civic facilities, cultural use planning and our long-planned greenspace network is on life support, while the Globe EB and columnists are busy setting up non-existent NIMBYs as strawmen, often just to hammer single, spot zoned one-off projects through approvals.

John Fish! Dun-dun-dun!

...I doubt they would have ever agreed to a "winner gets 2024, runner-up 2028" scenario with Paris - they would've insisted on going for broke (pun not intended?).

.