Clinton: Obama gave the "the old wink-wink" to Canadian officials regarding NAFTA

[sabra]

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/clinton_obama_gave_canada_wink.html

TOLEDO, OH -- Hillary Clinton -- fighting to hold a slim lead in Ohio -- is seizing on a leaked memo indicating that a top Barack Obama adviser assured Canadian officials the candidate's attacks on NAFTA were motivated by primary politics.

The former first lady -- ratcheting up her battle with the press -- suggested the Canada story would be getting more attention if the memo had referred to her campaign's activities.

Speaking to reporters here this morning, Clinton said, "If you come to Ohio and you go give speeches that are very critical of NAFTA... and then we find out that your chief economic adviser has gone to a foreign government and basically done the old wink-wink – 'Don’t pay any attention, this is just political rhetoric' -- I think that raises serious questions."

Peering at the 50 or so reporters packed into a small hotel conference room here, she added: "I would ask you to look at this story and substitute my name for Sen. Obama’s name and see what you would do with this story… Just ask yourself (what you would do) if some of my advisers had been having private meetings with foreign governments."

The memo, written by a Canadian embassy official and leaked to the AP, claims that the campaign's top economic adviser Austan Goolsbee assured him that Obama's anti-NAFTA remarks "should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

Goolsbee has denied that he made the comments attributed to him.

Harper meddling in U.S. primaries, Democrats say

Two years after U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins was accused of meddling in Canada's federal election, the same is being said of Stephen Harper's Conservatives with respect to the current U.S. contest.

Democrats appearing on a nationwide U.S. political program accused the Harper government yesterday of interfering in the primary campaigns to help the Republican Party candidate in the coming campaign.

"You've got a right-wing government in Canada that is trying to help the Republicans and is out there actively interfering in this campaign," Bob Shrum told the popular program, Meet the Press. Mr. Shrum is a top-level Democrat adviser who has had key roles in the presidential campaigns of Al Gore and John Kerry.

At issue are reports that members of Mr. Harper's prime ministerial office leaked word last week that a member of Barack Obama's campaign told a Canadian diplomat that Mr. Obama was not serious when he raised the possibility of renegotiating the free-trade agreement.

That statement has become fodder for Mr. Obama's opponents, who have accused the Illinois senator of saying one thing to win votes in hard-pressed states such as Ohio, and another to keep the peace with the Canadian government.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080227/dems_nafta_080227/20080227

<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.

"Senator Obama does not make promises he doesn't intend to keep," the spokesperson said.

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

[Kittycat]

1. The canadian officials denied this. Why is she lying?

[leftofcool]

3. Because the memo

negates the denial

[Metric System]

5. Well a memo has come to light proving that a meeting did indeed occur:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Democrats-NAFTA.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[JackORoses]

7. you mean a note with no way of tracing where it came from? that is your evidence?

[Marie26]

8. Goolsbee now acknowledges that the meeting occured

Yes, Goolsbee & the Obama campaign originally denied it, but they have since changed their story.

[sabra]

9. the orginal article notes they never denied the meeting...

<snip>

"did not deny that contact had been made."

[Marie26]

11. No, they did deny it at first

That's why there's still so many Obama supporters who say that the campaign denied it & it didn't happen. That was the original story that the Obama campaign put out there - they only acknowlged the truth after the memo surfaced.

Obama Adviser Denies CTV's Latest On NAFTA"
"February 29, 2008

The New York Observer managed to track down Austan Goolsbee, the Obama adviser who, according to the latest report on Canada TV, was the one who may have told a Canadian official that Obama's anti-NAFTA stump speech is merely "campaign rhetoric."

And Goolsbee denies it:

“It is a totally inaccurate story,” he said. “I did not call these people and I direct you to the press office.”

Meanwhile, Obama spokesperson Bill Burton also denies this latest round, via email:

This story is not true. There was no one at any level of our campaign, at any point, anywhere, who said or otherwise implied Obama was backing away from his consistent position on trade.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/obama_adviser_denies_ctvs_late.php

[ContinentalOp]

32. "I did not call these people"

That's because the CTV reports changed who "those people" were. In the original report they said it was a phone call to the Canadian ambassador. Now they're saying it was a meeting with the Canadian consulate in Chicago. It's a little hard for the Obama campaign to offer a clarification or denial of a story when that story keeps changing.

[Marie26]

36. It depends what the definition of "is" is.

Yeah, it was an excellent non-denial, very carefully phrased to give the impression that they denied the meeting, when in fact he was only disputing who he met with. But he never clarified that - no, they just published numerous "denials" claimining "inaccuracies" & left the impression that they were denying ever meeting w/Canadian officials over NAFTA, when in fact they knew the meeting had happened. They MISLEAD voters.

[flyarm]

44. Lie Of Omission is still a lie..

Lying by omission
Lying by omission is when an important fact is omitted, deliberately leaving another person with a misconception. This includes failures to correct pre-existing misconceptions. One may by careful speaking contrive to give correct but only partial answers to questions, thus never actually lying

[ContinentalOp]

58. Where are these numerous denials?

Do you have links? I only could find one brief denial from Goolsbee who said that the original story was totally inaccurate (which it was) and directed reporters to the campaign.

The original CTV report had the who wrong -- it was the Canadian Consulate in Chicago, not the Canadian Ambassador. They had the what and where wrong -- it was a meeting, not a phone call. And they had the why wrong -- it was not an attempt to alert canadian authorities not to take campaign rhetoric at face value as originally claimed by CTV. It was a 40 minute meeting where 3 minutes were spent discussing NAFTA and Goolsbee told the Canadians that "Obama is less about fundamentally changing the agreement and more in favour of strengthening/clarifying language on labour mobility and environment and trying to establish these as more `core' principles of the agreement."

I mean, every single part of the story was wrong. How can you expect them to "clarify" that?

[Marie26]

66. Telling the truth?

The numerous denials are posted here. And of course they wanted people to think the meeting didn't happen - look at the headline "Obama campaign denies NAFTA report". Look at the past threads on this topic; people all took it as a denial. The media took it as a denial. No one diagramed the sentence to say, ah, he's denying that the meeting took place at location A or that he wore a blue tie. It is just like Bill Clinton saying there "is" no relationship w/Lewinsky when the press asked if he had had an affair w/her. Oh, he wasn't, technically lying, right? Just giving a false impression. And they're still lying even now. Goolsbee basically confirms everything in the memo, just claims that he didn't use a specific phrase. Well, of course not, it's not a quote, but a paraphrase by the Canadian official who wrote the memo.

It wouldn't be so bad if they'd just said, yeah, there was a meeting, so what? We wanted to build alliances with Canada & reach out to build unity blah blah. And it probably would've worked, though it'd cost them a few votes in Ohio. But they didn't do that - instead they tried to pretend that they'd never contacted Canadian officials, denied the CTV reports, mislead voters & only came clean when the memo surfaced. That's pretty scuzzy. The lies & denials are worse than the actual meeting in many ways. And I take it personal, cause it's like they just planned to fool working-class voters.

[flyarm]

19. ahh yes Obama's economic adviser did deny the meeting took place..he lied it seems..

and by representing the Obama campaign ..he in essence lied for the Obama campaign.


thanks to Marie 26 who posted this earlier on another thread..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4857003&mesg_id=4857568


Obama Adviser Denies CTV's Latest On NAFTA" "February 29, 2008

The New York Observer managed to track down Austan Goolsbee, the Obama adviser who, according to the latest report on Canada TV, was the one who may have told a Canadian official that Obama's anti-NAFTA stump speech is merely "campaign rhetoric."

And Goolsbee denies it:

“It is a totally inaccurate story,” he said. “I did not call these people and I direct you to the press office.”
Meanwhile, Obama spokesperson Bill Burton also denies this latest round, via email:

This story is not true. There was no one at any level of our campaign, at any point, anywhere, who said or otherwise implied Obama was backing away from his consistent position on trade.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02...


Closely followed by....

"Another Version Of The Goolsbee Story From ABC News"

Below we noted that The New York Observer had gotten Austan Goolsbee to deny that he'd had any conversations with any Canadian official about whether Obama's NAFTA stump talk was mere "campaign rhetoric," as Canada TV reported.

“It is a totally inaccurate story,” Goolsbee told The Observer “I did not call these people and I direct you to the press office.”

But ABC News reached Goolsbee, too, and they had a different conversation:

ABC News' Jennifer Parker spoke to Goolsbee, a University of Chicago economics professor, Thursday who would not confirm or deny that he had a conversation with Georges Rioux, the Canadian Consulate General in Chicago. Rioux, in meetings this week in Ottawa, would also neither confirm nor deny any conversation took place. Both men did say that they know each other.
So, according to ABC, neither of those two men would confirm or deny whether they talked. The Obama campaign has a statement out today that doesn't explicitly mention Goolsbee, but said the story is "not true," and added that "no one at any level of our campaign, at any point, anywhere, who said or otherwise implied Obama was backing away from his consistent position on trade."

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02...



Obama also lied to the Iowa voters..so this does not surprise many of us.

fly

[ContinentalOp]

33. He did not lie.

He said he didn't make a phone call to the Canadian ambassador, which was the original CTV story. Now they changed their story to a meeting with the Canadian Consulate General in Chicago, which apparently did happen. He never denied that. These half-assed smear merchants just keep changing their story to try to seem as though they caught him in a lie.

[MonkeyFunk]

42. Well he certainly didn't come clean, did he?

[flyarm]

45. a Lie of omission is still a lie..

Lying by omission
Lying by omission is when an important fact is omitted, deliberately leaving another person with a misconception. This includes failures to correct pre-existing misconceptions. One may by careful speaking contrive to give correct but only partial answers to questions, thus never actually lying

[ContinentalOp]

59. What should Goolsbee's response have been?

So even though every single aspect of the original CTV report was inaccurate, Goolsbee should have freely volunteered details of other meetings he's been involved with? "No that story is inaccurate, maybe you're thinking of this other meeting that took place where I said this and that."

[flyarm]

68. truth..its an amazing thing..and it will come forward no matter how many lies one tells..

didn't your mother teach you that????????

fly

[fishwax]

79. where in there does he deny that the meeting took place?

Is that the quote people are referring to when they say that Obama initially denied the meeting took place, or are there other quotes/sources?

[oasis]

13. Obama's double talk exposed just in time.(eom)

[indimuse]

22. hopefully.

.

[Marie26]

31. And continues...

Bill Burton now says that Googlsbee did visit Canadian officials. In this visit, Goolsbee specifically laid out what Obama would do & what he meant w/his NAFTA rhetoric. But now Burton says that Goolsbee wasn't acting as a Obama campaign rep. but just a random U of Chicago professor. OK.... :crazy: The double-speak hurts my head.


"As Obama continues to court the economic populist vote, particularly in upcoming contests like Ohio, we are likely to see a continuation of some of the messaging that hasn't played in Canada's favour, but this should continue to be viewed in the context in which it is delivered," DeMora wrote in the closing section.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Goolsbee's visit was not as an emissary from the campaign, but as a professor from the University of Chicago.

[oasis]

77. "I'll be he kind of President that doesn't just tell American what they want to hear,

I'll tell them the truth". OOOOOObama.

[rodeodance]

57. in the nick of time

[rodeodance]

89. oh, i think it has been

[riskpeace]

18. That seems like parsing to me.

Whether it is a memo or a note, it shows that the previous versions of the story from the Obama campaign were less than full disclosure. Also, Mr. Goolsbee now acknowledges that the meeting took place.

[flyarm]

21. no they lied..plain and simple..they lied!

thanks to Marie 26 who posted this earlier on another thread..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4857003&mesg_id=4857568


Obama Adviser Denies CTV's Latest On NAFTA" "February 29, 2008

The New York Observer managed to track down Austan Goolsbee, the Obama adviser who, according to the latest report on Canada TV, was the one who may have told a Canadian official that Obama's anti-NAFTA stump speech is merely "campaign rhetoric."

And Goolsbee denies it:

“It is a totally inaccurate story,” he said. “I did not call these people and I direct you to the press office.”
Meanwhile, Obama spokesperson Bill Burton also denies this latest round, via email:

This story is not true. There was no one at any level of our campaign, at any point, anywhere, who said or otherwise implied Obama was backing away from his consistent position on trade.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02...


Closely followed by....

"Another Version Of The Goolsbee Story From ABC News"

Below we noted that The New York Observer had gotten Austan Goolsbee to deny that he'd had any conversations with any Canadian official about whether Obama's NAFTA stump talk was mere "campaign rhetoric," as Canada TV reported.

“It is a totally inaccurate story,” Goolsbee told The Observer “I did not call these people and I direct you to the press office.”

But ABC News reached Goolsbee, too, and they had a different conversation:

ABC News' Jennifer Parker spoke to Goolsbee, a University of Chicago economics professor, Thursday who would not confirm or deny that he had a conversation with Georges Rioux, the Canadian Consulate General in Chicago. Rioux, in meetings this week in Ottawa, would also neither confirm nor deny any conversation took place. Both men did say that they know each other.
So, according to ABC, neither of those two men would confirm or deny whether they talked. The Obama campaign has a statement out today that doesn't explicitly mention Goolsbee, but said the story is "not true," and added that "no one at any level of our campaign, at any point, anywhere, who said or otherwise implied Obama was backing away from his consistent position on trade."

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02...

[zulchzulu]

84. A memo written by a conservative Canadian official based on unnamed sources is legit?

I guess that the Hillaryworld campaign, gasping in its last death throes, has decided to use the memo written by a lackey in the conservative Canadian government and, based on unnamed sources, distorted what Goolsbee said in the meeting.


The New York Times taketh what the big print giveth away with this:

The meeting was first reported last week by Canadian television network CTV, which cited unnamed sources as saying that Goolsbee assured the Canadians that Obama's tough talk on the North American Free Trade Agreement is just campaign rhetoric not to be taken seriously. The Obama campaign and the Canadian embassy denied there was any inconsistency between what the candidate was saying publicly and what advisers were saying privately.

(snip)

The memo was written by Joseph DeMora, who works for the consulate and attended the meeting.

(snip)

Goolsbee disputed the characterization from the conservative government official.

''This thing about 'it's more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans,' that's this guy's language,'' Goolsbee said of DeMora. ''He's not quoting me.

''I certainly did not use that phrase in any way,'' he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Democrats-NAFTA.html?_r=4&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Who are we to believe? The compulsive liars that are not only named Clinton but her hacks within her campaign on the last gasps for air in her campaign?

I have champagne chilling for Wednesday when Hillary bids us a favor and drops out.

[mojowork_n]

97. Here's the full, bulletpoint summary of the sequence of events:

Everything gets started when:

• The Canadian Government requests a meeting with the Obama campaign.
  
• Austan Goolsbee gets the call, meets consular rep. on campus.
  
• The two men go for a walk and discuss NAFTA, among other topics.
  
• The Canadian writes a memo, afterward.
  
• The memo paints a portrait of a disingenuous posture Goolsbee certainly would have not signed off on, for any "on the record" statement.
  
• The right-wing Canadian government, having already leaked the memo, drops the other shoe, and issues a backwards apology.
  
• Barack Obama's suddenly on the defensive, for off-the-cuff remarks he never made, suggesting he's *Not Really* anti-NAFTA.
  
• His opponent (who most Republicans would prefer to run against, the candidate whose husband's administration actually crafted NAFTA), benefits.
  

Unless you actually read through all the details of several news reports, you're not likely to pick all that up. For example, this Reuters summary kind of glosses over a few inconvenient details in the rush to conclude "Canada says didn't misrepresent Obama over NAFTA"

"...Key Obama economic advisor Austan Goolsbee discussed his candidate's policies with the Canadian consulate in Chicago, which wrote a report suggesting Obama's words on NAFTA were designed for a political audience and shouldn't be taken too seriously.

The report was leaked to the U.S. media, prompting some Democrats to accuse Canada's right-leaning Conservative government of trying to interfere in the election -- a charge dismissed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper..."

This is the source link:

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0338038720080303

What Reuters failed to mention was that this was just two guys out walking across campus, having a conversation that both may have remembered differently. The Canadians were the ones who initiated the discussion -- they contacted the Obama campaign, not the other way around.

From CNN:

"...The AP obtained a memo from a Canadian diplomat saying an Obama adviser had told Canada's government the candidate's criticism of NAFTA was "more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

But Austan Goolsbee, the Obama adviser, told the AP his statements were mischaracterized.

Clinton said Monday the memo should raise doubts about Obama's criticism of NAFTA, which is highly unpopular in Ohio after a large loss of manufacturing jobs there in recent years..."

link:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/03/democrats.primaries/?iref=hpmostpop

The CNN piece goes on to include a response from the campaign manager:

"...Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said Goolsbee's comments came during an informal conversation on a walking tour of the University of Chicago, where the adviser is a professor. Plouffe described the AP report as overblown and inaccurate.

"This is being reported as if somehow this is an official meeting of an Obama representative and the Canadian government," Plouffe said. "That was not the case. He was essentially doing a walking tour and was essentially having a casual conversation and the report on that conversation was not accurate."

The really ironic aspect of all of this, for me, is that on the day before the most important primary election, Hillary Clinton (let's not forget whose administration brought us NAFTA, in the first place) is cast as NAFTA's "true" opponent, at least in terms of "the latest breaking news" media narrative, and she's magically absolved from any (shared) responsibility she may have had, in originally supporting it. Or for ever having spoken out publicly, in favor of it.

Makes you proud to be a North American.

There's more, at CNN, where Goolsbee names his accuser, and denies making the statements mis-quoted in the Canadian "memo":

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/03/obama.nafta.ap/index.html?iref=werecommend

The only troubling thing is that looking at the text of both those CNN links -- one is from the 'most popular' list, the other's from the 'we recommend' list. Tomorrow both links will probably be gone. I looked around on the page, but couldn't find a permanent link to either story.

What may be remembered, tomorrow, is what I'm hearing Joe Scarborough telling Tweey, that this just goes to show you that Obama's a "politician", like the rest of them...

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

28. Because It Is Now Certain That The Officials Lied, And Appears Obama And His Camp Lied As Well.

Definitely a huge black eye for Obama, and Hillary is right in saying that if this story came out against her, it would be all that was talked about 24-7, and they'd be completely railroading her with it.

[bridgit]

43. SAN ANTONIO, Texas - Barack Obama's senior economic policy adviser privately told Canadian officials

'to view the debate in Ohio over trade as "political positioning," according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press that was rejected by the adviser and held up Monday as evidence of doublespeak by rival Hillary Rodham Clinton.' http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-democrats-nafta,0,7542882.story

[rodeodance]

50. Right wing Canada is in DAMAGE CONTROL

[Horse with no Name]

53. Bush/Blair denied the Downing Street Memos too

It happens everyday.

[rodeodance]

94. It was BO that was deceptive--very much so

[AZBlue]

96. Her lips are moving, she must be lying.

[leftofcool]

2. She has a good point

[redqueen]

4. Well... they are both professional politicians, so...

yeah, the nuance thing... they kinda do that. Both of them.

It boils down to whom we trust more to do the right thing from office.

I trust Obama more. WAY fucking more.

[indimuse]

6. wow...another BLOW ...I mean Low for Obama..

...:(

[soundguy]

12. An Empty "lying" Suit ? Go Figure

Lets hope this puts the final nail in the Obama campaign!

[indimuse]

30. Lets hope..

enough corruption in the WH already...Don't need (sorry Chicago!;)) Chicago style ...

[anamandujano]

86. It's the politicians, not the people (as I'm sure you meant.)

[oasis]

78. Who was caught in another lie?....Oooooooobama.

:hide: "I won't be the kind of president that just tells people what they want to hear".Oooooobama.

[Zachstar]

10. That did not take long clinton.

You have joined the swiftboat style wagon against another democrat. I will never even think about trusting you again.

Not now

Not in 2012

Not in 2016

-------

You know this shit will not stick. And if you decide to stick in after tommorow. I guess it wont matter when finally the gloves come off and your bullshit past gets fully exposed. Some of the tid bits we have seen utterly sickening.

You are trying to swiftboat Obama before an election Clinton and you will FAIL!

[Lucinda]

16. Did you even read the thread?

[Zachstar]

20. Yes

I am no longer going to be all happy and nice about this. Anyone who is egging her and those fools up there on one day before the election is joining a swiftboat style wagon and it is sickening.

I guess at this rate I mise well prepare for president McCain. Thankfully tho I believe in America and I think the voters tomorrow will shut this shit down. Once Clinton exits we can move on to the GE.

[Marie26]

17. Is it swiftboating if it's true?

If the Obama campaign is publically promising Ohio voters one thing about NAFTA while whispering another in private to Canadian officials, don't Ohio voters have a right to know that? If Obama is free-trade, that's fine. But he should run on that platform, instead of lying to Ohio voters & making promises he has no intention of keeping.

[indimuse]

27. I feel this has much larger implications...

This is a foreign affair.

[Marie26]

67. It definitely does

This is about globalization & corporatism. About how leaders say one thing to the people & another to the multinationals. About how Obama is beholden to some very powerful financial interests. About why he relies on right-wing economic advisors & reaches out to a right-wing Canadian government. About why he preaches progressive values in public & reaffirms corporate values in private. About what kind of "change" he's actually planning to bring.

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. You act like it is impossible to legitimately be critical of Obama on anything

Being critical = "swiftboating". Total BS.

Clinton is absolutely right. I have no doubt posters such as yourself would be all over DU starting threads screaming about a leaked memo showing that Clinton's top economic advisor had held a meeting with Canadian government representatives to assure Canada that her anti-NAFTA talk was for domestic political consumption. And you sure as hell would not believe you were "swiftboating" Clinton if you did so.

[flyarm]

29. these obamites are something else..they love lies it seems..they are just like * sheeple..

in fact i highly doubt most are real dems..since they bl-ovate bullshit to keep covering up lies and they attack those who have sacrificed much to tell the truth for all these * years..they are as scummy as the bushbots!

and they disgust me.

fly

[Zachstar]

40. It is swiftboating and the desperation does not help.

Anything to get Clinton in eh?

This is a green light a FUCKING GREEN LIGHT to the republicans to use this in the GE.

So fucking thank you :sarcasm: supporters of this shit for aiding the republicans later in the year.

Swiftboating is wrong either candidate before any election. And for Clintion to join in rather than be the bigger person and slam such horrific crap is disgusting.

Just wait. This is the break the republicans needed. Now it is actually very possible for them to get a win by swiftboating the democratic candidate. If he/she complains? Well all they have to do is say "Hah double standards?" and they can continue. So if you want to continue this bullshit then say hello to President McCain!

The only way to stop this huge republican green light now is for Obama to get in front of everyone and rip this bullshit to shreds and completely denounce clinton for such horrific support. OBAMA they will will not let you win without going down in flames you MUST SHOW STRENGTH to these scumbags!!

Some of you Clinton supporters are making me want to throw up. Just one more day and this process will start to end.

[flyarm]

46. so now truth is swiftboating..and wrong..i dislike Hillary..so play that game with others..

i worked with and on the Edwards campaign...but unlike you..i believe if more truth about little lord pissy pants had been told..my co-workers and neighbors sons who died on 9/11 might be alive.

i believe in truth..something that seems to be sorely lacking with you obama supporters of late.

fly

[Zachstar]

49. Truth eh?

Like these stories coming from right wing camps? They are full of "Truth" arent they.

Dont even try that crap. The Swift Vets did it. Yall know what is going on.

It is NOT about this election. It is about how the GE will now be played now that the Republicans have the green light to pull crap out right before major events to deal damage.

Obama can handle this. He was obviously ready to get it from the republicans. It is just sad and sickening to see democrats supporting it.

So screw yall! You know you are aiding the republicans and you can take your crap elseware.

ONE MORE DAY!!

[flyarm]

64. ahh it was on CNN this morning with Candy Crowley..did you miss it?

well let me give you a little truth clue bubba..you are losing credibility with each and every post...


SAN ANTONIO, Texas - Barack Obama's senior economic policy adviser privately told Canadian officials
'to view the debate in Ohio over trade as "political positioning," according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press that was rejected by the adviser and held up Monday as evidence of doublespeak by rival Hillary Rodham Clinton.' http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-democr...



first he did meet with them then he didn't..so come on bubba..which is it..will you please point out the true story?? or haven't you gotten your talking points memo yet??????????



thanks to Marie 26 who posted this earlier on another thread..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4857003&mesg_id=4857568


Obama Adviser Denies CTV's Latest On NAFTA" "February 29, 2008

The New York Observer managed to track down Austan Goolsbee, the Obama adviser who, according to the latest report on Canada TV, was the one who may have told a Canadian official that Obama's anti-NAFTA stump speech is merely "campaign rhetoric."

And Goolsbee denies it:

“It is a totally inaccurate story,” he said. “I did not call these people and I direct you to the press office.”
Meanwhile, Obama spokesperson Bill Burton also denies this latest round, via email:

This story is not true. There was no one at any level of our campaign, at any point, anywhere, who said or otherwise implied Obama was backing away from his consistent position on trade.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02...


Closely followed by....

"Another Version Of The Goolsbee Story From ABC News"

Below we noted that The New York Observer had gotten Austan Goolsbee to deny that he'd had any conversations with any Canadian official about whether Obama's NAFTA stump talk was mere "campaign rhetoric," as Canada TV reported.

“It is a totally inaccurate story,” Goolsbee told The Observer “I did not call these people and I direct you to the press office.”

But ABC News reached Goolsbee, too, and they had a different conversation:

ABC News' Jennifer Parker spoke to Goolsbee, a University of Chicago economics professor, Thursday who would not confirm or deny that he had a conversation with Georges Rioux, the Canadian Consulate General in Chicago. Rioux, in meetings this week in Ottawa, would also neither confirm nor deny any conversation took place. Both men did say that they know each other.
So, according to ABC, neither of those two men would confirm or deny whether they talked. The Obama campaign has a statement out today that doesn't explicitly mention Goolsbee, but said the story is "not true," and added that "no one at any level of our campaign, at any point, anywhere, who said or otherwise implied Obama was backing away from his consistent position on trade."

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02...






Story Highlights
Obama adviser says parts of memo about campaign's trade policy are inaccurate

Memo says Obama's trade policy "more about political positioning" than clear plan

Obama camp says it's "a clumsy, inaccurate portrayal of the conversation"

NAFTA widely opposed in Ohio, which votes Tuesday
Obama adviser: Memo misinterprets stance on trade
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/03/obama.nafta.ap/index.html
SAN ANTONIO, Texas (AP) -- Barack Obama's senior economic policy adviser said Sunday that Canadian government officials wrote an inaccurate portrayal of his private discussion on the campaign's trade policy in a memo obtained by The Associated Press.


A Barack Obama adviser says Canadian officials inaccurately portrayed talk about the camp's trade policy.


The memo is the first documentation to emerge publicly out of the meeting between the adviser, Austan Goolsbee, and officials with the Canadian consulate in Chicago, but Goolsbee said it misinterprets what he told them. The memo was written by Joseph DeMora, who works for the consulate and attended the meeting.

Goolsbee disputed a section that read: "Noting anxiety among many U.S. domestic audiences about the U.S. economic outlook, Goolsbee candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign. He cautioned that this messaging should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

"This thing about 'it's more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans,' that's this guy's language," Goolsbee said of DeMora. "He's not quoting me.

"I certainly did not use that phrase in any way," Goolsbee said.

[dbmk]

76. Can you help me?

"first he did meet with them then he didn't..so come on bubba..which is it..will you please point out the true story?? or haven't you gotten your talking points memo yet??????????"

Where did anyone deny meeting anyone? Not saying it didn't happen, but its not in your quotes or links as far as I can tell?

And the last lines in the quote from Goolsbee - maybe _they_ should be in bold?

[Tom Rinaldo]

55. Sorry. Barack Obama is not "Entitled" to the Democratic nomination

He has to win it the same as anyone else. And if you think that the Republicans are too stupid to figure out Obama's potential weaknesses on their own - well that might at least explain your attitude.

[rodeodance]

60. Too bad he is not yet crowned-----get used to it. Its drip drip from now on

[Iceburg]

92. Dude ... this award goes to Canada not Clinton

'twas Canadians that nailed Obama on his double speechifying.

[ProSense]

14. So Hillary is using a BS RW story to prove, again, that Obama is no better than she is?

Beyond desperate!

[Zachstar]

24. Indeed.

What is more sickening is some DUers defending such swiftboat style crap.

I CANT WAIT FOR TUESDAY!!

ONE MORE DAY!!!

[flyarm]

34. seems to me you got your marching orders to put the fire out on this story..but you never

answer anything brought to your attention..you just keep posting the same crap and moving on to another post trying to water down the fire..lets look where you have been today..and see that you post the same stuff...to what is really occuring..

CNN showed the memo..so are you trying to disinform..or is it your job to lie and get this off the front pages?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4857857&mesg_id=4857990

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4857003&mesg_id=4857364

[carlotta]

35. You don't get it

This isn't about their positions on NAFTA--their positions are basically the same. It's about Obama claiming to oppose NAFTA, when behind the scenes, his advisor is telling the Canadians not to worry--that what he will be telling the American people about opposition to NAFTA isn't really true--just meant as election rhetoric.

That's huge!!

[flyarm]

37. Obama also lied to the Iowa voters..and they won't soon forget it!

about his Nuclear bill he passed..which he didn't pass.

anything for those sheeple votes you know..the young ones don't look the info up..they just want a rock star!!

until they can't get jobs..that is

fly

[ProSense]

51. No, you don't get it. Obama opposed the Clintons' horrible NAFTA bill.

He isn't opposed to free trade.

RUSSERT: Senator Obama, you did, in 2004, talk to farmers and suggest that NAFTA had been helpful. The Associated Press today ran a story about NAFTA saying that you have been consistently ambivalent towards the issue.

A simple question. Will you as president say to Canada and Mexico, this has not worked for us, we are out?

OBAMA: I will make sure that we renegotiate in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about, and I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced.

And that is not what has been happening so far. That is something that I have been consistent about.

I have to say, Tim, with respect to my position on this, you know, when I ran for the United States Senate, the "Chicago Tribune," which was adamantly pro-NAFTA noted that in their endorsement of me, they were endorsing me despite my strong opposition to NAFTA. And that conversation that I had with the Farm Bureau, I was not ambivalent at all.

What I said was that NAFTA and other trade deals can be beneficial to the United States, because I believe every U.S. worker is as productive as any worker around the world. And we can compete with anybody.

And we can't shy away from globalization. We can't draw a moat around us. But what I did say in that same quote, if you look at it, was that the problem is we've been negotiating just looking at corporate profits and what's good for multinationals, and we haven't been looking at what's good for communities here in Ohio, in my home state of Illinois, and across the country. And as president, what I want to be is an advocate on behalf of workers.

Look, you know, when I go to these plants, I meet people who are proud of their jobs. They are proud of the products that they have created. They have built brands and profits for their companies. And when they see jobs shipped overseas and suddenly they're left not just without a job, but without health care, without a pension, and are having to look for seven-buck-an-hour jobs at the local fast-food joint, that is devastating on them, but it's also devastating on the community.

That's not the way that we're going to prosper as we move forward.

link

[rodeodance]

61. OHIO Union has a letter out to him--He has NOT responded. poor judgement on his part

[rodeodance]

80. BO believed DRUDGE--the RW slim to make false claims against Hillary camp!!

[Little Star]

15. Does Obama EVER tell a straight story?

[indimuse]

26. I'ts what most call a "Habitual LIAR!!!"

!!

[theboss]

23. Her husband signed the goddamn law....

How can she campaign against a bill that her husband not only signed but championed? A law that she has publicly supported over the years? A bill that she claimed as a legislative victory in her own book?

I need someone to explain to me how she can get away with this level of chutzpah.

[Tom Rinaldo]

38. Yes, over a decade ago. And Al Gore defended it in a national debate with Perot

Gore was the most vigerous defender of NAFTA at the time. How many here hold that strongly against him now?

For a candidate of the future it is amazing how much Obama is stuck on the past. I wouldn't mind that if he honestly had dramatic new plans for the future than Clinton, but he doesn't on Iraq and he doesn't on NAFTA either. It was Hillary Clinton who first flat out said she would pull the U.S. out of NAFTA in 6 months without substantial changes to that treaty in the last debate. Obama followed by saying he would also.

[Armstead]

54. Unless I missed something, she only said that in response...

...to a question in the last debate. A response that Obama agreed with.

Personally I wish both of them would stops being such wimps about trade, and cut to the core of the issues, which is the whole movement by neoliberal and right wing ideologues in cahoots with big business and the elites to undermine the ability of nations to protect their own domestic economies.

[Marie26]

82. Goolsbee is a neoliberal, free market advocate

and an adherant of Chicago School economics. That's who Obama chose as his top economic advisor. He's not "cutting to the core of the issue" of elite control because he is beholden to those very same interests.

[flyarm]

39. Lots of damn laws get signed..and lots of laws get changed when they do not work or times change..

any part of that you don't get?

but lying and telling the american people you are going to change the law that you have no intention of changing just to get their vote and to win an election.. and meeting with a foreign government and giving them a back room wink ..and telling them you are bullshitting the american people, because in essence.. they are to fucking dumb to know the difference..is another thing..and that is exactly what Obama did..or had his people do..so nooooooooooo there is a big god damn difference!

fly

stop the continued lies and stop defending the indefensible...you are making fools out of yourselves!

[theboss]

48. I should probably come and out and say that I'm still in favor of NAFTA

I supported Clinton when he signed it. I still think it's a good law. And I think both candidates are pandering to labor unions.

But whatever.

[rodeodance]

63. we live in globalized world. nafta in and off itself is not bad i agree.

[Maribelle]

41. Ooops - Emerging this morning: Canadian Memo Recounts Meeting

Mar 3, 11:14 AM EST

Canadian Memo Recounts Meeting

By NEDRA PICKLER
Associated Press Writer


SAN ANTONIO, Texas (AP) -- Barack Obama's senior economic policy adviser privately told Canadian officials to view the debate in Ohio over trade as "political positioning," according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press that was rejected by the adviser and held up Monday as evidence of doublespeak by rival Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The memo is the first documentation to emerge publicly out of the meeting between the adviser, Austan Goolsbee, and officials with the Canadian consulate in Chicago, but Goolsbee said it misinterprets what he told them. The memo was written by Joseph DeMora, who works for the consulate and attended the meeting.

"Noting anxiety among many U.S. domestic audiences about the U.S. economic outlook, Goolsbee candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign," the memo said. "He cautioned that this messaging should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

more...
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DEMOCRATS_NAFTA?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US

My, my. Obama will have to go into super duper spin cycle on this one.

[flyarm]

47. yes its all over DU and that is what this whole thread is about..its been on CNN..all morning..eom

[rodeodance]

52. I heard Joe in the Morning was chatting this up also.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

56. yes he did!

[rodeodance]

62. YES HE DID

[flyarm]

65. anddddddd...yes he did !!

[bridgit]

69. BO was just talking out his ass cause that's what his supporters are used to...

They like that kinda stuff :puke:

[amborin]

70. Obama said Nafta greatly benefited the U.S. on record in 2004

[amborin]

71. Obama's hypocrisy on Nafta:

Fact Check: Clinton, Obama and NAFTA
The Associated Press
Tuesday, February 26, 2008; 10:42 PM

WASHINGTON -- Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama are paying a price for artful dodges on trade over the years, a burden on display in their debate Tuesday night.

Thanks to past equivocations, the Democratic presidential candidates have left themselves open to the criticisms and misrepresentations they are now using against each other as they scramble to dissociate themselves from a trade agreement they once praised _ with qualifications.
Their dispute over trade flared anew in their debate in Cleveland. Clinton contended that she avoided taking a public position on the North American Free Trade Agreement when she was first lady, and became a critic of it when she ran as a candidate in her own right _ in her 2000 Senate campaign.

In fact, she praised NAFTA while she was first lady and helped her husband lobby for its ratification. And she continued to praise it as a senator, while becoming more explicit in calling for improvements and citing its shortcomings.
Obama acknowledged in the debate that in his 2004 Illinois Senate campaign, he said _ as he put it now _ "NAFTA and other trade deals can be beneficial to the United States." His comments, as reported in 2004, were that NAFTA had brought enormous benefits to his state, but that trade deals needed to be made better for workers.
The root of their ambivalence is their shared

<snip>

Obama has been consistently ambivalent.

In his 2004 Senate campaign, he said the U.S. should pursue more deals such as NAFTA, and argued more broadly that his opponent's call for tariffs would spark a trade war. AP reported then that Obama had spoken of enormous benefits having accrued to his state from NAFTA, while adding that he also called for more aggressive trade protections for U.S. workers.
"We need free trade but also fair trade," he said, taking the dodge.

Obama is correct that Clinton has praised NAFTA in various ways, but he leaves out the qualifications she's expressed along the way. And she did not say NAFTA was a "boon," as the mailer states on its ominous cover, depicting a locked factory gate. "Boon" was a newspaper's characterization of her position, which is reprinted inside the mailer.

[amborin]

72. Obama said US benefited enormously from NAFTA

States News Service

February 24, 2008 Sunday

FACT CHECK: OBAMA CONTINUES TO MISLEAD ON HILLARY AND NAFTA

BYLINE: States News Service

DATELINE: WASHINGTON

"Senator Obama's insistence on repeating attacks that have been demonstrated to be false by independent entities proves once and for all that his speeches about the new politics are just words. That's not change you can believe in."

-Clinton spokesman Phil Singer

Today, Sen. Obama said the following:

And yesterday, Senator Clinton also said I'm wrong to point out that she once supported NAFTA. But the fact is, she was saying great things about NAFTA until she started running for President.

This is false. Hillary criticized Sen. Obama for sending out a mailer that claimed she said NAFTA was a "boon to the economy" when she never did. Today, the University of Pennsylvania's FactCheck.org concluded "We do judge that the Obama campaign is wrong to quote Clinton as using words she never uttered, and it has produced little evidence that she ever had strong praise of any sort for NAFTA's economic benefits."

Also, Hillary has been critical of NAFTA long before she started running for President. For example, here's Hillary in March 2000:

What happened to NAFTA I think was we inherited an agreement that we didn't get everything we should have got out of it in my opinion. I think the NAFTA agreement was flawed. The problem is we have to go back and figure out how we are going to fix that.

Sen. Obama touts his consistent opposition to NAFTA. But speaking in Illinois in 2004 Obama said the United States "benefited enormously" from exports under NAFTA and talked about the need to continue to pursue trade agreement like NAFTA that support "a system of free trade in this nation that allows us to move our products overseas."

[rodeodance]

73. So--Obama is in the wink wink. well well.

[meow mix]

74. hmm the news is reporting that it was hillary who wink winked and then made up an baseless

accusation to to throw at obmama. as has been thier procedure repeatedly.

looks like they are on to her lie on this one..

[rodeodance]

81. WRONG: AP: NAFTA Story Slaps Back—at Obama Camp

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject AP: NAFTA Story Slaps Back—at Obama Camp
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4861010#4861010
4861010, AP: NAFTA Story Slaps Back—at Obama Camp
Posted by rodeodance on Mon Mar-03-08 01:25 PM


http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20080303/cm_rcp/nafta_story_slaps_back ;_ylt=Asz69LHRFRHYK1zGAceMx_es0NUE

AP: NAFTA Story Slaps Back—at Obama Camp

Tom Bevan Mon Mar 3, 10:37 AM ET

It's never good when a story that you've slapped down as false gets up and slaps you back - as the NAFTA story has just done to the Obama campaign. The AP reports of a memo surfacing that appears to support the original version of the story that an Obama advisor told Canadian government officials that Obama's railing against NAFTA was more or less just campaign rhetoric.
ADVERTISEMENT

The Obama campaign is obviously decrying the news, saying that the memo was an inaccurate interpretation of their advisor's remarks, but Hillary Clinton jumped on the news, releasing this statement:

I think that after days of denial, the Obama campaign was confronted with a memo of a meeting - it was my understanding - in which there was a discussion of NAFTA. And it raises questions about Senator Obama coming to Ohio and giving speeches about NAFTA and having his chief economic advisor tell the Canadian government that it was just political rhetoric.

I don't think people should come to Ohio and tell the people of Ohio one thing and then have your campaign tell a foreign government something else behind closed doors. That's the kind of difference between talk and action and that I've been pointing out in this campaign. I think the questions should be directed at Senator Obama.

I don't think people should come to Ohio and you both give speeches that are very critical of NAFTA and you send out misleading and false information about my positions regarding NAFTA and then we find out that your chief economic advisor has gone to a foreign government and basically done

[BlackVelvet04]

75. K&R n/t

[ProSense]

83. Story debunked, again. Canadian embassy apologizes, and Obama's position is still not a secret

Canadians regret...

There's lots of grist for Canadian political reporters right now, as the Canadian Embassy issues an apology and a sort of recantation -- though not really a denial -- of the Goolsbee story. This happens even as their superiors in Ottawa seem determined to cause trouble in the Democratic primary.

The Canadian Embassy and our Consulates General regularly contact those involved in all of the Presidential campaigns and, periodically, report on these contacts to interested officials. In the recent report produced by the Consulate General in Chicago, 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. We deeply regret any inference that may have been drawn to that effect.

The people of the United States are in the process of choosing a new President and are fortunate to have strong and impressive candidates from both political parties. Canada will not interfere in this electoral process. We look forward, however, to working with the choice of the American people in further building an unparalleled relationship with a close friend and partner.

So they're not disputing the text of the memo, just what it's words intended to convey. Perhaps it's the language barrier, but I'm not sure there's a clear alternative reading.

Anyway, the dread specter of Canadian interference has now been raised.

A side story, as Noam Scheiber writes: "What's shocking is that a foreign government would leak it to the press. That seems like a pretty egregious breach of protocol--more like a dirty trick by an operative in a conservative government than anything else. I can't imagine it'll bode well for U.S.-Canadian relations if Obama makes it to the White House ...."

What does it say that Hillary's campaign is pushing this bogus RW distortion?

Obama's position on NAFTA isn't a secret. He opposed the Clintons' horrible NAFTA bill, but he isn't opposed to free trade. He also made his position clear during the last debate:

RUSSERT: Senator Obama, you did, in 2004, talk to farmers and suggest that NAFTA had been helpful. The Associated Press today ran a story about NAFTA saying that you have been consistently ambivalent towards the issue.

A simple question. Will you as president say to Canada and Mexico, this has not worked for us, we are out?

OBAMA: I will make sure that we renegotiate in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about, and I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced.

And that is not what has been happening so far. That is something that I have been consistent about.

I have to say, Tim, with respect to my position on this, you know, when I ran for the United States Senate, the "Chicago Tribune," which was adamantly pro-NAFTA noted that in their endorsement of me, they were endorsing me despite my strong opposition to NAFTA. And that conversation that I had with the Farm Bureau, I was not ambivalent at all.

What I said was that NAFTA and other trade deals can be beneficial to the United States, because I believe every U.S. worker is as productive as any worker around the world. And we can compete with anybody.

And we can't shy away from globalization. We can't draw a moat around us. But what I did say in that same quote, if you look at it, was that the problem is we've been negotiating just looking at corporate profits and what's good for multinationals, and we haven't been looking at what's good for communities here in Ohio, in my home state of Illinois, and across the country. And as president, what I want to be is an advocate on behalf of workers.

Look, you know, when I go to these plants, I meet people who are proud of their jobs. They are proud of the products that they have created. They have built brands and profits for their companies. And when they see jobs shipped overseas and suddenly they're left not just without a job, but without health care, without a pension, and are having to look for seven-buck-an-hour jobs at the local fast-food joint, that is devastating on them, but it's also devastating on the community.

That's not the way that we're going to prosper as we move forward.

link

[nlb]

85. if people decide ...

to vote FOR her based on this, then they're out of their minds.

[Maribelle]

87. Notice how the PM of Canada debunked Obama's lies that Canada was interfering

Obama has told too many lies.

[rodeodance]

90. Obama is in full Damage Control Mode

[kikiek]

88. Sounds like there is more to this than Obama's surrogates are admiting!

[saracat]

91. But the obama campaign is 'above " all this. He is a saint, not a "politcian"Snark!

Politics of change , my ass. Same old same old.

[Straight Shooter]

93. From Talkingpointsmemo.com home page:

I think it's clear that NAFTA/Goolsbee flap has blunted some of Obama's momentum, especially in Ohio. The volume of press releases out of the campaign certainly suggests that.

The Obama campaign just sent out a Youtube clip from a little more than an hour ago on MSNBC that shows video from the Canadian parliament in which a member of the opposition (I'm not sure who, if anyone can tell me, I'd appreciate it) attacks the government for meddling in the Democratic primaries; and then Prime Minister Harper responds.

Now, the headline of the Obama camp's email reads "Canadian Prime Minister Addresses Issue." But what's interesting is that Harper, who's close to DC Republicans, actually doesn't address it in a way that's helpful to the Obama campaign. Indeed, notwithstanding a statement of regret and other flowery language, he seems to go out of his way to confirm the essential charge against the Obama campaign.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLJJ88HTiX8&eurl=http://talkingpointsmemo.com/

When is the last time a candidate got involved in such a policy flap with another country while running in the primary? Talk about poor judgment!

[Maribelle]

95. So, did he lie to Ohio, or lie to Canada?

Ohio, I'll bet.

[libbygurl]

98. Wink, wink!

And a :kick:

[judaspriestess]

99. K&R

[Raffi Ella]

100. Give 'em HELL HIllary!

"I would ask you to look at this story and substitute my name for Sen. Obama’s name and see what you would do with this story… Just ask yourself (what you would do) if some of my advisers had been having private meetings with foreign governments."

[robbedvoter]

101. So, he said the memo didn't happen?

[amborin]

102. Canada was pressured

when US criticized them for interfering with US elections

but Obama's double speak occurred

Obama was playing Ohio voters

[LeftCoast]

103. This is the worst campaign stumble I've seen Obama make so far.

Not good...and just in time for the General election...

[susankh4]

104. I agree.

And in OHIO of all places!

The unions here, even those that endorsed him... are having a serious case of buyer's remorse.