The NPR News Blog
 
 

Canadians Mess Up NAFTA Talk, Eh.

Oh those darn Canadians. They never get their facts straight.

At least that's the spin from the Obama camp, now that a memo has been found about a NAFTA discussion between a senior Obama campaign official and "minor" representatives of the Canadian government in Chicago.

The Associated Press reports that "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."

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. "He's not quoting me. I certainly did not use that phrase in any way."

Goolsbee said the part of the memo that reflected Obama's campaign positions were correct, but those that didn't were wrong.

The meeting was first reported last week by the CTV network in Canada, which reported that Goolsbee had told the Canadians not to be worried about NAFTA bashing by Obama in last Tuesday night's debate in Ohio.

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. He was not authorized to share any messages from the campaign, Burton said.

Update: The Canadian Embassy issued the following statement today:

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.

 

Comments

Yeah yeah yeah, sure. And Michelle Obama doesn't speak for the campaign when she says that the first thing that made her proud of America in her adult life is her husband's candidacy. This guy isn't evil, maybe, but he isn't the saint his supporters want. Turns out he is just a lying politician. Just like he lied about not voting to reauthorize the Patriot Act, but then voted to reauthorize it. Will end the war in Iraq, votes to fund it, but votes against Senator Feingold's bill with timetables for withdrawing the troops. I have no problem with him lying and facilitating; I think we have all been trained to expect that from politicians. I have a problem with his "holier than thou" attitude.

Sent by austintx | 2:10 PM ET | 03-03-2008

The Obama team denied that ANY meeting took place at all= then said that a conversation with Chicago office representative not a real contact with Canadian officials, now it turns out that it lasted 40 minutes (and do we really thik that Goolsbee would have been given that time if he was not an uppity-up with the Obama Campaign=NO. Obama team has been spinning lies on this all along how can anyone believe the lastest spin unless they drank the Kool-AID.

Sent by Jean | 2:42 PM ET | 03-03-2008

Lets take a look at the pardoning of Mark Rich as part of Hillary's experience.

Sent by concerned | 2:45 PM ET | 03-03-2008

I just don't understand why both democrats can't just come out and say, "yeah, we know NAFTA was a really bad agreement and we want to drastically change it." We're never going to get other countries to enforce the kind of protections for workers and the environment that would make such an agreement fair.

So why isn't the democratic rhetoric tougher against trade agreements? Why have so many democrats misplaced their faith in the church of free trade?

Sent by Justin | 2:49 PM ET | 03-03-2008

Forget the Canadians. Obama said the meeting never took place. Now, we have the document, thanks to AP. What does NPR think about this document and Obama's statement?

Sent by PA Voter | 2:54 PM ET | 03-03-2008

NPR won't make a comment unless they can figure out a way to spin this into something against Clinton. They have done everyhing but officially endorse Obama. It's depressing.

Sent by Susan H. | 4:10 PM ET | 03-03-2008

oops. Obama campaign in a lie. No meeting- Now meeting. Keep reporting on this NPR. Let's hear what Obama has to say. I'm sure the media.. that is on the Obama campaign staff will figure a way out of this one for him.

Sent by Tamara/ Stone mountain, ga | 5:20 PM ET | 03-03-2008

I believe NAFTA-gate was orchestrated by the Bush Administration. Here's why. Let's start with Bush's desires. What does Bush want? If you listen to his remarks on Obama, he absolutely does not want Obama to be the next President. Bush would do anything in his power to prevent this. How could he do this? I know! He could make Obama look like a hippocrite. But on what issue? Well, NAFTA is a very important issue in the Ohio primary. Perhaps Bush could make it seem like Obama really supports NAFTA. How could he do that? Well, Obama hasn't made any statements supporting NAFTA, so he can't go that route. How about looking at the statements of his advisors? Could Bush get one of Obama's advisors to say something positive about NAFTA? Apparently he could.

If this seems far fetched to you, consider the following. Obviously, your first doubt will be, how would the Bush Administration get the Canadian government to go along with this? I would answer as follows. The same way the Bush Administration got the Canadian government to support the Candian equivilant of the DMCA. Why does the Canadian consistently push for this legislation? Everytime they try to pass this legislation, the Canadian people revolt, and the legislation fails. So who wants that legislation? The RIAA and the MPIAA. Two American organizations who seem to own just about all the politicians in this country, including Bush. So really, Bush getting the Canadian government to do its dirty work isn't anything new.

If you're still not convinced this was a set up, consider this. How did this story get to be news? The only two people who knew about this meeting were the Obama official, and the Canadian official. Unless you believe Goolsbee betrayed Obama, the leak must have come from the Canadian official. Given that the meeting was initiated by the Canadian official, how could this whole episode not be a set up? Think about it. The Canadian official iniates contact, then leaks the meeting to the press. What purpose could he have other than to make Obama look bad?

Sent by Mark | 9:23 PM ET | 03-03-2008

Blame it on Canada.

You Michael Moore Liberal Utopians see bogeymen behind every tree.

Look out! Puerto Rico is hatching a coup against you.

On the same sound stage where they filmed the moon walk.

Maybe it was Resko all along?

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 10:12 AM ET | 03-04-2008

People affected by NAFTA in Tx will generally tell you its been good (for Tx); People affected by NAFTA in Ohio will generally/vehemently tell its BAD (period) There is plenty of blame to finger point on this issue. This story would have had more substance if the Canadian govt would have stuck by the assertion made by one of its underlings. Absent this, its an another attempt by an Itchy Rump to kick up some sand in the political winds.

Sent by Roger | 12:47 PM ET | 03-04-2008

Canadians don't care who becomes the Democraticl leader.

Sent by Alex | 2:28 PM ET | 03-21-2008



   
   
   
null


 
E-mail this page Print this page
 
 
 
Tom Regan

Tom Regan

Blogger

 
 
 

About Us

This year's election cycle has been one of the most exciting in memory. At the NPR News Blog we'll do our best to bring you interesting, informative -- and controversial -- stories from our own reporters and bloggers, as well as the rest of the best of the Internet and blogosphere. And we hope you'll let us know what you think as well.

Want to learn more? Be sure to read our Frequently Asked Questions and our discussion guidelines.

 
 
Get My Vote promo

Share Your Story

What would it take to get your vote? Share text, audio or video.

 
 

 
 

Search the blog

 
 

Email Tom

If you would like to email Tom privately, please use our contact form.

 
 
 

Browse Topics

Services

Programs