Obama's anti-NAFTA rhetoric (1 Viewer)

Mr. Sparkle

Disrespectful to dirt
Joined
Mar 5, 2002
Messages
12,449
Reaction score
11,367
Offline
So, either he's genuine in his desire to trash our largest trade partner (what happened to repairing our international image?), or he's just another pol saying whatever that day's audience wants to hear.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4365922&page=1

Either way, it's disappointing, but somewhat amusing.

Of course, not nearly as humorous as Hillary blasting him for not being sincere enough in his anti-NAFTA efforts, as she rips into the treaty she trumpted during her first term as co-president.

Hello?

:covri:
 

UncleTrvlingJim

Administrator
Administrator
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 22, 2000
Messages
24,900
Reaction score
11,168
Offline
Yep, I'd much rather focus on this part of Obama than silly stories about his dad being a Muslim or his pastor being tied to Farrakan and whether rejecting and denouncing him is enough.

This is probably one of the bigger issues that will probably keep me from voting for him. I'm a free-trader, although I wouldn't mind seeing some enforcement on keeping the border open both ways...
 

cruize

Account closed at user request
Joined
Apr 3, 2005
Messages
5,866
Reaction score
0
Offline
Just when we had hope our current choices for President had to be better than the previous two elections...................
 
Joined
Jul 6, 2001
Messages
11,084
Reaction score
390
Age
37
Offline
This is what the anti-Obama group should be bringing up.
 

SoonerJim

Super Moderator
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 23, 2000
Messages
7,418
Reaction score
586
Age
66
Offline
USA Today today, and an economic journalist on NPR yesterday said he and Hillary were blowing smoke. they're in Ohio, so anti-NAFTA rhetoric sells.

Barack Hussein Obama, stamping out cynicism everywhere
 

billinms

Tiptoeing Through the Tulips
VIP Subscribing Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
19,649
Reaction score
24,609
Age
49
Location
Ocean Springs
Offline
You're not suppose to use his middle name.
 

dapperdan

Super Forum Fanatic
Joined
Jul 29, 1998
Messages
11,564
Reaction score
7,856
Age
58
Location
Juanita Beach, WA
Offline
The irony is, of course, that the only part of our economy that is currently humming along is...exports. This attack on NAFTA, at this particular point in time in our economic cycle, is not very intelligent. A rather knee-jerk, bow to partisanship politics.

Reworded: "Elect me as President, and I promise to shut down the only part of the economy that is doing well."
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2001
Messages
8,769
Reaction score
1,366
Location
Lafayette, Louisiana
Offline
To the best I can gather, here is what most likely happened to set off CTV's reporting that the Obama campaign is fudging the truth about its NAFTA intentions. Someone from the Canadian consul general's office in Chicago got to talking with Dr. Austan Goolsbee, he the principle economic adviser to Sen. Obama, and NAFTA came up. Mr. Goolsbee may have warned him that the rhetoric about NAFTA might be amped up and that the policy follow through might not be as drastic as the volume of the rhetoric would indicate. By no means, though, does that mean that Obama isn't serious about renegotiating the labor and environmental provisions of NAFTA -- just that, Goolsbee may well have said, Obama recognizes that the normative case for NAFTA is not as one-sided as general campaign trail bromides make it out to be.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/
 

dapperdan

Super Forum Fanatic
Joined
Jul 29, 1998
Messages
11,564
Reaction score
7,856
Age
58
Location
Juanita Beach, WA
Offline
To the best I can gather, here is what most likely happened to set off CTV's reporting that the Obama campaign is fudging the truth about its NAFTA intentions. Someone from the Canadian consul general's office in Chicago got to talking with Dr. Austan Goolsbee, he the principle economic adviser to Sen. Obama, and NAFTA came up. Mr. Goolsbee may have warned him that the rhetoric about NAFTA might be amped up and that the policy follow through might not be as drastic as the volume of the rhetoric would indicate. By no means, though, does that mean that Obama isn't serious about renegotiating the labor and environmental provisions of NAFTA -- just that, Goolsbee may well have said, Obama recognizes that the normative case for NAFTA is not as one-sided as general campaign trail bromides make it out to be.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/

This all could, and probably is, true. But what is interesting is the messianic message that comes from Obamamania; that Obama is above partisan politics, the purity of his message. Then comes the reality of the situation, that Obama is forced to talk out of both sides of his mouth to satisfy various constituencies...just like every other politician of my lifetime. He is a walking, talking spin machine. The biggest difference I've seen is that his political machinery around him seems to be very thin skinned, hypersensitive to every and any criticism of Obama. As if he's above the fray, which is, obviously, a complete crock.

There seems to be a real separation between Obama the man, a guy who comes across to me as a very smart, cunning, ambitious guy. But there is clearly a heavy dose of self-righteousness that surrounds his campaign. Personally, I see it as a sort of group narcissism surrounding the campaign. We've had Mr. Smith going to Washington, now we've got Burning Man going to Washington. And it is clearly a vulnerability that can and will be pierced by his political opponent over the course of the summer. It's definitely a flaw. A major flaw in the campaign, though I doubt it is a fatal flaw.

For all intents and purposes, the economy is currently in a recession, and will certainly be in a recession by the time the two parties meet for their conventions this summer. If the Democrats cannot win this election given the unpopular nature of the war in Iraq, given that the economy is in the midst of a recession, then heaven help the Democratic Party. You could prop Bernie up at the mike, pump in some pre-recorded political pap, and win this election with a dead man if you're a decent Democratic operative under these conditions.
 
Last edited:

blackadder

...from a chicken, bugwit
VIP Contributor
Joined
Nov 8, 2003
Messages
30,543
Reaction score
23,459
Offline
The irony is, of course, that the only part of our economy that is currently humming along is...exports. This attack on NAFTA, at this particular point in time in our economic cycle, is not very intelligent. A rather knee-jerk, bow to partisanship politics.

Reworded: "Elect me as President, and I promise to shut down the only part of the economy that is doing well."

How much of that is due to NAFTA and how much is due to the weakest dollar in decades and the burgeoning demand for agricultural commodities in Asia?

I have the feeling you could scrap NAFTA tomorrow and exports are going to remain at near record levels because they are cheap and demographic factors in our largest customers are driving demand.

Surely Mexico and Canada are not driving the export boom on their own?
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
14,746
Reaction score
2,515
Offline
black, Clinton had a good economy going partly because of the Internet boom in the 90's. It was a very calculated move by his campaign to focus on the economy in the 1992 election because it took a crucial element of that year's election to do so. HW Bush had done a good job at liberating Kuwait and avoiding the mistakes his son made now in his tenure, Clinton knew that and focused on the right things. Clinton was in the right place at the right time. He fell into a potentially good situation and ran with it.

But their are not many James Carville's out their these days anymore. Now a days the media plays an even bigger role in who gets elected and candidates have to promise everything to do what the people want to hear.

Obama has the best chance. Sure he may promise a bit too much, but he has I think, the ability to make some inroads on the economy and making some progress in Iraq and foreign affairs
 

UncleTrvlingJim

Administrator
Administrator
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 22, 2000
Messages
24,900
Reaction score
11,168
Offline
How much of that is due to NAFTA and how much is due to the weakest dollar in decades and the burgeoning demand for agricultural commodities in Asia?

I have the feeling you could scrap NAFTA tomorrow and exports are going to remain at near record levels because they are cheap and demographic factors in our largest customers are driving demand.

Surely Mexico and Canada are not driving the export boom on their own?

No, but if you start enacting trade barriers, the benefits of a weak dollar get diluted. Right now, the best part of a having a weak dollar is that we can export our goods...it will actually make it less likely for companies to leave here for cheaper labor elsewhere, etc... at this point we should be encouraging more free trade b/c with a weakening dollar we're going to benefit from it even more now...
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

 

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom