In the past several weeks I've noted how the Clintons have behaved, specifically toward Barack Obama. Bill's sound bite following the South Carolina primary loss was telling. He was sending out a message to the rest of America that the SC result was an anomaly and Barack's fortunes would not hold up elsewhere where blacks were in the minority. He continue with his antics in Nevada, claiming voter intimidation by the Obama people, and also by trying to change the rules on where people could caucus, because they feared their opponent had an advantage. They followed this undemocratic action by trying to drive a wedge between the Latinos and Blacks by putting the word out that Latinos would not votes for a black man. All through this destructive period the America people, who have been taken for granted by both parties, finally started to shift away from the Clintons. They would have terrific poll numbers until Barack started his campaign when almost invariably the polls would swing away from them. After a string of primary defeats and all looked lost they decided to open the Rove slime account. (I have no proof, but I believe Carl Rove is working on the Clinton campaign). So they have decide to go all out negative, and in doing so they have shown their hand. This all out war to persuade voters that Barack Obama is an inexperienced empty suit, using any means necessary, might work, but at the risk of destroying the Democrats chances in the General Election.

It is sad to see people whom you've felt so go about, in the past, disappoint you now. You have to recalibrate and adjust for what you now feel towards them. I would like the Democrats to have a sweeping victory come November, taking over a filibuster-proof congress.

I hope Hillary will have the decency to step aside after Tuesday.

The context of the Goolsbee comments--invited to the consulate for a tour, discussing many things, in which he mentioned Obama's focus on the labor and environmental standards of NAFTA--really remove all the teeth. But Clinton isn't about context. And the media won't be if they can have a horserace instead. Not saying it was smart, just that there's a lot less there than some would prefer.

On the muslim renewed flap, she would help herself with a strong (the first or certainly second time it's asked) "He's a member of a Christian church in Chicago which he attends with his family. Now why are you asking--what are you implying? We don't have religious tests for citizenship in the US, but the media..." I think her hedging with numerous subclauses is instinct, but it's unfortunate.

I don’t see how Obama followers could still be so blinded by this man.

1) On Nafta:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/03/724249.aspx

“*** Oh, Canada: In what feels like a Perry Mason moment, the Obama campaign is going to have a hard time somehow claiming their chief domestic policy adviser was meeting with the Canadians as a University of Chicago professor and not as an Obama emissary. The only thing the Obama campaign can be happy about is that this memo of the meeting leaked today and not three days ago when the Clinton campaign could have spent days harping on this. This really does hit the Obama campaign on credibility when it comes to the press corps and may hurt them on another story down the road. The press corps gave the Obama camp the benefit of the doubt on this story; it won't next time. Of course, we have another question: Why is the conservative Canadian government leaking this memo and getting involved in a Democratic primary race?”

2) On Foreign Policy:

Here is an excellent article from Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson delivering a blistering denunciation of Obama’s foreign policy stance (or lack of)
” Obama's Hollow "Judgment" and Empty Record”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-wilson/obamas-hollow-judgment_b_89441.html

Exerpts:

“I was involved in that debate in every step of the effort to prevent this senseless war and I profoundly resent Obama's distortion of George Bush's folly into Hillary Clinton's responsibility. I was in the middle of the debate in Washington. Obama wasn't there. I remember what was said and done. In fact, the administration lied in order to secure support for its war of choice, including cooking the intelligence and misleading Congress about the intent of the authorization. Senator Clinton's position, stated in her floor speech, was in favor of allowing the United Nations weapons inspectors to complete their mission and to build a broad international coalition. Bush rejected her path. It was his war of choice.

There is no credible reason to conclude that Obama would have acted any differently in voting for the authorization had he been in the Senate at that time. Indeed, he has said as much. The supposed intuitive judgment he exercised in his 2002 speech was nothing more than the pander of a local election campaign, just as his current assertions of superior judgment and scurrilous attacks on Hillary Clinton are a pander to those who now retroactively think the war was a mistake without bothering to acknowledge Senator Clinton's actual position at the time and instead fantasizing that she was nothing but a Bush clone. Obama willfully encourages and plays off this falsehood.”

“What should we make of Obama's other judgments in foreign affairs? Take Afghanistan, for example. It has been evident for some time that our efforts there are going badly and that cooperation and support from our NATO allies would be helpful. As chairman of the subcommittee on Senate Foreign Relations responsible for NATO and Europe, Obama could have used his lofty position actually to engage the issue and pressure the administration to take some action to improve our chance of success in that conflict against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Of course, that would have involved holding hearings, questioning administration witnesses, and taking a position and offering alternatives. That is what we expect that from senators in a democracy. It is called oversight.

But, instead, Obama, by his own admission, offers the excuse that he has been too busy running for president to do anything substantive, such as direct his staff to organize a single hearing. "Well, first of all," Obama was forced to confess in the Democratic debate in Ohio on February 26, "I became chairman of this committee at the beginning of this campaign, at the beginning of 2007. So it is true that we haven't had oversight hearings on Afghanistan." To date, his subcommittee has held no policy hearings at all -- none. At the same time that Obama claimed he was too busy campaigning to do anything substantive, racking up one of the worst attendance records in the Senate, Senator Clinton chaired extensive hearings of the Subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health and attended many others as a member of the Armed Service Committee.

As a consequence of Obama's dereliction of duty on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, a feckless administration has had absolutely no oversight as it careens from disaster to disaster in Afghanistan, including the central governments loss of control over 70 percent of the country and yet another bumper crop of opium to fuel the efforts of the Taliban and their terrorist allies. Of course, if you don't hold hearings, conduct oversight, make recommendations or sponsor legislation, then you have no record to explain or defend and you are free to take whatever position is convenient when attacking those who actually did address issues. Meanwhile, on the campaign trail, Obama holds forth on Afghanistan, chiding the administration and our allies as though he's a profile in courage and not someone who has abandoned his post in establishing accountability.”

3) On Race

Obama’s strategy to use race has certainly been effective.

“Race man” by Sean Wilentz, Professor of History at Princeton University:
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304&k=5083

4) On Under-the-table dealings

http://thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html

Other articles probing Obama’s under-the-table divisive strategies:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8751.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?emc=eta1

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/opinion/25kristol.html

Forward to your undecided friends and make sure they understand what Obama is really all about.

She is 100% correct. For some reason Obama always gets a pass by the rpess. Imagine if McCain or Hillary had written a letter on bahlf of Rezkos company so that Rezko could get $14mill in state funding for a project inside their district like Obama did. Then imagine that Hillary/McCain then had that same person help them buy a house for 20% under the value. Also the whole time this man has been their TOP FUNDRAISER. Also now with the man on trial imagine how the press would be all over this. With all the info out there on Obama and Rezko there is wrongdoing and yet the press ignores it. Obma always says that he told all there is to tell until then a letter is found that he wrote on behalf of Rezko, then it comes out that Obama hired the son of a REzko partner as an intern, then Rezko toured the house with him. There is always no nothing else to tell until something else comes up. I do not like Hillary but the press has not been fair in the coverage of the Dems race. With all we know about IL politics how can this not be an issue. Obama is buddies and has endorsed Blagoevich/Daley/Stroger/Alexi G. All have engaged in the same type of pay to play politics as Obama did with Rezko. Not to mention that Emil Jones is Obamas mentor. That is a major ered flag right there. Also the one thing Obama claims credit for on the police videotaping legislation was not even his doing. It was brought out by Hendon but Obama took the credit because Emil JOnes handed it to him. This is not change this is BUSINESS AS USUAL.

It's all politics as the Canadian leadership wants NAFTA in place, and wants Clinton or McCain to win.

Watch this VIDEO: NAFTA, McCain, Clinton and Change:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qH6shHjrhAg

Grasping at straws...

They're both fascists and communists. It's the pot calling the kettle black.

Why would she step aside, she is going to win all primaries tomorrow. You people just can't believe how devious Obama really is. I just hope you don't realize it after you all make the biggest mistake of this whole campaign.

On the most important asset one own is his or her house. On Mr. Obama’s house purchase he made the WRONG judgment by knowingly doing business with indicted Mr. Rezko.

It's simple. The Canadian leadership wants NAFTA in place, and wants Clinton or McCain to win, so they slam Obama.

Watch this VIDEO: NAFTA, McCain, Clinton and Change:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qH6shHjrhAg

On the most important asset one own is his or her house. On Mr. Obama’s house purchase he made the WRONG judgment by knowingly doing business with indicted Mr. Rezko.

They're near even in the delegate projections so far. All these calls for her to step aside come from anxiety in the Obama camp. It's too close and she could pull it out. They want to win through concession what they cannot win outright.

I think Hillary is acting in a very shameful manner. As a woman I am embarrassed by her. Can she please stop the whining.

The Clinton campaign is basing their comments on the memo written by a Canadian staffer interpreting the gist of a telephone conversation with an Obama adviser. That makes the content at least two and more probably three removes away from anything Senator Obama has said.

This is truly grasping at straws and doing the right-wing Republicans work for them.

The longer this campaign goes, the worse Hillary looks. Will she destroy the Democratic party in order to secure what she sees as her rightful place in history?

Oh.. Obama is a flip flopper, caught right on the scene.
He denied the existence of the meeting a couple days ago. Now he admitted it? Liar, liar, liar, liar, liar.
America deserves better.

Is Hillary using the same crying strategy that won her New Hampshire? It seems this time around she can't cry per se, but is essentially using the same tactics to get sympathy vote.

The man with no record saying one thing, yet doing or thinking another? Really? You've GOT to be kidding? St. Obama wouldn't do something like that, would he?

Obama represents change? A new kind of politics? Really? We are talking about the same candidate that is a product of the corrupt Illinois Democratic machine? The same politician who is tied at the hip to the Indicted Rezko?

The media and voters need to do more research on Obama’s background and voting record in the Illinois senate and the US senate, now that he is the front-runner. DIG DEEP, ASK HARD QUESTIONS.

We need someone who can handle the problems facing American families, like house foreclosures, health insurance, college tuition, gas prices, foreign enemies, etc.

Ask the tough questions. Vote with our heads. Voting for president is a serious business and we CAN'T AFFORD TO WASTE 4 YEARS ON SOMEONE WHO IS NOT QUALIFIED.

Keep in mind that the conservative government in Canada likes NAFTA a lot, and it would behoove them to keep someone who would aggressively re-negotiate NAFTA out of the WH. Not shooting the messenger, but it's something to keep in mind with all the back and forth goings on.

I hope Hillary will have the decency to step aside after Tuesday.

Posted by: An Inconvenient Truth | March 3, 2008 10:39 AM

For sure somebody will have to bow out soon. I'm starting to believe it will have to be Barack Hussein Obama, he will never be able to withstand the withering assaults surely to come from his "chummy " association with the Syrian Rezko and the convicted (corruption) Iraqi Mr. Auchi. Mr. Cari, the national Dem. fundraiser has already pled guilty.

Rezko + Auchi + Farrakhan = NOBAMA

Obama can do no wrong.

He can cut and paste a speech or a policy better than Bush.

Your all duped!

Obama is criticized Hillary for supporting NAFTA and has criticized the program. Now, his campaign is reassuring Candian officials that it's just "political positioning"? Why isn't this getting more coverage?

This doesn't sound like change to me.

Hillary for President?

Well, Let's look at this historical facts:

"A TRUE democrat..." (She was president of the "Young Republicans" at Wellesley College.)

"A TRUE fighter for Women's Rights..." (Bill Clinton sexually harassed Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, and Monica Lewinsky (who is only 7 years older than Chelsea Clinton)

"A TRUE supporter for the working class..." Democrats have long despised Wal-Mart's Corporate Board... only to realize Hillary WAS on the Wal-Mart board during the many strikes)

"A TRUE leader who can clean up a Bush Mess..." (After Ex-Campaign Manager resigns, several staff members from Hillary's campaign jump ship, loaned herself $5 Million in a disheveled campaign and, so far, lost 11 primaries straight)

Hillary for President?

If she wins, they can hand out celebration cigars.

Oops, Bill Clinton used them all during his Oval Office trysts with an intern 7 years older that his daughter.

Hillary won't need to step aside. There are still lots of us folks that want to see her as our president.
The press is trying to sway Americans away from a candidate who has real solutions. What do you expect from those always pushing Brittney down our throats?
How about some 'real' reporting??

You know, when Bush ran for re-election, I just knew that he wouldn't win because there was no way people would be so stupid as to put that moron back in office, especially after we found out about his crap with Iraq.

So, what happened? The zombies voted him back in. I overestimated majority intelligence.

That was Hillary Clinton's mistake. She gave the sheep & cattle way too much credit by thinking that they could make intelligent decisions.

Unfortunately, an "American Idol" mentality has set in, where fainting spells and empty speeches easily sway the crops.

While Obama won't be as bad/stupid as Bush, Clinton would have been the better President.

Guilt by association isn't proof; It's supposition.

If you want a guideline for how the candidate will serve as a leader, look to how they are leading their respective campaigns now.

Hillary has mismanaged her funding and turned her back on her constituents, when they no longer served her purposes. She's blamed everyone from the media to her own campaigners and supporters. The general election isn't even here and Hillary has broken her own party's rules - and has pushed and sued to change them, because she has been unable to win by the rules, she helped set up last year.

Could Clinton please stop her incessant whining about the press? This is the woman who is supposed to be so tough and so able to withstand the evil Republican Attack Machine but all she does is moan and complain about how she's mistreated by the "liberal" media.

Her entire campaign meme between the debates, her speeches and now SNL has been "I'm the poor victim at the hands of such monsters as CNN & MSNBC!" It's tiresome and doesn't speak well at all for her ability to handle the nation in a mature manner.

The Clinton SLIEM MACHINE is out in full force aided by a handfull of republican weirdos like John D. This thing is getting really ugly folks. But what else would you expect to read about in The Swamp that is Clinton politics. They have no shame. Neither do the republicans who ripped on John McCain.

An Obama vs McCain showdown would give Americans a chance to debate the important issues in an adult fashion.

They are both honorable men. That is a race that America should have. hillary are you listening?

Alright! Hillary is finally hitting her stride. Once she and her supporters smear their way past Tuesday, the Democratic Party will split like an egg.
Go McCain! (No more stained dresses coming out of the White House. period.)

Why is the media ignoring this?

"The CTV exclusive also reported that sources said the Clinton campaign has made indirect contact with the Canadian government, trying to reassure Ottawa of their support despite Clinton's words. The Clinton camp denied the claim"

Campaign raises NAFTA flap; Accusations fly over threats by ...
Owen Sound Sun Times, Canada - Feb 29, 2008
The network also quoted low-level sources saying the Hillary Clinton campaign made indirect contact with the Canadian government in Ottawa to reassure ...

First thoughts: The GOP's disadvantages
MSNBC - Feb 29, 2008
Today’s CTV story also repeats the charge -- largely ignored yesterday -- that the “Clinton campaign has made indirect contact with the Canadian government, ...

NAFTA threats simply rehtoric: CTV
Sault Star, Canada - Feb 28, 2008
CTV also quoted low-level sources stating the Clinton campaign made indirect contact with the Canadian government to reassure Ottawa about her support of ...

Oh, the Clinton desperation is as thick as solar mass; a spoonful might crack the Earth's crust. Osama? Obama? Please.

Change.

I think he's real.

Obama has been peddling one thing to the voters, and trying to assuage a foreign goverment. I had seen in another publication that Israel was being told to not pay attention to his campaigm rhetoric. What's it going to be one "truth" for us and the real "truth" for foreign governments? This is our election. So, why does he feel the need to check in with other countries? We, the voters, are owed the truth and nothing less. This empty suit is just like most pols that speak with a forked tongue. He won't acknowledge the truth when it's right there. I think it speaks to character. I can admire a person that takes responsibility but Obama never has thus far.

The Clinton name is in shambles. The Hillary SLIME MACHINE is in full gear. Karl Rove eat your heart out. Pathetic.

An all new low in democratic politics.

Should Hillary win many independents like myself will be forced to vote for John McCain. At least he is an honest man unlike Hillary. She is an embarrassment, not only to womaen like myself but to America as a whole. I feel sorry for Mr Obama having to deal with the Clintons stooping to all new lows. Shame on the Clintons.

Incredible to see a formerly beloved woman reach the depths of depravity. Really makes you wonder what Hillary Clinton administration would be like. The criminality would likely excede that of the Bush administration.

Truely frightening!

Obama's politics of change just sprung a big leak. So where did I hear somebody say some politicians will say anything to get elected? Now its Obama that has shown he will say "anything" to get elected. He can't be trusted on NAFTA and he can't be trusted to be telling the truth about Iraq either. Saying he will pull out very fast is just political positioning as we all now know.

Johnny D:

Tied at the hip to Rezko????

Please.

Has he been indicted with Rezko?? Even Jim Edgar, that well know liberal Democrat, er, Republican says that the majority of the Rezko trial will be about Blagojovich, NOT Obama.

James:

The last time I checked, when Barack did that supposed "deal" with Rezko, he was not indicted. Plus, even the Clintons had contact with him in the past.

Since everyone here is so concerned about NAFTA, could we get one of you GOP types to share with us John McCain's economic policy?? Seems like he has been too busy pushing the Iraq war to get down to things that matter to the rest of us.

"The Obama campaign and the Canadian embassy denied there was any inconsistency between what the candidate was saying publicly and what advisers were saying privately."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/03/canadian-memo-recounts-me_n_89539.html

today will be the last day I make this plea

so, as a veteran,

an independent American voter and
a medical professional in good standing,

I humbly ask ;

please no more bush/clinton/bush/clinton

please

if you want vision, vote obama

if you want experience, vote mccain

but if you want DI-vision and a BAD flashback, then by all means vote clinton -
because that is what your country will get

peace, everyone

Is it my imagination or all republicans one trick ponies? John "whos sane?" McCain has Iraq, and Don B has Rezko. Maybe someday when they have something positive about their candidate, we'll hear it.

Hillary Clinton Turns Off Democratic Voters.

Hillary congratulations, troglodyte republican John D, has now become your biggest fan. We all know you've ground your campaign into the ground and now must secure the cave-dwelling, xenophobic hominid vote. Don't worry about the fact that you've trashed your good name and have now decided that your going to ruin Barack Obama's in the proccess. Never mind the fact that those pesky American voters happen to LIKE Barack Obama.

No it's all about you Hillary. You and your knuckle-dragging, quasi-simian, republican voting public like this bottom feeder John D.

As goes John D, so goes the nation, right Hillary.

Hillary you are a joke. p.s. when the 3:00 AM phone rings pick it up on the first ring, not the fifth. Oh yeah and lose the diamond necklass and the glasses.

Before I forget, thanks for trashing the democratic party in the proccess.

I will vote for John McCain if Hillary somehow manages to steal, or slime her way into the Democratic nomination.

Hillary Clinton is a national disgrace.

HE IS TOTALLY CORRUPT! DO NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA!ATTENTION: OBAMA FINANCIAL BACKER REZKO TRIAL STARTS TODAY!
WHERES THE MEDIA??? We are sick of the media pushing obama down our throats! Another indictment former Dallas Mayor Hill, Obama camp financial contributor and supporter charged with federal bribery, extortion and conspiracy. Again has their hand full with other publically indicted bankrollers like Rezko. A company related to Another Obama “financial friend” Rep. Rick Renzi indicted Friday on multiple federal charges, law enforcement sources tell CNN. In a 35-count indictment handed up by a grand jury in Arizona, Renzi is charged with conspiracy, wire fraud, money laundering extortion and insurance fraud. The indictment stem from Renzi's efforts to use his position in Congress to promote “land deals” Again more corrupt camp donations for Obama
EACH WEEK WE HEAR ANOTHER CORRUPT BACKER WITH HUSSEN OBAMA!!! OBAMA IS CONSTANLY SURROUNDED BY CORRUPTION, ESPECIALLY WHERE CAMPAGINE FUNDS ARE CONCERNED WHERES CNN? MSNBC? FOX/ ROLAND MARTIN? IDIOT TUCKER CARLSON? BILL KRISTOL? TIM RUSSETT? AND ANYOTHER SO-CALLED TABLOID ENQUIRER TYPE ANTI FEMALE JOURALIST
Obama and his team have ducked "legitimate questions" about Rezko, who faces federal corruption charges most centrally involved with Gov. Blagojevich's administration. "Now the trial is beginning, it will be more difficult for him to avoid these various serious questions. I can guarantee you that. Obama's Relationship with Rezko Goes Back 17 Years. Obama Kept Contributions from Accused Fixer's (REZKO) Wife and Others ABCNews.com Analysis Shows. Obama opportuned Rezko to obtain jobs in the Blagojevich administration for Obama allies. For the third time in more than a year, Obama's presidential campaign announced it SO-CALLED shedding more donations
According to court documents, Mr Rezko's lawyer said his client had "longstanding indebtedness" to Mr Auchi's GMH. By June 2007 he owed it $27.9 million.
NEXT!

ATTENTION: OBAMA FINANCIAL BACKER REZKO TRIAL STARTS TODAY

MUST READ BEFORE YOU CAST THAT IMPORTANT VOTE!!!

SEE OBAMAS CONNECTION WITH SADDAM HUSSEN AND REZKO!
Land deal 'mistake' piles the pressure on Obama Mr Auchi, leading supplier of arms to Saddam's regime and convicted for corruption in France, the British-Iraqi billionaire lent millions and millions of dollars to Barack Obama's fund just weeks before an imprudent land deal investigation. In addition money transfer from Nadhmi Auchi, Obama used to buy his Georgian mansion in Chicago. Mr. Auchi says the loan, through the Panamanian company Fintrade Services SA, was for $3.5 million!!!. Mr. Auchi's money was made doing business with the regime of Saddam Hussein, Mr. Auchi was a leading supplier of arms to Saddam's regime. A former Belgian ambassador to Luxembourg charged that a bank in Luxembourg owned principally by Mr. Auchi laundered funds -- including oil for food money -- for Saddam and other Islamic dictators. Auchi helped French and Italian firms win a huge oil pipeline contract in Iraq, chiefly by paying off Iraqi officials, according to testimony given by an Italian banker to prosecutors in Milan. In 2003, he was convicted for his role in what was then the largest scandal in French history, involving payoffs from executives of the oil company now known as Total to political figures in Spain, Germany and Africa.. The connection between Mr. Auchi and Sen. Obama is cause for great concern in the U.S. The national news media have been remarkably incurious about Sen. Obama's relationship with Mr. Rezko, and his with Mr. Auchi. The Obamas bought the house for $1.65 million -- $300,000 below the asking price -- perhaps because Mr. Rezko's wife purchased from the owner an adjacent garden plot for $625,000. (The sellers deny they offered the Obamas a discount.) The Times of London wondered where Mrs. Rezko got the money to buy the garden plot. At the time, she had a salary of $37,000 and assets of only $35,000, the Times learned. Her husband told a court that at the time he had "no income, negative cash flow, no liquid assets," the Times said. Auchi participated in more than just Rezko's pizza and property ventures, however; he also contributed to Barack Obama's campaign by donating to a 2005 fundraiser through a company of which is wife is a Director. I quote the relevant paragraph from a London Times exclusive: Times has, however, discovered state documents in Illinois recording that the Panamanian company Fintrade Services SA lent money to Mr Obama's fundraiser. Fintrade's directors include Ibtisam Auchi, the name of Mr Auchi's wife. Mr Auchi's spokesman declined to respond to a question about whether he was linked to this business. The donation is significant, obama is the Ill politican mentioned in the following ABC News report on the FBI affidavit filed in US Attorney Fitzgerald's case against Rezko before Obama's political godfather was arrested on Monday: According to an FBI affidavit filed in the case, Rezko sought to get a visa for Auchi to visit the United States by contacting "the same Illinois government official ( Obama)
!

Hilary,
There is no proof that the memo, written by a Canadian embassy official and leaked to the AP, claiming that the Obama's top economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee assured him that Obama's anti-NAFTA remarks "should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans." I would't be surprised if this memo is another one of you and Bills dirty tricks that both of you are known for.

DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT YOUR "DESPARATION CAMPAGN TACTICS" ARE GOING TO WORK? WHATS NEXT, ARE YOU GOING TO ASK OBAMA WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME HE HIT HIS WIFE...WHAT A FOOL YOU ARE.

GET USED TO THE IDEA HILARY THAT YOU AND YOUR CHEATING HUSBAND BILL, THE "FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT" (WHAT A JOKE) ARE GOING TO LOSE BIGTIME.

I think the critical part of this story is not so much what the candidate's positions are on NAFTA, but instead about Obama's campaign saying one thing in public and another thing behind closed doors. Obama's campaign is largely based on how he will transcend beyond "politics as usual" and will lead instead with hope, honesty and inspiration. Obama claims his strong suit is his ability to unite people with straight talk and exercise good judgment in spite of what is convenient within the realm of political positioning. If Obama's platform is true, this closed door meeting between Obama's top economic advisor Austan Goolsbee and Canadian officials is in direct contradiction with his primary campaign rhetoric. This meeting sounds like the usual political game playing that happens behind the scenes and that is opposite of the image that Barack Obama has presented to the American public. Both Obama and Clinton believe in globalization and free trade (both are far from being protectionists). They also agree that NAFTA has not been favorable to certain parts of America, particularly in places like Ohio where thousands of manufacturing jobs have been lost. The Canadian memo has no reason to embellish or misconstrue what was said in the meeting with Goolsbee. The American public and media has been so enthralled with Obama's speeches that they are not realizing that although inspirational, Obama is still a politician and is not always doing what is "right"- he is doing what is convenient. It is worse that something like this would happen in Obama's campaign compared to any other candidate because it seems that his whole campaign is based on his holier than now image. Can you imagine the field day the media would be having if it was found out that one of Clinton's top economic advisors gave a private "wink wink" to officials of a foreign government!?

At first Obama and Obama's man Goolsbee denied talking to the Canadians. That was a lie (a "Clinton", if you will), as the AP story has shown.

Did anyone seriously expect honesty from a Chicago Democrat?

The Swamp has reached critical mass!!! I'm endlessly amused at the level Swamp Things will stoop to in order to get their points across. I think by now almost everyone has figured out who they will vote for. Yet the propaganda machines continue to churn out their attacks on the opposition. To think we all thought the Super Bowl was competitive!!!

By the way I tend to agree with the comments that assail the Clinton campaign for underhanded tactics. I gave money to her campaign a couple of years ago. After seeing what her team has regressed into, I would never cough up another nickel let alone vote for her. I think anyone who truely believes her aspersions about the Obama campaign need only do a Google search http://www.google.com/ to find all the information they need about Obama's many accomplishments.

Then again that might force them to face the thing they fear the most. Themselves!

Obama 2008

This is sheer stupid to discuss the internal US matters with foreign government without a discussion in congress / senat. This act will create damaging impact in the US economy. Politicians like obama thinks that the people will forget all that he promised in few days time after the election. Because he knows that he has promised so much that its difficult for him to keep track of so how can people keep track of these things?

This will lead to a dangerous situation for the nation when it comes to foreign policies. Guys if obama discusses with foreign government without having a debate with congressmen and senators as he did on NAFTA. It will be just his hidden agenda that you will see

No politician even the aboriginal tribal leaders will not discuss the internal economic factors with foreign governments unless they debate among parlament and congress to reach conclusions.

This act seems to be a rediculous! Think about what he will be talking to Iran and Iraq folks?

Wow! It's utterly amazing how something so mundane and common place can suddenly be blown out of proportion. The rhetoric and spin of Senator Clinton and her surrogates and the news media leads intentionally and unmistakably to the following implications:
1. A special, covert meeting was arranged between Mr. Goolsbee and the Canadian Consulate
2. The secret meeting was arranged to discuss Senator Obama’s views of the relationship between the US and Canada as they relate to NAFTA.
3. The meeting was arranged to discuss Senator Obama’s campaign speeches in Ohio and Texas relating to NAFTA.
4. And during the supposedly prearranged meeting, Mr. Goolsbee (acting as an official representative of Senator Obama) informed Canadian officials that there was no need for concern over Senator Obama’s public position on NAFTA.
5. Moreover, Mr. Goolsbee indicated to Canadian government officials that Senator Obama’s public and private positions are different. He really doesn’t mean what he says publicly.
6. Consequently, voters should be weary of Senator Obama’s character, integrity, consistency and reliability.
In ACTUALITY, none of the rhetoric and spin has any basis in reality according to the memo. Not only was there no special, prearranged, secret meeting scheduled between Mr. Goolsbee and Canadian official, in fact, there was No Meeting AT ALL! What did occur was Mr. Goolsbee’s participation in a routine, hour -long tour during which he spent all of 2 to 3 minutes in a brief, unofficial exchange with a low level Canadian official.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Clinton phonebankers are calling Obama "Osama bin Laden" and then claiming it is a "slip of the tongue."

http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/did_i_say_osama_i_meant_obama.html

Separately, Obama is not accused of any wrongdoing in connection with Rezko, a man who donated to all Chicago politicians. After Obama found out what Rezko was he donated all the money to charity. For information on the government ethics programs Obama has sponsored, including Google for Government, a computer database allowing citizens access to more information, go to Obama's website.

OUTRAGE!!!! This has to be clarified!!! How can Hillary say the press is unfair to her when all this week they have propagated the FALSE story that the Obama campaign had contacted the Canadian government with a "wink wink" about NAFTA--- And now AFTER THE TEXAS OHIO PRIMARIES the OUTRAGEOUS TRUTH comes out that IT WAS THE HILLARY CAMPAIGN THAT CONTACTED THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT -- DOING EXACTLY WHAT SHE FALSELY ACCUSED THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN OF! After hundreds of FALSE Obama smears all across the media, there is this one little and way-too-late matter of fact article saying Hillary did it too---still implying that the Obama campaign did it in the first place. THIS ARTICLE DOES NOT EVEN CALL HILLARY OUT FOR BEING THE DUPLICITOUS, CONNIVING MANIPULATOR SHE IS!

Two days after the March 4 primaries Canadian media reports said that it was actually the CLINTON campaign that was "telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt." - see below

By David Ljunggren
Reuters
Thursday, March 6, 2008; 5:09 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/06/AR2008030601437.html

Critics, who accuse Harper of being too close to Republican U.S. President George W. Bush, said the spat would damage U.S. ties if Democrat Obama won the presidential election. Harper said the leak was very unfair to Obama's campaign.

Canadian media reports said on Thursday that the furor was triggered by private remarks that Ian Brodie, Harper's chief of staff, made to the CTV Television network last week about Clinton's criticism of NAFTA.

They said Brodie revealed someone from the Clinton campaign was "telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt."

Because of new information, The Swamp should review its analysis of NAFTAgate - "as a Canadian Broadcasting Company story reveals, practically the entire story was a lie," http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-loeb/did-clinton-win-ohio-on-a_b_90254.html