Reader Posts

« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »

Why Obama's NAFTA Push Yesterday Was Hypocritical

avatar

Yesterday, Obama attacked Hillary on NAFTA and here is a key quote from his memo:

"Misrepresenting your position and carefully parsing your words when you don't think you'll get caught are the hallmarks of the kind of politics that Barack Obama is running to change."



However, here is how the NAFTA story went (from Politico):

"For four days after a news report alleged that Sen. Barack Obama’s economic adviser had told Canadian officials to ignore the Democrat’s tough talk on trade deals, the campaign gave incomplete – and sometimes misleading – explanations of whether a meeting had even taken place.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Monday night that the campaign had known of the meeting between adviser Austan Goolsbee and Canada’s consul general in Chicago since a Canadian television network, CTV, first reported the interaction last Wednesday.

“When they reported it, we were aware of it at that point,” Burton said.

Burton and other campaign aides – even Obama himself – vociferously denied the substance of the report, which alleged Goolsbee had given back-channel assurances to Canada that the Illinois senator’s call for reopening labor and environmental rules in the North American Free Trade Agreement was merely political posturing.

But for days, the campaign was less-than-forthcoming on a specific detail: Had a meeting actually occurred?

“Well, the Canadian ambassador issued a statement saying that that story was absolutely false. There had been no such contact,” said Susan Rice, an Obama foreign policy adviser, on MSNBC’s “Tucker” show Thursday. “There had been no discussions on NAFTA. So we take the Canadians at their word . . . Period.”

Also Thursday, Goolsbee told ABC News that he “would not confirm or deny meetings with anyone.” Yet he hinted at an interaction, saying Canada’s consul general contacted him “at one point to say ‘hello’ because their office is around the corner.”

David Plouffe, Obama’s campaign manager, was asked Friday by reporters to comment on the conversation reported on Canadian television.

“The story is just not true. Obama's position on this is very clear. Our campaign and the ambassador have been very clear on this; it did not happen,” Plouffe said, appearing to tailor his statement to only address elements of the initial Canadian TV story that had been discounted.

The Canadian network tweaked its initial story last week to reflect that Goolsbee had spoken with the consul general in Chicago, not the ambassador in Washington, as it was first reported. It is also appears now that the Canadian officials, not Goolsbee, initiated the contact.

Despite Obama's promises to run as a transparent and straight-talking candidate, the campaign offered muddled responses that allowed the story to metastasize in the days leading up to a primary election in Ohio, where trade issues could prove decisive."


A definite parsing of words and misrepresentation of position.  How can Obama change politics when he's running politics as usual?


Comments (4)

avatar

This is the most frustrating thing about Obama's campaign right now. They've been thrown off their game a little by something completely unrelated to Hillary, yet they seem to keep trying to shift the media scrutiny back to her using these innuendos and obviously incomplete statements. Even putting out that picture of Bill with Wright was a really odd decision because the Clintons have stayed away from the Wright story and even support Obama in his speech denouncing these racial games. I think that in the midst of all this campaign drama, there isn't anyone at the helm of the Obama campaign. I hope he gets things back under control soon or else he is going to further undermine his optimistic message. He has to remember that even if Hillary uses tricks that his theme is new politics not old politics and matching her tit for tat is only dragging his campaign into old political territory.

Hillary Clinton personally said she had always opposed NAFTA. The release of her public schedules as First Lady show that she actually promoted NAFTA at a meeting in 1993. Subsequent reporting has verified that she did, in fact, support NAFTA at that meeting even though she says she nver supported NAFTA. It's pretty obvious that she's lying.

I don't see an analogous situation with the Obama-NAFTA story. Unlike the the first person saga of the Clinton-NAFTA story (where Clinton herself supported NAFTA and Clinton herself lied and said she never supported NAFTA), the Obama-NAFTA story is all third person with plenty of room for misinterpretations and miscommunication. Did Goolsbee miscommunicate Obama's position either deliberately or accidentally? Did the Canadian official misrepresent the discussion with Goolsbee either accidentally or deliberately? If Obama sent Goolsbee to wink and nod at the Canadians, you certainly have provided zero evidence to prove that.

avatar

“When they reported it, we were aware of it at that point,” Burton said.
(The report came out Wednesday.)

“There had been no discussions on NAFTA. So we take the Canadians at their word . . . Period.”
(Thursday, the following day)

What further proof do you want?

When will you all get the message that it was CLINTON who told the Canadians to ignore the campaigning on NAFTA?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOLEK2lr3CM

Post a Comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe

The Coffee House
TPMCafe's regulars

House Brew
From Your Cafe Editor

Special Guests
Big names and big brains

Special Features
Pressing topics and trends

Table for One
An expert's week-long talk.

All Reader Posts
TPM readers discuss.

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address