Email This Post
Direct Obama-Fires On NAFTA-gate
What IS NAFTA-gate? My point – exactly. NAFTA-gate is perhaps one of the most incriminating confirmation on Obama’s integrity. All these shallow accusations on Obama’s racist pastor, and his Muslim background are merely theatre, which does nothing but booster Obama’s support base by highlighting the ignorance of the McCain camp.
So what is NAFTA-gate?
On the eve of the Ohio Democratic Primary back in February 2008, a leaked memo surfaced detailing a conversation between Obama’s senior economic advisor, Austen Goolsbee, with the Canadian consul general. The conversation (based on the leaked memo) essentially reassured the Canadian government that his anti-NAFTA stance was “more reflective of political maneuvering than policy.” And that he was “less about fundamentally changing the agreement and more in favor of strengthening/clarifying language on labor mobility and environment.” Basically, what he had been telling his voters were bullshits.
Obama had been quoted as declaring NAFTA as “devastating” and a “big mistake” and promised to renegotiate NAFTA. No matter in what context you try to read the memo, it does not carry a hint of that tone.
Talking out both sides of the mouth is typical amongst politicians (if not a prerequisite). No big deal. Admit it; Bill-Clinton your way around it and move on. Yet, the charade continued. Obama campaign continued its deceptions with conflicting reports. First Obama’s spokesperson, Bill Burton, claimed they were aware of the meeting (but refused to comment on the discussions). Then Susan Rice, Obama’s foreign policy advisor corrected, “There had been no such contact” coupled with Obama himself stating “It did not happen.” Obama changed his story, yet again, less than a month later confirming the meeting did occur.
Again, talking out both sides of the mouth is typical of politicians, Obama included. What’s the big deal?
It’s a big deal because he was not talking about issues like not raising taxes, where citizens could expect the candidate to break the promise. He was talking about mother-fucking NAFTA! And it was not like a fib where he promised rescuing puppies and then not followed through. He took a completely opposite stance, like from rescuing puppies to ordering a puppy genocide! How could he propose that he was against the existing NAFTA agreement when he was actually wholeheartedly embracing it?
This really does highlight Obama’s integrity issues, as well as questions of what he really stands for. He’s for better environment, is he really? He’s for diplomacy, is he really? As Bush has eloquently quoted, “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” How many times can you be fooled before you feel shamed?
For those “Obama-is-the-messiah” worshipper who insists NAFTA-gate was somehow a misunderstanding and that he really is opposed to NAFTA, Obama has officially retracted his statements calling NAFTA a “devastation” and a “big mistake” on a June 2008 Fortune magazine article titled “Obama – NAFTA not so bad afterall”. Is the dialog still ever so unbelievable?
Now the question lies – Why isn’t the McCain camp directing his firepower full blast on this issue? Yes, I know McCain is also pro-NAFTA also but at least he’s honest about it.
Related Posts
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
Leave your response!