Analysts in Canada believe Harper does not want a Democrat in the White House, a development that could encourage Canadian voters to cast their ballots for a more liberal government in an election that will be held before 2010.
Harper said last week that the United States should not reopen talks on NAFTA and warned that reopening trade negotiations could lead to Canada raising some matters of its own.
The NDP Press Secretary, Capstick, reported, “Our leader will continue to demand the resignation of the Prime Minister’s chief Ian Brodie, who BBC news alleges was the source of the leak. “
He described the sequence of events from the Canadian side:
George Rioux , consul general in Chicago, had a meeting with Mr. Goolsbee. That meeting was written up in a diplomatic cable. That diplomatic, we believe, would have been marked secret. That cable would have then been sent to Washington D.C., where our conservative ambassador there, the former finance minister for a conservative government here in Canada, Michael Wilson, who has scandals of his very own, I might add, then had a conversation and passed diplomatic cables to the chief of staff, allegedly passed the information to our chief of staff Ian Brody. Mr. Brody then passed it along to Canadian News media, thereby creating quite the storm in Ohio.
We haven’t seen the memo. ABC news has. They are the ones who have received the memo."
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.
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.
To add some grey shading to this story, according to Capstick, Rioux is not a political appointee and he would have had to approve the message sent by DeMora.
Around 2:30 PM, today, Layton will again be asking Harper questions about this episode on www.Cpac.ca , which is the Canadian equivalent to CSPAN. He'll be repeating the message, "
The source of the information that has worked it’s way into the Dem primary needs be identified and fired, by Mr. Harper and that we need, as Obama and Clinton have suggested, that we need to re-negotiate, take another look at NAFTA . We need NAFTA 2.0."
Rob Kall is executive editor and publisher of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, inventor . He is also published regularly on the Huffingtonpost.com. He is a frequent Speaker on Politics, Impeachment, The art, science and power of story, heroes and the hero's journey, Positive Psychology, Stress, Biofeedback and a wide range of subjects. He is a campaign consultant specializing in tapping the power of stories for issue positioning, stump speeches and debates. He recently retired as organizer of several conferences, including StoryCon, the Summit Meeting on the Art, Science and Application of Story and The Winter Brain Meeting on neurofeedback, biofeedback, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology. See more of his articles here and, older ones, here.
The framed magazine cover, with the word "IDEAS" spelled out in lightbulbs, is based on an article Rob wrote for Writers Digest, telling the magazine's quarter million readers how to come up with and pitch article ideas.
To learn more about me and OpEdNews.com, check out this article.
and there are Rob's quotes, here.
To Watch me on youtube, having a lively conversation with John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary committee, click here Now, wouldn't you like to see me on the political news shows, representing progressives. If so, tell your favorite shows to bring me on and refer them to this youtube video
My radio show, The Rob Kall Show, runs 9-10 PM EST Wednesday evenings, on AM 1360, WNJC and is archived on www.whiterosesociety.org Or listen to it streaming, live at either www.wnjc1360.com or here.
Or check the archived interviews at:
whiterosesociety.org
A few declarations.
-While I'm registered as a Democrat, I consider myself to be a dynamic critic of the Democratic party, just as, well, not quite as much, but almost as much as I am a critic of republicans.
-My articles express my personal opinion, not the opinion of this website.
It look to me like Clinton, OBama and McCain are all ruling-elite stooges when it comes to "free trade." No one mentions asking the people whether they want this regime which is destroying the USA and First world. and
making us abjectly dependent on a totalitarian capitalist society. The worst of worlds is emerging as a result - i.e., global oligarchy, global oligopoly, and the demise of the dollar.
Kent Welton,
OligarchyUSA.com
by
Kent Welton (49 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 37 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 12:37:24 PM
First off, you like living like this Rob? Bless you.
Freaking amazing. Nothing surprises anymore. IMHO, it has been decided that the US, Canada and Mexico shall be joined. What better way than to speak and begin the dialogue as if there is a social and political connection between the three.
On Feb 14th, an agreement was signed to allow Canadian and U.S troops to be allowed into each others country in case of "civil emergency". Harper was silent on the signing agreement. (see below)
SPP meetings, complete with 25 mile radius military protection of the attendees, video reports of Canadian military infiltrators into the protestors of the 'talks' ranks are available on youtube. (see below)
This is all so telling not in the effect it has or hasn't on Obama or Hillary or the nonsense that passes for 'spin'. No, what is telling is that the conversation is being made now to define the interwoven nature of our countries by ignoring the soverignty of each country. Again, It is not about anything more that bringing the '3' one step closer by speaking in tongues.
Start your engines and welcome to the NAU 500.
peace
by
mikel paul (5 articles, 1 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 310 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:10:54 PM
I don't know why people get so exercised by the idea of a North American union. The desire to annex Canada was a major reason for the War of 1812. Then we took half of Mexico in 1848. Now we just want to finish the job.
by
Gregg Gordon (25 articles, 45 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 186 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 12:00:08 AM
I am not against any cooperation between countries. I do not fear communication, nor the varied positives that can be attained through trade and sharing of resoruces and knowledge. What I do find reprehensible is the collusion to make agreements below the radar without congressional oversight, meetings that are first denied, then admitted to, for-show press meetings that answer straw men issues.
With this latest signed agreement sharing our military forces in such ambiguous and worrisome terms, I am very concerned that it is not as you humorously suggest just a continued land grabbing expedition for the U.S., but truly another puzzle piece of the movement towards an end to our soverign Constitution as well as Canadas and Mexicos. The fact that it is being spoken of and agreements are being made without constitutional and congressional oversight, not to mention that we the people are for the most part utterly left out, is appalling to me.
I welcome your thoughts as I know a closed book is not my goal. I would love to hear your views on my over sensitivity on this.
I have watched the forming of the EU and the beginning of the APU. Much of what is happening looks to be against the will of many of the peoples of these affected countries. 7 times the E.U. has been voted down by vote. It still happened. It is a bit unnerving that the will of the folks in Europe was and is not being followed. In there somewhere is my doubt this is above board.
peace
by
mikel paul (5 articles, 1 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 310 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 11:15:17 AM
No good neighbour interferes in the elections or primaries of another party. It just isn't done. Yes America seems to have been remiss in this respect in the past (Venezuela, Panama, Chile, etc.etc.) but two or more wrongs do not make a right. Canada's government has no business commenting or arranging the outing of confidential information (true or not) relating in any way to the U.S. primaries and Mr. Harper and his right wing enablers should be roundly chastised for doing so.
by
Archie (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 854 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:24:47 PM
And how did Mr. Harper get elected in the first place?
Surely Bush/Cheney & Co help to elect their allies. Absolutely. Deibold and ES&S are in wide play in Canada, especially in metropolitan areas and they certify their machines following US certification standards (which means there are no standards or protections for voters JUST LIKE HERE).
Harper is a neo-con through and through. He probably has Rove on voice dial.
"Karl!"
by
Kathlyn Stone (33 articles, 204 quicklinks, 19 diaries, 557 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 3:39:18 PM
So does Obama really represent any meaningful change? The buzz words are progressive - but the devil will be in the details.
We vote once every 4 years with a two year "change is in the air" campaign, then let's see who gets taken and who gets the free ride.
And while the "change is in the air" campaign distracts the sleeping giant into thinking if we only wait until the next President... meanwhile the evil doers in power continue to accelerate the trashing of our country while the stooges in Congress and the Senate - do absolutely nothing.
Change? Please.
by
August Adams (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 389 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:33:44 PM
Any Canadian citizen who shows even a passing interest...
in developments to the south of their border should come to understand that the deteriorating economy, degraded liberty and regressive social contract here in the U.S. is a pattern for what will eventually befall them in turn. Unless they really like what they see, I'm sure they will cast their votes to head it off.
They should just be careful not to cast them on Diebold, ESS or Sequoia Systems.
by
John Sanchez Jr. (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 905 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:37:08 PM
Very incite full piece of investigative reporting Rob. From the position of a Canadian patriot and friend of the American people, there is no question that we need a renegotiated trade agreement that is people centered rather than corporate centered. NAFTA was a corporate driven deal and has proved to be the foundation for the coming Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) agreement.The SPP is a Corporate bill of rights that will supersede the constitutions (or what is left of them) and any human rights and social legislation of both -- make that all three as we must include Mexico, our good neighbour to the south -- of our countries. It is curious to me that this coming deal is being opposed in the US by the right from it’s sovereignty restricting issues when it make the multinational corporation the sovereign entity which is a benefit to the power elite. It should be opposed and vociferously by the left for its production of economic slavery for the American people to the corporation.Of coarse all this may be mute as I believe that as long as you folks have an unaccountable and unverifiable electronic voting system, it is unlikely that a president will be chosen that is not bought and paid for by the corporate masters.
by
John Hill (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:44:23 PM
Although Barack Obama's primary economic advisor, Austan Goolsbee, disputes the interpretation of his meeting with Joseph DeMora (an employee of the Canadian consulate in Chicago) and Georges Rioux (the Canadian consul general in Chicago), the memorandum written by Mr. DeMora about this meeting and which was based on notes taken by Mr. DeMora, indicates that Mr. Goolsbee was trying to soft-pedal any anti-NAFTA statements made by Mr. Obama as campaign rhetoric. Despite the media hype, this development is not surprising because both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have tried to be on both sides of the NAFTA debate, but it is disappointing to watch Mr. Obama behaving somewhat like a typical politician in the tradition of Ms. Clinton. I oppose the "free trade" agreements made by the United States because these trade agreements have been structured in a manner that is primarily beneficial to corporations (especially multinational corporations) and international investors, and these trade agreements have been detrimental to the interests of most workers (particularly in the United States). Nevertheless, this morning I voted for Barack Obama in the Vermont Presidential Primary, and I expect Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee for President, and I plan to vote for Barack Obama in November, and I expect Barack Obama will become President on January 20, 2009. When I voted for Barack Obama, I did so with my eyes open because I do not think Barack Obama has any intention of pursuing substantive changes to NAFTA.
by
Blaine Kinsey (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 2:59:01 PM
Quoting form Jack Layton to support your case, you will be laughed out of your office straight into the lunatic asylum in Canada!
Jack Layton is a ultra socialist knee-jerk anti-American bigot who supports the Taliban conquest of the Canadian army fighting there. In Canada, even left-wing newspapers call him Taliban-Jack. He is further left than Dick Cheney is to the far right. He is a well-known loud-month brain-challenged joke in Canadian politics, head of the NDP party who has only a few seats in Parliament. He makes his living yelling at everybody in Question Period because nobody pay attention to him. Above all, he is 99.5% anti-American - he even hates Ralph Nader, which his own press secretary finds strange.
Do me a favor. Don't ever quote Jack Layton again and save your reputation.
by
TomK (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 202 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 3:52:36 PM
would call Jack Layton an "ultra socialist knee-jerk anti-American bigot." He's not even socialist-lite. He's about point-oh-five degrees left of centre. And he's not anti-American; he's anti-Anschluss.
by
delia (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 111 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 5:36:08 PM
The real thrust of this tale was that someone from the Obama camp assured Canadian officials that the candidate had no intention of altering the NAFTA agreement. Now it seems Rob is implying, not that Obama may have said one thing to the American public and another to the representative of the Canadian government, but that, somehow, th ereal villian is a right wing Canadian leader who is attempting to influence the election.
On the face of things I could infer that Rob himself is attempting something rather similar.....If indeed a member of the Obama camp spoke as is reported, and did so in his candidate's name then the facts seem clear enough, Obama lied, again.........Tim, Tim Gatto, where are you guy, you have received yet another vindication.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 5:50:26 PM
Real simple. US right wing prefers to run against Hillary. They get right wing friends in Canada to write a memo then leak it- one that makes the candidate they prefer less to look bad.
Ardee, are you a Neocon? Do you WANT to see another right winger in the whitehouse. Is that what you're about?
Me, I don't like right wingers in the US or in Canada. That's consistency.
by
Rob Kall (728 articles, 3775 quicklinks, 311 diaries, 1522 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 10:10:10 PM
but not from you Kall! You have got a great deal of nerve and no aptitude at all for propaganda. In two days you shifted the thrust of this story from an Obama aide assuring Canada that Senator Obama was committed to NAFTA and globalism to a plot by right wing Canadians to throw the election to Senator Clinton. Thats really a stretch and a descent into falsehoods that wont pass muster.
For Tony Wade. When you get your head out of your rectum and your ego off the ceiling you might then be fit to speak with the adults. But certainly not until then.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 6:48:36 AM
Right after Obama (& Hillary) said they will opt out of NAFTA unless re-negotiated, Obama chief economic advisor Goolsby (a Harvard professor) asked for a meeting with Cdn officials in the Chicago embassy, which he got. Cdn officials listened as Goolsby directly reverses Obama's NAFTA position, saying it is all politics. When Cdn federal politicians were forced to discuss the extraordinary Obama/Clinton NAFTA statements in Parliament, the Chicago embassy officials forwarded the Goolsby conversation back to Ottawa, which became public. That's it for the Canadian side - they were dragged into this, first by Obama statement (without prior consultations with NAFTA partners), then by his chief economic advisor's action. If Goolsby did this without Obama's knowledge, Obama should say so and remove him. He did not. But If Goolsby went under Obama's direction, the Obama is a lier and a sneeky political operator. Either way, Obama credibility must suffer - due entirely of his own making.
by
TomK (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 202 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 10:41:56 PM
The Canadian embassy in Chicago initiated the meeting. A canadian who took the notes clearly misinterpreted Ghoolsby's remarks (to cast it in the best light), the notes went to the embassy in Washington, D.C., and from there to Ottawa where they were leaked.
by
John Sanchez Jr. (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 905 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 10:55:55 PM
Its nice to see that some politicians are held accountable
Its nice to see an open forum where politicians can be held accountable for their actions and are forced to respond openly about them, as well as politicians with the spine to call those actions out.
by
Ben Kall (0 articles, 6 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 20 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 12:55:50 AM
I submit this information as someone who hopes and expects that Barack Obama will become our next President, but I also think Mr. Obama's record as a U.S. Senator has been much less progressive than his campaign rhetoric. The economic advisor to Barack Obama who is at the center of this controversy is Austan Goolsbee (I also misspelled his name two days ago), and he is a professor at the University of Chicago (not Harvard Univ.), but his political views are more progressive than those of the deceased University of Chicago icon, Milton Friedman. The Canadian embassy in Washington indicated that Canadian consular officials in Chicago initiated the contact with Mr. Goolsbee, but it is disingenuous of Obama campaign spokesman, Bill Burton, to state that Mr. Goolsbee's attendance at the meeting was unrelated to Mr. Goolbee's status as Mr. Obama's primary economic advisor. Although Mr. Goolsbee disputes the interpretation of his meeting with Joseph DeMora (an employee of the Canadian consulate in Chicago) and Georges Rioux (the Canadian consul general in Chicago), the memorandum written by Mr. DeMora about this meeting and which was based on notes taken by Mr. DeMora, clearly indicates that Mr. Goolsbee was trying to soft-pedal any anti-NAFTA statements made by Mr. Obama as campaign rhetoric. Despite the media hype, this development is not surprising because both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have tried to be on both sides of the NAFTA debate, but it is disappointing to watch Mr. Obama behaving somewhat like a typical politician in the tradition of Ms. Clinton. Neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton has any intention of pursuing substantive changes in our disastrous trade policies.
Economists prefer to characterize us critics of "free trade" as uneducated rubes, but such ad hominem attacks mask a deficit in the empirical data of the "free trade" advocates. Many of the reasons why I oppose our so-called "free trade" agreements are outlined in a commentary ("FREE TRADE AND THAT GIANT SUCKING SOUND") that OpEdNews printed for me on Feb. 13, 2008 (the typographical errors were my fault).
by
Blaine Kinsey (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 10:46:13 AM
