The Fact-Checker, by Michael Dobbs

Only TWO Pinocchios?! Will this story at least get on the Front Page too?

How many Pinocchios (or would it be on the Front Page a day before the Ohio primary) if Hillary DIANE Clinton's campaign had made the same exact contact / representations / denials?

Clinton would get skewered. Obama gets a wink-wink.

Why the double-standard by the press? It's so obvious, it's frustrating.

When are we going to ask Hillary about White Water and Vince Foster? She has not yet been vetted until the Republicans get a hold of her. I don't want to have Bill Clinton as First Man in the White House. Wasn't he impeached by the U. S. House of Representatives? He should be barred from the White House. So should Hillary. What a messy couple!

Wow. The media bias in support of Obama is astounding...He lied about a major issue to the people of Ohio and told the Canadian government the exact opposite! He tried to hoodwink the people of Ohio and this only gets him two Pinocchios? Get real!

Can we call Obama Slick Willy II?

Vince Foster. Really? Can't you let that tired old slander rest in peace? There are plenty of things to criticize the Clintons for without manufacturing fake ones.

There's a good reason why there's only 2 Pinocchios: no smoking gun, and no dead body. Technically, the original story was flawed, and it's not the purpose of any denial to go back and tell the whole truth that the flawed story didn't.

Besides that, *so what* if Obama tried to communicate a message of "don't worry" to a trading partner before criticizing the trade agreement that exists now. That actually shows that he is responsible, and economically savvy. I'll bet the voters of Ohio see right through all this hand-wringing!

First... How laughable that Debmood refers to Hillary not being vetted. FACT--The Republicans already got hold of the Clintons. Maybe you were off the planet during the Clinton administration.

I think this factcheck deserved at least a rating of three. Obama's ability to deflect is now starting to get his campaign into trouble because he has avoided confronting trouble head on. A good example is his longtime friendship, business/house-buying dealings, and political association with "fund raiser" Tony Rezko whose trial begins TODAY. So where is Obama's good judgement?

I'm confused at what constitutes the whole truth in this situation. Is it the statement from the memo or the campaign's handling of the situation? I agree, it's odd that it took four days to work through this, but there are very legitimate reasons. The original news story was a gross distortion of reality, which is why the Canadian government and Obama campaign immediately denied it. Goolsbee was not meeting as a representative of the campaign (he does have a day job), so it's understandable that the campaign was not immediately aware of the discussion. Finally, Goolsbee and Rioux had a different takeaway on some details of the meeting, which is the real issue here.

So, can you really call it parsing if so many details were originally off-base and the substantiative point is in dispute? And, as for the the disputed statement, it seems pretty minor when you look at the bulk of Rioux's memo as being consistent with Obama's position on trade. Honestly, it sounds more like Rioux chose his wording to assuage Canadian fears about US presidential candidates who are sounding more protectionist by the day.

Given the details, I might have to give the fact checker two Pinocchios for sensationalizing an issue.

This whole thing seems to be taken out of context. Does it mean the Canadian embassy was lying? Or is the whole thing being misconstrued?

The purpose of the meeting needs to be addressed.

Regarding NAFTA, both have said that they support it but that it has to be renegotiated. Is that exaggerating?

A side question: 60 Minutes showed Clinton being very soft on the Muslim attacks against Obama just last night. But In a recent debate, Hillary said it's not enough to give soft repudiation of certain groups, people, and tactics, and said she vigorously, actively rejected such. Earlier, another network aired Clinton saying that she was friends with the Obama family and looked at their family picture in her office everyday. This concerns me.

I would like to say that we should not look the other way when our friends and neighbors are being attacked in hate crimes. America has a substantial number of citizens whose faith is Islam and who do not advocate violence. In the Middle East, the majority of Islamists do not advocate violence toward America. People want to be treated fairly and to have peace, if given a choice.

Let's not let forms a extremism divide us.

now the media begin to take themselvs responsibility to scrutinize Obama. if you know the truth , you know who to vote.

Protection this protection that. Let's just remember that for every job that left the U.S. that means fewer dollars going into the federal gov. and fewer dollars going into ssc. as well as someone without a job ext. All the people behind making the desision to offshore jobs have no respect for this country and deserve to be looked at and treated like a whole other group of terrorists.

Only Two!!

Is Barack Obama stance on NAFTA contradictory?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1822

.

uh...let's see what news stories broke days before each election day...all triggered by the clintons and exploited heavily by MSM...and mine you none of them worked

IOWA - he's a drug dealer - result: won more delegates
NH - drug dealer, muslim and hillary crying - result: won more delegates
NM - more hillary crying, hillary lawsuit agaist caucus, oh and drug dealer, muslim - results: tie
SC - obama supporters are racist they only support black people - results: won more delegates
Super Duper Tuesday - the "snub" as the press put it and all of the above - results: won more states,delegates and votes
Cheseapeake Primary - the "pimp" word - results: won more delegates
WI & HI - supporters are a cult and all of the above - results: won more delegates
Texas & Ohio - all the above, secret conversation with the right wing canadian govt about nafta, red phone scare tactic...

it just wont stop but i guess the media isn't doing its job good enough for the clintons...i think obama is right again when he says if you keep doing the same old thing over and over and expect a different result, then you're crazy...judging from the past 30 + states this tactic will not work either.

The Clinton campaigners do know how to stir up the hornets nest. They learned from the best, the Republican/Rove Slimers. There's nothing here. Accuse the other side of something your side does all the time, make it sound bad, parse the details and then, watch the compliant Press swarm all over it for 3-4 days to find out that it's no beig deal, then accuse the Press of playing favorites! Damn, I've had enough of this kind of politics!

The day before election story . Only a Clinton could out Karl Rove -Karl Rove. The constant whining about the press being 'unfair' seems to have had the desired effect.

Bill Clinton has been using his international diplomacy to mole into Canada and back to Ohio with this story. The Fact Checker should be looking at the Clinton Connection in this whole story. This "memo" was manufactured to sabotage Obama.

Has anyone seen the canadian consulate's official government responser to this BS story fabricated and exploited by the Clintons?

Here it is:

The Canadian Embassy in Washington issued a statement on Monday saying its envoys "regularly contact those involved in all of the Presidential campaigns and, periodically, report on these contacts to interested officials."

The recent report from 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."

Get your facts straight before making judgement.

The Clinton's are a bridge to the 21st century, Obama is the 21st century.

Both Hillary and Obama carry on as if they can single-handedly break the NAFTA treaty, only because they need Ohio voters. Presidents don't make treaties; Congress does. Presidents are allowed to sign them; that is all. Did they perhaps forget that Canada is our biggest, and Mexico our second-biggest oil supplier?
I would NOT mess with NAFTA. We can only lose.

The fact is that a senior Obama campaign official, Austan Goolsbee, and the Canadian consul-general in Chicago, Georges Rioux met and talked about Obama's stand on NAFTA being a political rhetoric.
No matter how you spin it, they can't disprove that Obama's public statements about NAFTA and his campaign's behind the scenes meeting with senior Canadian diplomat do not add up

I think people should be looking at Obama as Slick Obama. This is unbelievable and if Hillary was the one who did this It would be all over for her. The press continues to support and baby Obama and I am sick and tired of the preferential treatment that he continues to get.

Easy solution... candidate Obama should just come out and say he is either for or against dismantling NAFTA. Quit straddling fences and let people know where you stand.

Otherwise the candidate reinforces the perception that he's a wimpy sitzpinkler afraid to take a stand on anything material. Already, his substance-lacking message has anyone with a minimal mental capacity seeking alternate candidates. Exactly what and precisely how do you intend to "change," Obama?

Kay,

Stating that something is a fact does not make it so. The fact is that Goolsbee is a prominent economist and met with the Canadian Consulate General in Chicago as part of his position at the University of Chicago. Because Goolsbee is also Obama's chief economic adviser they discussed some aspects of the campaign's position on trade. Later, a memo was distributed inside the Canadian government containing some oversimplifications and unintentional misrepresentation of the discussion. The Canadian Consulate General in Chicago has formally apologized for this misrepresentation and has reiterated that the Obama campaign did not maintain "... a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA."

I completely agree that this situation needed to be investigated as it developed. However, the facts are now known and the Obama campaign was entirely above board. The ongoing misrepresentation appears to be shameless mudslinging on the part of Clinton supporters.

Parsing? What bull.

THE STORY RE OBAMA'S INCONSISTENCY ON NAFTA IS FALSE.

The media deserve five pinocchios on this one.

"Statement by the Canadian Embassy

Washington, D.C., March 3, 2008 -- 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."
http://geo.international.gc.ca/can-am/washington/menu-en.asp?lang_update=1

Hill was along side her Hus when NAFTA started. So I think she's a little more in favor of it then Obama. We need to shut off NAFTA and start putting trade on a little more even playing field with other countries. Protectionism is an execuse for all you journalists ext. Bush is taking abvantage of what Clinton left and really screwing this country along with the Grand Oil Party GOP. Who cares about religion and beliefs, economics and jobs are important. Obama is a good pick.

Please print this Michael:

"The Canadian Embassy also released a statement on the matter, and it was circulated by the Obama campaign. '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," the statement said. "We deeply regret any inference that may have been drawn to that effect.'

i give the washington post's so-called fact checker 5 pinocchios for this inaccurate, biased "news story". this has long been refuted. good god america, when will we stop behaving like babies?

OBAMA '08!

why not look at a buried article in wapo online re a memo released by the canadian embassy where the BO aid clearly states BO was being politcally expediant (something he accuses HRC of doing) regarding his nafta spiel to the voters in ohio. it should be front page news....were it hillary, it would be on ALL front page news!

So Obama didn't lie outright ... I guess you could say he is a "Moderate" liar ...

If you are going to carry water for the Clinton campaign, make sure you update your blog posting when it is contradicted by one of the actors involved. The Canadian embassy strongly refuted the story today:

http://geo.international.gc.ca/can-am/washington/menu-en.asp?lang_update=1

Where are the Pinocchios for the "3 AM telephone call" video? How many foreign policy crises has Clinton managed (at 3 AM or at any time in her last "35 years")?

First Obama camp denies that any meeting between one of his staff member and a Canadian diplomat took place. After AP released the memo, they admitted that the meeting took place but are saying that Goolsbee met the Canadian Consul-General in an "informal" meeting and was "misquoted".
The basic facts remain that a senior Obama staffer (his Chief economic adviser) met with a senior Canadian diplomat and talked about NAFTA and indicated that Obama's position on NAFTA "is less about fundamentally changing the agreement".
All this has been reported by CTV and AP, not by Clinton's campaign.
Obama has been running his campaign on "Change" and "Hope" and "not politics as usual". If a candidate runs on high promises, they should make sure that their actions match their slogans.
All I am saying that all candidates should be held accountable and should face same amount of scrutiny.

clevelandparker:

Did you get that from Obama.com headquarters? I was kicked off that blog for asking simple questions like that. Why do you think Canadian officials will not "lie" in order to protect such "private" conversations? At the very least, your guy is on the ropes about this, right?

First Sen. Obama was an empty suit, a naive greenhorn. Now he's a "slick" charlatan. At one point Obama was a Republican in disguise, then he was the most liberal senator in America. Amazing how Obama can be all things negative to the Clintons, even if those characterizations are inconsistent and even mutually eclusive!

The Clintons are addicted to Gotcha Politics; to them it's the "fun part." But they have yet to realize that the voters are sick of it!

HE PARSES HIS WORDS AND HE READS THEM FROM TELEPROMPTERS OR PIECES OF PAPER LATELY

ON THE ECONOMY AND FOREIGN POLICY HE IS CLUELESS !

HE ALSO HAS AN ELECT ABILITY PROBLEM

AND A REAL BELIEVABILITY PROBLEM !!!

HERE'S PROOF OF THAT ! IMPORTANT TO WATCH THIS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuB_W8o_UsU

CITIZENSHIP IS A RESPONSIBILITY, NOT A RIGHT.

This story stinks like fish- show me a fresh catch (with facts). Looks like a way for Hillary to fight back at the 12th hour;

Texas Primary- Hillary vs. Barack:
http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=50

Thinker, what are you, hard of seeing? Or do you think that writing with caps lock on will make you more believable?

You've got some nerve talking about a believabilty problem. The Clintons are habitual liars. Bill can't even practice his profession, law, because he's a confimed liar! So he's off peddling influence in Khazakstan, for Canada's newest Uranium tycoon!

Citizenship is a responsibility alright, and so is being truthful in court, and in the Oval Office. The Clintons have betrayed us before, and we won't be fooled again!

This story should get major play, and it's buried deep in the Post's website with no one picking it up. The media is so in the tank for Obama, but people are now beginning to pick up on the truth. The halo is starting to dim. Will the truth get out in time for people to realize what is at stake? Senator Clinton is tough, tested, and ready to lead. To fix the economy, keep us secure, and restore America's standing and reputation.

What an incredibly stupid thing to do. Is this more of that good judgement?

The Canadian Parliament has now publicly condemned this story (BOTH the Labour and Conservative parties -- you can't get any more complete than that), so let's give as much attention to the retraction of this story as to the original story (non-story?). Link below. Hopefully this should resound in Obama's favor and backfire on Clinton.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/

Scandal breaks out. Politician denies. A few days after, memos begin to leak confirming that he is lying.

Yes, this is the change we have been waiting for.

Thanks to whoever posted this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuB_W8o_UsU

Unbelievable.

"This is a classic news management technique known as "parsing": focus on a minor detail that you can safely say is untrue, aggressively deny it, and create the impression that the entire story is inaccurate."

The Post shows here that the opposite is also true: focus on a minor detail that you can safely say is TRUE, aggressively PROMOTE IT, and create the impression that the entire story is ACCURATE.

clevelandparker:

Did you get that from Obama.com headquarters? I was kicked off that blog for asking simple questions like that. Why do you think Canadian officials will not "lie" in order to protect such "private" conversations? At the very least, your guy is on the ropes about this, right?

As of March 3, 2008 you need to update your Obama/NAFTA/Canada fact check because there were new developments and Obama did more than he admitted to.

Obama stated that "it did not happen" - I wonder if the Washington Post allowed the Obama camp to write this post?

He denies that this happened - he denied that he and Rezko toured his home and the adjacent property together prior to the suspicious purchase that Obama seems to have benefited from. He claimed that Sen. Rockefeller voted against the authorization to invade Iraq (he voted for it) and that he was chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee (he wasn't) when he got Rockefellers' endorsement. His camp and supporters think that any elected official and super delegate should vote for Obama if he won their state, except in CA, MA, NJ, and every other state where those who were on the wrong side of their constituents had pledged to support Obama and Hillary had won.

The man can't seem to get a story straight. He is such a hypocrite, and the press clearly gives them a pass.

Holy crap, what a non-issue. Perfect for the person who can blow it out of proportion the days before a vote.

Not so perfect for the retraction of the controversy after the fact.

Oh well.

What about the part where Obama says Goolsby didn't meet with Canadian officials on NAFTA. Then said they did meet but it wasn't about NAFTA, and then said OKAY, they met and it was about NAFTA!

Subject: The Clintons' Terror Pardons

what about that 3 o'clock phone call that Bill Clinton took in 1998 that told him and Hillary that Osama was cited on 3 different occasions and Bill and Hillary could have struck him but choose not , which proved to be a Big Mistake , so How can Hillary say that They will be able to make the right Decision at 3 o'clock in the morning when the red phone rings , when they didn't last time ?? Why should the Clintons get a pass on all their mistakes from the past , just to rewrite the history books , and get another shot at what needs a New perspective in American Future History making ??????????? If Hilary is catch in the position of having to cover for Bill at the same time trying to make a decision about what to do for America , will it turn out like this last time did ??? American needs to know why the force of striking bin laden was turned down at the same time The Monica Scandal was going on , was it a Political move that then led to the disasters we face today ??? America needs to be sure who we vote for to make sure the same mistakes don't keep happening over and over ????????

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/9/10/181819.shtml?s=ic

On Tape, Clinton Admits Passing Up bin Laden Capture; Lewinsky Played Role

Bill Clinton denies it now, but he once admitted he passed up an opportunity to extradite Osama bin Laden.

And NewsMax has the former President making the claim on audiotape. [You can listen to the tape yourself] -- Click Here

Former Pres. Bill Clinton interviewed by Fox News - Sept. 24, 2006 (Part 1/2)
Lasrever note: Just in case anyone missed it... (transcript obtained from twopercentco.com) "WALLACE: Mr. President, welcome to Fox News Sunday. CLINTON: Thanks. WALLACE: In a recent issu..

Clinton refused to kill bin Laden 8-10 times
But what troubles me most is Tenet's handling of the opportunities that CIA officers gave the Clinton administration to capture or kill bin Laden between May 1998 and May 1999. Each time we had intel..
Clinton Admits Passing Up bin Laden Capture

How does Hillary go toe to toe with the special interests when she has their special Money in the pockets of that Tax Return she won't open to public reviews, and these issues are critical to Hillary being able to deliver to the American people what she says she will do . It is just like when Hillary and Bill got in the Whitehouse before making all these promises and then everything just got quit after that , I remember the 1990s well , you would listen to Bill talk , and when he got done , you didn't know any more than before he started . It was the same old bunch of folks selling out to the same old bunch of special Interests that have got us to the point we are at today , and like you say its time to turn the page . Taxes Hillary promised to open them , OHIO deserves to know if Hillary is in bend with the very Special Interests she says she is a fighter against , Please make this noise so loud that she opens those taxes , or concedes the votes to you , because how do you represent the interests of the American people with so many favors leaning on Hillary and Bill to get back into power , like the record shows how power corrupts and puts the interests of the peoples Business , like Getting healthcare done , it gets hard with all the distractions like the ones below , take a look at the record of the wrong working getting done while the American People wait and wait for the right business to get done, this kind of Hillary experience is why they didn't get the healthcare issue done , how do you have any leverage , , see below
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/background.htm#money

The Clintons' Terror Pardons
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120277819085260827.html?mod=Letters

By DEBRA BURLINGAME
February 12, 2008; Page A17

Enron and Bill Clinton http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/2/28/12723.shtml
Subject: How do you change what is wrong , when you are a part of the problem the Influence of Lobbyists funds has caused in America ?

February 16, 2000 Issue Brief #137 http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/issuebriefs_ib137

The High Cost of the China-WTO Deal , Clinton
Administration's own analysis suggests spiraling deficits, job losses , all ignored because of Lobbyist influence . At least we could have had some fees paid on duty free Imports to make up the losses in our SS and Medicare systems , but I guess that was not acceptable by the Multi-National lobbyists , hum ???

why didn't Senator Hillary Clinton vote against the Bankruptcy law in 2005 , that gave the mortgage lenders the power to be brazen in altering the standard lending practices of the 20 % down traditional home loans , to the ones thats caused this crisis that we Tax payers get to pay for in Stimulus packages ??

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/109/senate/1/votes/44/

for all you obama bashers - and i agree obama needs to come clean on this issue - but lets keep a perspective - what is hillary hiding in her tax returns that she will not release unless she becomes the candidate, why would she parse words regarding Obama's religion instead of reject the implication - lets not demonize either for simple issues, lets not mischaracterize for inflammatory political purposes or we just become Rove/Bush clones

Who can't identify with a bone-headed mistake??!!! smells some

Just a note that Canada does not have a "Labor" party - we have Conservative (in power), Liberal, "New Democratic" (considered left-wing) and Green.

I guess if you asked the Senator: Are you for or against revising NAFTA? He would answer YES. No lies, no parsing.

This should be a front page story and four noses. A flat out denial is a flat out denial.
"I think it is important for viewers to understand that it was not true...It did not happen."

It did happen, it just did not happen quite the way it was originally reported.

I don't think there's a call for any pinocchios here, really. Goolsbee had an informal talk with someone, said exactly what Obama says (trade agreements can be good and they can be bad, it depends on how good the agreement is; NAFTA needs to be reformed; he's confident Canada will see the necessity for reform so it probably will be changed and won't have to be scrapped). The Canadian official typed up his notes on the conversation and either didn't report accurately or editorialized on his own. (I'm a professor, so I have lots of experience with people writing down in their notes what they want/expect to hear rather than what was actually said.) Someone reads the memo and decides to help out the Clinton campaign (or the Republicans) by releasing it and pretending that it represents some sort of official statement. The press asks Obama a few misinformed questions, which he answers accurately, only the press is so misinformed, they get confused and blame him for their confusion, when really all they needed to do was to do their jobs and find out the facts. They find out the facts, discover that he was telling the truth all along, and then blame him for not preventing them from being foolish. It's a pretty lame performance by the press, but that's par for the course.

The Factchecker is way off base to do this the day before Ohio votes. This shows your pro Clinton bias which is pathetic. Clinton lied today when she said that Obama says one thing in public and his advisors tell Canadian officials something else. There is not credible evidence to support her contention and the Factchecker knows it.

Is Factchecker next going to say that Obama is really a Muslim- give me a break. However, so what if any candidate were Muslim. Billary has been lying and smearing Obama throughout the whole campaign. Isn't eight years of Clinton enough. She is a weak candidate and all she can do is go negative against Obama who is stronger. To quote Bill Clinton- "Hope beats fear" and Obama is the candidate of hope.

These Pinocchios for Obama are the biggest bunch of BS. The story was obviously not only factually inaccurate, but misleading. This was confirmed by the Canadian embassy. The only demonstrable fact is that there was communication, but the participants in the communication make it clear that the story, along with its sinister implication, was wrong. Perhaps you would like to besmirch the Canadians as well? Shame on you. If you're going to play gotcha, you're obligated to play fair, or else go play in somebody else's sandbox. I'm tuning you out. Pulling this kind of crap on election eve in inexcusable.

This will have no effect on Obama's kool aid drinking cult.It's like Steven Colbert says facts don't mean anything to me.

After world-war 2, american soldiers brought their european girlfriends out of pity.
The same happened after the Korean war.
And after the Vietnam war we saw hundreds of thousands of vietenamese, cambodians
and laotians refugees coming to the USA.
Thousands of women of these ethnic races were married to american soldiers.
They did it out of a guilty conscience.
The same has been happening with the african-americans for the last 20 years.
So the point in case is that the white men
will have to make a hard decision at a crucial time in these election days.
And as a good pychologist would find out, the diagnostic is:
Bad guilty conscience. And so probably most of them will vote for Obama out of a guilty conscience, rather than from being a good, intelligent choice.

OBAMA TALKS OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF HIS MOUTH.

Bottom line: He's a liar.

He isn't just a liar when it comes to his NAFTA two-step, telling one version to the voters but another to the Canadians.

He was a liar when he claimed only to have worked 5 hours on the Rezko matter. LIES, LIES, LIES. The man bought your house for you, Liar.

He's a liar when he says the Rezko story has been "fully vetted by the press." Not so. As the Times of London is only beginning to show us -- and as the American press keeps trying to ignore -- it turns out there was some very dirty dealing.

He's a liar when he claims he made all of his earmarks public. No, Liar, you made public on the latest installment. You hid the earlier ones.

He's a liar when he claims he isn't in bed with lobbyists. No, Liar, you've been bought and paid for by Excelon, the nuclear power people. To pander to those interests, you so watered down energy legislation that it eventually failed.

He's a liar when he claims he isn't in bed with other lobbyists. Major Washington, DC, law firms who are know almost entirely for their "legislative affairs" groups -- that is, for their lobbying -- have given massive cash to Obama.

He's a liar when he says he raises half his money from small contributions. No, Liar. Half the people who donate might be small-fries, but the major corporate moneyed interests (like Excelon, like DC lobbyists) are your big backers.

Stop lying to the people, you charlatan!

This isn't about the Obama cult trying to divert the attention and play 'old politics' - this is about the 55%+ members of the Democratic Party who can finally see that this is a Chicago machine candidate - an empty vessel that Daley's media guru, David Axelrod, has branded as change agent, but the product is a fraud.

Rezko and a $300,000 benefit to the Obama's on the purchase of their home - empty rhetoric - no relevant experience - few accomplishments - but he arrogantly acknowledges that he can deliver a great speech and thinks he looks good in boxers and briefs.

This guy is a fraud. He is unqualified to be President and Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously falce and easily proven to be falce accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over ans over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously false and easily proven to be false accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over and over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand? Does my censor think that my approach original is? Even if you hide my comment, as you are trying to do now, the majority, overwhelming majority of voters would post similar comments.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously falce and easily proven to be falce accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over ans over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously falce and easily proven to be falce accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over ans over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously false and easily proven to be false accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over and over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand? Does my censor think that my approach original is? Even if you hide my comment, as you are trying to do now, the majority, overwhelming majority of voters would post similar comments.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously falce and easily proven to be falce accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over ans over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand. Does my censor think that my approach original is? Even if you hide my comment, as you are trying to do now, the majority, overwhelming majority of voters would post similar comments.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously false and easily proven to be false accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over and over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand? Does my censor think that my approach original is? Even if you hide my comment, as you are trying to do now, the majority, overwhelming majority of voters, would post similar comments.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously falce and easily proven to be falce accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over ans over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand.

"The original news story was a gross distortion of reality, which is why the Canadian government and Obama campaign immediately denied it."

It seems that most people missed the BIG issue which is that:
A - The Canadian Government is participating in the outcome of an American Presidential Race. I am not sure but I would think that there should be a law if their is not already. As an American citizen and a disabled veteran this troubles me despite the fact I am married to a French Canadian for 30+ years.

B-Even looking at this from the perspective that Senator Obama was trying to conduct some business with the Canadian allies we have, he would not be authorized to do anything about anything singly as a freshman Senator.

Just some food for thought.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously false and easily proven to be false accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over and over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand? Does my censor think that my approach original is? Even if you hide my comment, as you are trying to do now, the majority, overwhelming majority of voters would post similar comments.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously falce and easily proven to be falce accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over ans over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously falce and easily proven to be falce accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over ans over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand.

Mrs. Clinton belongs to straight jacket. The way, which she utilizes to run her campaign, making obviously falce and easily proven to be falce accusations, is emphasizing the correctness of my statement above over ans over, again and again. Who in right mind can cast vote for this person I really and truly can't understand.

This article totally and miserably fails its own Pinocchio test. This story is a simple matter of true or false. What was said to be true has shown to be false. If false=bad, then the maximum number of pinocchios must be issued. If you can't do this, stop running the feature now. It is not credible.

This article totally and miserably fails its own Pinocchio test. This story is a simple matter of true or false. What was said to be true has shown to be false. If false=bad, then the maximum number of pinocchios must be issued. If you can't do this, stop running the feature. It is not credible.

This article totally and miserably fails its own Pinocchio test. This story is a simple matter of true or false. What was said to be true has shown to be false. If false=bad, then the maximum number of pinocchios must be issued. If you can't do this, stop running the feature now. It is not credible.

This article totally and miserably fails its own Pinocchio test. This story is a simple matter of true or false. What was said to be true has shown to be false. If false=bad, then the maximum number of pinocchios must be issued. If you can't do this, stop running the feature now. It is not credible.

Obama is letting the Canadian government clarify because he does not want to clarify for this reason. He is a smart POLICIAN and understands his words could come back to haunt him later. He is no different from other politians. On another topic, I believe there is more to the Rezco real estate deal. How was Obama able to make a 1.6 MILLION bid on a mansion working in the Illinois congress. His response that it was only a coincident that Rezco put in a bid for the adjacent land the same time as Obama put in a bid for his mansion does not pass the smell test. This is another example of the double speak coming from Obama. He is no different from the other policians. He will say and do anything to get elected.

aepelbaum; shows how infintile Obama supporters are. He is probably one of the Obama supporters that faint at his rally by just hearing his voice.

aepelbaum comments tells us one thing. Obama' supporters are not as intelligent as the media portrays.

This is what democrcy is all about? And the officials in Canada and Mexico come out of their snake holes to reveal and try to smear Obama? why should he back down to what is the truth about NAFTA,being that it weakened the unions and caused job losses simple and clear. And who signed the agreement while in office Bill Clinton lifted the barriers. some on this blog said we better watch what we say about Canada and Mexico because they are our biggest oil contributers but he forgot to mention they profit nicely with what we pay for their oil so we are doubly cut up one side and down the other.
NAFTA eliminates the tariffs between us and our closest neighbors Mex. and Canada.Its about creating products there and sell them back to us for previous,lower wages being the attraction for outsourcing.Costing thousands of job losses moving the product out of country, only to sell them back to us, the very people they abandoned. This is immoral to democracy in what it does to the other country in trade agreements signed btwn unequalpowers., under monolithic strucure that is corporate interest. I hope and pray that our next leader is for the common people, who are on fast track to be silenced by Big corporate officials who come into town to do business, look around and before the workers know whats in the wind because the company doesn,t tell them why ..only that competition warrents decisions. by electing some one who isn,t afraid to speak out against trade agreements, and we keep up the support for that candidate, we can make a difference. to qoute Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. "True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a begger. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggers need restructuring."

s is what democrcy is all about? And the officials in Canada and Mexico come out of their snake holes to reveal and try to smear Obama? why should he back down to what is the truth about NAFTA,being that it weakened the unions and caused job losses simple and clear. And who signed the agreement while in office Bill Clinton lifted the barriers. some on this blog said we better watch what we say about Canada and Mexico because they are our biggest oil contributers but he forgot to mention they profit nicely with what we pay for their oil so we are doubly cut up one side and down the other.
NAFTA eliminates the tariffs between us and our closest neighbors Mex. and Canada.Its about creating products there and sell them back to us for previous,lower wages being the attraction for outsourcing.Costing thousands of job losses moving the product out of country, only to sell them back to us, the very people they abandoned. This is immoral to democracy in what it does to the other country in trade agreements signed btwn unequalpowers., under monolithic strucure that is corporate interest. I hope and pray that our next leader is for the common people, who are on fast track to be silenced by Big corporate officials who come into town to do business, look around and before the workers know whats in the wind because the company doesn,t tell them why ..only that competition warrents decisions. by electing some one who isn,t afraid to speak out against trade agreements, and we keep up the support for that candidate, we can make a difference. to qoute Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. "True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a begger. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggers need restructuring."

Here's a little update from the northern neighbors about this little trumped-up brouhaha , by way of nytimes.com:

23. March 3rd,
2008
5:31 pm
The Canadian government backs away from the spurious NAFTA memo.

http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/308919

This was a feeble attempt to help out the Republican party, by the right wing Canadian government. And Hillary tried to use it too.
Go O!
-- Posted by He, Hussein, who has been forbidden from placing jokes in this Caucus space!

I read the story for myself and I suggest the fact-checker staff and the other Clintonistas read it, lest you want to buy the lies from the dark side!

Obama did not meet with the Canada agents,
and that is how the story should read. It was the Clinton that initiated the NAFTA
agreement, not Obama; however, it is Clinton skillful gutter politics to have one of Obama's people to meet w/Canadian Official and try to reflect the NAFTA issue to Obama. The only thing that bothers me is that Obama is not using the same gutter politics as Hillary and her team and news media; I as a supporter would rather he get in the gutter and bring out Clintons gutter deals and politics....This is America and it seem that if you don't act like a gutter dog, people believe what ever the opposition states.

meldupree and bdicke1519: You're imitating Stephen cobert he states facts don't mean anything to me. For your own well being stay away from the kool aid.

It seems this 5:00pm statement from the Canadian Embassy implies that Mr. Dobbs and "Fact Checker" are once again full of manure.

Statement from the Canadian Embassy:

"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."

CNN and all this media morons have pratically falling over themselves as they try to promote the notion they've cut Obama in a lie. All trying to do is just give Hillary a edge in this last day before she says bye-bye.

I think its China we should be worried about and not Canada.

OHBs dangerous unilateralism has damaged our standing in many countries ver the last month as he has trashed Canada, Mexico, France, Germany. He has suggested we invade ally Pakistan. He wants to visit with loose cannon strong men in Iran and Cuba. We should all worry when that phone rings at 3AM if he is elected.

"I do not have to clarify it. The Canadian embassy already clarified it by saying that the story was not true. Our office has said that the story was not true. I think it is important for viewers to understand that it was not true...It did not happen."

Excure me Mr. Barack, but you might want to check factcheck.org.

Special thanks to Ms. Debra Burlingame, wife of one of the pilots that died in NYC on 9/11/01, for posting here tonight (6:12 pm) and providing the links. Especially the WSJ article about the Clintons "Terror Pardons" of the 16 FALN (Puerto Rico independence movement) members who bombed four NYC buildings on 12/31/82, ripping limbs off and blinding three police officers. These militants at first even refused to sign statements renouncing violence and expressing remorse! The votes of Hispanics in Hillary's upcoming senate race were more important than law and order, and a deal was made. The prisoners were released without being required to cooperate in ongoing investigations into unsolved FALN bombings.

Now compare that to NaftaGate!

A blooper by a news source, that is already proved not to be a credible report, gets blown up into this?

Seems like the more this story develops, the more you need to take down one Pinocchio. Certainly the campaign was less than forthcoming originally, but where is a lie? The only lies here---"lies", not "parsing"---are coming from that kitchen sink that may have grazed Obama. Direct hit? Only if the rest of the media that wants to prolong this primary battle for the sake of ad revenue and ratings fails to adequately inform news consumers of the true facts and lets the initial accusations stay out there in the public consciousness.

This is moreso seeming to be a non-story? A false story was reported. The Canadians, Obama campaign and even Clinton camp disputed the nature of their contacts concerning NAFTA. I don't understand what other evidence there is to go on the offensive about.

So you are saying parsing is not deceitful to the American public?

Gee, you don't think Hillary is trying yet another Hail Mary pass on the eve of the primary campaign's now-or-never election, do ya? Nah, couldn't be. Not Hillary "NAFTA Is A Victory" Clinton!

I'd like to give a Pinocchio to "IP Standing" @8:35pm, who wrote, "He (Obama) has suggested we invade ally Pakistan."

What Sen. Obama said: "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will."

Let's keep it real, OK? We need intense diplomacy to make up for 8 years of Condi Rice doing absolutely nothing. We need a non-aggression treaty with Iran, because they feel threatened by Israel's nukes and our occupation of the countries to their east and west. We need Iran's help in rebuilding Iraq, and making sure that the Iraqi government never becomes so weak that it tolerates an AQ presence. Iran captured AQ/Taliban along their border with Afghanistan in the early days after 9/11. We can talk to Iran about how to cool everything down in the ME, and how to cooperate economically, so they don't just become a Russian satellite.

The only reports on this, thus far have really been primarily based on Clinton camp's allegations and finger-pointing. They have the right to do so since there was an allegation.
However, there isn't evidence suggesting anything concrete about the actual nature of the meeting.

flarrfan, you nailed it.

"The only lies here---'lies', not 'parsing'---are coming from that kitchen sink that may have grazed Obama. Direct hit? Only if the rest of the media that wants to prolong this primary battle for the sake of ad revenue and ratings fails to adequately inform news consumers of the true facts and lets the initial accusations stay out there in the public consciousness."

Where theres smoke there's fire. The Canadian is trying to save its ass,so as not to be accused of meddleing in our politics.All the facts will come out after the smoke blows away.

It has been said that people see in Senator Obama what they want to see - I guess in this instance that seeing what they want to see also applies to the senior Obama campaign person discussing NAFTA. That's what happens when your candidate is all things to all people.

http://strictlyanecdotal.com

flarfan writes:Seems like the more this story develops, the more you need to take down one Pinocchio. Certainly the campaign was less than forthcoming originally, but where is a lie?

---Ob lied to the unions and unemployed in Ohio.He told them something that was untrue
and led them to believe he would change Nafta for there benefit.But his backroom boys were making other plans. Par for the course if yr a standard washington politician. Pretty pathetic for one who touts "change""no more business as usual" or the real car salesman line "the audacity to hope". A sucker born every minute. First we get Bush , now this loser

You would think...
...if Hillary wanted the Democratic nominee to have the greatest chance in November, she wouldn't start a mud fight.
...if she did the math, she would see her only chance at gaining the nomination is to carry 65+ percent of every primary and caucus that remains, then wrestle Obama at the convention.
...if unanswered questions about a land deal were any indication of a candidate's guilt, she would remove herself for her involvement in the White Water deal rather than try to use Tony Rezko to breathe life into her dying candidacy.
...if Obama wanted to retract his remarks about NAFTA and reassure the Canadians to the contrary, he would have just picked up a land line and called them.
...if Hillary had any consistent message, she might not waver from being "honored" to casting "shame" on Obama.
...if Hillary had any sense of decency or personal standards, she would not throw the "kitchen sink" at Obama in a Hail Mary pass to salvage a razor-thin chance at continuing the primary race, this while simultaneously handing John McCain ammunition for November to the detriment of all the policy goals she supposedly holds dear.

Ok, Clinton invited CTV to (with full immunity) to publicly disclose the name the person from her campaign who allegedly 'indirectly' contacted Canadian officials. No name has been released by CTV; end of story.

It is not just a story. There is a 1300 word memo - in the possession of AP - detailing a contact that the Obama campaign denied - oh that's right Obama said they didn't contact the Canadian EMBASSY as opposed to the Canadian CONSULATE in Chicago - so guess that's not a lie. And oh, yeah, he denied it the first time because he did not have all the information. Whatever.

This Joseph DeMora who wrote the memo is not available for an interview, imagine that. And here is what the Canadian embassy statement said "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". So why dont they just say flat-out that the memo written by DeMora is false and make this whole thing go away?

"Less than forthcoming" is now ok?

If Clinton had lied about a campaign official meeting with a foreign government in order to reassure them to pay no attention to the campaign rhetoric - she would be done.

If the Clintons had gotten a sweetheart real estate deal with a career patron in which they benefited by $300,000 and had lied to the press about touring the property with the indicted political patron, there would be a federal witch hunt (Whitewater).

But Obama transcends typical politics - campaign rhetoric of transparency is good enough for the press. Rather than holding a press conference like Senator Clinton did with Whitewater, or Senator McCain did with the NY Times innuendo of extra-martial affairs, Obama is given a pass.

This nation - largely due to the press - is going to hell in a hurry. This is the highest office in the land, and we are demanding so little from someone. Just give one speech, deliver it well, and you can hood wink America.

Obama is worse than Bush. At least with Bush, they have given up on the pretense that he was a fraud when talking about compassion and working across the aisle. This is simply the least qualified individual to ever be considered for the highest office in the land.

God help America. Its citizens have taken complete leave of their senses.

SHAME ON you, Obama. Until today after I heard the news, I would vote for you if Hillary loses. Now I would vote for McCain if you win the nominee. I just simply can not believe what you say and what you do.

Now I am going to vote for Hillary for sure or vote for McCain, not you at all. You disappoint me so much.

SHAME ON you, Obama. Until today after I heard the news, I would vote for you if Hillary loses. Now I would vote for McCain if you win the nominee. I just simply can not believe what you say and what you do.

Now I am going to vote for Hillary for sure or vote for McCain, not you at all. You disappoint me so much.

This is part of a pattern. Anyone watching the financial stations has already heard stock touts say don't worry about Obama he doesn't mean anything he says.

Obama is a natural born politician. He tells the citizens of Ohio and other states hit hard by NAFTA and nations that are party to the treaty something else.

If you want to gain a better insight into the real Obama then read Todd Spivak's story on Obama at hustonpress.com.

Obama is a phony creation of a Chicago pol. He is someone who is perfectly willing to let others do the hard and often nasty word and then coming in later and claim others' work as his own.

Here is a rather enlightening part of the story:

.....When asked about his legislative record, Obama rattles off several bills he sponsored as an Illinois lawmaker.
He expanded children's health insurance; made the state Earned Income Tax Credit refundable for low-income families; required public bodies to tape closed-door meetings to make government more transparent; and required police to videotape interrogations of homicide suspects.
And the list goes on.
It's a lengthy record filled with core liberal issues. But what's interesting, and almost never discussed, is that he built his entire legislative record in Illinois in a single year.
Republicans controlled the Illinois General Assembly for six years of Obama's seven-year tenure. Each session, Obama backed legislation that went nowhere; bill after bill died in committee. During those six years, Obama, too, would have had difficulty naming any legislative achievements.
Then, in 2002, dissatisfaction with President Bush and Republicans on the national and local levels led to a Democratic sweep of nearly every lever of Illinois state government. For the first time in 26 years, Illinois Democrats controlled the governor's office as well as both legislative chambers.
The white, race-baiting, hard-right Republican Illinois Senate Majority Leader James "Pate" Philip was replaced by Emil Jones Jr., a gravel-voiced, dark-skinned African-American known for chain-smoking cigarettes on the Senate floor.
Jones had served in the Illinois Legislature for three decades. He represented a district on the Chicago South Side not far from Obama's. He became Obama's kingmaker.
Several months before Obama announced his U.S. Senate bid, Jones called his old friend Cliff Kelley, a former Chicago alderman who now hosts the city's most popular black call-in radio program.
I called Kelley last week and he recollected the private conversation as follows:
"He said, 'Cliff, I'm gonna make me a U.S. Senator.'"
"Oh, you are? Who might that be?"
"Barack Obama."
Jones appointed Obama sponsor of virtually every high-profile piece of legislation, angering many rank-and-file state legislators who had more seniority than Obama and had spent years championing the bills.
"I took all the beatings and insults and endured all the racist comments over the years from nasty Republican committee chairmen," State Senator Rickey Hendon, the original sponsor of landmark racial profiling and videotaped confession legislation yanked away by Jones and given to Obama, complained to me at the time. "Barack didn't have to endure any of it, yet, in the end, he got all the credit....
------------------------------

Obama was "appointed" as sponsor of the bills for the sole purpose of making him into a viable US Senate candidate. What Obama claims as his ability to get legislation passed had more to do with a change in the majority party in the state senate than it does with his personality.

Politically speaking, Obama is someone born on third base who thinks he hit a triple. Read the whole story to get a picture of his true personality to see how he reacts to such stories.

Is this the sort of Johnny-Come-Lately, indebted pol with a short temper we want in a the most stressful and pressure pact office in the world, at this time in our history???

Why isn't The Washington Post running this as a lead story on their Web site, instead of just your "Fact Checker" column, with Pinochio rating symbols. I don't get it. I thought the Post was supposed to be impartial. Even the broadcast media was way ahead of you in reporting this. What gives, Post people?

I believe Obama's camp has surpassed so-called "Clintonian levels of parsing" on this one. Looks under-reported and under-rated here: you need to add another Pinochio face to the story.

Our 'Bush-loving' prime minister is a control freak. Nothing goes out without his consent. I would not put it past him to stir up this little hornet's nest to cause problems for Obama and the Democrats.

By the way, the US has preferential status for Canada's oil and gas, something many Canadians are angry about their government giving away to the Americans during the NAFTA negotiations. If NAFTA is reopen, like Hillary and Barack claim they will do, they will open up a big can of worms. Trade deals work both ways and to many Canadians they feel like they got the short end of the stick. Oil and gas will be on the table again and the Chinese are all over Alberta trying to get their hands on that oil.

Oh the Obama cultist like the right wing have been running BS to avoid talking about the issues. "If you do it is the end of the world if we do it is a lie or does not matter or WHATEVER"

Oh well. Hillary is the a B so don't worry.

The post is a pathetic as they come. We have to depend on SNL and Austen News Papers for our news.

Hahaha; this is hysterical and yet depressing at the same time. Way to go ignorant, blind, naive Obama supporters. Way. To. Go.

This Ohioan is voting Hillary all the way tomorrow. Ohio isn't stupid; we are smart, tough, and pragmatic people who see through the feel good, albeit stolen, rhetoric.

Also, I'm 21 and this is my first vote in a primary, and I've never felt as good as I do about a vote since last year when I voted in Sherrod Brown and Ted Strickland.

Hillary '08

This story is an example of most of the media giving too much attention to a minor, trivial subject. Of course, both Senators Clinton and Obama are pandering in Ohio on the issue of NAFTA.

Why was there very little media critical review of the notorious three a.m. story? Why didn't most reporters observe how Senator Clinton has had very little experience in the area of foreign policy? Most in the media like to report sensationalistic, highly negative ads, because they like stories about conflict. Remember the swiftboat ads four years ago, the three a.m. ad is similar in trying to falsely smear a candidate.

Political preferences is like looking at an ink blot test. The subject and the observer get to display their predispositions, until they give way to new delusions!

Most American young voters are very dumb. They say, "If his speech causes me to feel good, I will vote for him. I do not know his voting record. I do not understand his proposed policies. However, his charisma is mighty fine. I will vote for him."

I fully agree with the real fact. That is why many old and wise young people do not believe that only a beautiful speecher with slim experience policy. They had been known about a long history as a fact. I am worry if a weak person should be an election president from Dems that would not beat McCain - the old hero.

Bill Clinton was a successful president and built strong economic in the USA for 8 years, while Hillary learnt a lot experiences with various events in the world, also she is able to be a senator in NYC - a famous economic and largest city for two times. Only best expect if the Clinton/Obama radical factions will come to the realization that would be big helpful for Dems.

I'm sure you'll wait until just after Obama gets nominated before you decide to 'get tough' on him and start giving him real pinochios. It's sad that Wapo has become part of the conservative slime machine. By being cited nationally as one of the worst Probama offenders (a pew polls' research not mine) it will surprise none that this Probama piece is a pernicious attempt to skew the democratic nomination process. God bless Robert Novak, Krauthammer and your other right wing stormtroopers, this is why republicans kick a** and democrats take it in the a**.

nedra pickler? seriously? if there is one journalist i dont trust at all its her. she is the same person who quoted roger stone and other lapel pin patriot republicans for a hit piece about Obama and "patriotism". she has a history of very poor journalism using phrases like "some people say" and totally partisan stories. trust her to run whatever the right wing talking points of the day are. trusting her reporting is just about as smart as trusting bush.

As I see it, there is zero doubt that the CTV report got a number of their facts wrong at the outset.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080227/dems_nafta_080227/20080227
"Within the last month, a top staff member for Obama's campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.

The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value."

Here's what we've learned about that original story:
1. A "top staff member for Obama's campaign" - nobody knew who that was at the time Obama's campaign responded. Goolsbee isn't on the road with the campaign. He's an advisor with a full time job at his university. The description is somewhat misleading.

2. "telephoned (Washington)" We've found out that wasn't true. The Obama campaign never phoned any Canadians on this. Canadians in Chicago contacted Goolsbee in Chicago and they met face to face. Those incorrect "facts" as reported mislead anyone trying to get to the bottom of this story.

3. "Michael Wilson" We've found out that wasn't true. No one at the Obama campaign spoke with Wilson nor anyone at the Canadian embassy in Washington. Those reported incorrect facts mislead anyone trying to get to the bottom of this story.

4. "warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA" That's bogus because Obama has been speaking out against NAFTA for years. Many idiots can't make the distinction between free trade and NAFTA. Obama is pro free trade but against aspects of NAFTA and has been consistent in that stance for years.

5. "The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value" The Canadian government has said that the memo exaggerated what was said. So has Goolsbee and Obama.

Goolsbee did not meet the Canadians in an official capacity representing Obama's campaign. It was in informal dialogue of which NAFTA was discussed for a very few minutes. How is a campaign made up of many, many people supposed to keep track of every informal dialogue that someone makes? It's impossible.

The Canadians don't have a vote in the outcome. I ought to know that because I'm a Canadian. Why should the Obama campaign be deeply concerned with Canadians at this point? He needs to get elected before he needs to concern himself with how Canadians might feel about NAFTA.

Put yourself in the Obama's campaign's shoes for a minute. A very inaccurate story comes out of nowhere and they're supposed to figure out this nonsense in 2 seconds flat for a response?

Two Pinocchios to the Washington Post & a bunch of the media on the above. The original CTV story was very flawed and very misleading.

It's remarkable to me that a man who has spoken and acted quite clearly and consistently for years about his position on NAFTA (when people aren't playing 'out of context' games) means absolutely nothing yet innuendo or a suspect memo from a brief conversation with a guy who provides advice but doesn't set policy is suddenly something that Americans should rush to as the "guiding light"? Personally, I think that's insane reasoning. America is doomed if they can't get past this crap in the media and see through it. Unfortunately, the media isn't doing a very good job of helping them when a good rumour and spin can sell papers and boost ratings at the expense of distorting realities and what really matters.

If Obama supporters would come out of his spell long enough, they'd see his whole campaign is 100% Pinocchio's.

The real story here is that Obama should receive Pinocchio's for his overall message. This incident represents the epitome of the "politics as usual" that Obama preaches against on the campaign trail. To me his entire message represents the same hypocrisy that has run rampant in Washington for years. That fact that he denies being a part of it to pander to voters makes it worse.

Obama and Clinton should both bite their tongues with resepct to NAFTA. The hypocrisy of Obama's assertion that Canada needs to improve its environmental record and do more to protect its workers is astonishing.

Our biggest environmental problem is the Athabasca Oil Sands... a resource that we exploit primarily to feed the insatiable appetite that you folks have for oil.

If we cut back production you might have to look to Chavez to replace what we don't ship to you.

And protecting workers? Give me a break... the US has millions of illegal workers who toil for next to nothing and have no rights.

Had Bill Clinton not pushed for the passing of NAFTA, we wouldn't have had such problems we face today. Bill blamed the Republicans for not passing the Healthcare Reform bill, which actually had a lower priority than NAFTA on his to-do list. The Clintons need good reasons for the voters to vote them back to the White House and health care is one of those reasons. They had to leave it for 2008.

Bill also fought to get China into WTO and renew the most favored trade status for China. I just heard it on NPR that more than 60% of Chinese in China would vote for Hillary Clinton. They remember the good years with Bill Clinton and they want more of the same. Bill made it easier for the Commerce Dept. to transfer our satellite and missile guidance technologies to China. Nearly ten years later, China successfully tested anti-satellite missiles last January. Of course, they would love to have any Clinton back to the White House.

Hillary claimed to have been heavily involved in all foreign policies during Bill's administrations. Today's economy and your health care is the bitter fruit of these two world class geniuses in Bill's own words. Obama campaign's incident with Canada is nothing compared with the origin of the problems - the Clintons since Hillary claimed to have taken part of it.

This is amazing. He is cut blatantly lying. The meeting did happen. He knew it was happening and you give him two Pinocchios?

This has once again confirmed my belief that this is the single worst column in an otherwise good newspaper.

From what I've gathered from this and other news sources:

First, OB campaign denies that the meeting ever took place.

THEN, OB campaign admits that the meeting took place but denies that the senior economic advisor said those things.

THEN, OB campaign says that the advisor wasn't authorized to meet and was not representing the campaign during that meeting, basically admitting that maybe he did say those comments.

What's next?

I agree with what people have said above. The problem here is that OB has spoken endlessly about transparency and honestly, and then this crops up. Is his public stance on NAFTA just words?

I have compromised so much. So much humiliation. So much anger. So many battle scars. Fight is all I have left. Fight, fight, fighter. I am. I will survive. I will overcome. Regardless of the opponent, the greater good, or the outcome. I am a fighter. A fighter. Do you hear me? I am. I am. I am.

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or, being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or, being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise;

If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with triumph and disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with wornout tools;

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on";

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings - nor lose the common touch;
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run -
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man my son!

Now I have read all these comments regarding this issue and I find it to be a mute point. This is the reality that is before us today. Obama has found a way to run a campaign without using special interest money. Obama will (and I emphasize WILL) become the first black president of these so called United States. And with all do respect to my Caucasian neighbors, a new era in black power is about to begin. For all you haters out there, this is going to unite the black population.

BTW guys I found some brilliant/awesome analysis on Obama's Fundraising and other current happenings on the campaign. I haven't seen anything like this mentioned anywhere in the MSM.
Check out the article "Follow the Money" on http://savagepolitics.com/?p=165, "Bush's Twin and the G.O.P." http://savagepolitics.com/?p=172 and "Barack Obama's Apotasy" http://savagepolitics.com/?p=101

Check their "Political Analysis" section for other striking perspectives on both parties.

Makes you wonder what else the Messiah is hiding under that scary, glowing orb thing in his logo. Anyway else find his logo sort of creepy?

In this particular case.. I will continue to state that Barack Hussein Obama will continue to tell the American People what HE THINKS THEY WANT TO HEAR WHEN THEY WANT TO HEAR IT.

He is the ole Used Car Salesman..Do or say anything to GET THE SALE.

The 'knight in shining armor' is starting to lose the shine on his armor.

His has been a 'sheltered rise to fame. |Anyone that does not think his wife is BIGOTED against whites, because of the relgion they BOTH adhere too. He claims he is Christian... but she is just now proud of being an American.

Beware the Ides of March

All Clinton has to do is make an allegation against Obama and the media runs with it. She continues to attempt to slime and batter him day after day after day. Please Americans, stop and ask yourselves why doesn't she run her campaign on her own merits? To date, she has made about 30 allegations against him and none of them have been true, not even close. This is dishonest, dishonorable, disgusting behavior for a presidential candidate let alone a former First Lady.

"The news reports on Obama's position on NAFTA are inaccurate and in no way represent Senator Obama's consistent position on trade. When Senator Obama says that he will forcefully act to make NAFTA a better deal for American workers, he means it. Both Canada and Mexico should know that, as president, Barack Obama will do what it takes to create and protect American jobs and strengthen the American economy -- that includes amending NAFTA to include labor and environmental standards. We are currently reaching out to the Canadian embassy to correct this inaccuracy," said Obama spokesman Bill Burton.

OBAMA'S POSITION ON NAFTA WAS CLEAR AT THE LAST DEBATE

I will make sure that we renegotiate...I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced. And that is not what has been happening so far. That is something that I have been consistent about. I have to say, Tim, with respect to my position on this, when I ran for the United States Senate, the Chicago Tribune, which was adamantly pro-NAFTA, noted that, in their endorsement of me, they were endorsing me despite my strong opposition to NAFTA...And as president, what I want to be is an advocate on behalf of workers. Look, you know, when I go to these plants, I meet people who are proud of their jobs. They are proud of the products that they've created.