RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Shocker: Obama Campaign Reveals Fake Stand on NAFTA [Video UPDATE]

Must-see VIDEO UPDATE (second video update below the fold):

A Canadian medical professional (no more to protect anonymity) reports to me: “This story made headlines tonight in Canada in all major Canadian news networks. Barack Obama has been caught lying. Spread this as much as you can because it is true and factually supported. I think the people of Ohio as well as the rest of America, deserve to know this.”

(Original) Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Canadian media reveal Obama’s posture on NAFTA is solely “campaign rhetoric.” Via CTA.ca News article, “Obama staffer gave warning of NAFTA rhetoric“:

… Within the last month, a top staff member for Obama’s campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada’s ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.

The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value.

But Tuesday night in Ohio, where NAFTA is blamed for massive job losses, Obama said he would tell Canada and Mexico “that we will opt out unless we renegotiate the core labour and environmental standards.”

Late Wednesday, a spokesperson for the Obama campaign said the staff member’s warning to Wilson sounded implausible, but did not deny that contact had been made.

Oh, that bamboozler. Imagine, for a moment, that you’re the head of state or diplomatic corps, or one of the chief politicians or government officials, for the hundreds of nations across the world. Wouldn’t you read this article and wonder WHICH OBAMA you’ll be dealing with, and IF he means anything he says?

Second VIDEO UPDATE:

(Back to original) The article contains quotes critical of both candidates’ stands on NAFTA. But it is only Sen. Obama’s senior staff who called Canada’s ambassador to the United States to — wink, wink — let him in on the real deal: That his campaign rhetoric, especially in states like Ohio devastated by NAFTA agreements, was just that. ALL TALK. No cattle.

Imagine that YOU are one of those union members or factory workers whose jobs have gone overseas. Imagine that you’re hanging on to Barack Obama’s “rhetoric” about NAFTA. Imagine how you’ll feel when you find out that — wink, wink — it was just campaign talk.

I’d be heartbroken. I would feel utterly betrayed.

Remember the Machinists’ Union president? Do you recall his outrage at Sen. Obama’s promises — to the faces of machinists from whom he took hard-earned campaign donations — to save Maytag jobs only to find out that Obama never spoke out for those workers. And that Obama took donations from the top owners of Maytag and never once mentioned the workers’ plight to those executives.

I found the February 2, 2008 article from McClatchy/Chicago Tribune to which Buffenbarger refers, “Obama’s fundraising, rhetoric collide: Union says senator did little to save jobs“:

Maytag workers whose jobs were shipped to Mexico serve as consistent characters in Barack Obama’s stump speech. He employs their stories in railing against corporations that use trade pacts to replace well-paid union workers with low-cost foreign ones.

It is a ready applause line for the Illinois presidential hopeful, one that he has been reciting almost verbatim since he was a candidate for U.S. Senate in 2004, when appliance giant Maytag was in the process of shutting a refrigerator plant here, putting 1,600 people out of work.

But the union that represented most of those Galesburg workers isn’t impressed with Obama’s advocacy and has endorsed his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton. Its leaders say they wish he had done more about their members’ plight.

What rankles some is what Obama did not do even as he expressed solidarity four years ago with workers mounting a desperate fight to save their jobs.

Obama had a special connection to Maytag: Lester Crown, one of the company’s directors and biggest investors whose family, records show, has raised tens of thousands of dollars for Obama’s campaigns since 2003. But Crown says Obama never raised the fate of the Galesburg plant with him, and the billionaire industrialist insists any jawboning would have been futile. [BUT OBAMA COULD HAVE TRIED, DAMMIT.]

Aide: Didn’t know of tie

Obama’s chief political strategist, David Axelrod, said late Thursday that the senator did not know Crown sat on Maytag’s board until the Tribune noted it last September in a story about the closing of the Maytag headquarters in Newton, Iowa. … READ ALL.

Did not know. Did not care?

So much for the workers affected by NAFTA. Wink, wink. Obama thinks he can tell them one thing, and then do either nothing, or something else entirely. Wink, wink.

We have written numerous articles at No Quarter on Sen. Obama’s many misleading, or outright falsehoods, about NAFTA, including:

Lastly, I will leave you with Hillary Clinton’s statement on NAFTA tonight in her extended interview aired on PBS Newshour‘s “Newsmaker” segment:

JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, as you know, a lot of the blame for losing these jobs has been focused on NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement. You talked about it at length in the debate last night.

You’ve said that you’ve long opposed it. Your critics say, well, it really hasn’t been that long. Help us understand, when did you decide that NAFTA was not a good thing?

SEN. HILLARY CLINTON: Well, I had my doubts about it way back at the beginning of Bill’s term, but I was working on health care. But David Gergen and others have apparently remembered a lot of the meetings we were in where I raised a lot of questions.

But it’s hard to argue with the economic success overall of the Clinton years: 22.7 million new jobs, family income up $7,000 on average, more people lifted out of poverty than at any time.

So the impact of NAFTA and other trade agreements was not so obvious in the economy at large until the Bush administration, because they stopped enforcing trade agreements. They really stopped going to bat to try to keep jobs in this country. They gave more and more tax breaks to, you know, people who were not committed to growing the economy and jobs here.

So since I’ve been in the Senate, I have raised a lot of serious questions. And I’ve said, look, I have a plan to fix it. We’ve got to get core labor and environmental standards in the agreement. We’ve got to get better enforcement mechanisms. And we have to end the ability of foreign companies to sue over laws we passed to protect our workers.

There’s no wink, wink in her statements. There’s just the promise of a REAL plan — not faux rhetoric — to fix the problems.

There’s no behind-the-curtains promise to an ambassador “that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value.”

If I were one of those international leaders — or I were one of those workers who’d lost his or her job, future, retirement, health care, and family stability to NAFTA — I’d trust President Hillary Clinton to roll up her sleeves and get to work to help cure the complex problems of NAFTA.

  • harve

    obama is too wishy washy to handle the giant task of the major problems that are evolving here in US. Nafta will change our world here in US as we know it, and not for the better! Obama tells US voters one thing, he tells Canada something else….BARACK OBAMA IS JUST A SKILLED ORATOR, NOTHING MORE. HE HAS MASTERED THE ART OF HYPNOTISM.,REPEATING AND CHANTING THE SAME PHRASES OVER AND OVER SO THAT ANYONE IN HIS PRESENCE FALLS PREY TO THE POWER OF SUGGESTION! Wake up!This is the time to hire a man,not a smooth talker.if we elect obama we will have change,,but…. not the good kind! McCain is tried and true and he is not new on the front, like obama.Frankly, Obama has too many questionable associations…to put our entire country in his hands.

  • http://cbc.ca/news crown justice

    Hillary Clinton is the liar. Hillary Clinton camp called the Canadian government to tell them not to believe or be concerned about what Hillary says about NAFTA.

    HILLARY CLINTON IS A LIAR.
    cbc.ca/news
    Government will probe ‘entire’ NAFTA leak: PM

    Google the Globe and mail and search for the article below.
    The Globe and Mail
    PM must fire Brodie: Opposition

  • Dan

    You’d think you would have pulled this story, once it was proven false.
    You offer no quarter on the truth either.
    If truth were important to you you’d go to another site. Like this one about how the Clinton campaign warned about THEIR NAFTA rhetoric:
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080305.wharpleak0305/BNStory/National/home

    or this one where you actually have the memo so you can read for yourself:
    http://www.slate.com/id/2185753/entry/2185754/

    Be an informed voter, not a campaign advertiser.

    • ChrisXP

      Hillary always said to investigate any such leaks on her side, and said so on TV even.

      The point of bringing it up now to smear Hillary, doesn’t remove the fact that O-Bomba either told an outright lie about his economic advisor talking with the Canadians; or he’s seriously out-of-touch with his own advisors (as that’s also appearing with the Powers incident).

      As time goes by more and more incidents due to incompetence and inexperience will be showing. This is just the tip of the iceberg to come.

      So Obama-o-matics, click on that seat belt and hold on tight, as you’re going for a hell of a roller coaster ride. All Hillary has to do is ride the car to the convention, and be nominated. Skinny O-Bomba will probably fall out of the car after the big climb.

      O-Bomba is simply too green to fight against a very brown ex-POW who’s mad enough to slime O-Bomba so bad, he wished he was back at Harvard Law with the likes of Horowitz and crew.

  • Dan

    Congradulations.
    You bought into every Hillary lie. Impressive.

    Check your facts it was Hillary’s campaign that called Canada to warn them ahead of the debate about her stance on NAFTA, and tell them to, “take it with a grain of salt!”

    It’s all starting to come out, but you’ll probably keep buying into all of her BS.

    What a joke! You must be so proud!

  • jamie

    Obama never impressed me as someone with high morals. I’m not surprised at all, though I am surprised they aren’t ripping him apart for it in the media like they do with most democratic nominees. Maybe this is because they think he’ll be better than Hillary or McCain. I doubt it very highly.

  • Pingback: Guest Voice: Obama, NAFTA, Canada And The Blogosphere

  • Pingback: CTV Reconfirms Obama NAFTA Story : NO QUARTER

  • Pingback: This Could Be Problematic « The Krile Files

  • Pingback: Clinton Supporters Leap on Anonymously Sourced Obama Hit Piece « Liberty Street

  • Pingback: "Barack Will Never Allow You to Go Back to Your Lives as Usual." - Page 3

  • rjj

    I could be wrong. Probably will never know. Do any of the Obananates ever question their certitude?

    They seem to do a lot of neener neener neenering.

    • Yoshimi

      It looks like Obama is INEVITABLE doesn’t it.

      Clinton needs to pack her bags and head back to capital hill where she belongs.

      • Andy

        Hey Yoshimi sure; but then, please hurry up during the summer sales and buy some bags to give Obama in November.

        • ChrisXP

          lololololololololol

      • Kathleen

        It’s not over yet…but the Obama tidal wave does look huge.

  • rwc

    Its been obvious from the beginning that Obama has no interest in fixing NAFTA or any trade agreement for that matter.

    Look at his voting record in the senate on trade and labor issues. A ardent free trader and supporter of off-shoring and in-sourcing.

    Look at the 4 economists he has on his staff- Goolsbe, Cutler, Rubin and Liebman all free marketeers and two of them big supporters of free trade.

    Obama is showing everyone who cares to examine him what he really stands for and its not the American people.

    • ChrisXP

      Rubin is one of O-Bomba’s economists on staff?

      Well, read what Rubin has said about NAFTA while he was the Treasury secretary…
      ——————————————————————————————————–

      FROM THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

      July 11, 1997
      RR-1815

      TREASURY SECRETARY ROBERT E. RUBIN
      NAFTA AFTER THREE YEARS

      It is a pleasure to join all of you on the occasion of the release of the report detailing the impact of thefirst three years of NAFTA.

      America’s relationship with Mexicoimportantly affects our country in many ways, and in all theseways, and economically healthy Mexico is very important to our interest. Beginning in April of this year, Mexico became our second largest export market. Hundreds of thousands of Americans owe their jobs to trade with Mexico. Also, a prosperous, stable Mexico is better able to work with us in addressing other issues such as immigration and drugs. In short, a healthy, growing economy in Mexico is not only in the interests of Mexico, but it is also very much in the national economic and security interests of the United States.

      Mexico today is growing at a healthy rate, aresult of its economic reforms, including NAFTA. Last year, Mexico’s economy grew more than five percent, more than most private analysts had expected. Unemployment and inflation aredown, financial stability has returned, monetary and fiscal policy remain on track and foreign capital has returned. There are many challenges ahead, but much has been accomplished.

      The foundation of our economic relationship with Mexico is NAFTA. It has proved its mettle in bad times just as it is doing now in good times. In fact, it was probably even more important to our interests during difficult times than it is during good times. In 1995, as you all know, Mexico experienced a severe financial crisis. Realizing the potential impact to our own economy if Mexico collapsed economically, the President devised an emergency support package to give Mexico some breathing space to get its economic house in order, in conjunction with the Mexican government imposing strongest fiscal and monetary discipline. NAFTA, by eliminating the option of raising tariffs, provided a strong incentive for the government to choose this reform path rather than turning inward, and NAFTA also provided confidence about Mexico to investors. Moreover, because Mexico honored its NAFTA commitments and maintained its lower tariffs, U.S. exports to Mexico remained at much higher levels than would have occurred had NAFTA not existed and Mexico had turned inwards and raised tariffs.

      This was a far different situation than in Mexico’s 1982 economic and financial crisis, when Mexico reacted to crisis by imposing prohibitive tariffs and our exports fell by half — and didn’t recover for seven years. This time, Mexico continued to reduce trade barriers to U.S. goods despite its deepest recession in 60 years — allowing U.S. exports to Mexico to rise to new record levels in 1996. While it took seven years for Mexico to return to international capital markets after its 1982 crisis, this time it took just seven months. And, of course, Mexico has fully repaid our loans.

      NAFTA has served us well — though obviously we must always be focused on equipping people to deal with dislocations, as with all of the many changes that occur in our dynamic economy — and I believe NAFTA and trade liberalization more generally are critical to our economic future.

      And now, I am pleased to introduce our leader in all of these trade efforts, Charlene Barshefsky, who has done such a terrific job as U.S. Trade Representative.
      ——————————————————————————————————–

      With him at O-Bomba’s ear you better forget NAFTA being reviewed again!

      • Andy

        Robert Rubin backs Clinton; which is a good thing since he was the architect of the surplus and fiscal control. That article is old and he will do the right thing for President Hillary Clinton : Fix our horrible economy. Don’t worry.

        • Andy

          And as Hillary pointed out in the debate, Nafta has been good for Texas and bad for Ohio. So, one needs to be careful on how to fix it.

        • ChrisXP

          Folks don’t change policy decisions like that overnight. Nope. It’s like Bush saying, “War’s done. You can come home now!”.

  • Ann

    Thanks for the post. It’s been so clear that BO is not a man of his words…he talks about uniting not dividing and politics not as usual, and then goes about exerting intense threatening pressure on superdelegates and democrats in caucuses.

    I live in a caucus state and the BO intimidation machine was intense. He’s not winning because people have new hope, he’s winning because people are afraid.

    For the good of the country I’m voting Hillary — I just need all the good people of the states yet to vote to correct the errors of those of us who have. Hillare is the right choice for nominee of the democratic party — she’s the only democrat left in the race.

  • Yoshimi

    Canadian Embassy denies the story.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Canadians_deny_Obama_call.html

    I feel BamSusaned.

    • ChrisXP

      They naturally would. Why jeopardize relations so early?

      Kids, r-e-a-l-l-y should stay out of politics!

      • Yoshimi

        Who are you calling a kid?

        I mean, I am not old enough to count on dead people for endorsements but I am not kid.

    • Kathleen

      Uh Oh

  • BHO fan

    Just accept the eventuality. Quit spreading rumors. You are not doing Hillary any good. hahahahahhahahahaha

  • Andy

    Here they are already posting that the Canadian embassy “denies” the report…. Check this out:

    http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/nafta_bluster_the_report_thats.php

    • Goon

      the Embassy says there were no phone call, period. so there goes the end of this phony attack.

      nice try.

  • Andy

    Does anyone know if this report last night on the Canadian TV has been picked up by *any* news outlet here yet ?

    • rjj

      I would look for it Wednesday.

      • rjj

        at the earliest.

        • Andy

          Does anyone has some TV channel contact in Ohio ?

  • Cee

    Don’t leave this part out

    Low-level sources also suggested the Clinton campaign may have given a similar warning to Ottawa, but a Clinton spokesperson flatly denied the claim.

    Don’t you people see that this Canadian conservative is screwing with our election chances of both Clinton and Obama?

    What is the McCain position on NAFTA? NO CHANGE!

    Wise up.

    • Lorelynn

      The Clinton campaign has given blanket immunity to reveal who on their campaign staff, the Canadian ambassador spoke with. Don’t leave that out, Cee. I haven’t seen any such similar waiver from the Obama campaign.

      http://www.taylormarsh.com

    • Mr.Murder

      Why is Obama contacting conservatives with campaign information?

      • ChrisXP

        1/3 of his voters ARE Republicans!

  • rjj

    I don’t think they were dirty tricks. He exploited his opponents weaknesses and sloppy work.

    • BHO fan

      I second this. Hillary would do the same if faced the same situation.

      • kenoshaMarge

        But, but Clinton. Can no one just answer for their candidate and not drag Hillary into every single question about Obama?

  • Mel

    Clinton will be fielded on this by Obama as starting the rhetoric, that is the Obama way! Yet an Ambassador would never disclose something that wasn’t checked out first, especially an Ambassador from an allie like Canada, there is too much to lose by doing so!

    Have to ask, why would an Ambassador let this sort of thing out, well first he is a Conservative, second, people outside the US don’t care for rhetoric and stump speeches, they prefer facts and records, which Obama has none of but avoidance, sleeze and a dash to the Whitehouse!

    Even when sitting face to face Tim Russert claims to be a jounalist, yet he lacked in the debates of confronting Obama on a question he himself brought up in 2004, on if Obama was a US Senator at the time of the vote on Iraq, how would he have voted, Obama said then, “I don’t know how I’d of voted”! This is the true Obama, yet the media lets him continue to get away without doing their job and report on all the facts!

    This Democratic campaign has been one of the worst examples of American politics and American voter ability and proves to the rest of the world just what Americans take seriously and what they do not!

    The true article finally spoken in “The Republican” yesterday about Obama’s dirty campaign tricks on racism was exemplified by Lewis last night changing support, due to a minister talking of contesting his seat! We were warned and now the proof is before us, yet no press has called Obama out on his behind the scenes dirty campaign tactics!

    This man will undoubtibly destroy the American way that years of sloow building has produced should he not win the nomination and also become President, he has already proven it by ruining the reputaion of a well liked former President and he will stop at nothing for his selfish desires, so America, you have one option, elect Obama President or face a race revolt he has proven he is willing and able to manipulate!

    • Salo

      Canada’s economy is trade dependent.

  • Pingback: Obaba O-Bomba Obama caught LYING!!

  • Pingback: "Barack Will Never Allow You to Go Back to Your Lives as Usual." - Page 2

  • Pingback: Buck Naked Politics

  • Kathleen

    My question for Senator Obama is “when you had an opportunity to vote against the Kyl Lieberman amendment passed in Oct 2007 which Senator Webb described as “tantamount to declaring war on Iran” you just “happened” to be of town the day of this critical vote. Why did you sit on the fence when you could have drawn a line in the cement with the same people who helped lie our nation into Iraq who are doing their best to push for a pre-emptive attack on Iran?

    • TeakWoodKite

      Thanks Kathleen for the “on the ground” info. Kudo’s
      once again for being there and reporting back.
      Message control. mmmm

    • kenoshaMarge

      Great to have someone actually on the ground that tells the truth. Really enjoy reading your posts Kathleen.

      And I think, just my opionion of course, that Obama manages to keep from voting on things that he’s afraid may come back to bite him in his political butt. Can’t avoid all of them but enough so that this particular piece of legislation has become a millstone around Hillary’s neck while he gets to be above the frey by doing nothing.

  • Kathleen

    Here was a huge negative that I want to share about what I witnessed at the Obama rally in Columbus. I want to premise what I am about to say with that at both Clinton (Hillary in Dayton, and Bill in Athens Ohio) events that I attended I was able to carry in signs that had appropriate language on them, but tough questions posted on these signs. At both of these events the Secret Service and the folks at the doors did not question my signs. They allowed me to go through.

    At the Obama rally the police at the door politely told me that I would not be able to carry my hand made sign in ( Pro Palestine..Pro Israel…Pro Peace. Talk about this issue please) I took the sign back outside but told the secret service that I had been able to carry signs into both of the Clinton rally’s ( at both of these events lots of other folks had signs especially at the Athens event about Guantanamo, torture etc). When I went in to the Obama event I saw hundreds of hand made signs and Union signs in the stadium. I went out to question the Obama campaign and found out from those in charge at the stadium that they had been required by the Obama campaign to not allow any signs in. Only signs that the Obama campaign had made or o.k’d were in the stadium. The same security people told me that at HIllary’s event on Ohio State’s campus (where the OBama event was being held) just several weeks before people had been allowed to carry signs in with questions and opinions posted on those signs without questions. THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN HAD NOT REQUESTED THAT SIGN BE TAKEN FROM PEOPLE AT THE DOOR, THEY WERE NOT CONTROLLING THE SIGNAGE. Both of the security people agreed with me that this double standard between the Obama campaign and the Clinton campaign was a very serious double standard. At that point I had an encounter with a group of Obama supporters about this issue. That’s another story.

    The point is that the Obama campaign has a very tight hold on the message…a very tight hold. No room for questions from the peasants.

    • kenoshaMarge

      Oh my, how very George Bush of them. That’s not much of a “change” now is it? Let’s all “hope” that if he’s elected he’ll “change” his mind about doing this.

      • Kathleen

        It was a bit cult like.

    • ChrisXP

      Thanks Kathleen about the play-by-plays from the scene. Nice getting real coverage from the floor, for a change (not another talking head pundit).

      :thumbs:

  • fribbles

    wow, that CTV video is devastating. If it gets picked up by an American news sources, it’ll go to the heart of the character issue. Big IF there, though.

    Thank gawd for YouTube. You can run from your words, but you can’t hide from them, because words matter.

  • merlallen

    I’m pretty sure that at least 60% of Obama supporters will vote for McCain if Clinton is the nominee. Probably 40% even if Obama wins.
    Will you vote for Obama if he wins?
    I will, even though I want Clinton to win.

    I’m sure the GOP oppo researchers appreciate the Liberal blogs doing their work for them.

    • fribbles

      Get a clue, merlallen. Don’t you think GOP oppo researchers have MORE STUFF on Obama than liberal blogs can even fathom? I hope your sleep remains undisturbed by the thought of Karl Rove-trained ops down in New Haven right now, digging up all the stuff about Obama’s “lost years.”

    • kenoshaMarge

      And liberal blogs must all walk in lock step and and not ask questions? Speaking your mind is helping the GOP oppo researchers?

      Does anyone really think for one silly minute that Karl Rove and his Merry Band of Smearmerchants needs help from the left? Good grief compared to them we’re rank amateurs. Once beyond the primaries and into the General they will also have the media to parrot their attacks 24/7. It has all ready begun albeit slowly, carefully and whispering more than the full throat-ed roar it will become.

      I am a Clinton supporter who would never vote for McCain. However I will never vote for Obama either.

      If the choices I have in November are Obama and McCain, and since we are not provided with a “none of the above” choice, I’ll vote for the Green Candidate. I will also vote for any Democrats on the ballot I think is worth voting for. Since when is it our “duty” to vote for someone just because their is a “D” behind their name. That’s Republican Robotic voting, not Progressive Thinking For Ourselves voting.

    • ChrisXP

      About 30% OF O-Bomba’s supporters ARE Republicans.

      They’re just voting in the primaries to kill Hillary’s chances, then will switch in November to vote for McCain.

      Dems r-e-a-l-l-y need to close primaries to lock voters in one choice. That way they can’t do these fraud producing tactics.

      I like open primaries, but after seeing what I’ve seen in GA (solidly Republican low vote rural counties suddenly voting for Obama — I KNOW it’s a coup).

  • Marjorie

    The Chicago Tribune published a many part series on Obama early 1996-it is on the internet. The section by reporters David Jackson and Ray Long tells of Obama’s win in the Illinois State Senate as a result of Obama’s cronies challenging signatures on the petitions of four Democratic rivals, including State Senator Alice Palmer-a Chicago activist. By the time they finished, all four of Obama’s rivals were forced off the ballot. I found it scary reading.

  • Kathleen

    Will be interesting to witness if these claims about the Obama staffer are verified beyond a shadow of a doubt.

    Susan you will not be happy to hear what I heard from the Teamsters Legislative rep (have his card do not have it on me, will post his name later) who I talked to at length at the Obama rally in Columbus on Tuesday. When I asked him “why are the teamsters supporting Obama, what has Obama done for Union workers”? He replied “new opportunity”. I pushed and asked “what was wrong with McCain” He responded with a thumbs down and said “McCain has done absolutely O for blue collar workers, has supported shipping jobs over seas and does not stand up for middle America”

    I asked “what about Hillary”. His hand went to a level position and wavered back and forth. He replied “Hllary’s back stage claims that she did not support NAFTA when Bill was in office are empty words and that it was not apparent at the time, and that she supported NAFTA in her book”

    He had no evidence what so ever of Obama’s work for Unions, but made it clear that the Teamsters support for Obama was based on “new opportunity” His thumb went up for Obama.

    Today I will be hearing Chelsea Clinton and Michelle Obama..both in Athens Ohio today.

  • barbh

    The Canadian clip ought to be forwarded to all the news agencies. What a crock of crap! The more I see of Obama the less I think I will be able to hold my nose and vote for him in the GE. His duplicity is nauseating.

    • Goon

      there is no “Canadian clip” – there was a ctv.ca article, it may had a 1 minute piece on the news somewhere, however unlike the claim in the OP, it is not being carried across all networks, it is not our top story, and you won’t be able to find a reference to it beyond the link in the OP

      i’m no tposting here to dispute the content, i’m here to ask Susan to stop spreading lies about my country’s news. as much as you’d like to believe it, our news doesnt revolve around rumors involving US primary candidates.

      • Frostback

        http://tinyurl.com/2nww86

        When Lloyd talks about it…it’s news.

        I have no idea what other news outlets may have carried it as I’ve sworn off tv for the moment, and I’m not in the mood to be a research monkey. Please also note this site’s post was in reference to last night’s news, and (correct me if I’m wrong) it seems you are referring to today’s top stories.

        I wonder how rare us ‘ladies of the house’ are here in Canada, given that there are 2 of us responding to this site…

        • TeakWoodKite

          Damn fences… :)

  • http://thehorizontalworld.blogspot.com/ Mary Jo Kopechne

    Obama on Gun Control: How will like this in Texas?

    The U.S. Senate Debated, Obama Voted:
    Supporting concealed carry for citizens – Anti-gun
    Banning many common semi-automatic firearms – Anti-gun
    Disallowing self-defense in towns where guns are banned -Anti-gun
    Imposing one handgun a month restrictions – Anti-gun
    Requiring lock up your safety trigger locks – Anti-gun
    Protecting gun dealers from frivolous lawsuit – Anti-gun
    Outlawing gun confiscations during a national emergency – Pro-gun
    Squelching the free speech rights of gun owners – Anti-gun
    Restricting the interstate sales of firearms – Anti-gun
    Repealing the gun ban in Washington, DC – Anti-gun

    Obama says, “National legislation will prevent other states’ flawed concealed-weapons laws from threatening the safety of Illinois residents.” David Mendell, “Democratic hopefuls vary a bit on death penalty,” Chicago Tribune, February 20, 2004.

    As a state senator, “Obama regularly supported gun-control measures, including a ban on semiautomatic ‘assault weapons’ and a limit on handgun purchases to one a month.” “Obama Record May be Gold Mine for Critics,” Associated Press, January 17, 2007.

    On July 28, 2005, Senator Obama voted for a provision requiring gun dealers to include the sale of a lock-up-your-safety device with every handgun sold. The amendment, offered by Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI), passed by a vote of 70-30. The provision amended the gun makers’ protection act (S. 397).

    On July 29, 2005, Senator Obama voted against S. 397, a bill that was designed to put an end to the frivolous lawsuits that were threatening to put many gun dealers out of business. While an argument could be made that a pro-gun Senator might vote against this bill because it contained a lock-up-your-safety provision (see supra note 14), the fact that Obama voted in favor of that trigger lock amendment (but against the overall bill) indicates his real animus against helping gun dealers protect themselves from the anti-gun lawsuits that were aimed at driving them into bankruptcy.

    On January 18, 2007, Senator Obama voted against a pro-gun amendment to strike language in S. 1 that would infringe upon the free speech rights of groups like Gun Owners of America. The amendment, which passed, struck requirements that would have required GOA to monitor and report on its communications with its members, and could easily have led to government demands for GOA’s membership list (a.k.a. registration).

    Obama has frequently made statements which indicate that he would restrict the interstate sale of firearms. For example, he told the NAACP that, “We’ve got to make sure that unscrupulous gun dealers aren’t loading up vans and dumping guns in our communities, because we know they’re not made in our communities. There aren’t any gun manufacturers here, right here in the middle of Detroit.” Senator Barack Obama, at the NAACP Presidential Primary Forum, July 12, 2007.

  • Goon

    I am actually from Canada and that CTV article is the only one I’ve seen… if you go to ctv.ca its buried way down the page.
    you cant find it on CBC news or any other site, period.

    so even though i saw you claim this was the top story all across Canada on DK, you are simply lying. period.

    • Simon

      so even though i saw you claim this was the top story all across Canada on DK, you are simply lying. period.

      Because you say so?

      Because you are one source?

      Why would anyone believe YOU?

      Can’t you see yourself?

      • Goon

        Because you say so?”

        if it was such a huge story, you should easily be able to prove it.

        fact is, the site Susan sourced, ctv.ca has it buried way down the page.
        please look at major canadian sites like cbcnews.ca, cp24.com, thestar.ca, etc and tell me with a straight face that this is our top story.

        • Simon

          if it was such a huge story, you should easily be able to prove it.

          CTV is sticking by it.

          Your qualification of “if it was such a huge story” is a logical fallacy.

    • Goon

      …and you can say otherwise all you want. but i actually live here, I have cable news on most of the day while i paint because the lady of the house is a rare item in this country: a Canadian politics junkie – whoever told you this was making waves across the country is simply full of it.

      if you think the article is true, bgy all means keep pushing it, but PLEASE dont claim this is our top story, because you will leave with egg on your face.

    • Fred

      you do realize the globe and mail is biased to obama? of course the won’t report on it

  • votermom

    Can’t wait to hear how they spin this one.

    • mostest

      Yeah. Another round in the WORM game. “What Obama Really Meant”

      Popcorn anyone?

    • kenoshaMarge

      That’s easy. Just like all the Bushbots used to respond whenever anyone asked about something he had done; “but, but Clinton.”

      Didn’t work for me when I was 10 years.

  • Jesus Reyes

    The fact that there is not much of a difference between the McCain, Clinton, and Obama is not much of a revelation.

    All this just highlights further why Ralph Nadar needs to be elected

  • BHO fan

    What’s the big deal? Every politician lies.

    • mostest

      Correction every normal ordinary politican lies. Obama is the “chosen one” or just “the one.”
      Haven’t you heard?

    • Frostback

      This must be satire.

  • BernieO

    This episode tells more about Obama than that he is just a politician who says anything he needs to get elected – it also shows how incredibly naive he is. His campaign confides in the Canadian Ambassador that he is lying to the American people and the Canadians rat him out. Big surprise! Apparently Obama not realize that the Canadian government is conservative. Or was it he decided to reach out to the other side and got his hand bitten off!

    The man is a babe in the woods. Definitely not ready for prime time.

  • demfromphilly

    This is a story that cuts right to the core of the character issue. Without our push the main stream media will abdicate their obligation to inform and enlighten the public again much the way they did in the built up to the Iraq War. They have acted as though we are electing a Homecoming King rather then the President of the United States. I understand that policy discussion is not the easier or sexier narrative but have they no sense of responsibility? They must return to reporting issues that have a profound impact on the citizens of this country and leave the nonsense and garbage to the National Enquirer .

  • MarkL

    Obama is a Republican, pure and simple.
    Why isn’t this obvious?

    • chris

      I wouldn’t call him a Republican…unless we’ve decided to agree that Republican simply means Opportunist.

      He’s a pandering wanna be. I guess that has a Republican theme to it.

    • Frostback

      When I read the article re BO’s tactics in disqualifying Alice Palmer et al to my husband some 3 months ago, the VERY first words from his mouth were “Sounds like something a Republican would do.”.

      Apologies if this has previously been posted:

      (warning: image of Karl Rove attached to article)

      http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html

      • MarkL

        I thought that counted as “community organizing”, right?

        • Frostback

          Oh, was Obama a community organizer ? lol

  • Veteran in Florida

    Larry — you’re doing a great service for America here.

    Here’s a youtube that’s the short and sweet version of Obama’s huge NAFTA lie in the Cleveland debate:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0

    Everyone in Ohio should see this.

  • Kat Ballentine

    I can see Hillary’s television spot in Ohio now, concluding wtih a clip of Obama intoning, “Words, just words.”

  • CognitiveDissonance

    We need a robo-caller that will contact every single household in Ohio with this news! :-)

    Susan, here is another article I just found today written by someone very familiar with Obama back in Illinois that you might want to check out. It explains why Obama seems to have pushed through so much legislation in Illinois. Looks like another swindle.

    http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/1

    • http://noquarterusa.net/ SusanUnPC

      TRULY! Just saw that one from a blogger pal. It is stunning stuff. Must.write.up

  • ChrisXP

    ———————————————————————————————————-
    “Canada and the U.S. have signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries from either nation to send troops across each other’s borders during an emergency, but some are questioning why the Harper government has kept silent on the deal.
    ———————————————————————————————————-

    Oh, shit! You’d read this stuff on militant Right websites and consider it Tim MacVeigh bunk.

    But they where right with this scenerio!!

  • The Oracle

    (Via Buzzflash, via Vancouver Sun article)

    “Canada and the U.S. have signed an agreement that paves the way for the militaries from either nation to send troops across each other’s borders during an emergency, but some are questioning why the Harper government has kept silent on the deal.

    Neither the Canadian government nor the Canadian Forces announced the new agreement, which was signed Feb. 14 in Texas.”

    Hmmmmmm. Maybe the talk by some people of a North American Union (kind of like Europe’s) isn’t so far-fetched.

    I just wonder if the Bush administration has signed a similar agreement with the Mexican government, making a similar arrangement to allow Mexican troops into the U.S. in case of an “emergency,” bypassing the U.S. Congress once again, in creating a policy that sounds an awful lot like a treaty should have been involved.

    I mean, I know a lot of our national guard and reservist units have been depleted due to Bush’s war over in Iraq, and at any moment an emergency might arise requiring foreign troops to enter the United States to quell any civil unrest, since our missing national guard and reservist units, as well as local police forces, wouldn’t be able to handle any “emergency” situation, but, but,…what the hell is Bush up to?

    Or maybe Bush signed this secretive agreement with the conservative Canadian prime minister to pave the way for U.S. forces to invade Canada to go after its oil next, in case of an “emergency,” like $5.00 per gallon gasoline?

    Anyway, I just thought this was a curious report coming out of Canada, and almost sounds like the militarization of NAFTA. Oh, wait, NAFTA was an actual treaty, while this move by Bush just involves a hand-shake agreement he made with Canadian prime minister Harper. But then Bush is the “decider” who doesn’t have time for silly things like laws. Geeez, how could I have forgotten.

    • CK

      Diesel at $4.199 here.
      Oil over $100 a barrel
      Home Heating Oil $3.65 and going up.
      It now takes $1.51 to buy a Euro ( 2 years ago I was buying Euros for $0.84 ).
      Milk up 100% a gallon
      Butter up
      Bread up
      Health insurance up 75% in one year. Could not afford the increase.
      Credit Card interest rates being quadrupled and sextupled on folks for absolutely no reason.
      Unemployment up, underemployment way up
      Home values down 15%
      Unsold home inventory 10 months worth
      Unsold commercial lots 18 months worth
      Vallejo Ca the first city that is going to file for bankruptcy.
      Interest rates on mortgages up again, over 6% and this in the face of the Fed cutting interest rates to below the “governmentally approved fake” rate of inflation.
      Retail sales off ( except for Walmart — Walmart’s increases are coming from overseas store sales. Foreign sales now make up 25% of Walmart’s total sales.)
      Job creation below the rate necessary to stay even with population growth.
      Type of jobs being created: Bartenders, bedpan emptiers, insurance filing clerks.
      H1B’s being used to fill programmer, engineer, scientist slots.
      Teachers and nurses being imported from the Phillipines to fill jobs in CA.
      National savings rate negative.
      HomeEquityLinesOfCredit ( HELOCs) being capped or closed on folks who mistook their homes for ATMs.
      Citi stopping withdrawals from investment vehicles and capping withdrawals from ATMs.
      Greenspan in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States telling the Sauds and the Sheiks to DEPEG their currencies from the dollar if they wish to avoid inflation. You do realize that if the Sauds no longer peg to the dollar, then the dollar loses its “oil currency” status. The Iranians already trade oil in Yen, and Euros. The Russians are selling oil for Rubles and Euros. The Chinese Yuan will be used to trade oil.
      Gold that barbaric relic closing in on $1000 an ounce. Silver closing in on $20 an ounce, Platinum already over $2000 an ounce.
      Mexican truckers, ( uninsured or underinsured and un-unionized) being used to transport goods to The Port of Kansas City.
      And now this agreement: Us Marines to be used to quell canadian disturbances, canadian troops to quell american food riots. I am waiting for Keene NH to do Watts 65 redux, or Detroit Newark 67.
      I suspect that the current US military will have no compunction about killing Canadians nor the Canadian military any about killing US citizens.

    • Frostback

      I can say with near certainty that had Harper been the PM in the day, Canadians would be in Iraq. I can say with absolute certainty he would have at least tried it on.

      A further article on this surreptitious agreement:

      http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=403d90d6-7a61-41ac-8cef-902a1d14879d

    • TeakWoodKite

      Martial Law.

  • ChrisXP

    This election is the fraud of the century. Point blank.

    • Salo

      The Great Barack n’ Roll Swindle.?

      • ChrisXP

        The preening of an Manchurian candidate, with a remote possibility he can be elected as president.

        Worse, Dems so dumb to not even see it.

        Rove may have the playbook, but folks have to be willing to be rolled.

        • http://OUTRAGEDBUTNOTSURPRISED bama_barrron

          more often then not, Chris, I share your frustration and anger in regards to democratic voters supporting obama so blindly. once i get pass these feelings, i recognize that in a very real way i am falling into the trap of blaming the victims. rank and file democrats get their information like rank and file republicans … from a corporate media that manipulates and lies to further their agenda. this agenda, of course, is to continue the status quo while strenghtening the realtionship between corporations and the governing of america. yes, facism … it cant be anything else.

          a couple years ago i believed the really critical issues of this election would be iraq, health care and the economy. yes, they are still very important issues but IMHO no significant progress will ever be made on these issues or any other issue until the media is reformed. we must find a way to mitigate corporate influence. concurrently, we must also start public financing for all elected offices. if america can not find a way to accomplish these two goals … we will continue to have more of the same … an election process that is so tainted and corrupted that the only choices will mirror the possible outcome of this election process. an empty suit versus a mad man. god, how the corproate masters must be so happy.

          • Simon

            god, how the corproate masters must be so happy.

            The corporate masters are morons, what the hell do they know?

            The world stops with them?

            Those who run from fear with every breath they take, those who are consumed, paralyzed with the constant thought of their deaths?

          • Frostback

            Your comment reminded me of one of George Carlin’s latest bits (performed this past summer, I believe). It’s great, and on-line.

          • ChrisXP

            It comes down to thinking ahead, not now.

            I’m a conservative, a moderate but far Right conservative. I’m against over half of what Hillary is proposing, as I really don’t believe Robin Hoods helping those in need. BUT, looking at the available candidates, and what they can do within 2 years, only Hillary will keep this country from destroying itself.

            McCain is building his image as a war CiC. So he must show and tell. He’s also interested in Russian internal affairs, so much it can create another Cold War — he’s out.

            Obama is promising folks the Sun and the Moon much like every Communist/Socialist leader before. His talk about everyone must work for some goal he likes, reminds me of Mao and the Cultural Revolution or Tojo before and during WWII (there are reasons why the majority of Asians aren’t voting for Obama, and race isn’t the main factor) — he’s out.

            Hillary is talking about meat and potato issues, that are what American working class folks talk around the table. I don’t like the talk about payroll taxes increasing; as I don’t like “universal” healthcare (as it nearly killed my mom, I and some of my friends — and it DID kill some of my friends). But besides those domestic issues, Hillary isn’t preaching revolutions, nor interested in interferring with other country internal affairs — she’s in.

            It still comes down to the voters making decisions for what’s right for the country. Not just what their group can get out of it; that something sounds good; or that constant wars will settle thousands of year old problems.

            So yes, voters are to blame for making bad choices (on either side of the aisle). Like with corporate America, they’re not willing to think ahead, just between quarters for the most profits. They’d rather charge their dreams on a credit card, and be damned willing to pay for it when the bill comes due (they expect Uncle Sam to cover it for them, when it’s not taxpayer’s job to be overseers of a welfare State).

        • grtphoto

          absolutely! how can no one see this? I have been pulling my hair out, waiting and wanting the general public to wake up? Don’t they have any cognitive dissonance? Manchurian candidate indeed.

  • TeakWoodKite

    I have always wondered since learning of Michelle Obamas postion on the board of that Walmart supplier what was up. He did not ask Crown about the folks at the Maytag factory because he was there for money, not to help the workers. Nice Photo Op for a Pol eH?\
    Stand “with the workers” the sell them out.
    I have seen that happen with my Congresswoman, use students as a back drop. Sick.

  • rwc

    Obama didn’t even mention NAFTA until he hit the states harmed by NAFTA and it becomes apparent why when you look at his economic advisers.

    Austan Goolesby – senior DLC economist and Free trade supporter and the man George Will admires.b He is also a supporter of the current health care system and attacked Michael Moore for his movie Sicko which exposed the system.
    Robert Rubin – Wall Street wheel, promoter and architect of unfettered free trade.
    Jeffrey Liebman – another conservative ass that worships the market and supporter of privatizing Social Security.
    David Cutler – another conservative economist and supporter of market solutions and privatized health care.

    link:
    http://politicalfleshfeast.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1913

    Obama is clearly no liberal but a Republican if you judge him by the company he keeps.

    But wait there’s more!

    During his time in the Senate he refused to support legislation that puts caps and other restrictions on H1-B and L-1 guest workers that are used by American companies to replace American workers and depress wages in many industries.

    He even supports a measure in the pending immigration reform legislation that creates a guest worker program to replace jobs done by college educated Americans. Its called the F-4 Visa(google it).

    Basically what it does is grant a automatic green card to any foreign student who graduates with a B.S. or higher degree. Thus turning our colleges into green card factories.

    And you can see how little he thinks of Americans in this article his pledges a new partnership with India(who is the major provider of H1-B and L-1 guest workers).
    http://news.in.msn.com/International/article.aspx?cp-documentid=1256697

    Obama, ladies and gent is a labor arbitrage champion, not a Democrat, not a populist nor any sort of man of the people.

    Support him and you will find your job being in-sourced to a foreign guest worker making half your wages and with zero benefits.

    Thats the “hope” and “change” he’s really peddling.

    • EDWARD ALEX MKWELELE

      You Americans you must distinguish betwwen names and religions, HUSSEIN is not a religion is a name like EDWARD,.

      For example in IRAQ, PALESTINE, LEBANON, EGYPT there are christians with the name such as ALLY, OMARY, HUSSEIN, ABDULAH and they are christians, these are just names not religions, a name a is culture not religion.

      Also the clothes OBAMA put on the picture are religion clothes, they are cultural and traditional in all over East African countries, people with religions or without do put on them they have nothing to do with any religion.

      Trousers , shirts and fancy names were just brought there by you guys, the colonisers, we knew nothing about present names and religions before you came to colonise us.

      OBAMA is christian, he has been going to the church for more than 20 years, and is half black half white, the white side from EUROPE has Hillary Rodham Clinton’s family came from, and the other hal ffrom Africa, Kenya.

      Why you guys you talk most about father’s side what about mother’s side?

      IF DEMOCRATIC THEY WANT TO WIN NIMINATE HIM (OBAMA), HE HAS ALL IT TAKES TO DEFEAT McCain.

      EDWARD ALEX MKWELELE.