Obama Denies Assuring Canada on NAFTA

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Obama Denies Assuring Canada on NAFTA stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 03- 3-08 09:32 AM   |   Updated: 03-28-08 02:46 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Obama Nafta

UPDATE: Canada's parliament took up the issue of Obama's position on NAFTA today, with Liberal leaders angrily accusing conservative Prime Minister Steven Harper of helping to leak documents that misinterpreted Obama's position. Harper distanced himself from the memo released by the Canada's Chicago consulate. Watch it:

+++

More from AP:

SAN ANTONIO — Barack Obama said Monday that his campaign never gave Canada back-channel assurances that his harsh words about the North American Free Trade Agreement were for political show _ despite the disclosure of a Canadian memo indicating otherwise.

According to the memo obtained by The Associated Press, Obama's senior economic adviser told Canadian officials in Chicago that the debate over free trade in the Democratic presidential primary campaign was "political positioning" and that Obama was not really protectionist.

The adviser, Austan Goolsbee, said his comments to those officials were misinterpreted by the author, Joseph DeMora, who works for the Canadian consulate in Chicago and attended the meeting.

In Carrollton, Texas, Obama told reporters: "Nobody reached out to the Canadians to try to assure them of anything."

Asked why he had appeared to deny a report last week that such a meeting had taken place, Obama said: "That was the information I had at the time."

The original report by CTV in Canada suggested an Obama emissary had reached out to officials at the Canadian Embassy in Washington. Embassy officials artfully denied any such contact had been made with them.

As it turned out, the meeting took place in Chicago instead, with Canadian Consul General Georges Rioux and DeMora taking notes.

Obama said that one of his advisers had been invited by someone at the consulate to visit and discuss trade.

Story continues below

"The Canadian Embassy confirmed that he said everything I said on the campaign trail," Obama asserted.

"We think the terms of NAFTA have to be altered" to strengthen environmental and labor protections, he said.

The memo says: "Noting anxiety among many U.S. domestic audiences about the U.S. economic outlook, Goolsbee candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign."

It went on: "He cautioned that this messaging should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

Goolsbee disputed the characterization.

"This thing about 'it's more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans,' that's this guy's language," Goolsbee said of DeMora. "He's not quoting me.

"I certainly did not use that phrase in any way," he said.

NAFTA is widely opposed in economically depressed Ohio, which holds its presidential primary Tuesday and is a battleground between Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Clinton said Monday that Obama's campaign gave the Canadians "the old wink-wink."

"I think that's the kind of difference between talk and action that I've been talking about," Clinton told reporters while campaigning in Ohio. "It raises questions about Senator Obama coming to Ohio and giving speeches against NAFTA."

Both candidates said in a debate in Cleveland last week that they would use the threat of pulling out of NAFTA to persuade Canada and Mexico to negotiate more protections for workers and the environment in the agreement.

The memo obtained by the AP was widely distributed within the Canadian government. It is more than 1,300 words and covers many topics that DeMora said were discussed in the Feb. 8 "introductory meeting."

Goolsbee "was frank in saying that the primary campaign has been necessarily domestically focused, particularly in the Midwest, and that much of the rhetoric that may be perceived to be protectionist is more reflective of political maneuvering than policy," the memo's introduction said.

"On NAFTA, Goolsbee suggested that Obama is less about fundamentally changing the agreement and more in favour of strengthening/clarifying language on labour mobility and environment and trying to establish these as more `core' principles of the agreement."

Goolsbee said that sentence is true and consistent with Obama's position. But he said other portions of the memo were inaccurate.

In a statement, the Canadian Embassy expressed regret on how the discussions have been interpreted.

The 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."

Goolsbee said the visit lasted about 40 minutes, and perhaps two to three minutes were spent discussing NAFTA. He said the Canadians asked about Obama's position, and he replied about his interest in improving labor and environmental standards, and they raised some concerns that Obama sounds like a protectionist.

Goolsbee said he responded that Obama is not a protectionist, but that the Illinois senator tries to strike a balance between the economic struggles of working Americans and recognizing that free trade is good for the economy.

"That's a pretty ham-handed description of what I answered," Goolsbee said of the memo's description of "political positioning." "A: In no possible way was that a reference to NAFTA. And B: In no possible way was I inferring that he was going to introduce any policies that you should ignore and he had no intention of enacting. Those are both completely crazy."

___

On the Net:

http://www.barackobama.com

UPDATE: Canada's parliament took up the issue of Obama's position on NAFTA today, with Liberal leaders angrily accusing conservative Prime Minister Steven Harper of helping to leak documents that misi...
UPDATE: Canada's parliament took up the issue of Obama's position on NAFTA today, with Liberal leaders angrily accusing conservative Prime Minister Steven Harper of helping to leak documents that misi...
Filed by Will Thomas  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
642
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next › Last » (12 pages total)

They're both unbridled free traders. Just as Clinton voted to go to war and then claimed she didn't, she has always supported NAFTA and supported extending NAFTA to Peru late last year. Obama also supported extending NAFTA to Peru late last year. Both attack each other for their NAFTA positions when both have the same position on NAFTA -- anti-labor, pro-outsourcing good paying jobs -- unbridled free trade.

They both suck on NAFTA.

It's 3 o'clock in the morning and some two-bit corporate head of United Fruit calls the White House and demands the President to agree to a free trade bill that will allow poison Chinese oranges into the US at half the price of what US farmers can produce safe oranges for.

President (Obama) (Clinton) asks what gift they're going to get and then make the promise -- Chinese oranges forever. Which would you want to be there if you wanted safe fruit? Answer: Ralph Nader.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:14 PM on 03/03/2008

"Nonamnesiac" has posted an absolutely ravishing comment here.........truer words were never spoken.

I found it entertaining (in a "gallows humour" sort-of-way) upon the passing of Wm. F. Buckley Jr. last week, how many folks lamented the fact that the left has no counterpart to Buckley.....willing to espouse progressive positions consistently over time....even when they are unpopular.

These are many of the same people who like to call Mr. Nader names as suggest that he is simultaneously "irrelevant" and "a spoiler" (which is not logically possible) Regards.................................................................................tm

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:27 PM on 03/03/2008
photo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLJJ88HTiX8

Canadian Parliament asks PM Questions

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:10 PM on 03/03/2008
photo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLJJ88HTiX8

Canadian Parliament asks PM Questions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLJJ88HTiX8

Canadian Parliament asks PM Questions

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:09 PM on 03/03/2008
- Mattie I'm a Fan of Mattie 54 fans permalink

I think we were talking about what obama did, Do you have an explanation as to why he said no meeting ever took place, but now his words were misunderstood in the meeting that never took place. I'm sure you're answer will be to insult Hillary, or say but, but Hillary did it to, but try answering why Obama lied.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:59 PM on 03/03/2008
photo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLJJ88HTiX8

Canadian Parliament asks PM Questions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLJJ88HTiX8

Canadian Parliament asks PM Questions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLJJ88HTiX8

Canadian Parliament asks PM Questions

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:08 PM on 03/03/2008
- mach I'm a Fan of mach 12 fans permalink

At least Obama prays to Jesus every night.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 PM on 03/03/2008

This whole story is about a bunch of Canadians mixing up their messages to each other.

Obama did not lie. Goolsby did not lie.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 PM on 03/03/2008
- EinChicago I'm a Fan of EinChicago 37 fans permalink

No. An Obama staffer lied and Obama disavowed all knwoledge.. once again. Do Obama staffers draw straws each week to try and figure out who gets to take the fall this week?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:21 PM on 03/03/2008
- Didi47 I'm a Fan of Didi47 15 fans permalink

EinChicago:

By the time the Obama Camp gets through denouncing anyone and everyone who questions their Saviour.... there'll be no one left to deal with except each other. Then what I wonder.

Did you notice the yes we can chant on his ads... the mob chanting as one.... Spooky.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:47 PM on 03/03/2008
- Mattie I'm a Fan of Mattie 54 fans permalink

So when he said there was never a meeting, that wasn't a lie, because now he's saying he was misunderstood at the meeting that never was. How does that work!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:01 PM on 03/03/2008
photo

Wag the dog Clinton!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:59 PM on 03/03/2008

The audacity to mislead. www.politicalamnesia.blogspot.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:57 PM on 03/03/2008

For some reason the HuffingPost won't let me get there from here, so simply Google the address and you can get to the site, (it's what I had to do.)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:39 PM on 03/03/2008
- Cedman I'm a Fan of Cedman 28 fans permalink

Wow. The Clinton's are good! This Canadian incident is the stuff of movies. There is no end to the games they will play. Nixon would be so proud.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:54 PM on 03/03/2008
- Issak I'm a Fan of Issak 12 fans permalink

Well, Nixon must be proud that people like the nefarious Tony Lake is one of Obama's key advisors, you now- when a Kissinger trains a henchman in the fine art of deception and can attach themsleves to a mediocre empty suit- well- anything cannn happen. But, I bet that you like most Obamanoids does not even know who surrounds yourr messiah. Faith! faith! grasshopper that wil do it- no, wait- hope! hope! hope!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:01 PM on 03/03/2008
- Cedman I'm a Fan of Cedman 28 fans permalink

Well actually I do. It does appear that you are attempting to move the goal post away from the similarities of Hillary and Tricky Dick in terms of political gamesmanship. Lake as you surely know served as Clinton's NSA. As for the usual "messiah" reference I can only say that if he were the messiah that would make Hillary the anti-Christ.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:23 PM on 03/03/2008

If Clinton had pulled this caper, the press would be baying for blood and calling her a liar.

Where is the fairness?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:50 PM on 03/03/2008

If they did they would be just as irresponsible as all of the outlets who have reported this story, and the Resko story.

In either case, there is ZERO evidence of any wrong doing by Obama. And yet it's all over the place. Oh yeah, Obama is getting a free ride. What nonsense!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:55 PM on 03/03/2008
- SLone08 I'm a Fan of SLone08 5 fans permalink

The reason it's not being blown out of proportion is because it's a non issue. The Canadian government apologized to the Obama campaign today for misrepresenting what happened in the meeting.

Also, as CTV reported the story, both Obama AND Clintons campaigns had spoken to the Canadian government.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:57 PM on 03/03/2008
- Buddhabman I'm a Fan of Buddhabman 11 fans permalink

"He said the visit lasted about 40 minutes, and perhaps two to three minutes were spent discussing NAFTA. He said the Canadians asked about Obama's position, and he replied about his interest in improving labor and environmental standards, and they raised some concerns that Obama sounds like a protectionist.

He said he responded that Obama is not a protectionist, but that the Illinois senator tries to strike a balance between the economic struggles of working Americans and recognizing that free trade is good for the economy.

"That's a pretty ham-handed description of what I answered," Goolsbee said of memo's description of "political positioning." "A: In no possible way was that a reference to NAFTA. And B: In no possible way was I inferring that he was going to introduce any policies that you should ignore and he had no intention of enacting. Those are both completely crazy."

Where is the fairness?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:13 PM on 03/03/2008
- AnninCA I'm a Fan of AnninCA 54 fans permalink

This hasn't anything to do with Clinton. Obama is a big boy and got himself into this mess by denying the original CNN story.

CNN stood by the story. Obama kept calling it a lie.

You can't call CNN a liar like you can Hillary and get by with it.

CNN PROVED it by releasing the letter.

So knock off the lies.

He did it.

The more he denies, the worse it's going to get.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:24 PM on 03/03/2008
- Didi47 I'm a Fan of Didi47 15 fans permalink

AnninCA:

You mean CTV I believe. CNN not only downplayed it, they worked like the devil yesterday trying to link Hllary's name to it. Just disgusting.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:50 PM on 03/03/2008

What lie(s)?

1. Sen. Barack Obama said no member of his staff met with the Canadians at their embassy in Washington (as reported), NOT A LIE.

2. Sen. Obama said he has never given any instructions for any of his staff to advise the Canadian Govt. that he was not serious about amending NAFTA (as reported), NOT A LIE.

3. Sen. Obama's aide, Austan Goolsbee who met with Canadian Government officials has said ""This thing about 'it's more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans,' that's this guy's language, (of DeMora, the writer of the Canadian memo). "He's not quoting me...I certainly did not use that phrase in any way,"

So to me, point number 3 is Mr. Goolsbee stating Canadian Govt. official DeMora is either someone who is prone to putting his own words in someone elses mouth or he is a liar. There has been no retaliatory statement by the Canadian Prime Minister's Office to say...We Stand By Mr. DeMora. As a matter of fact, they have said IT DIDN'T HAPPEN (as reported), again NO LIE.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:07 PM on 03/03/2008
- deminmo I'm a Fan of deminmo 16 fans permalink

Why has Bush not done more in regards to illegal immigrants?
Why has Canada beefed up security and the US/Canadian borders?
Why do Mexican truckers have access now to all areas of the US without
the same safety standards that American trucking has to follow?
On the I-44 corridor there are hundreds of drug busts every day.
Why are there more companies seeking foreign banks and moving
operations out of the country?
Cheap labor and operation costs, the banks have no governmental
oversight like in the US and lastly, US companies can move money
to off-shore banks and not pay US taxes. This is some of the things
that NAFTA has done.
And with "shock capitalism" you destroy the manufactuing sector in
the US for the purpose of profit. No pensions, no labor unions, cheap
pay =HUGE PROFIT.
Read up on "unfettered capitalism", Milton Friedman economics,
"venture capitalism", Jim Prentice, Robert Pastor, Herbert Grubel,
Fraser Institute, CATO and other economic "think tanks". It's very
scary stuff.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:43 PM on 03/03/2008

NAFTA is an issue if your job went to China
and you are a college graduate flipping burgers

Obama wants jobs to go to China and is lying about it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:38 PM on 03/03/2008
- PTTY I'm a Fan of PTTY 7 fans permalink

Who was it that defined neurosis as repeating the same mistake again and again, and expecting a better outcome each time? That’s really what the Clinton campaign is doing in its post-Chesapeake primary strategy.

Now Hillary defines Obama as the candidate who makes speeches, while she is the one who provides “answers” and “solutions.”

That Slogan she stole from Newt Gingrich: "AMERICAN SOLUTIONS for winning the Future."

Why is Hillary embracing this new line? It’s not that she has any great record of solutions or answers of which to boast, but rather that she wants to highlight Obama’s lack of a legislative record.


Once again, she and her campaign geniuses are making the same mistake they made when they decided to use the experience as their defining difference with Obama. It’s not that she had much, but they sensed an opportunity to highlight that he had even less.

Of course experience not only didn’t work. It backfired massively. By co-opting the experience tag, Hillary bought into the status quo and left Obama to be the agent of change. A candidacy that could have excited tens of millions of women, the first serious prospect of a female president, became merely a boring part of the status quo, shorn of its novelty.

Hillary’s claim to be the solution-person won’t work either for the same simple reason: She hasn’t passed any. If she were McCain, she could tout a long history of legislative success on key issues and herald her ability to pass bills and engineer progress. But she hasn’t done that. She hasn’t walked the walk so now she cannot talk the talk.

As a first lady, Hillary’s sole important legislative involvement came during the first two years of her husband’s presidency when she sought to pass her ill-conceived health care reform, an effort that failed so miserably that it cost her party control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years.

Between 1995 to 1997, she was largely absent from the White House, traveling the world, promoting her best selling book and helping to raise funds. She never attended strategy meetings and her only intervention in the singular legislative achievements of Bill’s administration — welfare reform and the balanced budget deal — was privately to urge a veto of the former and to oppose the latter because it provided for a cut in the capital gains tax.

Hillary returned to the White House in 1998 to oversee the defense to the Lewinsky scandal and the impeachment attempt, but the Clinton administration essentially folded its legislative efforts during those years and hung on for dear life. No portfolio of accomplishments there.

In the Senate, she has largely spent her time raising funds for herself and other Democrats (in hopes of attracting the votes of super delegates) and promoting her best selling memoir Living History. In part because of a lack of attention and also because of the Democrats’ minority status during much of her Senate tenure, she has passed very, very little of note.

Her legislative accomplishments in her first term in the Senate were almost entirely symbolic. She renamed a courthouse after Justice Thurgood Marshall. She passed a resolution honoring Alexander Hamilton and another celebrating the win of a Syracuse University lacrosse team. She renamed post offices, founded a national park in Puerto Rico and expressed the sense of the Senate that Harriet Tubman should have gotten a federal pension 150 years ago.

Her only actual legislation included one bill to increase nurse recruitment, another to aid respite time for Alzheimer’s care givers and another to expand veterans’ health benefits, a paltry output for six years’ service.

In her second term, she has spent full-time campaigning for president and has the worst attendance record of the three senators now still in the presidential race.

So who is she kidding? If she wants to hit Obama with a negative based on his inexperience and limited legislative record, she should go right ahead. But to pretend that she is the “solutions” and “answers” person while he gives speeches is absurd.

___________________________________________________________
Clintons' Terror Pardons

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120277819085260827.html?mod=loomia&loomia_si=t0:a16:g2:r1:c0.128055

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:51 PM on 03/03/2008
photo

Sounds definitely like it was written by someone on the Obama campaign staff. I'm sure that comments here and elsewhere are frequently posted by people on both his and Clinton's staffs.

Does Obama support what Clinton said she will do - support the repeal of the provision in the core of NAFTA (and other trade agreements we've signed) that allow other countries to sue the U.S. for our environmental and worker safety and other worker protections?? Has he specifically said he would revoke this terrible core provision of NAFTA?

Personally, I think all the "free trade" agreements are almost completely slanted to benefit Wall St. and rich investors and against the interests of the vast majority of U.S. workers and consumers.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:13 PM on 03/03/2008

The audacity to mislead, www.politicalamnesia.blogspot.com

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:35 PM on 03/03/2008

Get real, this is crap and typical dirty innuendo play by the Harper Conservatives who are closely related to the Evangelical right in the Republican party. We in Canada, see this kind of play from them all the time and they will happily stick their nose into American politics if they think it will benefit the Republicans, make no mistake.
Don't you find it interesting that it now comes out that the Consul pursued a conversation with Professor Goolsbee? Remember the first CTV story? It also suggested that there had been an approach from the Clinton camp as well! Though we don't hear anything more about that now.
Right on cue we have Mr. McCain with his comments about 'our Canadian friends'.
Make no mistake, the Conservatives would tar either Obama or Clinton in a heart beat, so I have no doubt that the memo that went out was creatively edited to suit that agenda and probably bore little relationship to what poor Goolsbee actually said.
It is very significant that the Consul General has quickly distanced himself from that memo and essentially refutes it, that would mean to me that others in the meeting also refute the content of the memo and thats a problem. Where there is smoke of this sort most Canadians suspect a little fire that is why the Liberals went after Mr. Harper on this matter immediately.
The Consul General is a career civil servant but my bet is that Mr. De Mora is a conservative appointee by the Prime Ministers office. If others in that meeting refute that memo then the Government is guilty of playing a hand in the American election and Canadians and Americans would take a very dim view of that. I am betting that the Conservatives are hoping this matter goes away very quickly before more comes out on this matter.
But be that as it may, Goolsbee makes it clear he was not there on behalf of the Obama campaign and I think if he is guilty of anything it is of being very naive in this case.
There is no good will in the Canadian Conservatives, under Stephen Harper to anyone who is Liberal or as we call them a Democrats. Further there are many Canadian who would happily renegotiate the NAFTA agreement or opt out for the same reasons that Obama would actually.
I think the real story is what is behind the Consul Generals quick denial and assurance that there was no difference between what was conveyed at the meeting by Mr. Goolsbee than the public position taken by Mr. Obama. As a duel citizen who votes in the US I want to know if the Harper flunkies played politics in the US.

I think

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:14 PM on 03/03/2008
- Didi47 I'm a Fan of Didi47 15 fans permalink

charley008:

You're spouting a pile of bull that the Obama camp obviously handed you in their panic to negate another piece of garbage lie they've been caught foisting on the American people.

Don't pretend to speak for the Canadian people, nor try to insinuate that Hillary was also involved in Obama's lie to the public. That's really stretching it and makes you look ridiculous.

CTV stood by their report and Goolbie's name was the ONLY name verified as an Obama source... and the other LIE about Hillary the Obama camp has scrambled to spread is grade school obvious!

And he's running on judgment LOL! Wait till the republicans release all the other stuff they have on him. The public has been conned big time.. all with the help of the Republican owned media. You've been trained to accept anything and everything Obama says without question. That's very irresponsible don't you think?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:59 PM on 03/03/2008
- abot I'm a Fan of abot 4 fans permalink

This NAFTA memo a non-issue

The Canadian Government issued a statement regarding the memo released through the embassy in DC:

, "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."

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080302/nafta_memo_080303/20080303?hub=TopStories

Full Text:
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 statement went on to say that in 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."

The statement added that Canada will not "interfere" in the American electoral process.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:34 PM on 03/03/2008
- Mattie I'm a Fan of Mattie 54 fans permalink

I'm curious why he first says no such conversation took place, and now he's misunderstood. How does a conversation that never took place get misunderstood. Hmmmmm!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:21 PM on 03/03/2008

Mattie, Mattie, Mattie...to quote you "he first says no such conversation took place, and now he's misunderstood. How does a conversation that never took place get misunderstood. Hmmmmm!"

Please provide some evidence that Sen. Obama ever said anything other than the reports were false that his staff had told Canadian officials that he did not mean the things he was telling the American People.

He said none of his staff had any meetings at the Canadian Embassy (as was reported) with regard to Trade Issues and his stance on amending NAFTA.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:29 PM on 03/03/2008
- Didi47 I'm a Fan of Didi47 15 fans permalink

abot:

The last sentence of your post says it all: "The statement added that Canada will not "interfere" in the American electoral process."

Big time pressure to KILL the story, fast.

But too late... the cat's out of the bag. Now wait until the other lies start being aired....
It's only the beginning. That's what happens when one BLINDLY follows a media made pop star presidential candidate without scratching the surface.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:01 PM on 03/03/2008
- snowcat I'm a Fan of snowcat 23 fans permalink

The Canadian Gov defends Obama. The Prime Minister says it didn't happen!

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=eLJJ88HTiX8

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:31 PM on 03/03/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next › Last » (12 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect