Obama Will Accept Nomination at Bank of America Stadium

[WilliamPitt]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/01/17/obama_will_accept_nomination_at_stadium.html



The optics on that will be just lovely.

[sharp_stick]

1. You'd rather he do it

from a smaller venue somewhere? I don't get it... Is it the name on the Stadium that they are renting that bothers you?

[WilliamPitt]

2. BofA, yes.

Just bad optics in my humble O. He's (reportedly) going to campaign on social and income inequalities, and then stand next to a giant sign for one of the worst banks in the world.

[emilyg]

17. +x10

[Capitalocracy]

99. It's true, but like 99% of large venues are now named after some giant evil corporation

so it's kind of hard to escape.

At least it's not Goldman Sachs Stadium.

[onenote]

132. Can we have a hyperbole alert?

I think its safe to say that President Obama is not going to "stand next to a giant sign" for Bank of America. I certainly don't recall such pictures in front of a giant sign saying "Invesco Field" in 2008.

[trof]

148. Yeah. FAIL. Big Time.

[rhett o rick]

23. i agree w you. BoA should get some thing from their campaign bribes. nm

[sharp_stick]

29. They don't though

Bank of America pays the owners of the stadium a fee to put their name on it they don't own the place.

[rhett o rick]

91. Ahhh but they do. You see they dont put their name on the stadium out of civic pride.

They get exposure. And what better exposure than to have the Democrats choose the stadium with their name emblazoned on the outside. Priceless. I can see the corp-media now, combining BoA and Democrats in every sentence.

BoA represents the oligarchy that is strangling our middle class and yet we let them their name on a stadium paid for by We The People for a few pieces of gold.

[kentuck]

95. People should simply ignore it.

It's such a trivial matter. Don't people have better things to do than to criticize the promotion of a big bank that helped to tear our economy down to the ground?

[rhett o rick]

101. Yes, ignore the oligarchy. Be thankful they let us pretend to have

a Constitutional controlled Democratic Republic. Remember if you dont vote you cant complain about the detention centers. God save our Oligarchy.

[arcane1]

3. I wish some other company would buy naming rights before then

it definitely doesn't look good, despite it probably not meaning much.

[gyroscope]

25. I wouldn't call it meaningless

given that half the Obama administration is made up of former banking executives and lobbyists. this just underscores his very close loving relationship with Wall Street.

'Wall Street has their man, and his name is Barack Obama.'
- Michael Moore

[woo me with science]

38. Yup, it's fully appropriate. nt

[trumad]

4. Check out the entrance.

Epic facepalm for sure.

[Major Hogwash]

70. That's majestic!

Are you going? Huh, are ya, are ya?

[trumad]

72. I don't know bugs bunny.

[bigtree]

5. yes

It will be the source of endless analogies for critics of this administration.

Otherwise, it's just a large football stadium. It's where the Panthers play. Large enough to accommodate an Obama-sized crowd.

[rhett o rick]

24. I agree that it is appropriate. It epitomizes our sell-out to the big banks. Why live in denial?nm

[kenny blankenship]

47. Supposedly, along with renaming the stadium they are renaming the Party

(To the victor goes the spoils - 'twas ever thus) Right now, the leading candidate is "the Bankstercrats". Some say that's de trop and over the top. Others are applauding its in your face, where else can you go, and so whattaya gonna do about it? attitude.

[rhett o rick]

82. Oligarchy Blue Party vs. Oligarchy Red Party nm

[bigtree]

52. epitomizes? How does it do that, outside of your factless rhetoric?

It may well create negative 'appearances', but how does acquiring the stadium to accommodate the public in his inauguration 'emphasize' anything other than the innuendo and political opposition of the President's critics?

How do you expect anyone to buy into any of your rhetoric when you raise dishonest analogies like this as something substantive and important?

[Occulus]

69. Symbols are powerful things, bigtree,

and no, you aren't in charge of how those symbols are taken.

You might think it means nothing. To a family whose home has been out-and-out stolen from them by BoA, though.... I think seeing Obama accepting the nomination from there specifically probably will mean something to them.

[Broderick]

73. Excellent point about foreclosure

[rhett o rick]

71. How is it "dishonest"? BoA is the epitomy of Wall Street and Congressional

corruption. IMO this stadium/church is a monument to BoA and corruption. But apparently there are no We The People venues.

I am curious if you recognize that we are in a class war and We The People are losing badly.

[LanternWaste]

48. And it will the source of endless rationalizations from the gallery, too

"It will be the source of endless analogies for critics of this administration...."

And it will the source of endless rationalizations from the gallery, too. Six of one, half a dozen of the other...

[bigtree]

56. but, I'll eventually stop talking about it

outside of critics of the President, who's really going to be impressed by this vacuous attempt to make it look like there was something dishonest, unethical, or illegal about the administration's association with BOA? All critics have on this is innuendo and plain bull. That handful of nothing will eventually earn their complaints a spot beside all of the rest of their nonfactual criticisms. Impressive.

[LanternWaste]

61. I imagine everyone will stop discussing it sooner or later

I imagine everyone will stop discussing it sooner or later, regardless of whether it complies with your own personal schedule or no...


However, I'm fairly certain we will all of us rationalize and justify our own schedules of when we believe it's appropriate to discuss, regardless of what side of the fence we sit on.

[JDPriestly]

114. Accepting the nomination in that location is not immoral.

It's just plain stupid.

How many, many homes has BofA taken by foreclosure?

The sign on the front of that stadium or auditorium is a stinging reminder to those who placed their hope in Obama and were foreclosed that Obama depends, like the stadium, on corporate approval for everything he does.

It's a public relations error of huge proportions.

[99Forever]

6. The symbolism won't be let slide.

What are his PR people (not) thinking?

[whathehell]

12. Precisely...

WTF?....That's SUCH a stupid choice.

[hlthe2b]

7. Exactly...

though I doubt if there is a great deal of venue choice in Charlotte if he wants that large a capacity. But, "Bank of America" geebus.

At least the old "Mile High" has finally changed from Invesco Field at Mile High to Sports Authority. If we have to deal with the rampant corporatism in sports, at least that's better.

Bad optics, indeed.

[joeybee12]

8. Obama got bad reviews for his overblown acceptance locale in denver....

This will not help...the learning curve doesn't appear to exist.

[jefferson_dem]

33. Yeah! I remember Hannity was screaming for a month about those "Greek Columns."

Mustn't offend him!

[JoePhilly]

110. +1

[frazzled]

9. Well, he can either keep it closed to a smallish group of delegates ...

or, like last time, open it up to the public ... to make it more democratic (small d). That the naming rights to the stadium venue in Charlotte were unfortunately bought by BoA is not Obama's fault, really. Almost every stadium or arena in the country has a creepy corporate name these days. Hopefully, the Party will make sure that the name does not become advertising. I think the optics will only be bad if there's a big sign behind him. And that would be bad.

[Cali_Democrat]

10. oh my...

[EFerrari]

11. Good grief.

[Fumesucker]

13. Truth in advertising..

I for one welcome our new corporate overlords.

[bpj62]

14. Formerly known as Errikson Stadium

Very few stadiums/arenas have the cities name on the arena. The city of Charlotte was picked a few years ago because North Carolina is going to be a battleground state this year. Do you want them to hold the nomination in the Charlotte Arena which may also have a corporate sponsor. Somethings are just not worth getting worked up over. As for the optics most of the views will be from the inside of the stadium and all of the BOA advertising will be covered up with the traditional red, white and blue bunting that appears at all of the conventions. Charlotte is the home of BOA and the city owns the stadium not BOA. I am more concerned with what he says then where he says it.

[WilliamPitt]

15. Looks like I'm not the only one concerned.

"However, the choice of Bank of America stadium for the speech may give ammunition to critics of the bank, which received a federal bailout after the 2008 financial crisis and also angered consumers with a proposed, though later dropped, $5 monthly debit-card transaction fee."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/01/17/136087/obama-to-speak-at-bank-of-america.html#storylink=cpy

[bigtree]

22. that doesn't seem like much concern

Two sentences . . . one about their bailout, and the other about the fee they backed off of after public pressure. Of course, they mentioned that the association might be controversial among critics.

Isn't that the nub of it? The association will be hyped by folks (mostly columnists) looking to knock the president down a peg. It's hard to find a football stadium without a corporate sponsor. If it's just about symbolism, I think the party and President can survive it alright. If there's something deeper that's unethical, or illegal about the arrangement that would be another matter. As it looks right now, I'm not sure if this is something that most Americans (outside of circles like our politically-immersed community) will notice or care about.

[bvar22]

81. Right.

"Its ONLY One Prayer."

[jefferson_dem]

30. Wow. Thas certainly does reflect great concern.

Oh...

"It doesn't matter whose name is on the stadium," one of the party sources said. "President Obama has a record to run on holding Wall Street accountable, and there will be no doubt which candidate in the race is willing to stand up to Wall Street."

[WI_DEM]

51. And it's bullshit if the president of the United States can't use a football stadium

to allow many people to attend his acceptance speech rather than a few thousand party hacks and delegates. This is just pushing a manufactured line of attack against the president.

[Mr.Liberty]

80. What?

A manufactured line of attack? The President giving his acceptance speech in a stadium representing everything wrong with this country doesn't strike you as being awkward? Now in the larger scheme of things this is nothing to get upset about. But the imagery isn't becoming.

[sad sally]

136. This will just mean that those wall street bankers will have to pony up a bit more campaign cash.

Remember B of A's Moynihan was regular visitor at the WH during 2010. A person Valerie Jarrett said was “... willing to come to Washington and roll up his sleeves and work on the issue.”

The Obama administration has found a banker it can do business with: Bank of America Corp.’s Brian Moynihan.

While many U.S. banks’ chief executive officers publicly oppose at least some elements of President Barack Obama’s plan for financial regulation, Moynihan, 50, is winning White House praise for his stance. He backs a consumer financial protection agency, addresses shortcomings the administration finds with his bank’s home-loan modification program, and pursues small- business initiatives in collaboration with the White House, Bloomberg Businessweek reports in its May 17 issue.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-05-13/moynihan-becomes-obama-s-top-wall-street-ally-on-financial-rules-overhaul.html?xid=huffbl?du

“Despite his rhetorical attacks on Wall Street, a study by the Sunlight Foundation’s Influence Project shows that President Barack Obama has received more money from Wall Street than any other politician over the past 20 years, including former President George W. Bush. In 2008, Wall Street’s largesse accounted for 20 percent of Obama’s total take, according to Reuters… An examination of the numbers shows that Obama took in $421,242 in campaign contributions in 2008 from Bank of America’s executives, PACs and employees, which exceeded its prior record contribution of $329,761 to President George W. Bush in 2004… When asked by The Daily Caller to comment about President Obama’s credibility when it comes to criticizing Wall Street, the White House declined to reply.” Of course they did. What could they possibly say? “It doesn’t count when we get in bed with the evil bankers, because HEY LOOK OVER THERE!!!”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/10/thedc-morning-obama-bites-the-banks-that-feed-him/#ixzz1jkzV6Blg ?du

[dembotoz]

16. any other options???

do not know the area
and my relationship with the obama bunch sort of precluldes my being a delegate..... and how
so i sure as hell ain't gonna get an invite.....


but damn
just damn

[Charlemagne]

65. Other options

Obama is big on education, right? Well, why not have it at a stadium of one of the many fine NC universities. It would be smaller, yes, but still big enough to get the point across. Plus we wouldnt have to worry about the name (which will be a cannon fodder for the conservatives), and he can highlight academics.

BoA Stadium seats 73k
UNCs stadium (same town) seats 63k
NC State Football stadium seats 58k
Duke Stadium 53K

The rest are much smaller. But UNC is only 10k smaller than BoA. What a win-win that would be.

[GoCubsGo]

102. Those university stadiums are 150 miles or more from Charlotte.

Are they supposed to load up all those thousands of convention-goers into busses and truck them all to Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill?

[T S Justly]

18. That's just perfect. K&R (nt)

[MinervaX]

19. That Barack, he's a real man of the people

NOT!

[Broderick]

20. Just a slight thumb in the eye to OWS, IMO. n/t

[pintobean]

135. The DNC will occupy BOA

It's all in the spin.

[MinervaX]

21. President Barack Obama presented by Bank of America

[jefferson_dem]

26. Excellent choice.

Unless you have another venue in mind, that would allow more "regular folks" to be a part of the event.

A clue: Nobody (other than a teeny tiny handful of serial complainers) cares about then name of the venue.

And this:

"Meantime, Democratic Party officials said the convention, initially slated for four days as in past years, will hold formal convention events on just three of the days to allow one day for organizing and canvassing in North Carolina, a battleground state that Obama carried in 2008 by 14,000 votes over Republican nominee John McCain."

[MinervaX]

27. Hey! How about he just accepts the nom at the convention center.

[WI_DEM]

31. then a lot of people will be excluded. A few thousand vs. 70-100,000 people--that's why.

[joeybee12]

32. That's the way it's always been up until 2008....

Then Obama went all Greek with it.

[jefferson_dem]

36. Are we seriously debating Greek columns on DU?

Facepalm indeed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6779524

[joeybee12]

54. We're debating lack of common sense

It was a blunder in 2008, gonna be a blunder again.

[jefferson_dem]

59. A blunder...in your mind.

You do realize the Obama campaign went on to field one of the strongest, most deft, campaigns ever... and on November 4, 2008, he collected more votes than any candidate in US history, right?

[AtomicKitten]

75. It's low-hanging fruit. They can't resist the cheap shot.

[jefferson_dem]

85. Yeah...

Let 'em complain about (of all things) the name of the venue.

I will be in Charlotte for the DNC. Certainly, this gives me a better shot of being there to witness democracy in action. I'll post pictures.

[AtomicKitten]

89. Looking forward to it.

[trof]

149. Well, there were more of us than ever before.

[jefferson_dem]

161. If by "us" you mean Obama voters... then...

you got it. Gold star!

[WI_DEM]

42. Actually you are wrong--JFK accepted his nomination in a stadium as did FDR in 1936

at Franklin Field.

[frylock]

39. so?

why the desire to fill stadiums?

[MinervaX]

41. Certainly to appease the cult of personality.

[jefferson_dem]

45. So Democrats who support Obama are part of a "cult"?

Hmmm...

[Cali_Democrat]

134. "cult of personality" wikipedia definition:

A cult of personality arises when an individual uses mass media, propaganda, or other methods, to create an idealized and heroic public image, often through unquestioning flattery and praise.[1] Cults of personality are usually associated with dictatorships. Sociologist Max Weber developed a tripartite classification of authority; the cult of personality holds parallels with what Weber defined as "charismatic authority". A cult of personality is similar to hero worship, except that it is established by mass media and propaganda.

Read more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality

[Summer Hathaway]

140. No, "cult of personality"

Like when people on message boards yell, "Michael Moore for President! Cenk Uygur for President! Matt Damon for President!", because they are enthralled (momentarily) with someone's personality, rather than their experience, competence, or ability to, in this case, govern a nation.

I say "momentarily" because these "perfect presidents" change every couple of weeks. Just ask the "Andrew Cuomo for President!" crowd - don't see many of them around much anymore.

[WI_DEM]

46. typical simplistic response. Is that why FDR in 1936 and JFK in 1960 gave their acceptance speeches

in stadiums too? or is it just Obama?

[joeybee12]

55. Two examples...very good...certainly shows this was the norm

and not the exception.

And people wonder why a disaster like Romney is even close.

[WI_DEM]

44. to allow more people to come

can't you even understand that?

[frylock]

84. and i ask again, so?

oh noes! i can't see the preznant!!1 life goes on.

[frylock]

174. bet there will be a whole bunch of them there "regular folks" up in them million dollar luxury boxes

what do you think?

[jefferson_dem]

176. 70,000+ luxury boxes! Oh...the outrage...

What's Obama's problem? And what's wrong with Zuccotti Park?! That would've been a perfect venue!

[frylock]

180. million-dollar luxury boxes..

makes ya proud, don't it? just reg'lar folk.

[jefferson_dem]

181. September 5 will be a site to behold.

70,000 Bank of America banksters celebrating at the Bank of America Stadium, each with his own specially-constructed luxury box.

[WI_DEM]

28. Sorry, but Obama didn't name the stadium and he needs a large venure for the crowds he will pull

that is just the way it is. Look at all these football and baseball stadiums--most of them have corporate names.

[Charlemagne]

66. But he chose to have it there

Not all have corporate names....

Kenan Memorial Stadium at the University of North Carolina.

Capacity: 63k, just 10k less than BoA.

[treestar]

104. Exactly! I hate it and prefer the old stadium names

And don't like they way they are now named after banks. But many of them are.

[librechik]

34. at least now we know what it takes to make a black man president n/t

[MinervaX]

35. Yeah, a large propaganda apparatus and a sell out.

[jefferson_dem]

37. Hey There, Welcome to DU!

[Number23]

139. What does this post mean?

[surfdog]

40. you're OP is a total face palm failure

Dick Durbin informed us all that the bank's own the Senate , but you're worried about Bank of America owning a stadium ?

let's be honest now

The president works with the Senate nearly every day but giving one speech in the Bank of America Stadium bothers you ?

[Broderick]

43. Not necessarily a huge deal

but on the surface it appears good campaign fodder for the opposition and to me it is a smack in the face to OWS. I am not sure where it "helps". Just my two cents.

[surfdog]

57. Good optics?

It's not as if BOA will be painted on his podium

[Broderick]

60. I will see how it plays out I guess

There will be plenty of free advertising for them as you look at pics of the stadium, and I will see what the press does with it.

[WI_DEM]

49. A lot of people in this thread are making too big a deal out of this and pointing to this

as further proof that Obama is a corporate sell out or he's doing it because of what a huge crowd will do to build up his ego. Of course they don't understand history and Obama isn't the first president to use a stadium setting, as some assume. FDR did in 1936 and so did JFK. As for the reason he is giving an outdoor speech in a stadium that can fill up to many thousands--that should be obvious. NC is a key state and the more people who come the better it is. What a demonstration of strength it would be for Obama to fill the 70,000 person stadium and have several more thousand outside. As for the name--yes, that is unfortunate, but what can Obama do about it? He needs a big venue (like Denver in '08) and this is the choice. Most other stadiums these days, too, have corporate names.

[Octafish]

170. FDR and JFK fought for the little guy against Wall Street.

So far, Obama not so much.

#OWS Interview: Prosecute the Wall Street Mafia! Bill Black, Dylan Ratigan & David DeGraw on the Destruction of the Rule of Law

[justiceischeap]

50. Does Philly still have the FU center?

Just askin'?

[varelse]

53. I'm a little embarrassed to admit

that I did not 'get' your problem with this venue (even with BOA in your thread title) until I saw the picture of the stadium.

[Horse with no Name]

58. Fitting. n/t

[kentuck]

62. The Party of the People...

will unleash the lions at halftime upon the helpless Christians and the audience will roar with approval.

At the very least, deaf and blind to the appearance of such a spectacle.

Bank of America? Democrats? Bailouts? Bonuses? Foreclosures?

Let us gather and celebrate the spoils of their war upon us...

[Broderick]

63. Sigh here

I mean on the surface your post is how some will write it perhaps. I hope not, but fodder fills cannons at times.

[Major Hogwash]

68. Mitch McConnell said that he wants to put a fence across the Cumberland gap now . . .

to keep out all of the foreigners.

[spanone]

64. silly silly silly

[Huey P. Long]

67. I guess if Goldman Sachs doesn't have a stadium, you go to BoA!

[Broderick]

74. lol

point made very well

[kenny blankenship]

78. The graphic identity of BOA and OBAMA appears to come from the same hand

for some mysterious reason, which I'm sure is inexplicable!

Their eventual merger looks to have been intended and inevitable.

[Wait Wut]

76. Holy Moly. In

I wonder where his underwear is made. He's going to Disney World. A capitalist mecca aimed at brainwashing children. I hear he likes dogs better than cats.

OMG...he's accepting the nomination at BofA from real BofA execs...except he's not. Maybe we should boycott the Panthers. In fact, we should boycott all sports teams that play in any stadium sponsored by a bank or large corporation.

There are a lot of things you are welcome to criticize, and will, but this is an enormous stretch.

[kentuck]

79. Politically speaking...

It is about the same as if Mitt Romney accepted his nomination at the Mormon Tabernacle. Nothing wrong with it but it looks like crap.

[Fumesucker]

83. Except I doubt dog-on-car would want his connection to Mormonism so blatantly displayed...

[kentuck]

86. You're absolutely right!

Because of the appearance, more than anything else. Romney wouldn't want his presidency tied so closely to the Mormon Church and President Obama should not want his presidency tied so closely to the big banks. But those are appearances that are not easy to paint over. Are we to believe there were no other options??

[Wait Wut]

92. Then he should have it at Soldier Field.

Chicago, the Bears, working class, underdogs, fresh air.

This is a non-issue. Plenty of real issues to be more concerned about than the Panthers stadium, which is what it really is. They just can't afford to put their name on it.

[Renew Deal]

77. Still better than Fenway

[CrispyQ]

87. BOA is a particularly odious selection by the administration.

It's time for a national dialog on why our stadiums & parks are all named after corporations, instead of notable human beings, like in the past.

Oops, my bad. Corporations are people too, don't 'cha know.

[GoCubsGo]

112. Fenway is only one of two stadiums that I can think of not named after corporations.

Madison Square Gardens being the other. And, maybe Wrigley Field, which was named after the owner of a corporation, rather than the corporation itself. That's not counting college stadiums, many of whom are named after wealthy donors. That's why I think this is much ado about nothing.

And, yes, I agree that it's time to discuss why our stadiums and parks are named after corporations, and not after the taxpayers who are stuck with footing the bills to build them.

[Telly Savalas]

171. Arrowhead, Lambeau

[1stlady]

88. Sigh!

I swear folks have to find the damnedest irrelevant things to complain about. Some liberals were so used to doing nothing but complain and protest during the Bush years and now that is all they know. Even when the country is moving in a better direction, under a great president, they still have to scower the net to find something to moan about. Piss and moan, piss and moan, it must be a miserable life to lead.

[kentuck]

90. Don't look!

The emperor has no clothes.

[Wait Wut]

94. + a heavy sigh.

Oh, and Happy Birthday 1st Lady! Yep, you reminded me.

[FrenchieCat]

93. Do folks not go to football and baseball games in NC,

because of the names of the ballpark???? Or do they refuse to watch them on Television?
Does anyone here attend games in ballpark linked to names of corporations they don't like?

Here in San Francisco, it's the AT&T Park. Should folks just not go?

Do these extremes really help us, or do they just making some of us look extreme in seeing everything in terms of symbolistic nonsense. Cause those who this really bother, should be much more be bothered with Romney handing $50.00 to a Woman stating she's desperate. To me, that's personal....but the name of a ballpark? Not so much.

[kentuck]

97. I can't believe you would compare going to a baseball game....

with choosing the political leadership of this country. It is not the same.

[FrenchieCat]

103. At the end of the day......

its someone like you that would find both of these activities to be "games",
and most likely you would pronounce them both "rigged" at that!....

We have already chosen the Democratic political leader far as I'm concerned....
so what we are talking about is simply a venue, and you know it......

But go ahead and get all dramatic with your "I can't believe you would..." bullshit.

I suggest you be as incensed as possible, cause you do that well anyways.

[kentuck]

124. It is you...

that is the blind one.

[SammyWinstonJack]

168. +1000. nt

[treestar]

107. The issue is the name of the stadium

And these are the things that occur in stadiums.

The fact they are now named after banks may be lamentable, but the DNC can hardly put a stop to it singlehandedly. It's just life in this century.

[JDPriestly]

121. FrenchieCat, it isn't a question about it being a stadium.

The problem is that the words Bank of America are placed prominently on the front of the entrance to the place.

That is a public relations faux pas on the parts of the DNC and the Obama campaign.

Democrats have taken their money out of the BofA and transferred accounts to credit unions to protest the heavy-handedness and greed of the banks.

The DNC and the Obama campaign are sending a horrible message with this pick. Appearances do matter especially in presidential campaigns.

The speech will be the brunt of jokes across the country.

I thought you were more knowledgeable about public relations than not to see the problem.

[Broderick]

96. If Romney was accepting the nomination at BOA Park

I think this place would be hopping on it and promoting it as a "see what Republican's stand for and stand with". The most odious company, or one of them, in America. OWS would have a cow and be protesting.

I suspect it will be the same said from the other side.

To be determined.

[Rex]

98. Either they 'don't get it' or just don't give a shit.

I haven't figured out which one yet.

[kentuck]

100. I hate to think it might be the latter...

:sigh:

[Rex]

131. Same here.

I really do believe it is 'they don't get it' and the reason is the D.C.Bubble that makes perfectly sensible people believe that middle class is $250,000 dollars on average per family. That criminal corporations like BoA and BOP will clean and police themselves, to have faith.

Really I believe it is their 'faith' in the system that will be our downfall, if we have one.

[Huey P. Long]

133. If they 'got it', OWS would not even exist. -eom

[SammyWinstonJack]

169. I think it's obvious. It's the latter and so 'in your face' puke inducing.

[quinnox]

105. The symbolism is not by accident

I don't think this was chosen by accident, and its not a good sign. Instead of "man of the people", it seems it has become man of the corporations.

The defenses offered so far by apologists are pretty dense and pathetic sounding in my humble opinion. Do they really not see any problem with this, even of the appearance it gives? wow, talk about wearing blinders.

[Broderick]

106. My head might get real heavy

lugging those things (blinders) around all day. Just sayin.

[JoePhilly]

108. Obama Bad Obama Bad Obama Bad

And another manufactured outrage widget hits the shop floor.

Maybe Obama should hold it in a phone booth.

[Wait Wut]

119. "Maybe Obama should hold it in a phone booth. "

Are you saying you think he's Superman? Maybe he should have it in a manger, since you probably think he's the Messiah, too.

Now that I think about it, Panther stadium...he's black...OMG!!! He's a Black Panther!!!!


Do I need...yeah, I better for all above statements.

[Summer Hathaway]

155. And who owns that phone booth?

Wouldn't that be a clear example of Obama being bought and owned by the telecommunications industry?

I'd like to discuss this further, but I'm afraid I'll miss the next manufactured outrage widget. They come so fast and furious these days, it's hard to keep up - especially when you're trying to negotiate the shop floor without stepping on the ones that were dropped in the last twenty-four hours.

[JDPriestly]

109. What idiot agreed with this?

Thousands if not hundreds of thousands of Democrats have removed their money from Bank of America, and now the fools in the DNC . . . . .

I cannot believe how stupid this is.

What kind of message are they trying to send to the people whose homes have been foreclosed by BofA?

So, BofA did not have the money to take a little loss on your mortgage so you could stay in your home and keep your family together, but they did have enough money to build a stadium?

Insensitive, awkward, crude, mean, foolish. There is nothing good to say about this.

Please tell me this report is not true.

[rudycantfail]

111. That's the kind of President he is. n/t

[Broderick]

116. Welcome to du

[rudycantfail]

128. Thank you.

[Codeine]

157. Yep. He's the kind that can fill a fucking stadium.

Haters gonna hate.

[frylock]

175. and filling stadiums, that's what's important, right?

[zorahopkins]

113. Charlotte Must Certainly Have A Park

Charlotte is a large city, and my guess is that it must have a park somewhere large enough to accommodate all the people who want to be there in person when President Obama accepts the nomination.

Why would anyone advise President Obama to accept his nomination in a place named for a huge evil corporation??

[GoCubsGo]

117. No. They don't.

[yellowcanine]

115. And so what would be the politically correct alternative? Hold it somewhere where many fewer

people could participate, just to avoid a bad photo shot and a bunch of people ranting on-line? I don't get the thinking, I really don't.

[mike_c]

118. wall street owns him, so why not...?

I agree, it sends a terrible message, but not necessarily an incorrect one.

[quinnox]

123. thats the scary part

I think this was a very deliberate choice by the "team", they aren't stupid and its no accident.

[Whisp]

120. lol

maybe there's a Hooters free for the occasion.

good grief.

[Wait Wut]

122. OHSHIT!

You just made me bite my tongue!

[Quantess]

125. Is anyone actually surprised?

Obama is a corporate suck-up, just like 90% of all of our politicians.

[ecstatic]

129. So is everyone who goes to that stadium a corporate sellout?

Football fans, etc?

[Quantess]

130. No. Fans can't do much about it, can they.

But the Obama Admin can choose how many corporate dicks they fellate.

Candlestick Park is now ...darn it I can't remember, is it PacBell Park? Pretty widespread epidemic.
It's not a huge deal, but it's a faux pas that the Obama administration probably should have avoided.

[Whisp]

138. not surprised at all this same shittalk is still going on here

all in the name of just simply being Anti-Obama

Hey, I wonder how those brave and hard working Wisconsinites did Their thing, re: the sigs needed for Walker's recall. Did they just piss and moan and lie back on there laz-y-boys with their embedded keyboards and point at others that they are silly to work for this corporate system, that there's no difference between a Democrat and Scott Walker.

yeh, bet that's how they 'got'er done'.

[Quantess]

142. I'm absolutely NOT anti-Obama. I think you have a lot of nerve

to be complaining when someone doesn't love Obama enough. Of course I'm going to vote for him! But you're not happy unless every democrat is singing his praisies and acting as though he's flawless. Sure, let's all pretend like Obama hasn't done anything to deserve some serious criticism.

Goddamnit, I better be careful and not write something really rude like I want to, so as to not get my post deleted.

[font size=3]I AM GOING TO VOTE FOR OBAMA! WHAT ELSE DO YOU WANT FROM ME?!

[Whisp]

146. lol. not anti-Obama...

would hate to see it if you were!

but you just carry on like a good trooper. don't let me upset you so

[Whisp]

151. oh, my mistake I guess you didn't write this:

Is anyone actually surprised?

Obama is a corporate suck-up, just like 90% of all of our politicians.

must be a glitch.

[Quantess]

154. Yes, of course I wrote that. I stand by it. It's pretty obvious to everyone I wrote that, silly.

Is that all you've got as a response? Weak.

Look, never mind. I see this is a waste of my time. Looks like the pig I'm fighting with is having fun while I'm getting covered in mud.

Goodbye.

[jefferson_dem]

164. Opening up the convention to more "regular folks" absolutely reeks of corporate suck up!

[frylock]

177. more "regular folks" to fill those million-dollar luxury boxes

[zorahopkins]

126. Freedom Park in Charlotte Must Be Unavailable That Evening??

A quick google of "Parks in Charlotte" revealed that there is a Freedom Park in Charlotte.

Freedom Park must not be available the evening the President wishes to accept the nomination.

That, or the President's advisors really are tone-deaf to the problems caused by Big Banks.

[kenny blankenship]

137. Really? Freedom Park?

"Freedom Park" - and you're comfortable with the overtones of that?

[cliffordu]

166. LOL....

[ecstatic]

127. An ironic name choice, but that should be where the time thinking about this ends

It's very petty to think about this for more than 5 seconds, IMO. It was the largest venue available. If I lived in Charlotte, I would definitely go, so I imagine the stadium will be packed. Hell, I still might go. Charlotte isn't that far from me.

[WillyT]

141. And If He Wins... He Can Be Sworn-In In Front Of The Exxon/Mobile Capitol Building, By The Chief...

Justice of the Wal-Mart Supreme Court, and have a lovely reception at the Goldman Sachs White House!!!





Every time it starts to look like they might know what they are doing...







& Rec !!!

[Major Hogwash]

159. Oh, he'll win. There's no doubt about that anymore.

I guess you didn't know, so I'm breaking it easy to you.

[WillyT]

160. Well... If He Loses To Any Of These GOP Morons... All HOPE Is Truly Gone, No ???

[frylock]

178. dude! you're ruining it for the folks that want to use the spectre of ron paul..

as our president!

[Summer Hathaway]

143. I'm so glad I found this thread

because this is really, really, really important stuff.

Just shows to go ya nothing is ever too trivial to be outraged about. For some.

I just wanted to weigh-in on this topic before it's replaced by the next outrage-de-jour - which should be along in ten, nine, eight, seven ...

[cherokeeprogressive]

144. Maybe he can share the stage with Jeff Zients... Former BAIN employee and OMB Director.

"Jeffrey Zients will serve as President Obama's new acting director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), but the president's decision might undercut attacks on Republican Mitt Romney's career as a venture capitalist, because Zients and Romney are both alumni of Bain & Company."

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/new-obama-omb-director-bain-alum/317976

"He graduated in 1984 from St. Albans School and earned a bachelor's of science degree at Duke University summa cum laude. Zients worked in management consulting for Mercer Management Consulting and Bain & Company and then was chief operating officer of DGB Enterprises, a holding company for the Advisory Board Company, Corporate Executive Board, and Atlantic Media Company."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Zients#Early_years

Liars, cheats, and thieves... ALL 537 of them.

[DCBob]

145. Much ado about nothing..

Nearly every major stadium in the US has an ugly corporate name. Get over it.

[joshcryer]

152. EverBank Field, Metlife Stadium, FedExField, SunLife Stadium, M&T Bank Stadium, CenturyLink Field...

...Heinz Field (LOL), Lucas Oil Stadium, Jones AT&T Stadium, Boone Pickens Stadium (his name is marketable), Papa John's Cardinal Stadium, TCF Bank Stadium, Safeco Field, Busch Stadium, Citizens Bank Park, Progressive Field (heh), Petco Park, Citi Field, Comerica Park, AT&T Park, Minute Maid Park, U.S. Cellular Field, Target Field, ok I got to afk. The list goes on and on.

I'd say approximately 20% of all these stadiums are corporate named. The bigger the stadium, the more likely a corporation is behind it.

[DCBob]

156. I wonder if the poster would have been happy with "Progressive Field"..

[joshcryer]

147. I'm glad he picked Mile High, almost 100k people were there.

It was pretty epic.

The Vault seems like the only place where people can go in large numbers, have proper security, and seating.

[magical thyme]

153. perfectly appropriate

The homeless people probably can't register to vote anyway, what, with no real address.

Just shows he's a man of the real people.

[jefferson_dem]

162. AND...

my back lawn still needs raking...this morning's dishes are still in the sink, and it's raining in Atlanta!

That OBAMER... Some "man of the people"! Pffft...

[Codeine]

158. Y'all cry about some silly shit sometimes.

Stadiums are expensive. Money is raised for the construction and upkeep by selling the naming rights. Who gives a shit what corporation wasted its cash buying the right to plaster their name on the entrance?

I don't like big box hardware stores, but I don't piss and moan about watching my favorite sports team play at the Home Depot Center. It's a fucking name, and it is utterly without consequence or significance for a normal person.

[joshcryer]

165. Looks like the naming rights are bought after the fact, some stadiums, decades old...

...getting the naming rights. It probably helps the upkeep of the stadium, install improved screens, stuff like that. It at the minimum helps lower ticket costs for the working class, and yes, even poor people who can get a $15-20 ticket. It's just one of those corporate overlord things people, the fans in particular, deal with and accept. They don't even call it Bank of America Stadium, the fans call it "The Vault." A play on the fact that a bank took the name (it wasn't originally called that), but in many ways wiping away any banker connotations.

[Summer Hathaway]

173. "for a normal person" n/t

[cliffordu]

163. Epic fail OP.

Just another in a long line.....

[stockholmer]

167. he's just making sure that one of his true bosses' names gets a little airtime,nothing wrong w/ that

[Riftaxe]

172. Strangely Apropos

[downwardly_mobile]

179. Two other issues. What if it rains? That won't make for good "optics."

And one does have to consider the strong possibility that OWS disruptors will likely be able to get into the audience to try to cause a scene: we already know they're planning to be in Charlotte in force. Chicago '68 - never again!

[Fumesucker]

182. Oh, I'm sure there is a robust security plan to deal with the 99%..

No doubt there will be free speech zones conveniently located in Gastonia and Winston Salem.

[joshcryer]

183. He would love OWS in there.

It would be epic.

[donheld]

184. indeed