Obama Has Fibbed About NAFTA - Political Forum

SamInTheSouth · #1 (**permalink**) 03-03-2008, 07:48 PM

Quote:

SAN ANTONIO - Barack Obama said Monday that his campaign never gave Canada back-channel assurances that his harsh words about the North American Free Trade Agreement were for political show — despite the disclosure of a Canadian memo indicating otherwise.

According to the memo obtained by The Associated Press, Obama's senior economic adviser told Canadian officials in Chicago that the debate over free trade in the Democratic presidential primary campaign was "political positioning" and that Obama was not really protectionist.

Associated Press

Well the unions aren't going to take kindly to that.

Quote:

The memo says: "Noting anxiety among many U.S. domestic audiences about the U.S. economic outlook, Goolsbee candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign."

It went on: "He cautioned that this messaging should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

So in other words, Obama lied to his audience in order to get their vote. Well that sounds like every other politician. And here I thought Obama was all about change.

sicarri · #2 (**permalink**) 03-03-2008, 09:03 PM

He lied because his fat cat special interest supporters and financiers want to bring about the North American Union.

Freedom Rider · #3 (**permalink**) 03-03-2008, 09:19 PM

Evidently this is a case of the Canadian Conservative party playing dirty politics. Today Jack Layton, the head of Canada's New Democratic Party, strongly accused Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative Party, which currently runs the Canadian government, of trying to sabotage Obama's campaign with this leaked memo.

Keep in mind that the memo was not written by Obama or anyone on his staff - it was written by Joseph DeMora, who works for the Canadian Consulate in Chicago, and is most likely a member of Canada's Conservative Party.

Goolsbee. Obama's economic advisor, says that he was severely misquoted by DeMora, and that DeMora put a lot of his own spin on what Goolsbee actually said.

One Canadian officials summed it up this way:
"The Harper government is so ideological and so tied to the Republicans that they will use any opportunity to throw a wrench into the Obama campaign,"

Read the whole story at
Liberals accuse Tories of undermining Obama with leak on NAFTA talks

francois60 · #4 (**permalink**) 03-04-2008, 01:22 AM

Trouble is, the Obama campaign didn't come clean from the start. The Harper government is looking a lot more credible here.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · #5 (**permalink**) 03-04-2008, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sicarri

He lied because his fat cat special interest supporters and financiers want to bring about the North American Union.

Yeah sure, he did. The Ron Paul camp already failed in its Larry Sinclair smear. Don't you guys have better things to discuss at the Stormfront forum?

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · #6 (**permalink**) 03-04-2008, 02:19 AM

I think that the consulate that the Obama advisor put in his own interpretation of what that adviser said. National leaders tend to think in very crude realpolitik terms, and that's how he read the comments of the Obama adviser. That doesn't mean that's what the adviser actually said. The adviser probably was saying that NAFTA is unfair but Obama isn't totally protectionist.

This does do considerable damage to Obama though. Hillary has been looking for any brick in the street to hit Obama over the head with and this is a pretty big one. She's played the race card, the fear card, the Muslim card.....her campaign has been called the "kitchen sink" strategy, throwing everything she can at Obama. Some of it will stick, and it will probably be used again by the Republicans in the general election.

Hillary is starting to hurt Obama in the primary and the general election now.

SamInTheSouth · #7 (**permalink**) 03-04-2008, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by W.E.B. Du Bois

I think that the consulate that the Obama advisor put in his own interpretation of what that adviser said. National leaders tend to think in very crude realpolitik terms, and that's how he read the comments of the Obama adviser. That doesn't mean that's what the adviser actually said. The adviser probably was saying that NAFTA is unfair but Obama isn't totally protectionist.

This does do considerable damage to Obama though. Hillary has been looking for any brick in the street to hit Obama over the head with and this is a pretty big one. She's played the race card, the fear card, the Muslim card.....her campaign has been called the "kitchen sink" strategy, throwing everything she can at Obama. Some of it will stick, and it will probably be used again by the Republicans in the general election.

Hillary is starting to hurt Obama in the primary and the general election now.

If this truly is a misrepresentation and nothing more than dirty politics (which I'll be more than willing to concede if that's the case), it makes you wonder if this was timed to purposely come out right before the Ohio primary.

francois60 · #8 (**permalink**) 03-04-2008, 03:22 PM

How so? Harper has already shown himself to be very shady on several issues.

Obama said there was no meeting. There was. In this case, Harper has not been caught in any lies. Obama has. Who is more credible?

Hillary is starting to hurt Obama in the primary and the general election now

Obama hurt himself with this one, although Hillary has no credibility on NAFTA. She's pandering big time. And hurting our relations with our allies with the protectionist talk.

Nightstalker · #9 (**permalink**) 03-04-2008, 04:28 PM

This is an example of typical old time political combat. You wait until the last minute and dump something to the press that will 'look bad' about your opponent in order to muddy the waters. The facts are that Obama has said that he did not know about the meeting when he said there had not been one, the staffer was acting as almost a free agent and Obama shoud not be held responsible for his untoward comments even if he made them, and the Canadian government has published that the words are paraphrased based on their person's interpretation of what was said and may be a misunderstanding. But just explaining it takes your opponent off the mound and makes them field ground balls. Everyone knows that after enough ground balls some one will make an error and then that is blown up also. It's just dirty old style politics like Hillary and Bill know so well and should be disregarded entirely.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · #10 (**permalink**) 03-04-2008, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by francois60

Obama hurt himself with this one, although Hillary has no credibility on NAFTA. She's pandering big time. And hurting our relations with our allies with the protectionist talk.

You can say that but you can't back that opinion up with facts.

Here's what Obama says:

Memo Gives Canada’s Account of Obama Campaign’s Meeting on Nafta - New York Times

Quote:

When asked about his past denials, Mr. Obama said he had responded with what he knew.

“That was the information I had at the time,” he said.

He added that the Canadians had reached out to Professor Goolsbee and that he met them as a “courtesy.”

“At some point,” he added, “they started talking about trade and Nafta, and the Canadian Embassy confirmed that he said exactly what I have been saying on the campaign trail.” Campaign officials said Professor Goolsbee went to the consulate as a professor, not as an adviser to Mr. Obama and that other campaign officials did not know about the meeting when it was held.

In a statement, the Canadian Embassy in Washington suggested that the consulate had sought out Professor Goolsbee specifically because of his ties to Mr. Obama’s campaign.

Show me why "Obama hurt himself" as you say.