You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Is Obama lying about NAFTAgate?
2008-03-04
Byron York, National Review

. . . With the evidence we have so far, Obama appears to be in a difficult position. At first, his campaign denied that there was any contact with the Canadian government. Then, when it was forced to concede that there had been contact, it insisted that it had nothing to do with softening ObamaÂ’s position on NAFTA. And then, when the newly-released memo suggested that it had been about just that, Team Obama simply stuck with its story.

After talking with people knowledgeable about these events, it’s possible to come to a few early conclusions. One, there was a meeting. Two, the DeMora memo was a good-faith effort to record what went on at that meeting. Three, the conversation did touch on NAFTA. Four, the Canadian government’s statement was a carefully worded, diplomatic message that did not shed any light on whether the key accusation against the Obama campaign — that it privately hedged its position on NAFTA and then misled the public about it — is true. And five, the Canadian statement did say outright that Goolsbee was contacted because he was involved in the Obama campaign, not — as Plouffe claimed — because he was a university professor.

So itÂ’s not likely that the story will go away, given the Obama campaignÂ’s inaccurate and misleading statements about it and the Clinton campaignÂ’s interest in keeping the controversy alive. The only question is whether it will do Obama any significant damage and Clinton any significant benefit.
Posted by:Mike

#3  Dammit, ed, you stole my best line!
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2008-03-04 23:16  

#2  Are his lips moving?
Posted by: ed   2008-03-04 15:30  

#1  "It was political rhetoric in order to capture votes but in no way is how he will actually behave when (if) elected."

Now if it were me giving sworn testimony in court I would be found in contempt and fined+jailed.

See the difference?
Posted by: swksvolFF   2008-03-04 11:49  

00:00