Skip to main content

View Diary: Update: Obama's Big Lie About NAFTA (80 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Ad hominem fallacy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jacob Freeze

    The memo exists and matches the CTV report.

    •  it does NOT match the CTV report. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      maxomai, Ahianne, Scoopster

      On Wednesday, CTV reported that a senior member of Obama's campaign called the Canadian government within the last month -- saying that when Senator Obama talks about opting out of the free trade deal, the Canadian government shouldn't worry.

      First of all he's never said he would opt out. He said we should use the threat of opt out as leverage and also said on the stump that an opt out is not realistic. Second he did not call the Canadian government. They initiated the contact with him.

      That's what they were denying. The Goolsbee memo does not corroborate any of this. The language about "political positioning" was the stenographer's summary of a conversation about protectionism. Maybe taking a protectionist tone for political reasons is hyppocritical but that's splitting hairs. When it comes to the meat of what he said about NAFTA it matches his public statements. Period.

      •  If that's what they were denying (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jacob Freeze

        ...it's parsing in the extreme. What difference does it make if it was a phone call, or face-to-face meeting? The salient point is that Obama (Goolsbee) told them that his campaign rhetoric was BS political posturing. And note that his denial said no contact had been made on the issue.

        And I saw the Ohio debate--Obama threatened to opt out of NAFTA for the first time. I suspect this was to try to defuse the growing charge that he was pandering on NAFTA because he hadn't said he would end it.

        It was an empty threat, I realize, as he is a NAFTA supporter and wouldn't be so stupid as to get rid of it.

        But the heart of the issue is his dishonesty and pandering.

        •  Again, that's not what he said (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Ahianne, Scoopster

          They were discussing the campaign rhetoric in reference to the fact that NAFTA was going to become a major issue on the trail. And that the frequency at which it shows up in his speeches is about political positioning and does not mean that Obama is a protectionist. These comments were summarised in the memo as what you just said. I don't really see that as hyppocritical.

          And again, you're ignoring the fact that the memo says he wants to renegotiate, which is what he said on the trail. There is no contradiction. The part about political positioning was referring to the overall tone of his speeches and the fact that someone might interpret them as protectionist.

          Obama said many times that he is not a protectionist. he said trade deals are a reality and the global economy is not going away BUT trade deals should have environmental and other standards in place.

          And yes, the way the campaign denied things was stupid. I acknowledge that. They handled this issue very badly.

        •  And btw, the embassy that wrote the report (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Ahianne, Scoopster

          had this to say:

           

           In a statement, the Canadian Embassy expressed regret on how the discussions have been interpreted.

             The statement said "there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA."

          The memo was exploited for political purposes.

        •  And it's nott the phone call vs. face/face (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Scoopster

          That's not what's important. What's important is Obama didn't initiate the contact.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site