Manly yes, but O'bama likes it too!
Posted on 03/01/2008 7:33:44 AM PST by pissant
Did Barack Obama's campaign quietly contact Canadian officials to tell them not to take seriously the Illinois senator's tough talk about renegotiating trade agreements? ADVERTISEMENT
CTV, the well-regarded Canadian news network, reported this week that a top Obama adviser contacted the Canadian government to calm fears that the senator was serious about rewriting pro-corporate deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement to benefit workers, farmers and the environment. According to CTV, the Obama adviser told the Canadians that "when Senator Obama talks about opting out of the free trade deal, the Canadian government shouldn't worry. The operative said it was just campaign rhetoric not to be taken seriously."
After that report aired on ednesday, an Obama campaign spokesperson claimed in an interview with CTV that "no message was passed to the Canadian government that suggests that Obama does not mean what he says about opting out of NAFTA if it is not renegotiated."
The problem, of course, is that CTV has a highly credible source -- a a high-ranking member of the Canadian embassy -- who has provided the network with details of the call and a timeline.
Of course, the source is now being pressured to tell a different story by superiors. But few serious observers of the trade debate -- with its history of back channel communications -- doubts the scenario as it was first reported.
Attempts by CTV to get the Obama camp to respond to specific questions about the conversation and the timeline in question have so far proven unsuccessful.
According to CTV, "the Obama camp did not respond to repeated questions from CTV on reports that a conversation on this matter was held between Obama's senior economic adviser -- Austan Goolsbee -- and the Canadian Consulate General in Chicago."
CTV did contact Goolsbee, but he's not cooperating.
The network reports that "(Goolsbee refused to say whether he had such a conversation with the Canadian government office in Chicago. He also said he has been told to direct any questions to the campaign headquarters."
It is starting to sound an awfully lot like the Obama campaign may have gotten caught telling Canada one thing and Ohio something different.
What's the bottom line on this story? According to the network: "Sources at the highest levels of the Canadian government -- who first told CTV that a call was made from the Obama camp -- have reconfirmed their position."
And what's John McCain saying?
"I don't think it's appropriate to go to Ohio and tell people one thing while your aide is calling the Canadian ambassador and telling him something else," says the likely Republican nominee. "I certainly don't think that's straight talk."
On this point, McCain's right.
O’bama said, “NAFTA has done a fair job with the space program but they need change.”
Haven’t heard a peep about this in the MSM
LOL.
ROFL. And “CAFTA standards need to be increased until alternative fuels have been developed for automobiles”
They buried this baby quick.
My post was incomplete. I’ll try again.
O’bama said, “NAFTA has done a fair job with the space program but they need change.”
The entire crowd fainted and Michelle said, “For the first time in my adult life I’m proud to be an American”.
There.
Pretty much says it all right there.
That’s the spirit.
Manly yes, but O'bama likes it too!
Happy to help!
You’re the first person to comment on the O’bama spelling. Good guess but actually he is Scottish. “If it aint Scottish, it’s CRAP”.
rumor has it Canada would LIKE to renegotiate NAFTA. Seems that little clause about selling us oil could be changed to allow them to sell oil on the open market and make more profit!!!!
It’s good to have good friends.
“O’bama? Irish is he?”
LMAO!!!
One of several reasons that McCain wants to keep NAFTA in place as is.
Not true, he(and Hillary) were only exxaggerating. The dems still have their underlying problems with NAFTA.
First, they think that the GOP was using the investor protections that are in NAFTA and CAFTA, and would have been in FTAA, to set up a dual system of regulatory law. Many conservatives don't like this either. It is not uncommon to hear some freepers complain that NAFTA and/or CAFTA trumps US law(regulatory law).
And once the GOP was able to get this hemispheric wide, dual system of regulatory law in place, a GOP SCOTUS would find the right case and rule all the regulatory laws that the dems put in place(including the New Deal) to be unconstitutional.
The second problem is Bill Clinton and the parallel NAFTA agreement. After Bush signed NAFTA, the dem Congress wouldn't approve it unless there was a parallel agreement that contained protections for labor and environment. Clinton negotiated this agreement and signed it. Congress approve both the original and parallel agreement and they went into effect the following Jan.
But the labor and environmental protections in the side agreement turned out to be toothless and the dems blamed Clinton's misfeasance or his malfeasance..
Some dems said misfeasance. He just did a bad job.
Some dems said malfeasance. He purposely negotiated a toothless side agreement because he was in cahoots with the GOP.
The issue is not NAFTA, it’s his honesty. I’d scrap NAFTA so fast, completely and permanently it would make your Obama’s head spin.
When confronted with the story that his campaign adviser contacted the Canucks to ‘reassure’ them, Barack Sinclair Obama gave a strident and full denial. His denial is false.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.