How important is Obama's Denmark trip to lobby for Olympics in Chicago?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

In what may be a risky political decision, President Obama is headed to Copenhagen, Denmark this week to lobby to bring the 2016 Summer Olympics to his hometown of Chicago. Still no health care reform. Still no jobs.

But the White House says the president decided health care negotiations are "in a better place now," and they point out that bringing the games to Chicago could help the U.S. economy.

First Lady Michelle Obama will be going to Denmark too. She's vowing to "take no prisoners," and compares the lobbying effort to the presidential campaign. Really?

Leaders from the other three contending countries - Brazil, Spain and Japan - are also expected to make appearances in Copenhagen - but it's a first for a U.S. president.

Here's the problem: President Obama was just talking to world leaders at the G-20 Summit about the importance of doing something to curb global warming. What size carbon footprint does this little field trip to Hans Christian Andersen land leave?

Think about it - for the president to travel overnight to Europe Thursday and return Friday... it will take not one, but two 747 airplanes... plus a military transport plane to haul his bulletproof limo and other vehicles. Then there's staff, Secret Service, VIPs traveling along... not to mention hotels, cars, etc. while in Europe.

All for something that could have been done on a video conference from the White House. Just a thought.

Here’s my question to you: How important is Pres. Obama's trip to Denmark to lobby for the Olympics to come to Chicago?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Chuck writes:
Not at all important to me. Having voted Democrat in the last 3 elections, I'm sensing it's time for a change. Apparently the potential for an nuclear confrontation with Iran, nationwide double digit unemployment, the prospect of the ranks of uninsured maybe doubling or tripling because of Democratic pandering to health insurance companies, and two failing wars are not enough to keep this guy focused. Another self-important politician who has already run his course with me and I suspect a good number like me. 2016 Olympics? I'm not sure the nation will last that long.

Esther from Ohio writes:
Jack, After the beating of that child in Chicago, I wouldn't want the Olympics to come to that city. Sorry, but I would be afraid for the foreigners who come to this country that the punks in that city would attack them and ruin what little of dignity we have left. We have turned our eyes off this for far too long; the crime rate in Chicago is horrible and the children that are running in the streets make me afraid to ever want to visit Chicago again.

Aaron writes:
Exceptionally important. Returning the Olympics to America would hold special meaning for us, in a diplomatic sense, if we could host a worldwide event within our borders and show that we're team players again. And sending our president, one of the most powerful men in the free world, to personally make that appeal says that we're serious about rejoining the rest of the world in the spirit of fellowship. After the last eight years, it's a boost we could really use.

Ken writes:
Think of all the jobs that would be created years ahead of the Olympics. American jobs, you know, building things? How about the billions in tourist dollars spent in America? As far as a carbon footprint, the Olympics create a Sasquatch-sized footprint with all the tourists and athletes that travel for the event. Seeing as these people are going to travel anyway, why not to America?

Mike from Syracuse, New York writes:
How about a 'take no prisoners' approach with Iran and North Korea? What this president seems to consider important baffles the mind. We've lost 3 million jobs since he took office, the commanding general in Afghanistan says he needs 40,000 more troops and he's worried about who gets to sell T-shirts at the Olympics.