I hate the Olympics. I hate the way they look. I hate how long they take. I hate the fact that they eat up at least six pages of my newspaper every day. I hate the whining, bickering, letters of protest, doping scandals, inspirational triumph-over-adversity stories, and tragic falls from grace. I hate the fact that people think sports promote international relations. And I hate the fact that they have around-the-clock coverage set up specifically so that all I ever see is figure skating or gymnastics, which I also hate.

For the record, I do not hate sports. In fact, I like sports very much, both watching and playing. (Also for the record, nothing involving a motor should be considered a sport.) The best job I've ever had was as a sports photographer, where I went to at least three events a week, and even learned how to think golf is interesting (it's called vodka). I cheered for the Chicago Bulls when they won three championships in a row even though I didn't watch any of the games. I helped throw tomatoes at Parma fans when they beat Marseilles in the European Cup. I even watch sumo sometimes. But as I said, I hate the Olympics.

My disgust begins with the International Olympic Committee and their farcical selection process. Salt Lake City has taken a lot of flak for monkeying with the bidding, but they're just the ones who got caught. If everyone else isn't doing it, how did the 2008 Olympics end up in a country that still jails people for being "dangerous intellectuals"?

Then there is the fact that all but the most obscure sports will always be dominated by rich countries. I don't care how much dedication you have. If your opponent has a $10 million dollar training facility, not to mention a team of medical researchers who will figure out how many of each performance-enhancing drug you can take without getting caught, you are at a severe disadvantage. If real fair competition is the goal, they should determine the makeup of each Olympic team by drawing straws a week before the games begin. If you think it's fun watching America try to beat Canada at hockey, imagine them trying to play together.

But even if the host cities were fairly chosen and the teams were even, I don't see why anyone should bother with all this hoopla. Every sport in the Games already has it's own world championship event. (With the possible exception of curling. That glorified—i.e. heavier—game of marbles is the Brigadoon of sports: it appears from the mists every four years, and vanishes again as soon as the TV cameras go off.) The Olympics is just repeating all that other stuff under the illusion of a higher purpose. That's what makes something like the World Cup so much more watchable than the Olympics: no illusions. No vapid symbolism. No phony cultural sensitivity lip service (at least not until this year). Nobody wants Argentina and Italy to pretend they like each other when they play. Nobody expected Brazil to give some lame we're-just-proud-to-be-here speech after being humiliated by France in the last Cup. No judging scandals. No figure skating. Plus, a country like America is still losing to it's tiny, impoverished Southern neighbors. Is that great or what?

Anyone who thinks the Olympic Games actually promote internationalization hasn't been watching. I'm not opposed to international cooperation, but I am opposed to people kidding themselves about where it will come from. Look at the famous Soviet boycott in the 80s. (Or maybe getting slapped around again by their gymnasts was all America needed to finally start liking it's Cold War rival.) While we're at it, India and Pakistan need some brotherly love. Let's put them on a hockey rink and let the healing begin! If the world wants to see cooperation, they should eliminate the sports and televise all the bed-hopping in the Olympic Village. I'd watch. I might even start liking figure skating.