It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Obama To Denmark: Plans Emergency Trip To Copenhagen To Pitch Chicago Olympics

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:57 AM

Obama To Denmark: Plans Emergency Trip To Copenhagen To Pitch Chicago Olympics

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama will travel to Denmark to support Chicago's bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics, projecting the highest-ever White House profile in lobbying for the international event.

Valerie Jarrett, a senior adviser to the president, told The Associated Press Monday morning that Obama will leave Thursday and join his wife, Michelle, in Copenhagen, where they'll make the pitch to the International Olympic Committee.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:57 AM
Before all of the "I'm sure he's no different than any other President" bandwagon folks get here, I would like to draw attention to this:

Obama would be the first U.S. president to actually appeal in person to the International Olympic Committee for an Olympics event.


We are in the midst of one of the greatest economic disasters in history.

We are currently enjoying the largest deficit in history.

We currently have the largest unemployment numbers without any relief in site.

We are currently debating an overhaul of the entire US healthcare system.

We are STILL at war in the Middle East and our commander-in-chief is now contemplating an entirely NEW strategy. In other words, starting from scratch.

We are about to, or are faced with the possibility of, defaulting on gov't acquired loans for the first time come January 2010.

We are undergoing a massive outbreak of H1N1 and the costs associated with vaccine research, innoculations, etc.

The list, unfortunately, goes on and on.

At what point, do we the American people, say enough is enough?

First it was a date, then it was night time TV show, then it was an all-out media blitz, then it was visiting more countries in less days than any other President, etc. etc.

Now, we have to spend money in a bid for the Olympics?

It has been proven time and time again that hosting the Oympics costs more and leaves the hosting city/state in debt for years and years and years.

However, if this is what Illinois wants for their state, then so be it.

But this is not, and should not, be a job for our President.

Doesn't anyone else think that there are more important things for our POTUS to be doing and spending money on rather than as a salesman -- for one state?

How many blind-eyes are we going to turn before we realize this all adds up -- and adds up to nothing that actually benefits the average American?

Thoughts? I'm ready to be flamed.....

Edit to add: You can argue that Obama inherited this mess, you can argue that Bush is to blame, you can argue that this has been building for decades, but the one thing we should all be able to agree on is that THE ONLY PERSON NOW RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTUALLY FIXING IT IS OBAMA!
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 28-9-2009 by lpowell0627]

[edit on 28-9-2009 by lpowell0627]

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:01 AM
I am by no means an Obama fan
but tourism is always good for the economy

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:11 AM
reply to post by ModernAcademia

Tourism is good, but there are certainly more ways to generate tourism than hosting an Olympics event.

Here are some facts to consider:

Hosting is very expensive. In recent times the Olympics have never made a direct profit. The bidding process alone for 2012 will cost each bidding city around £20m and whichever is selected will expect to pay at least £6.5bn (Paris). With increased security fears Athens spent $1.5bn on security out of a total of $12bn on the 2004 games. The burden of this cost falls on government (and therefore the taxpayer), companies and individuals. Both Paris and London’s local governments have put aside around £2.4bn which will mean £20 per year extra in tax for every household in the cities. Big projects are notoriously hard to budget for (so much so that London is estimating the total cost may go up by up to 50%) and residents in Los Angeles have only just stopped paying for the over-budget 1984 Olympics through their local taxes. If cities want to regenerate or improve their infrastructure then they should use this money directly on those projects rather than wasting it on subsidising a sporting event.

Link -

To be fair, the Olympics does tend to grow the economy. However, using the Olympics to profit is akin to gambling since some cities profit and others end up in debt for decades.

I just don't think that we are at a point where we can afford to gamble on anything.

Do you gamble with the last dollar you have and need to use to feed yourself? Or do you gamble when you have a surplus and can afford to consider that money already gone?

We have no surplus. We should not be gambling.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:15 AM
reply to post by lpowell0627

good points!

I do agree it's an innapropiate use of resources in the worst of times

but think about the georgia vs. russia short war
didn't get much coverage because everyone was watching sports on TV
it was perfect timing

what's Obama up to?
I find he often acts like a celebrity more than a president

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:19 AM
Some other points to ponder:

For 17 days every four years the Summer Olympics attract the world’s attention and the host city gets immense media coverage. Yet many argue that the huge cost of hosting the Olympic games means that cities are left with crippling bills and empty stadia once those 17 days are over. Montreal, the host in 1976, is still paying off the cost of staging the games today and the Athens Olympics of 2004 ran billions of euros over the original budget - at state expense. The scandal surrounding the bidding process for the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Games revealed that 13 of the 124 International Olympic Committee (IOC) members who were tasked with deciding who should be awarded the games were ‘bought’ with gifts and bribes. Since then the IOC has tightened up its regulations but rumours of corruption amongst some members remain and were revealed by a BBC sting operation in 2004. Whilst proponents of hosting the games generally accept that they will inevitably cost significant amounts of money, they argue that the ‘feel good factor’ and longer term benefits justify this outlay.


Feel good factor?

While I agree that the citizens of the US could use a little boost in feeling good, I really don't think it needs to cost upwards of $20M to achieve.


Well, if people are worried about the military policing the US now, just wait. What better way to begin a security assault on the US all in the name of "preparation for the Olympics".

Job of the President?

In my opinion, it really doesn't matter whether hosting the Olmpics benefits a state/city or not. The bottom line is that our President has absolutely no business putting this on his agenda.

Secure the country. Win the war. Bring our military home -- for good. Worry about Iran -- watch Israel. Tackle healthcare. Improve the economy. Lower taxes. Bring down foreclosures.

You know -- be presedential.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:29 AM
So Michelle is already there? Wonder if it another vacation for her and the kids?

I hate him more every day.

Obama, who represented Illinois in the U.S. Senate after serving in the Illinois Legislature, is a longtime supporter of Chicago's bid. Michelle Obama is a native of the city and he considers it his adopted home town. Obama recently sent letters to selected IOC members promising a "spectacular Olympic experience for one and all."

"President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama symbolize the hope, opportunity and inspiration that makes Chicago great, and we are honored to have two of our city's most accomplished residents leading our delegation in Copenhagen," Mayor Richard M. Daley said in a statement. "Who better to share with members of the International Olympic Committee the commitment and enthusiasm Chicago has for the Olympic and Paralympic Movement than the President and First Lady."

Read more at:

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:33 AM
reply to post by ModernAcademia

That's exactly the problem with having a celebrity presidency. It's one thing to use celebrity status to accomplish things -- such as Charlize Theron, Angelina Jolie, Charlie Sheen, etc.

It's quite another to have it paid for by the American people.

Keep this in mind: There was an interview with General McCrystal (sp?) last night on 60 Minutes. When asked how many times he has personally spoken with the President, the answer was ONCE. Now, the argument can be made that his advisors are speaking to McCrystal, therefore there is communication. However, when the President says "No MORE TROOPS" and the General says "Without more troops we will lose the war" there is obviously a problem in communication.

I think that our Commander-in-chief being on top of the situation in Afganistan is a tad more important than the public's love of sports.

That's why we have a President -- so that the general public can go about living their life while the government worries about protecting it.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:35 AM
There are a lot of Service and Labor Contracts at stake for the Chicagoland Cronies that gave birth to Obama. These are the only people that will make any money off of this deal. The Obamas have a lot of people to pay back.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:38 AM
reply to post by Iseekthetruth!!!!!!!!

I think someone forgot to tell Obama that he no longer works for just the people of Illinois. Love of your "homestate" is wonderful but not to the point where the American people -- the ones that live in the other 49 states -- suffer. And any minute that Obama spends on anything other than what's best for all 50 states is an abuse of power and an enormous waste of time and money.

If things were hunky-dory in the US -- money was flowing -- morale was high -- people were generally happy -- then this type of thing can be overlooked (still wrong mind you). But today is not that day!

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:41 AM
False Flag? Maybe he is getting out of dodge while he can.

(Gimme a break this is a CT site)

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:41 AM
reply to post by jibeho

The Obamas may have a lot of people to payback -- but the American people shoud not be the ones paying it.

Let him pay them back in four years when he no longer is OUR EMPLOYEE!

Again, some of the things I mentioned, when looked at individually, can be considered no big deal. But added together -- in under 10 months mind you -- it starts to take its toll.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:41 AM
I would say 90% of people here in England would gladly pass on our Olympics to someone else. It just seems to suck up more and more money and provide little real improvement to any city it's been held in.. We can't afford it especially now.

It certainly wont be on the same scale as Sydney or Beijing.

I think your President has more pressing things to deal with than this.

[edit on 28-9-2009 by woodwardjnr]

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:51 AM
reply to post by lpowell0627

I agree but to Obama, it's only money, regardless of the source. This is the attitude that secured him his new job. His whole purpose in the White House is to advance the cause and wealth of those who got him elected. From Hollywood to Chicago to Wall Street... They all have something to gain with Obama in their corner.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:53 AM
reply to post by lucentenigma

Rather than a false flag event, I think it's more along the lines of "right in your face flag".

Money for police of the National Guard to administer vaccines -- military force in Pittsburgh --

Americans are beginning to voice their dissent about a "police state". What better way to surround the country with police and military force than to declare it as "preparation for the Olympics".

Wait until we see the new "homeland security measures" that will need to be put in place.....

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 12:00 PM
reply to post by lpowell0627

Wait until we see the new "homeland security measures" that will need to be put in place.....

I bet that you won't have to wait till 2016 to see those measures in place.

Increased Security and a Bankrupt Chicago=2016

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 12:03 PM

Originally posted by Iseekthetruth!!!!!!!!
So Michelle is already there? Wonder if it another vacation for her and the kids?

People should also keep in mind that the American people ALSO pay for whatever the First Lady decides to do. I would also make the argument that she has no business spending our money for this either....but even I admit I wouldn't publicly raise much stink about it.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 12:33 PM


Seriously, the more of the next 3 years this guy wastes the less of his insane ideas for America can be passed and pushed through.

Beer tasting, cigars, Olympics... Hookers...

I don't care what he is doing if it keeps him away from Washington and pushing his moronic ideas for America

May he stay 3 weeks and stop in Amsterdam to enjoy the legalized herbs for a 3 weeks more.

The less we see of this guy the better off we are.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:14 PM

Originally posted by lpowell0627

We are STILL at war in the Middle East and our commander-in-chief is now contemplating an entirely NEW strategy. In other words, starting from scratch.

This is the one I have the biggest problem with. He is dragging his feet on the new strategy he campaigned on as being a #1 priority, he has only spoken to commander McChrystal once since being elected.

The military general credited with capturing Saddam Hussein and killing the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, says he has spoken with President Obama only once since taking command in Afghanistan.

"I’ve talked to the president, since I’ve been here, once on a VTC [video teleconference]," Gen. Stanley McChrystal told CBS reporter David Martin in a television interview that aired Sunday.

"You’ve talked to him once in 70 days?" Mr. Martin followed up.

"That is correct," the general replied.

This revelation comes amid the explosive publication of an classified report written by the general that said the war in Afghanistan "will likely result in failure" if more troops are not added next year. Yet, the debate over health care reform continues to dominate Washington’s political discussions. On Monday, the White House announced President Obama would travel to Denmark to lobby the International Olympic Committee to select his hometown of Chicago for the 2012 summer games.

Mean while the fatalities continue with the status quo and no new ideas.

Obamas lack of leadership is really showing.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:31 PM
Wow, this is community organizing on a global scale.

Finally, something the President is really good at.

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in