By Gorman Gorman

May 27, 2009 7:33am

Protestors Greet the President in Las Vegas

ABC News’ Yunji de Nies reports: President Barack Obama helped Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., raise money Tuesday night for his 2010 re-election campaign. While the president held a $2,400 per person VIP reception before the main fundraiser (where tickets began at $50) inside of Caesar’s Palace, outside several dozen protestors gathered with signs bearing slogans against the senator and the president. The protestors are angry over comments Mr. Obama made last February, when he called out the city as an example of corporate excess.  "We’re going to do something to strengthen the banking system," Mr. Obama said in a townhall event in Elkhart, Ind. "You are not going to be able to give out these big bonuses until you pay taxpayers back. You can’t get corporate jets. You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers’ dime. There’s got to be some accountability and some responsibility." Las Vegas mayor Oscar Goodman called those comments "harmful" at the time, but on Tuesday, he greeted the president upon his arrival on Air Force One. Gov. Jim Gibbons, however, refused to come. "What happened when he made that statement and because of the power of his words, Las Vegas lost four hundred conventions and business meetings," Gov. Gibbons said. "One hundred million dollar loss to the economy of Las Vegas.  Now don’t you think that it’s high time that we try to do things to stimulate the economy instead of crushing the economy with your words." The governor had requested a private meeting with the president, but the president had only wanted to meet him on the tarmac.  For Gibbons, that wasn’t good enough.  "I am not interested in a handshake and a hello from President Obama. I am interested in an apology," the governor said. Christy Patrick also wants the president to apologize.  The small business owner was among the protestors on the strip this evening.  "I wish he would take it back on national TV and tell people Vegas is a great place to come spend money, bring their conventions, bring their business meetings here.  It’s a great place to be," she said. — Yunji de Nies

User Comments

He’s not going to apologize.

Posted by: Kay | May 27, 2009, 7:52 am 7:52 am

Obama’s followers are still willing to forgive him anything-not for much longer though.

Posted by: Kathy | May 27, 2009, 7:54 am 7:54 am

This arrogant president would rather apologize for America’s strengths than he would apologize for his own mistakes.

Posted by: Dennis London | May 27, 2009, 7:55 am 7:55 am

He knows how to apologize to Mexico & the Muslim world but he forgets about the American people. Money greases the wheels of this country its what it was built on. People come to this country to make money. When the president wants to tell the CEO how much they can make, he is only one step away from telling them what the employees can make. Better watch what you wish for you may not like what you get.

Posted by: BOB B | May 27, 2009, 7:56 am 7:56 am

Las Vegas is suffering just like the rest of the U.S. Jim Gibbons is not a class act and doesn’t understand that Las Vegas is a luxury that is just not affordable for most people today. Lost conventions? Perhaps Las Vegas is too hot, too crowded, too polluted, too dirty and just a foolish way to spend money?

Posted by: Santa Fean | May 27, 2009, 7:58 am 7:58 am

A corrupt place like the Mormon city of Las Vegas is indeed dificult to reconcile with any sense of morality. Business is business, I suppose you’d say, but when it comes to government supported companies in bancrupcy, I doubt if Kathy or Kay would really expect the tax payer to cover the bar-tab.
Chris Brown in Hamburg

Posted by: Chris Brown | May 27, 2009, 7:59 am 7:59 am

Yah, what is he supposed to apologize about? he didn’t tell people not to visit Vegas, he said that corporate ceo’s can’t take extravagant personal trips with their bail out money. which I’m pretty sure 99.9% of the american public would agree with.

Posted by: um | May 27, 2009, 8:00 am 8:00 am

One side of his mouth wants to apologize, the other side won’t let him.

Posted by: beebop | May 27, 2009, 8:02 am 8:02 am

Truth hurts. People will not spend money if they dont have it. Gibbons have no other plan for Vegas and thus he found some one to blame. About the Corportate conventions, why should the stock holder pay for these silly meetings where nothing happens. I want the profit to come to the stock holder as dividends.

Posted by: MayBerry | May 27, 2009, 8:02 am 8:02 am

He’s supposed to apologize for saying that CEOs at companies that have been bailed out cannot use that tax payer money to go on vacation in Vegas?
What? Why should he apologize for telling them not to spend our money on frivolities?

Posted by: Missy | May 27, 2009, 8:06 am 8:06 am

The Governor is being ridiculous and these protesters would be out there protesting no matter what Obama said. Las Vegas is a great place to visit, but trips there are very much a luxury that companies cannot afford when they’re about to go bankrupt. It’s not a slam on Vegas, it’s simple economics. You don’t see the Super Bowl pouting because of his comment, do you?

Posted by: Gregory | May 27, 2009, 8:06 am 8:06 am

Obama said “You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas…on the taxpayers’ dime.”
Except if of course you are the President raising money for your own party or member of your party.
The taxpayers paid for Obama to take a trip to Las Vegas to support Reid!!!
WHAT A HYPOCRITE!!!

Posted by: Callin' it like it is | May 27, 2009, 8:10 am 8:10 am

Go, Gov. Gibbons. I’m with you!

Posted by: a1dbb | May 27, 2009, 8:11 am 8:11 am

Apologize for what? It’s a down economy, everyone was affected by it. To think it was the president’s words that caused the loss of revenue in Las Vegas is just silly.
Even after the president made those comments, the bankers still held events over there very much the same way they did before.
Do you really think they care about the regular Joe? These are the same individuals that take their multimillion dollar bonuses at the expense of thousands their employees. The laid off employees are the ones not making it to Vegas, there’s your loss of revenue.
So if you want to blame someone, blame the ones that created this whole mess in the first place.

Posted by: Vegans | May 27, 2009, 8:13 am 8:13 am

Conventions are the lifeblood of the Las Vegas economy. The President’s unfortunate remarks sparked the cancellation of 400 already booked conventions, resulting in the loss of 100 million to the city. He needs to apologize to the city and say good things in order to re-stimulate their convention industry. This is business and economics, not politics.

Posted by: Dennis London | May 27, 2009, 8:13 am 8:13 am

Apologize for what….. These corporate robbers shouldn’t go to Vegas riding on Taxpayers dollars and a government bailout! Did the Superbowl complain? So Vegas’s economy is based on the Corporate Robbers! Has to be, because the average American is Not going to Vegas for Nothing right now. Whine, Whine, Whine. I know President Obama don’t give a Hoot about this Governor. He didn’t carry his State anyway.

Posted by: tychisum | May 27, 2009, 8:14 am 8:14 am

What is the difference between having your conference in NYC or Lost Wages? They both cost a lot… sometimes the POTUS says some unusual stuff.. I remembered this blurb about Vegas, without being reminded.. it was not very accurate..
One day, I hope, he will apologize to someone, right here in arrogant America (rather than just apologizing to America haters).

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 27, 2009, 8:22 am 8:22 am

Vegas owes America an Apology for being so intellectually disingenius…
Whatever happened to embracing its stigma as a city of SIN? Its branding effort by the City’s Tourism Council Worked!!
“What happens in Vegas Stays in Vegas!” was the mantra during good economic times. And when the money flowed freely throughout the land it overflowed in Vegas based primarily on tourism, vacation, fun, and vices…
So, anyone with one half a brain could understand that when the economy shrinks in a recession, Vegas will Undoubtedly take a disproportionate Share of the HIT…
Vegas…you can’t have it Both Ways, Sister. Take your licks and just keep on going, you’ll be fine when you stop blaming OBama..

Posted by: What Happens in Vegas... | May 27, 2009, 8:23 am 8:23 am

Yes. I am willing to ‘forgive’ the President for telling corporations that they can’t take the bailout money I paid in taxes and spend it in Vegas.
First you want to teabag the government for spending too much, then you want them to encourage businesses to spend tax money gambling to support your cheating corrupt casinos.

Posted by: LateAgain | May 27, 2009, 8:23 am 8:23 am

Mussolini said it long ago. Fascism is the merger of corporations and government. This is what has been coming for 30 years or more. I am sorry, but every change will create some losers, but it’s high time somebody started reigning in corporate political power. Think about it: Is this a democracy? We get to vote every 2,4,or 6 years while corporations (via lobbyists) get to vote every day often several times a day. GOOD COMMENTS OBAMA! KEEP IT UP!

Posted by: Dp | May 27, 2009, 8:41 am 8:41 am

..lobbyists get to vote everyday..
I’ve said this before, we vote (as consumers) everyday.. when we give our money to the corporations.. we vote with our dollars (indirectly, of course).

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 27, 2009, 8:44 am 8:44 am

This is why it is good Obama gets out of the Whitehouse. While a few dozen protestors is trivial, it is important that he is forced to take note of how people and governors across the country view his actions.
I do not think Obama’s comments were at all out of line – sorry Vegas, but the gold gilded banking sector was just not sustainable – but at the same time yeah, he should have to made aware of all the implications of them.

Posted by: jhw539 | May 27, 2009, 9:03 am 9:03 am

He Dosent Need to Apologize He was Just pointing out the Ceos was taking our Tax Dollars going off to Lavish Resorts in Vegas, President Obama welcomes Protesters He Likes the Debate!

Posted by: Angie in Pa | May 27, 2009, 9:06 am 9:06 am

Dp:”We get to vote every 2,4,or 6 years while corporations (via lobbyists) get to vote every day ”
While I understand your complaint, I think you need to fund a lobbiest or two on your behalf. Take a cue from the NRA and donate to a lobbiest group that fights for your interests – there are many to choose from in the areas of consumer protections, environment, gay rights, civil liberties and the like.
The ACLU is pretty good at the moment, the Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) is working on protecting public domain, the National Resource Defense Council (NRDC) is a rational place to put some green dollars, etc. No one person can match the dollars of Exxon, but a couple hundred thousand – OK, it’s still a push but you can at least get someone in the room to give visibility to the issues you care about.

Posted by: jhw539 | May 27, 2009, 9:10 am 9:10 am

Posted by: Callin’ it like it is | May 27, 2009 8:10:17 AM
“Callin’ it like it is” .? LMAO
1. Obama made those comments about Vegas when one of the banks we bailed-out used taxpayer dollars to host quite a luxury junket there. I suspect you were complaining about that lack of oversight or something along those lines at the time.
2. Bush was in Vegas in January of 2008 raising money for Republican candidates. Unless you called him out on it too – the only “HYPOCRITE” would be you.

Posted by: Padma | May 27, 2009, 9:24 am 9:24 am

Some of you are totally missing the point of the protest. They protestors are not saying “come and splurge tax payer money at casinos” you dopes. They are upset because he called out the CITY OF LAS VEGAS. If he had been the brilliant man you all suck up to, he wouldn’t have named cities in his comment, only pointed out excessive spending on lavish conventions and left it there. But he called out the city, making it a political hot spot if your business was having a convention there. Many just moved their convention somewhere else, like Miami or San Antonio. That hurt the city of Las Vegas badly.

Posted by: KR | May 27, 2009, 9:32 am 9:32 am

KR:” If he had been the brilliant man you all suck up to, he wouldn’t have named cities in his comment”
Always cute to see right wingers to sell this “suck up to” myth, yet Obama doesn’t even get unquestioning support from his own party in Congress all the time. Of course, it is on record that the Republicans were slavishly dedicated to supporting Bush without question for at least 6 years, arguably 8 with with a record-setting number of filibusters the last two.
And he named Las Vegas in direct reference to a contemporary scandal that was getting a great deal of play. He’s not one to play the wink and nod method of rhetoric when there was a clear and widely known example to reference.

Posted by: jhw539 | May 27, 2009, 9:39 am 9:39 am

I understand the text of which Obama made the statement and have no problem with that. Vegas IS over re-acting; however, I DO think a hand shake on the tarmac is a snub to a state’s governor (and its people/voters) and Obama may regret that fact when he’s back out there campaining for his re-election. He should have been interest and caring enough to want to have met with him. But then most of us know he only cares about himself.

Posted by: Concerned AMERICAN Grandmother | May 27, 2009, 9:57 am 9:57 am

Frankly, in this economy or EVER…why should the government encourage gambling? That is like supportig tobacco use.
Maybe Las Vegas should start specializing in a different industry, neurosurgery, heart and kidney transplants, hip and knee replacements….. Then Las Vegas would get everybody’s support including the government. As it is now, it is just a visually over-ornate, ostentatious hub of profligacy, at a time when people all over the world are starving, going without medical care and shelter.
I’m sorry if you live there and I have offended you, but it was YOUR choice to exploit gambling addictions, sex for pay (in an age of lethal STDs yet, and quite a few ‘shows’ that wouldn’t make it on Broadway.

Posted by: Naomi Rhoads | May 27, 2009, 10:13 am 10:13 am

I admit I don’t know the total population of Las Vegas, but to have “a couple of dozen” protestors…so 25-30 people are complaining…and that makes the headline?
I understand that LV economy is based on tourism, but to complain when their the base their economy on ONE INDUSTRY and that industry is based on expendable income, blaming all their problems on the President is merely shifting the blame for poor planning or short-sighted profits is pathetic.
This city’s Silver Spring banking failure was part of the same process…all is well as long as no one looks to close at what they are doing.
A little local responsibility is in order!

Posted by: afisher | May 27, 2009, 10:18 am 10:18 am

So the question to ask is this. “How many US tax dollars were spent on Obamas visit to Las Vegas”.
So lets get this straight.. its ok for the government to spend US tax dollars and go to Vegas for a lavish $ 2,400 per seat fund raiser, but it is NOT OK for corporations to go to Las Vegas… see the hypocrisy here… you be the judge the next time you head to the ballot box.

Posted by: concerned | May 27, 2009, 10:22 am 10:22 am

yes please waste my taxpayer money with trips to vegas for whores, drugs, gambling…i want my taxpayer money going to vegas. governor should be able to recoup money from the mob

Posted by: taxpayer | May 27, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am

“They are upset because he called out the CITY OF LAS VEGAS.”
Agreed. Obama has been trained in Alinsky-style oration. Ridicule those who oppose you and their opinions, isolate them and marginalize them. With most of the MSM’s working in tandem with him, this tactic has worked in varying degrees against Clinton, Palin, and Limbaugh.
Unfortunately, this time he marginalized an entire city in the United States. Not such a smooth move.

Posted by: Meh | May 27, 2009, 11:01 am 11:01 am

The problem is with big lavish conferences in general, not with Vegas specifically. Telling the companies to not have their conferences in Las Vegas doesn’t mean they aren’t going to go ahead and reschedule their 400 conferences somewhere else just as expensive. The only thing that was accomplished with this statement was to hurt the Las Vegas economy.

Posted by: AK | May 27, 2009, 11:06 am 11:06 am

This report should have pointed out that Gov. Gibbons is a Republican, Mayor Goodman a Democrat. Their responses to a visit by a Democratic president are hardly surprising.

Posted by: Randolph | May 27, 2009, 11:20 am 11:20 am

oh give me a break people, Obama is entitled to fly to Vegas and this is not any different than what or any president does for their party, but because Obama is always under a microscope, it gives people something to complain about. Don’t call it hypocrisy – the CEOs involved that he was referring to were receiving government bailout money at the time. Republicans are the first to complain about waste of taxpayer dollars (which they rightly should), so it’s a bit disingenuous to complain about a remark the president made about CEOs who are getting taxpayer dollars to take some responsibility and cut down on luxury trips to Vegas. The governor and the silly protesters need to grow up and quit being such babies. People all over the country are tightening their belts.

Posted by: GEM | May 27, 2009, 11:21 am 11:21 am

“You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers’ dime. There’s got to be some accountability and some responsibility.” As a taxpayer I see absolutely nothing wrong with this statement! Have they given consideration that America is in a recession and that may play a part.

Posted by: rickyt1234 | May 27, 2009, 11:38 am 11:38 am

The N. Koreans and Iranians are openly defying Obama with their actions towards increasing their nuclear capabilities. Iran has sent six warships into international waters, a historically unprecedented move. Obama, without any hint of passion, reads words from a teleprompter, votes “present”, and heads off to party in Vegas.
Great priorities, Barry. But not surprising. Great job, Gov. Gibbons!

Posted by: tjp612 | May 27, 2009, 11:59 am 11:59 am

KR
You may be laughing but you are not getting my point.
Your two points are irrelevant.
1. Obama said that you can’t go to vegas on the taxpayers dime. By you attempting to clarify his statement to mean only corps that received bailout, you are saying that Obama would allow others to go to Vegas on the taxpayers dime. Do you see how that is still hypocritical?
2. Bush never said that people should not go to vegas on the taxpayers dime. If Bush had said people should not go to Vegas on the taxpayers dime and went to vegas – he would be a hypocrite too. And I did not call him on it – I would be a hypocrite, HOWEVER, Bush never said it.
BTW – I am against any prez going places to support candidates or party on the taxpayer dime regardless of party. This incident is even worse than that because of Obama’s previous comment.
Do you get it now?

Posted by: Callin' it like it is | May 27, 2009, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm

We are asked to believe that 400 conventions suddenly decided to cancel their Vegas plans because of what Obama said? That is just laughable. It is as ludicrous as it would be if he had said “I think all conventions should be in Washington DC” and then 400 conventions scramble to book hotels in DC. Do you suppose that the ECONOMY TANKING had something to do with the loss of the Vegas conventions?

Posted by: Waterboard All Right-Wing Whack-Jobs | May 27, 2009, 12:06 pm 12:06 pm

“The N. Koreans and Iranians are openly defying Obama with their actions towards increasing their nuclear capabilities. Iran has sent six warships into international waters, a historically unprecedented move”
ROFLMAO!
Unprecendented?
Which right wing talking head are you parroting?
2 weeks ago:
Iranian warships will join an international armada fighting piracy in the waters off the coast of Somalia and the Gulf of Aden.
Piracy off the coast of Somalia has led to attacks on more than 200 ships over the past 15 months. International concerns over the issue have prompted a fleet of warships to attempt to protect merchant ships in one the world’s most important shipping lanes.
Or from December 2008
TEHRAN, Dec. 20 (Xinhua) — An Iranian warship has arrived in the Gulf of Aden in Somalia waters to fight pirates, the semi-official Fars news agency reported on Saturday.
“After traveling some 4,000 maritime miles, an Iranian warship announced our country’s army’s powerful presence in the Gulf of Aden,” the report said, without mentioning the time of arrival.

Posted by: Ryan C | May 27, 2009, 1:08 pm 1:08 pm

“Which right wing talking head are you parroting?”
Well, if you consider an Iranian Navy Admiral a “right wing talking head” then so be it:
(from Reuters 5/25/09)
TEHRAN (Reuters) – Iran has sent six warships to international waters, including the Gulf of Aden, to show its ability to confront any foreign threats, its naval commander said on Monday.
Admiral Habibollah Sayyari, quoted by the ISNA news agency, made the announcement five days after Iran said it test-fired a surface-to-surface missile with a range of 2,000 km (1,200 miles), putting Israel and U.S. bases in the area within reach.
“Iran has dispatched six … warships to international waters and the Gulf of Aden region in an historically UNPRECEDENTED move by the Iranian Navy,” Sayyari told a gathering of armed forces officials, IRNA reported.
Sayyari said that preserving Iran’s territorial integrity in its southern waters called for the “perseverance and firmness” of the navy.
The move to dispatch the warships “is indicative of the country’s high military capability in confronting any foreign threat on the country’s shores,” Sayyari said.
====================
tjp612
aka, “self-described macroeconomics expert” (still burns, doesn’t it?)

Posted by: tjp612 | May 27, 2009, 1:28 pm 1:28 pm

“aka, “self-described macroeconomics expert” (still burns, doesn’t it?)”
You claimed it was unprecedented.
You lied, got nailed on it.
Just like your lies about CAFE got nailed.

Posted by: Ryan C | May 27, 2009, 1:31 pm 1:31 pm

My apologies to tjp, he was just passing along the lies of the Iranian Navy vs his usual schtick for the right wing media.

Posted by: Ryan C | May 27, 2009, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm

“You claimed it was unprecedented.”
An Iranian Admiral is much better positioned to judge the degree of “precedent” than I – I was passing along his observation.
“You lied, got nailed on it.”
No, not so much…
“Just like your lies about CAFE got nailed.”
And what lies would these be? Would you like for me to pull out the cost-benefit analysis again for you? While suspension of reality is convenient when it suits your needs, the numbers do not lie…

Posted by: tjp612 | May 27, 2009, 1:56 pm 1:56 pm

“”While suspension of reality is convenient when it suits your needs, the numbers do not lie.”
Sure they do, when proffered by the dishonest like yoruself.
But tell us again how a 25% reduction in fuel consumption would lead to a net expense in a raising gas tax (which for the Feds is at 18 cents and the only gas tax they control), assuming gas at $2 a gallon (though that is quite an assumption)

Posted by: Ryan C | May 27, 2009, 2:32 pm 2:32 pm

(tjp) “While suspension of reality is convenient when it suits your needs, the numbers do not lie.”
(rc) “Sure they do, when proffered by the dishonest like yoruself.”
Where is the dishonesty? I have no problem with you calling me out, but under what grounds/claims have I been dishonest?
“But tell us again how a 25% reduction in fuel consumption would lead to a net expense in a raising gas tax (which for the Feds is at 18 cents and the only gas tax they control), assuming gas at $2 a gallon (though that is quite an assumption)”
a.) I used your assumption of $2/gal. in analysis
b.) You claimed that the extra cost that would be required to meet increased CAFE standards (I assumed a reasonable – although probably understated – $1,300 per vehicle in my calculations) would be more than offset by the gains in fuel efficiency of 10 mpg. I showed that including additional investment cost and gains in fuel efficiency, the payback period would under most scenarios be beyond five years (except in those scenarios where gas approached $4/gal. or in some scenarios where annual mileage exceeds 12k/year). In many scenarios, the payback exceeds 5 years (in my personal case, ~8 years). Not necessarily a great investment.
If you truly are interested in calling out “lies” and dishonesty, perhaps you should look into the Obama administration’s claim that these more fuel efficient, higher cost vehicles will have a payback of 3 years. I’d be interested in those numbers and the assumptions used to support their claim….

Posted by: tjp612 | May 27, 2009, 2:58 pm 2:58 pm

I wouldn’t say that POTUS’s duplicity is unmatched.. but he’s definitely in on my current top 10 list.
Let’s all have faith that his lack of consistent product…. will come home to roost.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 27, 2009, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm

President Obama was justified saying “COMPANIES WHO RECEIVED FEDERAL FUNDS SHOULD NOT BE USING TAXPAYER DOLLARS FOR CONVENTION, ETC TO LAS VEGAS.
President Obama said nothing aobut companies who did not take federal stimulus money.
Governor Gibbons is just a political jerk. He is using political stand for his own benefit, ignoring actual true facts.

Posted by: Sharon | May 27, 2009, 4:24 pm 4:24 pm

“If you truly are interested in calling out “lies” and dishonesty,”
Speaking of dishonesty, I reference your argument about the gas tax needing to jump significantly to match revenues in the event of a 25% reduction in consumption, you cite vehicle cost.

Posted by: Ryan C | May 27, 2009, 4:30 pm 4:30 pm

How are we going to reduce gasoline consumption with the Chinese driving cars? World oil consumption will most likely skyrocket in the next ten years.

Posted by: DontGet818OnMeNow | May 27, 2009, 4:38 pm 4:38 pm

Posted by: Ryan C | May 27, 2009 4:30:00 PM
Deflection not engaged. Try again.

Posted by: tjp612 | May 27, 2009, 4:38 pm 4:38 pm

Excellent. Obama is a Marxist and is not welcome in the heart of US capitalism i.e Las Vegas…

Posted by: winston | May 27, 2009, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm

Naomi Rhoads,
Agreed — 100%.

Posted by: tanarg | May 28, 2009, 11:38 pm 11:38 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.