Obama’s NAFTA double-talk confirmed: CTV

posted at 10:11 am on February 29, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

After reporting on Barack Obama’s dance with the Canadians on NAFTA yesterday, Canadian broadcaster CTV got accused of perpetrating a smear against the Democratic front-runner. They insisted that Obama meant every word he said about overturning the free-trade treaty, and that no one had contacted the Canadian diplomatic corps to reassure them that it was mere demagoguery. CTV responded today by naming names — and suddenly the Obama campaign has grown quiet:

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 questions to the campaign headquarters.

CTV didn’t stop there. They also announced that their sources, at “the highest levels of the Canadian government”, reconfirmed the story to CTV. One of their primary sources provided a timeline of the discussion to CTV. Contrary to some reports, CTV has not retreated at all from this story.

Jim Geraghty notes:

I realize Obama’s campaign can still claim that one of his advisers went rogue in contacting the Canadians about his NAFTA rhetoric, but to me, this is game, set and match to CTV. … If Goolsbee had not talked to officials in the consulate, it seems likely that his answer would have been, “No, I didn’t talk to them.”

Who is Austin Goolsbee? According to this press release from last September, Goolsbee serves as the Senior Economic Advisor to the Obama campaign. He was highly touted by Obama in his visit to Iowa in that month, when he showed his intellectual chops by bringing Goolsbee along with a raft of other advisers, in part to show that he wasn’t a political lightweight.

It will be rather hard to distance himself from Goolsbee at this point. If Goolsbee spent time reassuring the Canadians sotto voce that Obama was merely demagoguing on NAFTA, then voters need to understand that the supposed “new politics” of Obama smells very similar to that of the same old lies and empty rhetoric we have heard from the Beltway for decades. And without that “new politics”, Obama is nothing more than an empty suit with a pleasant voice.

UPDATE: ABC also gets some refusal to confirm or deny from both Goolsbee and the Canadian diplomat in question, Georges Rioux.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I hope someone from McCain’s campaign is taking notes on this. This HAS to be brought up in the general. Audacity of Hope = Big Fat Two Faced Liar.

JustTruth101 on February 29, 2008 at 10:19 AM

That is gonna smart. I hope McCain follows up with a backhand to the chops.

a capella on February 29, 2008 at 10:20 AM

Obama isn’t very good at this cloak and dagger stuff is he? I can only HOPE that he learns about plausible deniability for CHANGE. At this point, any further denial would be a bit AUDACIOUS. Just sayin’

Immolate on February 29, 2008 at 10:20 AM

It’s a shameless semi-self-plug, but I have a guest-post at Protein Wisdom from Wednesday about Obama, Goolsbee and trade (and more).

Karl on February 29, 2008 at 10:27 AM

Say it isn’t true. A political campaign and candidate lying?

TooTall on February 29, 2008 at 10:31 AM

I’m trying to figure out why it was even necessary for Obama to give the Canadians a hug. What does he gain? Bad press in Canada? If he does this to stroke his image in Canada then what is he going to tell Dinnerjacket behind closed doors? The world is gonna love this guy at the negotiating table.

Limerick on February 29, 2008 at 10:37 AM

ooops…’No bad press in Canada’.

Limerick on February 29, 2008 at 10:38 AM

It’s an Obamanation I tell you!!!! An Obamanation!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on February 29, 2008 at 10:40 AM

Caught in the act!

AbaddonsReign on February 29, 2008 at 10:41 AM

The question is whether or not the Hillary camp will be willing and able to make political hay out of this. It could hurt Obama in Texas if he’s seen as flip-flopping on NAFTA. Of course, they have to hurry to get the word out before Tuesday.

JeffC_95 on February 29, 2008 at 10:42 AM

Heh. Unforced error! If Hillary will play it very hard on the issue over the weekend, she might make something out of it.

Spirit of 1776 on February 29, 2008 at 10:49 AM

JeffC_95 on February 29, 2008 at 10:42 AM

Texas is smitten. It’s a done deal here.

Limerick on February 29, 2008 at 10:49 AM

But B.O. is the Chosen Messiah Of Hope and Change. We are supposed to hang on every word he utters as being the Absolute Truth. Mama Michelle says so! And we don’t wanna upset Mama now, do we?

pilamaye on February 29, 2008 at 10:49 AM

How about Obama and “the bomber”? He has not answered questions about his association with the Weathermen’s former bomb maker in Chicago. Obama has met with this man and served on some board for a community group in Chicago. This man was at war with the United States and is unrepentant for bombing the Pentagon and a police station among other “targets”. It remains to be seen if he is going to be asked about this? He should be.

sheriff246 on February 29, 2008 at 10:49 AM

Karl on February 29, 2008 at 10:27 AM

From your link, it appears Goolsbee may have done this on his own, if he opposes Obama’s protectionist rhetoric. If so, I imagine he’ll get thrown under the bus shortly.

a capella on February 29, 2008 at 10:54 AM

The MSM is too distracted, looking for extra pillows for Senator Obama, to care about this story.

bloviator on February 29, 2008 at 10:54 AM

It’s an Obamanation I tell you!!!! An Obamanation!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on February 29, 2008 at 10:40 AM

copyright that. and get the web address.

TexasDan on February 29, 2008 at 10:55 AM

OT, how many Dread Pirate Roberts do we actually have now?

TexasDan on February 29, 2008 at 10:56 AM

Texas…yesterday at Fort Worth….stick with it until they show the lines. Hillary is toast.
http://www.wfaa.com/video/index.html?nvid=222786

Limerick on February 29, 2008 at 10:57 AM

Sadly I believe that the teflon on Barack has completely hardened and he is politically bulletproof. The press will issue yet another “pass” on the topic. >:-(

cannonball on February 29, 2008 at 11:00 AM

Karl, good show.

Obama’s dance, Pinocchio’s “I have no strings”, is utter tripe. Who else dodges the bullet like Obama, though? He’s burning the candle from both ends with what he says, and has supposedly succeeded to date based upon how he votes (present, absent, or whatever). He is the Third Man as a front only. When he went to Occidental as an underclassman, who there took him on to formulate his future NY contacts?

maverick muse on February 29, 2008 at 11:00 AM

Hillary won’t pick this ball up if she in fact has committed the same double-speak, and I’d almost positively guarantee that she has, just with more discreet persons in the Canadian gub’mint.

Immolate on February 29, 2008 at 11:00 AM

I think this will hurt Obambi badly. The press is just starting to actually look at him. McCain and Hillary wil hit him on this so it will be harder for the MSM to ignore it anyways. And NAFTA is a hot button issue in my home state of Ohio and his whole campaign is built on this idealisticunrealistic perfect messiah complex.
Mix in waffling on his public finance charge and ….. possibly big trouble.

I just hope he still gets the nom because I think by November he will make McGovern look electable….

tottoritodd on February 29, 2008 at 11:03 AM

Immolate on February 29, 2008 at 11:00 AM

Yeah, I doubt she would use it. However, it is high value for the GOP, if there are any ball busters left over there. I pine for the Lee Atwater days.

a capella on February 29, 2008 at 11:06 AM

hey Rush! Can you please pick this up? Aside from an ABC blog, it’s being largely buried.

JiangxiDad on February 29, 2008 at 11:08 AM

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.

Slick Willie 2.0

Time to start parsing every single word and phrase again.

“have taken place” …. like on that very day, Thursday?
“senior rank” …. who does campaign consider “senior” in rank?
“representatives” …. as in plural, did they only converse with one diplomat?

In the eyes of the press, will Obama replace der Slickmeister as the best liar most clever politician evah?

fogw on February 29, 2008 at 11:09 AM

You guys need to use Messiah pictures whenever the Messiah does something unMessiahlike.

ninjapirate on February 29, 2008 at 11:10 AM

I am still naive enough to be stunned that a campaign will contact, in this case the Canadian government, to warn them that what the candidate’s about to say in a speech is a complete and total lie, designed to make people vote for the candidate, and that the government should be aware of this and pay no mind.

WTF kind of a world do we live in, where these lying scumbags take our natural cynicism and use it as policy?

Jaibones on February 29, 2008 at 11:15 AM

It’s an Obamanation I tell you!!!! An Obamanation!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on February 29, 2008 at 10:40 AM

copyright that. and get the web address.

TexasDan on February 29, 2008 at 10:55 AM

Thats not the first time obamanation has been used here, but it fits. I first heard obamanation on the radio.

I don’t know about copyright, but looks like obamanation.com has already been anonimously registered.

AverageJoe on February 29, 2008 at 11:18 AM

What a cynical, lying pos this Obama is.

Jaibones on February 29, 2008 at 11:22 AM

Funny thing, the more things CHANGE, the more they stay the same.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 29, 2008 at 11:24 AM

I can sense the reaction of the Obama-nation! (Covers ears with hands, shouts “la, la, la, la….”)

sleepy-beans on February 29, 2008 at 11:26 AM

How “byzantine” of him.. All hail Emperor Barack Rodham Obama (even playing field with SAME middle names, can I do that RNC?? )

redrock on February 29, 2008 at 11:30 AM

Now why would CTV want to exert this influence at this point in U.S. primaries? There is red meat there waiting to be carved.

shaken on February 29, 2008 at 11:32 AM

I would note that the CTV article where they name their source also says (waaaaaay down in the article) that the source is now saying “perhaps it was a miscommunication”.

Jazz Shaw on February 29, 2008 at 11:42 AM

OT, how many Dread Pirate Roberts do we actually have now?
TexasDan on February 29, 2008 at 10:56 AM

Dread Pirate Roberts I – (Living in Patagonia)
Dread Pirate Roberts II – Cummerbund
Dread Pirate Roberts III – Ryan
Dread Pirate Roberts IV – Westley
Dread Pirate Roberts V – Inigo
Dread Pirate Roberts VI – Me

Since I have not retired any others are imposters. So fear them not!

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on February 29, 2008 at 11:56 AM

NAFTA is a done deal and Obama would be the perfect President of North America. Maybe Juan Pablo will win and keep our troops in Iraq to make sure all the lives and money were not wasted, that’s pretty much the only difference.

Christine on February 29, 2008 at 12:00 PM

Jazz Shaw on February 29, 2008 at 11:42 AM

He even provided a timeline. He has since suggested it was perhaps a “miscommunication.”

Translation: I did not know anyone would find out!! I like Obama…

That Dude stepped in it and now he is trying to back away.

Theworldisnotenough on February 29, 2008 at 12:01 PM

Once Obama’s been declared The 12th Imam, will we be able to photograph or show his picture ever again?

Dread Pirate Roberts VI on February 29, 2008 at 12:01 PM

I’m trying to figure out why it was even necessary for Obama to give the Canadians a hug. What does he gain? Bad press in Canada? If he does this to stroke his image in Canada then what is he going to tell Dinnerjacket behind closed doors? The world is gonna love this guy at the negotiating table.

Limerick on February 29, 2008 at 10:37 AM

Whenever I hear talk about American politicians trashing NAFTA or the need to increase border security, the Canadian part of me understands that the talk is directed mainly towards Mexico. To directly avoid an uproar with Mexico, it’s just safer to refer to both Canada and Mexico publicly. Obama probably doesn’t have the trusted contacts yet with Canadian officials where he can inform us ahead of time he’s going to say something provocative about border security or trade but he really means Mexico and not us. They were then caught.

Canadian Infidel on February 29, 2008 at 12:07 PM

[Jaibones on February 29, 2008 at 11:15 AM]

It takes all kinds to make a society, Jaibones, and one can’t, at this point, blame society for the fact that Obama decided to run for the Presidency. Yes, we are past the point where Obama decided lying was a fruitful method for pursuing it and gathered advisers and managers who approve of it and some people who have turned a blind eye to it. But the fault only lies with the society at large if the people elect him. Right now it only lies with the people who support Obama, if they persist, and then, shortly, with the Democrats if they nominate him.

I would point out that too many people have taken this lie to mean he won’t pursue the policy he’s voiced to Americans and wouldn’t alter NAFTA as he proposes. It could be just the opposite — that he lied to the Canadians and will screw them, the Mexicans and anyone else in the furtherance of his own conception of the USA, first, and the people, second, if he is elected.

Dusty on February 29, 2008 at 12:08 PM

Isn’t doubledealing SOP (standard operating procedure) for most liberal politicos? So, six of one or a half dozen of the other seems to be the choice of the Democrat party in their quest for the White House….AGAIN! Not surprised that the fresh and new is exactly the same as the old and worn, just unseen ’till now.

b4lucy on February 29, 2008 at 12:11 PM

Here is the FT on Obama’s “move to the left” that has Democrats, like a Bill Richardson advisor, concerned.

I reject the premise that he was ever a centrist, but it is interesting that there is some concern in the Dems camp.

Milk it Mac!

Buy Danish on February 29, 2008 at 12:16 PM

Again Obama exposed for the TOTAL NINCOMPOOP that he is.

jimbo2008 on February 29, 2008 at 12:19 PM

Liar, liar…halo’s on fire.

SouthernGent on February 29, 2008 at 12:24 PM

Calling Juan McCain … please offer an apology to the Canadians and take the bullet for Obama.

trs on February 29, 2008 at 12:25 PM

It matters not what Obama says. We need a man of tint in the oval office; one with more vowels (not ‘Y’ either) in his last name. Second coming of Christ preferred. Halo and wings are good, as long as they aren’t too constraining.

Immolate on February 29, 2008 at 12:43 PM

Naive is what he’s called, jive talking is what he is doing. The BeeGees put it too song.

google can provide the details.

tarpon on February 29, 2008 at 1:18 PM

This story can’t be true…

Because, as we all know, Canadian TV is, like, highly motivated to totally lie about American politics.

Right, Dude?

franksalterego on February 29, 2008 at 1:33 PM

His inexperience shows with this and other situations. If President Kennedy was not taken as a serious leader by our enemies of his time, what can we expect from our present enemies viewing Mr. Obama in action.

amr on February 29, 2008 at 1:33 PM

Yes and let’s forget everything John McCain says to us conservatives. Can any of them be trusted?

aloysiusmiller on February 29, 2008 at 1:34 PM

There’s something even more disturbing about the Big O’s “foreign policy” experience I think we all need to take a closer look at…

Google: Obama, Morris, Odinga

Is it just me? Or is there a LOT more to this story we need to know?

Califemme on February 29, 2008 at 1:44 PM

It seems that somebody failed that “international test” John Kerry once referred to…

major john on February 29, 2008 at 1:45 PM

“Slick Willie 2.0″

Hits is out of the park! Trademark that puppy!!

drunyan8315 on February 29, 2008 at 2:03 PM

This reminds me so much of 1980.

Carter’s supporters could apparently think of little good to say about Jimmy, so they spent most all their time just bashing Reagan, what a light weight he was and how he would destroy the country, if not the entire world and maybe even the entire solar system.

How did that work out for them?

Oh, I remember now.

MB4 on February 29, 2008 at 2:10 PM

Califemme on February 29, 2008 at 1:44 PM

OH…MY…WORD !!!

franksalterego on February 29, 2008 at 2:51 PM

What exactly does Obama stand for? Has he ever said? He makes speeches like denouncing NAFTA while he secretly calls Canada telling them to disregard his comments. He refuses to wear the Flag lapel pin of the country he is running for President of. He refuses to place his hand over his heart while listening to the national anthem. During the playing of the anthem he just looks around at the peasants that do show respect for their country. What does he stand for?
Americans and Democrats in particular have lost the ability to think and reason, we want to elect a man to the highest and most powerful position in the world, to be the commander in chief of the armed forces that will protect us. We want to elect this man who has no respect for the country or it’s people, which means he has no respect for you and I.

What is the real deal with NAFTA? What is the real deal with Farrakhan? Will we surrender to Kenya? Will Opra be the Sec. of Defense? Can we believe anything the man says? We may not like Bush but this is worst.

Largil on February 29, 2008 at 3:00 PM

A must read for sure:

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/01/31/obamas-african-hubris-2/

how come nobody is picking this up??

Be Reasonable on February 29, 2008 at 3:01 PM

Carter’s supporters could apparently think of little good to say about Jimmy, so they spent most all their time just bashing Reagan, what a light weight he was and how he would destroy the country, if not the entire world and maybe even the entire solar system.

How did that work out for them?

Oh, I remember now.

You appear very fond of this point, making it in multiple threads. It’s not clear how it applies here: this is a very interesting story, in that it’s sort of the first time to see Obama in action. He has a problem. He’s in a false position, and it appear that his senior economic advisor put him there. What will he do about it? Let’s watch, it should be interesting.

I think your analogy, and your narrative, is a very poor fit to reality. Reagan was self-evidently not a lightweight, so that dog just didn’t hunt. He was Governor of California, a serious executive position. How can you compare that with what Obama’s got to refute claims of inexperience? Meanwhile, Carter was a proven failure. I well remember his “malaise” speech in which he essentially said “I gathered th world experts, and they said there’s a crisis of confidence! So all y’all need to be more confident.” It was evident that the idea that there might be a crisis of confidence in him, never once crossed his mind.

Then, too, Reagan was selling a vision of an America that had been great, and could be great again, given the right leadership. That’s a long way from the “hope, change, socialism” pablum Obama’s peddling.

Splunge on February 29, 2008 at 3:06 PM

I’m an American who lives in Toronto and I can tell you that CTV, the source of this story is a highly respected broadcaster, who reports news, not opinion. Unlike most American MSM, it also doesn’t omit stories that don’t suit a specific political slants. The Dems would just hate them.

Also, in contrast to the likes of the NYT, CTV actually checks and confirms their sources, which to me, tells me this story has legs. I suspect that there will be more to talk about over the next few days.

Syd B. on February 29, 2008 at 3:08 PM

franksalterego on February 29, 2008 at 2:51 PM

So, it’s not just me, right?

Califemme on February 29, 2008 at 4:22 PM

A must read for sure:

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/01/31/obamas-african-hubris-2/

how come nobody is picking this up??

Be Reasonable on February 29, 2008 at 3:01 PM

Zactly! Wassup? Not even HA has looked into this one! (that I’m aware of)

Califemme on February 29, 2008 at 4:27 PM

This smells like a smoke screen from Obama’s camp to imply aanti-nafta posture, without really taking a public stand in order to influence labor union intensive Ohio.

Any hard confirm yet? No.

benjo on February 29, 2008 at 5:21 PM

A must read for sure:

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/01/31/obamas-african-hubris-2/

how come nobody is picking this up??

Be Reasonable on February 29, 2008 at 3:01 PM

Nobody’s covering Kenya because nobody cares about Kenya. It’s not an al Qaeda hideout, it’s not an oil-producing country, it’s basically not anything to Americans.

I’ve covered Obama’s radical background (and will continue to do so) so a relative in the hard-core Marxist camp is not surprising. I’ll look into this Kenya story, too, and will probably blog about it in a couple of days.

philwynk on February 29, 2008 at 6:45 PM

philwynk on February 29, 2008 at 6:45 PM

Please do look into it. Google: Obama, Morris, Odinga. Enquiring minds want to know. This could be the next leader of the free world here, folks, if it’s crap, then I want to KNOW it’s crap, and if it’s true, then EVERYONE should know!

Califemme on February 29, 2008 at 7:26 PM

I just get a kick out of the claim that CTV was trying to smear Obama…. If it were possible for a corporate entity to do so, they would have his love child.

Jim708 on February 29, 2008 at 7:48 PM

Of course they would have to get in line behind the CBC, the Toronto Star and The Globe and Mail……

Jim708 on February 29, 2008 at 7:52 PM

Splunge on February 29, 2008 at 3:06 PM

Thank you. You just helped to make my point, by not even once in your long “rebutal” even mentioning Juan’s name.

MB4 on February 29, 2008 at 11:27 PM

If Obama can’t cover his butt any better than this,then he
is definitely going to need a teflon Clinton as a running mate.

If it wasn’t for that blue dress, the Clinton legacy would have slid by with the help of the press.

Baxter Greene on March 1, 2008 at 2:12 AM

In a burst of Saturday Morning Creativity

franksalterego on March 1, 2008 at 12:21 PM

Cancel previous…Try this:

In a burst of Saturday Morning Creativity

franksalterego on March 1, 2008 at 12:24 PM

These idiotic democratic candidates are dissing one of our best friends, Canada who in the NAFTA agreement are bound by contract to sell us oil. If they opt out of NAFTA Canada can sell their oil to whom ever they want to and China wants to buy badly! Morons!

sabbott on March 1, 2008 at 5:10 PM

The following is from a letter to me from a very informed Canadian citizen.

Sheriff,
Canada spent the greatest part of the last 40 years designing,
constructing and operating a complex system of petroleum pipelines, and
separate natural gas pipelines, to serve the eastern Canadian market for
certain. However, the pipleline system could not have been built without
the economic contribution made by the US market. Today, seving the
eastern and east-central U.S. alone, there are 4 major operating lines
connected to the expanded network of the Trans Canada Pipeline Ltd system,
the main connection to this US market being Sarnia/Indianapolis.
Literally billlions have been spent on ‘looping” to ensure all markets are
satisfied with refined product.

Further, a few more recent projects carry unrefined Canadian crude.
Many national pipeline systsms in the US are connected to supply lines
from Canada, including those which move US domestic crude and crude
stored in locations near ports receiving supplies from non-Canadian sources.

The most recent pipeline project is intended to transport expected
product, currently being refined fpr immediate delivery, from Sable Island
and off-shore facilities south of Newfoundland. The required capacity
of these pipelines have not been published, to my knowledge, but you
can rest assured it is not only the formerly impoverished Provinces
alone which are anxious to finish market assets.The off-shore wells are
shared jurisdictions, so the Federal government has its own degree of
revenue to look forward to – and I dare say that greedy bunch in Ottawa
have probably spent, in their own minds, the future massive rewards
from operations. The only real market being served from the off-shore
rigs is the US.

Finally, from where would Canada
ship its petroleum to these fictitious new markets? From the one and
only port facility near Vancouver, B.C.? Possibly, as long as China or
whomever doesn’t expect to dock the new supertanker. Point Roberts has
to be upgraded first. There has been some talk about a port south of
Kitimat. It is being worked on now, along with the design of a new
pipeline. The latest estimates for completion times is about 10 years -
long after the tenure hoped for by the candidates hoping to apply
“muscle” to revise NAFTA.

It may be too simplistic for certain fear-mongering pundits to
appreciate one rule: The U.S. is Canada’s largest customer. Until this year,
Canada was the largest customer of the United States – now China has
surpassed Canada’s position. Does anyone seriously think Canada wishes
to jetison its largest marketplace? That is not only very improbable,
but the U.S. will have at least a decade worth of notice.

As Mentioned in our conversation, Ambassador Wilson reports in the
Government of Canada’s lobbying effort to exclude oil sands production from
the US market, inadvertently, in a new “green” Bill going to Congress,
Canada now exports to American 2.3 million barrels of oil per day.
Not only does that surpass Saudi product sold in the U.S., but the
statistics cited by Wilson were contained in a letter after the Democratic
position on NAFTA was expressed. If anything, the direction of planning
guessed at is going the other way, in reality.. From the
American point of view, I understand NAFTA is responsible for $388 Billion
worth of export revenue from the U.S. Can the Democratic candidates be
so ignorant as to strike a strategy for implementation without input
from some level of expertise?

sheriff246 on March 1, 2008 at 8:41 PM

Er, has anybody bothered to point out that there’s no actual reporting taking place? This is just like the NY Times’ hit piece on McCain so far, except that the Times actually had a story (about McCain being too close to lobbyists) but threw the screwball innuendo in there. We have no proof in either article that CTV’s not just making this up out of whole cloth, and the only “evidence” provided is that Obama and Goolsbee didn’t explicitly deny that a conversation took place (irrespective of what the conversation was even ABOUT). We do the exact same thing we get so outraged about with the Democrats when we swallow this story whole. Let CTV provide its sources or at least the evidence the sources provide, or call them out as slimebags.

Math_Mage on March 1, 2008 at 10:17 PM

TIME gives Obama a “halo”

Have you seen the front cover of the March 19th edition of TIME?

It’s a picture showing the back of Obama’s head–facing into a spotlight–against a backdrop of darkness.

The effect gives him a type of “halo”. Deliberate?

Ragnell on March 2, 2008 at 12:29 AM

The Messiah doesn’t mean what he says?

Hmmm…….

drjohn on March 2, 2008 at 5:05 AM

Goolsbee–Obama’s “senior economic advisor”–is not allowed to answer a question about whether he talked with someone???
He refers questions about whether he talked with someone to the Obama campaign–but he’s part of the Obama campaign!

jgapinoy on March 2, 2008 at 9:51 AM

Check Drudge -

Canada defends Obama over NAFTA flap

But the Canadian Embassy in Washington released a statement essentially backing up the Obama camp’s version of the meeting between adviser Austan Goolsbee and officials at the Canadian consulate 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,” the embassy statement said. “We deeply regret any inference that may have been drawn to that effect.”

Skywise on March 3, 2008 at 8:19 PM

CTV agrees with Obama,good grief Charley Brown,
why do some of my fellow Canadains fall for
the Liberals,at the rate this is going we
should be as popular as France!

canopfor on March 3, 2008 at 9:27 PM