Obama staffer gave warning of NAFTA rhetoric

[ConcernedCanuk]

Source: CTV.ca

Obama staffer gave warning of NAFTA rhetoric

Updated Wed. Feb. 27 2008 11:45 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Barack Obama has ratcheted up his attacks on NAFTA, but a senior member of his campaign team told a Canadian official not to take his criticisms seriously, CTV News has learned.

/snip/

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.

/snip/

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.





Read more: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080227/dems_nafta_080227/20080227?hub=TopStories

---

You gotta read the whole article if you really want to get an idea of the story

There's no 4 paragraphs that paint the picture properly as CTV presents it.

Seems like whatever the "truth" is,

This NAFTA debate/pledges, whatever has got some of our politicians "concerned".

That's about as polite as I can put it.

It's worth a good read,

CTV is pretty well thought of up here,

not sure about down there, but they SURE ain't no FAUX news.

[babylonsister]

1. So are you from Canada, do you believe Michael Wilson, Harper,

and this station? From what I hear, The source of this story is Michael Wilson:

http://www.canadians.org/wordwarriors/2006/feb-15.html

He's a Stephen Harper appointee, a lying POS who makes people like Gonzo and Condi look credible by comparison.

[ConcernedCanuk]

2. Ok, I'll try to answer some of your questions - Harper's easy, I neither like nor trust him.

.
.
.

I don't know anything about Wilson, so no opinion from me would be fair/accurate.

I trust CTV

They are reporting as they get what they consider to be facts.

I don't see any "posturing" from CTV, I believe they are reporting fairly what they believe others said, including the Democratic delegates.

It might be interesting for yourself, and others to read some of the comments at the end of the article, mostly from Canadians I believe.

You might get some insight as to what other Canadians think of the NAFTA issue, and the American election.

But if you are indeed correct in asserting that Condi has more credibility than our ambassador to the United States,

Then we got more troubles than I imagined.

[babylonsister]

3. You don't know anything about Wilson? Here:

and FWIW, I didn't either, but I'm an American. He's been around for a long-g-g while.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wilson_(politician)

Michael Wilson (politician)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Michael Holcombe Wilson, PC OC (born November 4, 1937) is a Canadian diplomat, politician and business leader.

Born in Toronto, Ontario, Wilson attended Upper Canada College, Trinity College at the University of Toronto where he joined the Kappa Alpha Society. He was a Bay Street investment executive when he was elected to the Canadian House of Commons as a Progressive Conservative Member of Parliament in the 1979 general election. He served as Minister of State for International Trade in the nine-month minority government of Joe Clark.

Wilson was a candidate at the 1983 Progressive Conservative leadership convention. He tried to woo young delegates by having the rock group Spoons perform on his behalf. He dropped off after the first ballot, and urged his supporters to vote for the eventual winner, Brian Mulroney.

Mulroney appointed Wilson Minister of Finance when the party formed a government after the 1984 election.

He reformed the tax system to broaden the tax base and lower tax rates, removing many special tax provisions, and helped negotiate the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. Wilson also introduced the Goods and Services Tax in 1990, a tax which is widely credited, even by Liberals (who had promised to abolish the tax), as having helped bring the Federal government back into surplus.

In 1991, after seven years as Minister of Finance, Wilson became Minister of Industry, Science and Technology and Minister of International Trade. In that role, he participated in negotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement. Wilson was not a candidate in the 1993 election, and returned to Bay Street to head his own consulting and financial services firm. He later rejoined Royal Bank of Canada and was Chairman and CEO of RT Capital when that business was sold to UBS AG. Wilson was formerly Chairman of UBS Canada.

In recent years he has become a spokesman for a lobby group promoting Public-Private Partnerships. He was Chairman of the Canadian Coalition for Good Governance. In September 2003, Wilson was installed as chancellor of Trinity College.

He is a mental health advocate, having lost a son to depression and suicide; he established the Cameron Parker Holcombe Wilson Chair in Depression Studies at the University of Toronto.

On October 30, 2003, he was appointed an Officer of the Order of Canada.

Wilson became the 22nd Canadian Ambassador to the United States on March 13, 2006 when U.S. President George W. Bush accepted his credentials.

And that's just wiki! Please research and educate yourself. And then me!

[ConcernedCanuk]

5. Oh!- I never noticed your last line before, but I DID some research, but now I got more questions!

.
.
.

Questions for myself that is.

Ok.

Just so this isn't too long, I'll just give a link, and one or 2 paragraphs each.

I'll give you my observations/conclusions at the end.
_____________________________________________________________________

http://www.leadersoftomorrow.com/lot_page.asp?pageid=77

The Hon. Michael Wilson Roundtable

By: Nathaniel Payne

On Monday, December 10, 2007, Canada’s ambassador to the United States, The Honourable Michael Wilson, met with members of The Company of Young Professionals (CYP) and Leaders of Tomorrow (LOT) program following his luncheon speech to Vancouver Board of Trade members at the Vancouver Marriott Pinnacle. This networking roundtable, which is an exclusive opportunity available to CYP and LOT members, gave future business leaders from The Vancouver Board of Trade the opportunity to challenge, question, and learn from the Ambassador on a variety of issues pertaining to U.S.-Canada relations, border security, and trade agreements

_____________________________________________________________________

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/canada_us/mission_washington.html

Michael Wilson
Mission: Washington

CBC News Online | February 17, 2006


Jim Blanchard, Washington's ambassador to Canada under former president Bill Clinton, called Wilson the quintessential Canadian: thoughtful, reserved but very strong. He said Harper "hit a home run" by appointing Wilson.

"Michael Wilson comes to with extensive experience in dealing with the U.S. government and in dealing with the diplomatic issues. He will hit the ground running."

Blanchard expects doors to open for Wilson while he's in Washington. He knows a lot of key people from the presidency of Bush's father.

Wilson may be carrying a little baggage into Washington. He's expressed support for the U.S. war in Iraq and said Canada should have helped out — at least with equipment and supplies. But even that hasn't seemed to have been much of a problem: even interim Liberal Leader Bill Graham called Wilson a good choice for the job.

_____________________________________________________________________

http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/media/nr-rp/2005/2005_4_e.html

February 4, 2005
For Immediate Release

News Release

Michael Wilson to serve as Special Ministerial Advisor on Mental Health
VANCOUVER - The Honourable Ujjal Dosanjh, Minister of Health, is pleased to announce the appointment of the Honourable Michael Wilson, former federal finance minister, as special advisor to the Health Minister on mental health in the federal government workplace.

_____________________________________________________________________

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/managing/ceo_interviews/article.jsp?content=20060108_160440_4592

From the October 10-23, 2005 issue of Canadian Business magazine

I became active in mental health advocacy after I left Parliament because I felt it was an important area with few volunteers. I decided that's where I could have some impact. It was about a year and a half after I became really involved in this area that our son became ill . It obviously increased my commitment. But it was an ironic coincidence.

** _________________________________________________________________ **


First off, my impression was pretty good from your wiki thing.

And so with most of the articles I read, of which I read in total, so it took a while.

However one very specific item nags me,

wiki AND in the body of some of the links I posted say that his involvement in mental health, which impressed me as a worthy endeavor, was a result of his son's illness and suicide.

However, note above where he himself states "It was about a year and a half after I became really involved in this area that our son became ill .

I'm gonna hafta verify that one way or 'tother with specific research in the near future.

That's a big discrepancy, and now I'm curious.

The other thing isn't curiosity -

Alarm bells started to ring as soon as I read (from above):

"He knows a lot of key people from the presidency of Bush's father.

Wilson may be carrying a little baggage into Washington. He's expressed
support for the U.S. war in Iraq "

I guess I gotta dig deeper,

but he's heading rapidly toward my "don't trust bin".

I'll be back -

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

133. this OP isn't late breaking news, this is Day Old news already debunked early today

sheesh!

[ConcernedCanuk]

135. You are right. - It is day old news, - at the time of your post.

.
.
.

Time frame

Wed. Feb. 27 2008 11:45 PM ET

- - Date/Time on the Article in the OP

Thurs. Feb-28-08 12:40 AM

- - Date/Time I posted the Article in the OP

Thurs. Feb-28-08 02:40 AM

- - Date/Time of the post you just responded to

Fri. Feb-29-08 02:51 AM

- - Date/Time of your post saying it's not LBN (24 hours later)
_________________________________________________________________


I don't see the problem, and I'm sure if it was NOT LBN -

mods just mighta noticed . .

[IndyOp]

34. This is the best comment on the CTV website in response to the article...

I'm not sure what the U.S. is bitching about. The don't honour any agreement when it doesn't work in their favour, including NAFTA. Softwould lumber leaps to mind, right off the bat. NAFTA was pooly negotiated anyhow. Renegotiation to give teeth to NAFTA rulings might be the best thing.

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

138. Anatomy of a smear: Obama and NAFTA (CTV backing away from claim)

Anatomy of a smear: Obama and NAFTA (CTV backing away from claim)

[niceypoo]

38. When you cannot answer the charge attack the person

Works for the neocons...

[Zhade]

120. See below - DIDN'T HAPPEN. Story's bullshit.

"It didn't happen," said Roy Norton, who heads up the congressional, public and intergovernmental affairs portfolio for the Canadian embassy.

[liberalmike27]

46. Assuming it's true

Then I'd say Canada isn't really the problem any more, rather than the whole idea of free trade, as is. This has the sound of Hillary campaign stuff to me. I'd not trust anything that comes out in the next week, before Texas or Ohio.

[leftofcool]

60. Of course, it comes out on Canadian TV

and the Clintons did it.

Left of Cool

[Chovexani]

102. The Clintons are sekritly Canadian spies eh

Why I saw Hillary eating bacon JUST LAST WEEK. :o

[ConcernedCanuk]

145. EH? - and sshhhhhh - a sekrit is supposed to be a sekrit . . . .

.
.
.

Hope it wasn't CANADIAN bacon (OMG!!)

[Chovexani]

147. OH NOES

PLZ SEND ME TO GITMOOOOOOO

[crimsonblue]

4. hey canada

stay the F out of our election. we can screw it up just fine without your help.
Thanks,
The US

[aquart]

6. Had the brass balls to be a bit nervous about Obama, did they?

It's important that you explain that no one is allowed to criticize Obama.

[aquart]

7. Had the brass balls to be a bit nervous about Obama, did they?

It's important that you explain that no one is allowed to criticize Obama.

What interests me is that Obama's camp seems to be telling Canada not to worry, it's just campaign bullshit.

Hope and Change, folks. Hope and Change.

[orleans]

10. spooky

:scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared:

now i want to know if it's true

[merbex]

78. Hope, but little change is what this foretells n/t

[ExPatLeftist]

22. Arrogant & Ironic

First, you do not speak for the USA.

Second, as US elections have a direct impact on the rest of the world, people all around the world have an interest in them and therefore, I would argue, a right to discuss them.

Don't know if your post was meant as a joke, but this attitude pisses off many around the world. Especially considering the ironic FACT that the US refuses to "stay the F out" of affairs in other countries.

The above replaced my more smartass and ironic response:

"hey USA
Stay the F out of our countries.
Thanks,
THE WORLD"

But then, of course, I do not claim to speak for anyone but myself, unlike you.

[AlertLurker]

73. WTF?

We'll stay the "F" out of your election just as soon as US multinationals stop colluding with our OWN corrupt politicians to our nation's detriment.

[pink-o]

83. Crimson Blue, you are a new member

...I read your post as being sarcastic. But I think I'm the only one. Please reply to your own post to explain yourself further.

[Zhade]

119. You, sir, are an idiot.

NT!

[MagsDem]

8. Instance number 2742 of Obama the phony

I cannot even believe our party has fallen for the bullshit from BO.

[BigBearJohn]

9. Careful Mags. People are going to start believing you (like me).

[libbygurl]

68. Exactly. Such a fake! Glad some media people aren't being (willingly) duped by this...

...hypocritical campaign.

[tidy_bowl]

141. Its not nice to diss The Messiah (tm)!

[oasis]

11. Middle name for Barack Obama: "Bandini".

[swag]

12. Love the reader comments at the link.

[swag]

13. Love the reader comments at the link.

[leftofcool]

14. So let me get this straight

Obama's rhetoric implies that he is against NAFTA or thinks it needs to be overhauled yet he calls or has his staffers call Canada to say, "don't worry about anything I say concerning NAFTA, because I don't really mean it, I'm just using it as a tool to hurt the Clinton campaign." Fair translation? If it is true.......... Pity, I was just begining to think maybe he might be the one.

Left of Cool

[babylonsister]

23. Don't believe everythiing you read on the internet.

I'd find an alternate, credible source before I'd believe this garbage.

[lumpy]

25. Is it garbage ? that is the question. Obama should act fast to

clear this up before it becomes public here in the US. I agree it is not wise to believe every thing to be read on the net or TV, however this is troubling.

[leftofcool]

29. I am not sure yet if it is garabge.

I think there is some truth in this as I found out several days ago and was just waiting to see if it made the news here.

Left of Cool

[babylonsister]

37. I asked a dear friend who lives in Canada about this last night,

and this is the response I got. If you want to do some research, start with Michael Wilson. Also, see post#5 on this thread.
Finally, FWIW, I just don't see anyone connected to Obama responding in that fashion. And this guy is a supporter of this illegal occupation. You connect the dots.


The source of this story is Michael Wilson:

http://www.canadians.org/wordwarriors/2006/feb-15.html

He's a Stephen Harper appointee, a lying POS who makes people like Gonzo and Condi look credible by comparison.

'Nuff said?

I rarely watch the MSM news, and NEVER watch Canadian news, so I didn't even know about this story until your PM. But the minute I saw that Michael Wilson was involved ... well, you know the rest.

[WyldRogue]

74. Funny thing about timestamps

'Spoke to a friend last night' but only 30 mins after you posted you would get an alternative source. Hmm... something just does not add up.

If this is true that Obama is indeed using backdoor rhetoric, them shame on us for swallowing the bitter pilland ignoring the story.

I know you guys would be all over Clinton if it was about her....

Funny how blind faith makes one candidate accountable and not the other.

As for myself, I hold them BOTH accountable and maybe alot of you so called Dems need to do the same before we elect a MISTAKE

[babylonsister]

85. Huh?

You have heard of cut and paste, right? I rec'd the info via a PM last night, and I don't give a damn what you believe. The whole point is to show this isn't necessarily true, which is my choice to do. Don't read it if you don't like where it's going.

[WyldRogue]

87. Duh

Yes, I have heard of copy and paste, it's what the smear jobbers and defenders excel at. Myself, I don't rely on C&P as I am more than capable of researching for myself thank you very much.

But the question I would ask is this: What would YOU be saying about the topic IF it was about Hillary??

You wouldn't be so blase' as you are at the moment now would you?

Also worth mentioning that this topic and subject was brought up TODAY so how could anyone possibly ask someone about said subject/topic last night?? Me thinks you be a bit deceiving but like you stated before:You don't give a damn.

Hold BOTH candidates accountable.

** Bets that this response will be reported and deleted really soon **

[babylonsister]

92. This thread was started last night, genius. And I think I'd be saying

the same thing about Clinton. She wouldn't say one thing in the debate and then turn around and say something entirely different to Canada a day later. The timing is really suspect, but coming from a guy who cheerleaded this war and is friends with the Bushes, there's probably other motives at work. Duh indeed.

And there's no reason I'd alert on your post. You just need to get a clue. Bye now.

[WyldRogue]

95. I apologize...

for my indiscretion and that I don't live on DU day in and day out. Some of us DO have to work.

If this was brought up last night then shame on me, at least I am man enough to admit my mistake.

[babylonsister]

97. There's a time stamp after each line to your right so you

can see when something was posted, right after the date.

[still_one]

30. What makes you think that this story will reach here, since I am skeptical

that it is even true?

[lumpy]

44. I am skeptical that US media would go with the story.

And I have no idea the truthfulness of it. There is one thing though, Canadians have the story obviously and what the response with Canadians could be troubling. Not that Canadians have much influence with US politicians (or confidence).

[lumpy]

47. I would like to add that Obama's opponents will

be aware of this story since it is on the net and on Canadian TV. Campaigners look for every possible source of ammunition to throw at the opponent. I would hope that Obama's campaign will be following it up.

[leftofcool]

26. Didn't see this one on the net until early am

I had already heard the scuttlebut from my Canadian business partner who found this out about 4-5 days ago. I am just surprised it took this long to reach the DU.

Left of Cool

[TheDoorbellRang]

100. Agreed. Here's an odd thing

Why does the story lay out what Obama's alleged staffer said without naming the staffer? Why hold the name back?

This is the second time I've seen an incipient smear on Obama started by saying his staff and/or advisors were cautioning concerned interests not to worry about his "campaign rhetoric."

I say show us some evidence before anyone buys this load of horsehockey.

[JustDavid]

93. This is non-news in a way

A politician says something he doesn't really mean to pander to whoever is in front of them.

Thats been happening since....well, since politicians.

The fact that he may be caught doing it.....well, that might be news. But only for those that want to hear it.

I have a feeling Hillary will run with this as Obama getting caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Right after she wipes a few crumbs from her own face.

[indimuse]

15. if it walks like a ...oops TALKS..(words)

weasel?? ~^~^~^

[natrat]

16. i like obama, but it wont surprise me if he turns out to be a scumbag

[acmavm]

17. This is just so Barrie. To me this is the kind of stuff that DEFINES the man.

[libbygurl]

71. Fake. Just like Elmer Gantry, dontcha think? nt

[griffi94]

18. wow

so obama will say whatever he has to in order to get elected. so much for the hope and change theme.
the hypocrisy is expected, but i wonder if his supporters will see it. somehow i doubt it since they don't seem to be very issue driven anyway.

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. It's called diplomacy

Something our leadership is currently lacking in. And it indicates why Obama will be a far better leaader than our current WH occupant.

[lumpy]

24. What should we believe, Obama tells US voters one thing

and tells Canadians another. I don't call this diplomacy. I call it lying to someone for one's personal gain. Have't we had enough with Bush's brand of 'diplomacy'?

[still_one]

35. On what basis do you believe this is an accurate story and not a smear?

[lumpy]

45. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. I don't know if this story is

accurate. However,if it is true, I wouldn't consider this a diplomatic move by Obama's campaign. Sorry if I gave the impression that I believe the story to be true on face value.

[GoldieAZ49]

107. agreed...and because Obama himself set the bar higher

I am disappointed, and as an Obama supporter feel duped.

I would like the story investigated here in the USA, doesn't look like that is going to happen. I cannot imagine this being all over Canada without some truth to it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

126. I am willing to bet Hillary's campaign also called the Canadian leaders

Just a hunch :)

[griffi94]

40. so having two different positions

that are completely opposite from each other, and changing his position back and forth, depending on who he's speaking to is diplomacy. funny i thought it was flip flopping, or to be more direct, lying.

[proud2BlibKansan]

127. How is it lying?

Obama wants to reform NAFTA. So does Hillary. Surely the Canadians realize that. Unless you know exactly what this staffer supposedly said to the Canadians, how can you say anyone lied?

[Evergreen Emerald]

41. it is called "saying anything to win." Remember when Clinton

was vilified for being a liar?


Double standard.

[LWolf]

19. That's an illustration of the point I've tried to make all along.

It doesn't matter how good his speeches are, or what he SAYS, however charismatic. It matters what he will do.

I think many people, after the last 7 years, are so hungry for hope and change that they don't look past the speeches. They want and need to trust, so they do.

Not me.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

32. Prime example of why faith has no place in politics. n/m

[still_one]

33. Wow, someone post an accusation and we automatically believe it

Should I also believe that Obama is a radical Muslim who isn't patriotic because he doesn't wear the flag lapel

Let's see some confirmation, and at the minimum if you don't even give Obama a chance to respond, then the story is worthless

Incidently, the only way he can respond is if he is made aware of the story

[lumpy]

48. We are aware of the story. If Obama's campaign is not aware

of it he'd better get better campaign managers.

[madmom]

72. "Wow, someone post an accusation and we automatically believe it ".. like when drudge said

they got the Obama pic from the Clinton campaign? Or is that different because it's "her"?

[murbley40]

79. you would believe it in a heartbeat..........

if it was about Hillary.

[LWolf]

130. Who is "we?" You and who else?

I surely hope you are not insinuating that I believe something because somebody posts it. I don't believe what most politicians say when campaigning; why the fuck would I automatically believe what anyone says about them in support or opposition during the course of that campaign?

I'm fully capable of examining available information and coming to my own conclusions. I came to that conclusion about Obama a long time ago.

Popping in to note that I agree with what someone else has said is no indication of gullibility, lol.

As a matter of fact, I made this point quite clearly in the post you are responding to:

I"t doesn't matter how good his speeches are, or what he SAYS, however charismatic. It matters what he will do.

I think many people, after the last 7 years, are so hungry for hope and change that they don't look past the speeches. They want and need to trust, so they do."

I don't give a flying fuck if you are stupid enough to believe that Obama is a radical muslim that isn't patriotic because he doesn't wear a flag pin. I'm blunt enough to say that I am not patriotic in the least, and I wouldn't wear a flag pin on my lapel either. It has nothing to do with the fact that I'm neither a christian, a muslim, or a jew.

Why would you be asking me for confirmation about the story? The OP provided a link. If you want confirmation, contact the press that published it.

Give Obama a chance to respond? Who's stopping him? Of course, since I don't automatically believe anything he says, his response doesn't carry more weight with me than the article at the link does. :shrug:

[debbierlus]

58. I think he comes across as a snakeoil salesman

But, people WANT to believe in easy answers and false platitudes.

Hence, Obama the rockstar.

Ick.

[LWolf]

131. You nailed that one. n/t

[happygoluckytoyou]

20. PROMISES FROM CANDIDATES ARE ALL BULLSHIT

NO NEW TAXES? (BUSH SENIOR)
NO NEW TAXIS? (BLOOMBERG ON NEW YORK CITIES)
WE ARE NOT MARCHING TO WAR (BUSH JUNIOR)
IM NOT HERE TO SPOIL THE ELECTION (NADER)
I DID NOT INHALE (CLINTON (MR))
SOMETIMES A CIGAR IS ONLY A CIGAR (MONICA)

what matters is actions.... in today's elections we know they all have to scrape and lie OR
be like Dennis K (honorable BUT lost)
sadly winning requires attacking...

and lying...

I TRUST THE MAN... 94% HONEST... AS GOOD AS IT GETS !!!


(HAVING SAID THAT... my family will be voting democrat for whichever candidate wins the primary)

[still_one]

27. an Obama senior staff member called Michael Wilson, to warn him?

why should I believe this report? That Obama would tell a staff member to reassure Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric seems pretty far fetched for me.

This is as good as the story a few days ago that it was the Obama campaign that submitted the pictures of him in Muslim garb

Does it even make logical sense that his campaign would tell a foreign source not to take him seriously about NAFTA, when he doesn't even have the nomination yet? I am quite skeptical of this story.

Funny that no other source seems to be picking up on this story?

[leftofcool]

31. Not yet anyway

[elias7]

28. Renegotiation is good. Snap judgements are bad.

To those who are bashing Obama over this: slow down, not everything is black and white, let the story evolve before judgements are made.

[disndat]

36. The swift boating on Obama has started..

What next?

[indio55555]

39. I see it this way..................

If it's true then "shame on you Obama" (LOL), but also think of it this way. Since it's out in the open don't you think he's going to totally go against whatever this thing is all about to save his image when/if he's elected. Anyways I see it as a ploy. This guy is sqeaky clean. The cleanest president nominee I've seen in a long time.

[leftofcool]

43. But his voting record now indicates

that he is not so squeaky clean on the environment.

Left of Cool

[murbley40]

80. Nobody is that clean... believe me...........

The repubs will not let go so easy....they will dig until they find it.

[lumpy]

42. This is the only reference to NAFTA on Canadian Broadcasting

CBC http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/02/27/debate-nafta.html

Guess it's wait and see. Pretty good short article re. Obama and Clinton stance on NAFTA.

[Tarc]

49. Hmm, so now we can add "pandering" to the Anointed One's short resume?

Awesome.

[whosinpower]

50. Of course it is just rhetoric

I can tell you this - as a Canadian - I WOULD DEARLY LOVE TO RENEGOTIATE NAFTA. However - your outrage over Nafta is misplaced as I am not so sure Nafta was the main cause that eroded your manufacturing base. how many jobs were outsourced to Canada or Mexico? I know of many to India, China. Your barking up the wrong tree blaming Nafta I think.

Course with Harper at the reins - who knows what he would give up.....our borders, our currency....

I would love for us Canucks to actually have control over our own energy resources - that would be nice instead of it all going south of the border, and controlled by foreign oil companies. We thank Nafta for that. We would like our oil back.

And you can pay us for all that lumber too - what the real price was. Your downpayment was nice, but now you are long overdue to make the final payment.

And if this story was leaked by Canadian sources - consider that Harper is a Bush wannabe. nuff said.

[hedgehog]

51. Somehow, free trade between Canada and the US does not sound

like a problem to me. For years, we had excellent health insurance because my husband's employer was a Canadian company and our coverage was matched to the Canadian health care system. Also, I live in upstate New York and I haven't seen thousands of factories that don't follow pollution control laws or worker's rights spring up in Ontario. IF there is any basis to this story at all, maybe all that was being conveyed was the acknowledgment that trade between Canada and the US is generally on a fair footing.

[GoldieAZ49]

108. NAFTA has pros and cons to it for all signers to the agreement

What bothers me about this story is that Obama would tell them it was going to be a campaign issue and not to take his rhetoric seriously.

That sucks.

That is not 'change we can believe in'

The longer this campaign goes on the more he sounds like any other politician. Which would be ok if he had not said he was above the politics of the past.

[Divernan]

52. "The Clinton campaign may have given a similar warning." from OP's link

Would you all please read the OP's link before starting the daily scream fest?

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

Throughout the article we don't see any names as to which individuals (from both Obama and Clinton campaigns)are alleged to have passed along said warnings. The claims re each campaign have no back up. It's hearsay piled on hearsay.

Finally, I can't see any advantage to either campaign in talking to the Canadian govt. about this at this point in time. It would be all risk and no gain. There is no urgency involved re relations with Canada; there are no votes to be lost or gained in Canada; and it's not as if the Canadians are going to freak out and storm the border at the thought that the US would exercise its 6 month opt out provision if NAFTA was not renegotiated.

[leftofcool]

53. Clinton

has already responded to this with a denial. The campaign was quick to do so.

Left of Cool

[Divernan]

63. A "quick denial" doesn't allow time to check with all your staff, does it?

The "quick" part doesn't reassure me. The Clinton campaign has gotten rid of other workers for sending out embarassing emails, etc.

[leftofcool]

66. This story has been floating around Canada for several days

If your staffers are on top of things, there has been plenty of time.

Left of Cool

[Divernan]

84. But her staffers are notoriously not on top of things.

Would those be the same staffers who didn't bother to find out how the Texas Two Step electoral system works until earlier this month? The same staffers who failed to develop a Plan B in case Clinton didn't clinch the nomination on Super Tuesday? The same staffers whom Clinton just claimed she told "last Spring" that they had to start working on Texas? Or here in Pennsylvania, the same staffers who haven't (as of yesterday, I believe) organized a single event, while Obama volunteers have set up over 165? The same staffers who moved Bill's speech from a gymnasium in Texas to an outdoor parking lot, at the very last minute, after all the media had set up to cover the event in the gym - thereby losing a lot of valuable press coverage?

And also, the way the Clintons parse words, it depends on the meaning of "my staff". If Clinton found out a staffer had taken an action which would potentially embarass the campaign, she is quite capable of firing/dismissing said staffer on Day 1. Then on Day 2, the Clinton campaign can state unequivocally that none of their (present) staff was responsible for said action.

[GoldieAZ49]

109. I agree that it doesn't make sense to call Canada

however they watch our political process and their comments at the end of the story shows that they are clearly pissed about the debate including NAFTA.

That is the only logical reason I can see, and the article clearly was to calm the Canadians about the debate.

[malik flavors]

54. If this story has been floating around for days, and nobody else has picked up on it...

that would suggest that there's not much truth to it. You know the MSM and the Clintons would be all over this if there was anyhting actually there. It doesn't even make since that his campaign would say something like that to Canadian offcials during a primary.

LOL@People just believing anything they read even if it hasn't been backed up by anyone or anything other than this single source.

[mistertrickster]

55. Now that Obama's a serious threat to the Pukes, the attacks begin in earnest.

Shame on DU mods for putting this as their banner story.

Makes me glad I didn't contribute lately . . .

[Clintonista2]

61. So Republicans own Canadian TV now too?

Or is it the Clintons that do? Why is the Obama campaign not denying the charge?

[mistertrickster]

62. You never heard of campaign dirty tricks? nt

[Clintonista2]

69. Sure I have, I'm just unsure of who you think is doing the tricking

So let's say a Clinton staffer calls the Canadian ambassador, claiming to be working for Obama, and makes these statements. These statements are completely false, as it is purely a campaign dirty trick. Why would the "real" Obama campaign refuses to deny these false charges? Please explain, thanks.

[malik flavors]

76. For the same reason the Clinton's haven't out right denied posting the Obama "dressed" photo...

You want to make sure nobody in your staff made a dum mistake without authorization before you flatout deny it and then have it come back to bite you. But the main point is that if this were true the Clintons would be having a press conference RIGHT NOW about it. There's no way they would let this go if they thought it was legit. So I think we can assume this is b.s. until we see atleast ONE other source confirming something...ANYTHING that's in the article.

[ProSense]

56. Front page garbage. Obama has been speaking out publicly against NAFTA for years.

Canada didn't know that? Does anyone not see the AEI source? This smacks of RW Rovian BS!

[debbierlus]

57. So? Obama is a corporatist. He is the new face of change without the change

This isn't news.

It is beyond astounding that 'progressive' people fawn over a man who refuses to demand not for profit health care, and inserted a openly hostile ex-gay as a speaker for him in the South.

Obama is such an obvious snakeoil salesman, it is utterly astounding that progressives fall for the rheoteric.

The repukes had their cowboy.

We have Obama.

[LWolf]

144. "The new face of change without the change."

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Cass]

59. If there is any truth to this, the voters need to know Obama is pandering to them for their vote.

If there is no truth to it then it needs to be squashed as it is a smear piece. This cannot be left hanging like this, it needs to be verified one way or another.

[Divernan]

64. And I wonder why DU put this up as their banner story on the home page.

with no named source, and with Clinton staffers referred to in the same story.

[leftofcool]

67. The source is Canadian TV

And the source to them was supposedly a high level Obama staffer.

Left of Cool

[Divernan]

101. For future reference, now that this anonymous lie has been debunked,

A descriptive phrase like "high level Obama staffer" does not constitute a source's name. Otherwise no journalists would ever have to face imprisonment for refusing to identify their source. They could just say "high level campaign/government/industry/whatever staffer."

[Leopolds Ghost]

114. Debunked how?

It's telling that the Obama supporters on this thread claim the story has no merit
but "even if true" they have no problem with NAFTA and no problem with lying to
working-class voters.

They claim Clinton, who did the EXACT SAME THING (both candidates have openly lied
and want free trade; they will not attack each other for it) would wrap herself in
the mantle of ending NAFTA and go after Obama if this story is true (which it is of course.)

The worst part is DU has bought into the NAFTA lie hook line and sinker.

DUers do not seem to care about NAFTA or CFR and are unconcerned if their candidate
reverses themselves privately on the issue to assure wealthy supporters.

[GoldieAZ49]

110. Agreed, either Americans were duped by Obama or Canadians were duped with a false story n/t

[libbygurl]

65. Thanks for this. Why NOT mentioned in the wonderful US media? nt

[leftofcool]

70. I am sure it will

GOP will latch on to it.

Left of Cool

[libbygurl]

75. .

:kick:

[AlertLurker]

77. As if any US Politician is going to mess with NAFTA. Pffft.

The USA does not want the agreement re-opened or renegotiated with respect to Canada (MEXICO, perhaps...).

The first thing that Canada would want to do is renegotiate the Oil cand Gas "Proportionality Clause" and then renegotiate a) Softwood Lumber b) Fishing Rights (especially BC Salmon) and c) the "AutoPact."

It. Just. Ain't. Gonna. Happen.

[Leopolds Ghost]

115. Since NAFTA needs to be ended, that is fine with me.

Suck it up, US should not agree to MORE free trade corporocrat agreements
with Canadian resource extraction quislings.

To draw a distinction between Canada and Mexico is racist.

And you have no business telling us what OUR politicians will and won't do
to satisfy YOUR employers up north.

[AlertLurker]

136. Yep, I think Canada should get out of NAFTA, too.

We are getting screwed by US MNCs in oh, so many ways...

As far as your nasty comments are concerned, a) I can tell your politicians anything I want. Since I am unable to vote for any of them, however, it is unlikely that any of them would pay any attention.

b) Canada is a different country than Mexico. USA has different trade issues with Canada than they do with Mexico. To point this out is racist? GFY - You are full of shit.

c) WTF is a Canadian resource extraction quisling? Like we have a fucking CHOICE? Ever read the Proportionality Clause? NAFTA reserves Canadian oil SOLELY for USAmericans' oil and gas security. Canada HAS NO CHOICE but to export AT LEAST 63 per cent of the oil it produces and 56 per cent of its natural gas to the USA. We can NEVER reduce this amount without reducing our own consumption by an identical proportion.

Personally, I'd be much happier if we nationalised our Oil and Gas industries and just kicked the corporations the fuck out. There's no way that we should HAVE to pump out the amount we deplete for US interests on an annual basis - used wisely and minimally, Canadian Oil Sands could last a millenium.

Fat chance of THAT ever happening, though.

[Zhade]

148. We're stealing YOUR oil, too?

You guys should totally tell our government to fuck off.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

137. we get large amount of our oil from Canada

in the case of US/Canada trade, NAFTA may be a good deal for the US.

Leave it to Timmeh to try to corner candidates into carte blanche repudiating the whole thing.

[Megahurtz]

143. Dude

I can agree with everything else you're saying but FYI Mexico is a Country not a Race. :think:

Sheesh.

[ProSense]

81. The Obama campaign confirms the story is BS!

The sourcing is blind, and I've got a call into the embassy for their take. The Obama campaign is denying it.

"?The news reports on Obama's position on NAFTA are inaccurate and in no way represent Senator Obama?s consistent position on trade," says Obama spokesman Bill Burton. "When Senator Obama says that he will forcefully act to make NAFTA a better deal for American workers, he means it. Both Canada and Mexico should know that, as president, Barack Obama will do what it takes to create and protect American jobs and strengthen the American economy -- that includes amending NAFTA to include labor and environmental standards. We are currently reaching out to the Canadian embassy to correct this inaccuracy."

link

[WyldRogue]

94. Wow

An Obama staffer says it's untrue and so it becomes the Word of God and story QUICKLY disappears...hmm.. DU is definitely playing favoritism.

Good work Obama supporters!

[ProSense]

98. How embarrassing!

Amazing that people are salivating over as story that claims "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."

Is there a disconnect that causes people to not see the idiocy of that time frame? Obama has been speaking out publicly against NAFTA for years. A story quoting a person from Rove's AEI claiming the somehow Canada needed to be warned this month about something that's been going on for several years is beyond ridiculous.

[GoldieAZ49]

112. the Canadian embassy needs to correct it ASAP

either Americans were duped by Obama or Canadians were duped with a false story, the longer it hangs out there, the worse it is

[Leopolds Ghost]

116. Meaningless statement.

Sounds like Hillary's position on the issue. Lots of weasel words.

[lumpy]

117. Thank you for posting this. Every bit of info is important to

us.

[ACanadianLiberal]

82. I have to admit that lying is part of skill set to unite people in the real life.

The unity may not last long, but it works as far as it goes. Self-delusion is part of our beautiful life. Many times if you want to see through the thing sparkling and shining you may get nothing but a false reality decorated in a way pleasing us.

Sometimes truth hurts!

[cliffordu]

86. YAWN..........

In the real world we want dates and times and maybe some NAMES........before we piss all over candidates.....

But not here at Rumor Central. I mean D.U.

Next Big Story:

Obama is Really a RUSSIAN AGENT!!!!

I heard it on Telemundo!!!! I don't speak Spanish, but that's what my maid said!!!!

OMFG OMFG OMFG!!!!!

[malik flavors]

88. Now that the story has been debunked, I think it's a good idea to take it off the front page...

Thank you in advance

[leftofcool]

89. Did Canadian TV retract the story?

I want to see what the Embassy says after Obama has talked to them.

Left of Cool

[malik flavors]

90. Whatever eases your gullible mind.

[ACanadianLiberal]

91. Up to this point, I start to lean to Hillary even now the chance for her

is getting quite slim. We the people actually are the big part of conspiracy to fail ourself. We believe in rhetorics more than real solutions because their over-simplified construction relieve our lazy bones quite promptly.

Now NAFTA becomes a dirty word, like liberal. Nobody wants to carefully lay out a spreadsheet to illustrate those things in NAFTA benefitting us, things not good for us, things that can be improved by certain negotiations and bargains, things that come along as by-products that cannot be avoided. NAFTA is all bad, just dump it. Right? Let me tell you, the best solution might be that we all (American) move to the Mars tomorrow, even right now, and let us leave those people (non-American) hopelessly staty on the earth. Beautiful solution for you!

[malik flavors]

96. If you spent as much time informing yourself on the candidates instead of just believing the hype...

You would realize that none of our candidates on either side offer simply rhetoric, they all have great solutions for America, and are extremely intelligent and are prepared to lead this nation if elected. I'm assuming you're referencing Obama and at this very moment he's giving a town hall in Tx that's being streamed on CNN, and he's covering every issue the audience is throwing at him and he's covering each in great detail and with all the specifics that would be expected from any presidential candidate. Those that just blindly follow campaign narratives are as silly as those that just blindly vote for the word change.

As for Nafta, Clinton and Obama both hold the same position on the issue, so any critque of one candidate is a critique of the other as well.

[Leopolds Ghost]

118. Yes, they're both pro-NAFTA & lying about it because they understand how ignorant most Americans are

And how unfamiliar they are with what a manufacturing economy looks like!

[babylonsister]

99. HOLD YOUR HORSES~UPDATE:

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

Canadians deny Obama call

A spokesman for the Canadian Embassy to the United States, Tristan Landry, flatly denied the CTV report that a senior Obama aide had told the Canadian ambassador not to take seriously Obama's denunciations of Nafta.

"None of the presidential campaigns have called either the Ambassador or any of the officials here to raise Nafta," Landry said.

He said there had been no conversations at all on the subject.

"We didn't make any calls, they didn't call us," Landry said.

"There is no story as far as we’re concerned," he said.

[OhioChick]

104. You Need to Start a New LBN Thread on This! n/t

[ConcernedCanuk]

111. I find numerous references all over the blogs,but not ONE newspaper yet - so I'll wait

.
.
.

of interest tho on one blog I noticed the following:

"Norton did allow, however, that the embassy on the staff level had discussed multiple issues, including NAFTA, with the Obama and Hillary campaigns at various times, and had urged them to look at NAFTA in a positive light.

"We've impressed upon them the fact that NAFTA has been good for all three countries," Norton said. "They have made it clear that NAFTA is an issue of contention in the , and that inevitably there would be discussion and debate surrounding NAFTA."
______________________________________________________________________

So SOMETHING got CTV and CBS to cover this

And believe me

CTV will be the FIRST to cry foul if this story has no base in truth.

And people in the Embassy staff ADMIT that NAFTA has been a topic discussed more than once with the Democratic delegates.

One misspoken comment may be all it took to set this issue in flames.

I don't know.

But I'm sure our media up here is scrambling to get at the truth.

They'll let us know soon. I DO have faith in the integrity of most of our Main Media up here.

I'll have to wait to satisfy myself one way or another.

And watch.

[GoldieAZ49]

113. Thank you!!!!!!

I hope they disclose where and how this was started, that person should be drawn and quartered!

[LibertyorDeath]

103. Story is complete bullshit

and Robertson, and Clark should be ashamed of reporting such

Unsubstantiated BullShit..

February 28, 2008 12:09 PM

ABC News' Jennifer Parker Reports: A senior Canadian Embassy official in Washington, D.C. disputes a report by the CTV Canadian television network that an Obama campaign staffer telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the United States, to reassure him that campaign rhetoric against NAFTA should not be taken seriously.

"It didn't happen," said Roy Norton, who heads up the congressional, public and intergovernmental affairs portfolio for the Canadian embassy.

Norton said none of the three campaigns for Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Hillary Clinton, or Sen. John McCain have contacted the embassy.

"Neither before the Ohio debate nor since has any of the U.S. presidential campaigns called Ambassador Wilson or the Canadian embassy to raise NAFTA," he said.

CTV reported last night that two unnamed Canadian sources said a "senior member" of Obama's campaign team called Wilson in the last month to warn him that Obama would be ratcheting up rhetoric against the North American Free Trade Agreement, but that he should "not be worried about what Obama says about NAFTA" and "Its just campaign rhetoric...Its not serious."

[arikara]

105. The Canadian government and media

are owned by the same interests that own the American gov't and media. They don't care who gets in... as long as its either Clinton or McCain.

I'm still not sure about Obama but if they're spreading lies about him from that level then he's sure a lot better choice than either of the other two.

[BearSquirrel2]

106. Canada isn't the problem ...

The problem is NOT Canada. They have a similar standard of living and payed health care. The problem is the Mexico part of the agreement.

[ExtraGriz]

121. youtube link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAJYMgX4JuU

[axordil]

122. Thanks! Can't ever have too many links to discredited stories

Seriously, it's dead, Jim. Obvious plant by someone on the GOP side of things or a Canadian conservative sympathizer--after all, it impugned both Obama and Clinton. I'm glad the Canadian embassy shot it down so quickly and thoroughly.

[sueragingroz]

123. This is what I nabbed from the Globe and Mail today at lunch

I couldn't post it here when I read it because DU and other such sites are blocked..

But better late than never I suppose:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080228.wnaftaottawasb28/BNStory/Front

Relevant excerpts:

OTTAWA — Americans' privileged access to Canada's massive oil and gas reserves could be disrupted if Washington cancels the NAFTA accord as Democratic presidential candidates threaten, Canadian Trade Minister David Emerson warned yesterday.

"There's no doubt if NAFTA were to be reopened we would want to have our list of priorities," he said.

"Knowledgeable observers would have to take note of the fact that we are the largest supplier of energy to the United States, and NAFTA has been kind of a foundation of integrating the North American energy market," Mr. Emerson said.

"When people get below the rhetoric and start picking away at the details, you are going to find that it's not such a slam-dunk proposition to go from the rhetoric to a meaningful improvement," he said.

But Mr. Obama's rhetoric on the subject may be just that, CTV News reported last night. Citing Canadian sources, the network said that a senior member of Mr. Obama's campaign team called Canada's U.S. ambassador, Michael Wilson, within the past month, warning him that Mr. Obama would be taking some "heavy swings" at NAFTA in the campaign.

"Don't worry, ... it's just campaign rhetoric, ... it's not serious," CTV reported the campaign official as saying.

He scoffed at Democratic suggestions that they want to toughen labour and environmental provisions, saying: "I don't think the United States has got anything to teach Canada about labour and the environment."

It's far from certain that tearing up NAFTA would leave Canada without any trade deal with the U.S. That's because its predecessor, the Canada-U.S. free-trade agreement (FTA) of 1988, was suspended, not cancelled, when NAFTA came into force and it was what delivered the benefits of free trade to the two nations.

"My understanding is that abrogation of the NAFTA would automatically trigger reversion to the FTA," Michael Hart, a trade expert at Carleton University who helped negotiate the original Canada-U.S. free-trade deal, said.

"In U.S. law, there is both a NAFTA Implementation Act and an FTA Implementation Act. Congress would need to revoke the first, which would then reactivate the second," Mr. Hart said.

Gordon Ritchie, an architect of the Canada-U.S. FTA, said Canada would be in a good position to weather things if the free-trade arrangements fell apart because the two economies have become much more integrated since 1992. Also, since then, multilateral trade rules have cut global tariffs and established a World Trade Organization system to arbitrate disputes that's no worse than the NAFTA mechanism, he said.

"At the end of the day, the Americans would be foolish to embark on this course, but if they did, we could deal with it just fine," Mr. Ritchie said. "It wouldn't be the end of the world."

and it goes on from there.

Canada is the repository for the fresh water and the oil (not to mention the talent) that America will need in the upcoming decades.

Unless Americans want to invade, they will have to play ball. It's really that simple.

[libbygurl]

129. Good on you, Canada! nt

[sendero]

124. In case there is anyone here who hasn't figured it out..

.... 90% of everything every presidential candidate says is campaign rhetoric. Even if they WANTED to do the things they talk about, they are unlikely to have the power to do so.

Big Fat Hairy Deal.

[reggie the dog]

125. 1 USD = 0.976368 CAD 1 CAD = 1.02420 USD as of today

You should consider yourselves lucky that Canadians would consider having free trade with you. You need 1.02 of your American Dollars to have 1.00 Canadian dollars. You need 1.52 us Dollars to have 1.00 Euros. You need 1.99 us dollars to have 1.00 UK pounds. The US economy is in the shitter. Of course free trade with CANADA is not the problem. The problem is free trade with MEXICO, which has a currency valued far less than the US dollar

[libbygurl]

128. Thanks for the TRUTH, Canada!

:kick:

[ConcernedCanuk]

132. Update - CTV not backing down on story.

.
.
.

Opponents slam Obama after CTV story on NAFTA

Updated Fri. Feb. 29 2008 12:37 AM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

/snip/


The Obama campaign told CTV late Thursday night 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.


However, 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.


Earlier Thursday, the Obama campaign insisted that no conversations have taken place with any of its senior ranks and representatives of the Canadian government on the NAFTA issue. On Thursday night, CTV spoke with Goolsbee, but he 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 question to the campaign headquarters.

/snip/

But just yesterday, one of the primary sources of the story, a high-ranking member of the Canadian embassy, gave CTV more details of the call. He even provided a timeline. He has since suggested it was perhaps a miscommunication.

/snip/

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.
________________________________________________________________________

You pretty much have to read the whole article.(20 more paragraphs)

I picked my snips carefully so they made sense.

But CTV is sticking to their story.

Something to ponder

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

134. CTV, far from standing behind story, is rapidly backing away from it

CTV may not be backing down, but instead are revising their story, and it is still a smear job.

Anatomy of a smear: Obama and NAFTA

February 28, 2008 Posted by Mark Kleiman at The Reality-Based Community

....Just one thing, though: the story reeks of fish, and CTV, far from standing behind it, is rapidly backing away from it. The original account vaguely mentions "Canadian sources." The follow-up, which includes denials from Obama and from the Ambassador, gets a little more specific: now the source is said to be "a high-ranking member of the Canadian embassy." But suddenly that source isn't so sure he had it right in the first place: "He has since suggested it was perhaps a miscommunication."

Swiftly switching gears, CTV now claims to be pursuing, not a conversation between a senior Obama staffer and the Canadian Ambassador, but a phone call between Austan Goolsbee — not a staffer but an academic at the University of Chicago who has been advising Obama — and someone (unnamed, of course) in the Canadian Consulate-General in Chicago.

Since we have no evidence for any of this save the word of CTV, and since CTV can't get its story straight, anyone who claims to believe the story — that is, McCain and his odd bedfellows Marsh and Johnson — ought to be presumed to be in bad faith. It might be true, but there's no reason for any fair-minded person to believe that it's true.

Is it possible that Goolsbee — like most economists, a free trader by instinct — tried to say something calming to someone he knew at the Consulate General in Chicago? Sure. But so what?

more at the link

[Eileen]

140. Who the fuck is that????

Mark Kleiman?? A nobody blogger on the internet and you pretend he is a more credible source than a major TV source from a country larger than the USA!!

The trouble with this story is that by and large the Canadian journalists are being equated with the partisan integrity-free hacks who report on FOX and CNN and MSNBC at the bidding of their masters. Oh sure there are odd Keith Olbermann exceptions but by and large what passes for journalism in the USA today is nothing but dreck. That's the reason so many who want to be informed turn to European and Canadian news sources for news that has less corporate filtering.

CTV's follow up - quoted above - speaks for itself and the fact that the named source of the information will not deny the exchange gives all the credibility the story needs.

So let's face it - with Obama it's simply dirty lying politics as usual and any claim to be running a more honest campaign has just been blown out of the water. He'll tell the shills what they want to hear. Unfortunately this time he expected the Canadian press to treat him as his sycophants in the US press do and they disappointed him by engaging in real journalism.

[itcfish]

139. If This Happen Been Reported

About Hillary, it would be reported on every news show till Nov. The anti Hillary crowd in DU would be calling her all kinds of name, but dear Obama gets a free pass yet again.

[Megahurtz]

142. NAFTA.

Good for Canada, lousy for the U.S.

[robcon]

146. Obama's economic advisor has admitted he spoke to the Canadians.

He has pointedly NOT denied that he undercut Obama's message on NAFTA...

Obama Adviser Urged to Come Clean on Canadian Contacts

"Obama economic adviser Austan Goolsbee was challenged by Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson on Friday to answer whether he had contact with the Canadian government, embassy, or anyone who would relay a conversation to the Canadian government regarding NAFTA.

"Very simple question," said Wolfson. "It deserves a very simple answer: Has Austan Goolsbee had any contact with anyone in the Canadian government or the embassy to send such a message?"

Speaking on a conference call with reporters, Wolfson said if Goolsbee signaled that Obama's anti-NAFTA rhetoric shouldn't be taken seriously, it would represent "saying one thing and doing another."

On Thursday, Goolsbee told ABC's Jennifer Parker that Canada's consul general in Chicago contacted him "at one point to say 'hello' because their office is around the corner."

Goolsbee refused, however, to deny whether he downplayed Obama's anti-NAFTA rhetoric."
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=3105455&page=1