What if the Right Wing Appointees of the Right Wing Canadian Leadership are Lying About Obama
The talk today is that a memo was sent from a chicago-based canadian embassy that an Obama person delivered a message to the Canadians that he didn't mean what he said about NAFTA.
Canada's prime minister is a right wingnut just like Bush. He appoints right wingnuts like Gonzales, Rove, Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld. Should we wonder that some right wing appointee decided upon himself, or even got the word from higher up, to help out the republicans, by attacking the guy they would rather not run against?
We can expect Osama Bin Laden to support Obama too, if he doesn't want him. Then the dummies who stenographically report the "news" will tell the nation that Osama loves Obama and that means Obama is bad.
And the dumbies who eat up their pap will sop it up.
There's no reason to trust or believe the liars who've been appointed by Bush. None. And I don't see any reason to believe appointees of Bush's right wing allies in other nations either.
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.
to trust or believe the Democrats who have betrayed our trust and left the repugs in power by not impeaching them? And funded the war? And passed all the legislation that gutted our constitution?
Those that know the three candidates are globalist puppets yet continue to act as if one of them were not remind me of a 12 year old trying to cling to his belief in santa claus. The black santa claus is a myth. Get over it already.
by
john riggs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 353 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 2:22:12 PM
better to lose with a winner than win with a loser. We as a people have ALL lost this election to the globalist owned media and Diebold TM. Now we get to find out who will be a good loser. Lesser of two evils or lesser of three evils, it doesnt make much difference now. As we near world depression and world famine it makes more sense to me to focus on our survival of total globalist domination of every facet of our lives. After the almost sure loss of the second ammendment with either of the dimo candidates resistance will be more difficult. Some will take the mark willingly, others will go down kicking and screaming. Acceptance of the scam tends to lend credibility to it. Go with the herd or choose your path.
by
john riggs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 353 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 4:25:51 PM
JOHN YOU GOT IT RIGHT TO A TEE, THIS IS WHERE WE ARE HEADING AND MOST PEOPLE JUST DON'T KNOW, AND ARE NOT PREPARED, I FOR ONE ARE GETTING READY FOR THE WORST, AND IF IT DON'T HAPPEN FIND, BUT TO ME THE WRITING IN ON THE WALL, BUT WHAT WILL IT TAKE FOR PEOPLE TO REALIZE THAT HISTORY IS ABOUT TO REPEAT ITS SELF. THESE NEOCONS ARE USING HITLER'S PLAY BOOK, AND THERE IS NO OUTRAGE. DAM THAT FLUORIDE.
by
RICHARD SHADE (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 460 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 4:56:20 PM
Although I plan to vote for Barack Obama, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have engaged in deceptive campaigning regarding NAFTA, and I think it is plausible that Barack Obama had his primary economic advisor (prominent free-trade advocate Austin Goolsbee) indicate to the Canadian Government that the anti-NAFTA statements were just campaign rhetoric.
I will repeat that I plan to vote for Barack Obama, and I hope (there is that word again) that he becomes President, but I expect Barack Obama will then find a way to equivocate on any promises he made about reforming NAFTA and our disastrous trade policies in general.
by
Blaine Kinsey (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 4:02:28 PM
I have not heard or read of this anywhere else, Rob, and you provide no link or other details which might enable me to judge the veracity or worth of the gossip.
What I would choose to comment upon is your rather easy dismissal of such an act by the Obama camp, pushing it off immediately as a poltical ploy to discredit Senator Obama. Why on earth this might be the case, coming as it is supposed to from a Canadian source, one which would have no bone to pick with either candidate in the race. You suggest a rater convoluted logic at best; that because the Canadian politico is right wing and George Bush is right wing there must perforce be some link or affinity that would give them both a role in a story like this.... Sorry but I fail to get it, Rob.
I have heard enough falsifications and plays on logic from both of the candidates to make such an act a possibility......But why even open this can of worms without more information?
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 5:38:58 PM
Last evening I finally got some info on this, from the Keith Olbermann show. He played clips of Obama's denials of this and I must say that his speech was not up to his usual standards of eloquence. I found his noting that the aide in question was "summoned" to the meeting and sandbagged by it to be less than credible. While I still do not know whether there is any truth to the rumor I share Mr. Olbermann's raised eyebrow....
As to those shallow political thinkers who believe this the work of the Clintons I say Bah! To those who believe that her campaign is taking advantage of this news I say, so what would you expect them to do?
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 6:56:20 AM
Yeah, they're doing what I'd expect them to also. But you have to wonder how instrumental Clinton's campaign has been in pushing this to the forefront... She's desperate and, need I say it? Hypocritical. Legal action in Nevada and the possibilty of it in Texas speaks volumes about her double standards. Bah, indeed!
To my knowledge, it's just been in the last couple of weeks that she's taken her grand stance against NAFTA! How long has she been a senator?
by
C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 571 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 9:12:24 AM
This tripe had to be generated either by the far right due to their preference for Hillary or the near right because she believes in her own divine right to rule the United States (as far as she knows).
When asked about reports of the incident by members of the press, the Canadian government denied that any such thing had occurred. Further, the Ottawa government's official response to the Democratic debating points regarding NAFTA was to threaten the favored status of the United States regarding crude oil exports, suggesting that China would be welcomed to gain access to that market.
That last certainly seems to be a rather aggressive communique to be issued by a government that had been delivered assurances that there was nothing to be concerned with.
When all of this is considered along with a main stream media push for Hillary, as exemplified by ABC, I get a feeling that something is up. The ABC's Evening News aired a Hillary puff piece followed by a piece doubting Obama's abilities, followed by coverage of the opening of the Rezko trial that consumed fully half of their broadcast.
I have an uncomfortable sense that the results of voting in Ohio and Texas tomorrow are going to be at odds with the polls going in and the results of exit polls.
by
John Sanchez Jr. (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 903 comments)
on Monday, March 3, 2008 at 6:23:37 PM
Since both Hillary and Obama want to re-negotiate NAFTA the Cdn government has no incentive to pick or interfere with either's campaign. In the Cdn parliament the prime minister have already stated in public response that if the US want to open NAFTA up for re-negotiation Canada has a few interesting questions and proposals on the table. I do not need to say that these things, massive oil and gas, electricity, other commodities, the auto industry, and the huge US imports to Canada, will make Hillary and Obama think twice about NAFTA via-a-via Canada. The fact is US has a substantial net benefits with Canada, while Canada can compensate for the loss of significant US trade advantage without NAFTA. The problem lies not with Canada but with Mexico, where US has suffered.
BTW calling the Harper gov 'right-wing' in the same sentence with Bush neocon is turly ignorant of Canada and its politics. US politics has gone so far to the deep right that Harper 'right-wing' is slightly left of the Democrats. Now when Obama sent a rep to the Cdn embassy to tell a different story, he creates his own problem.
by
TomK (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 202 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 12:57:31 AM
I didn't characterize the Canadian government either way.
I referred to the far right, meaning the executive branch of the United States government and its press allies; or the near right, meaning the Clinton campaign. This is where I see this story rising from as a part of the relentless character assassination that both are so devoted to.
However, although I don't follow Canadian politics very closely, it is my understanding that the Harper government is indeed conservative, or what we in the States might refer to as right wing. I see that as lending credibility to their claim that the incident is bogus.
But when one considers the additional facts that a memo was released to the press from Canadian state department files(an unprecedented happenstance), saying that the meeting with Obama's trade advisor took place suggests that there is indeed someone in the Canadian government who is allied to the character assassins. In fact the meeting was initiated by the Canadian Embassy in Chicago, and Obama's trade advisor simply reiterated Obama's campaign positions regarding NAFTA to those in attendance. So what do you think? Is there a person in the Canadian government that is taking sides in U.S. electoral politics?
by
John Sanchez Jr. (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 903 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 8:39:38 AM
Forgive me. I'm a little ignorant about either Hillary or Obama's opposition to NAFTA or any of the other free trade agreements during their stints as Senators... but I'll never forget that it was Hillary's husband, Bill, who hammered NAFTA home for us all -and I'll asume that Hillary wasn't just 'standing by her man' on that one, but really championed it as well! I can't say with any degree of certainty that Hillary or Obama has raised much of a stink about it before now -but I certainly don't think that they have!
Given that Clinton's campaign is paying some really over-the-top lip service to the scandalous rumor, and coupled with the desperate attempts to save her race for the nomination by possible lawsuits to change the Texas laws in regards to the primary and caucuses Tuesday (remember the whole Nevada thing?) -it would appear that she is willing to do just about anything to capture the nomination... Bill and Hillary are pretty sharp when it comes to their own Rovian skills, ya know. So, I wouldn't be so quick to point the finger in Bush's direction on this one! It reeks of a last ditch effort by Clinton to discredit Obama...
by
C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 571 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 3:13:42 AM
The delegates at Bilderberg 2007: Istanbul, Turkey May 31-June 3
Bilderberg refused to provide a complete list. Most names come courtesy of Danny Estulin, an independent journalist based in Spain, and the rest from personal observation by a team of reporters in Istanbul and from local newspapers.
Alogoskoufis, George - Minister of Economy and Finance - Greece;
Arzuhani, A. E. - Chairman of the Turkish Industrialists and BusinessmenÕs Association;
Babacan, Ali - Minister of Economic Affairs - Turkey;
Balls, Edward - Economic Secretary to the Treasury - UK;
Balsem‹o, Francisco Pinto - CEO, IMPRESA, S.G.P.S.; Former Prime Minister - Portugal;
Barnier, Michale - former Foreign Minister - France;
Barroso, Josˇ M. Dur‹o - President, European Commission - Portugal/International;
Bernabˇ, Franco - Vice Chariman, Rothschild Europe - Italy;
Beytout, Nicolas - Editor-in-Chief, Le Figaro - France;
Bildt, Carl - Former Prime Minister - Sweden;
Borg, Anders - Finance Minister - Sweden;
Burda, Hubert - Publisher and CEO, Hubert Burda Media Holding - Belgium;
Camus, Philippe - CEO, EADS - France;
Castries, Henri de - Chairman of the Management Board and CEO, AXA - France;
Cebrian, Juan Luis - Grupo PRISA media group - Spain;
Clark, Kenneth - Member of Parliament - UK;
Collins, Timothy C. - Senior Managing Director and CEO, Ripplewood Holdings, LLC - USA;
Collomb, Bertrand - Chairman, Lafarge - France;
David, George A. - Chairman, Coca-Cola H.B.C. S.A. - USA;
Dervis, Kemal - Administrator, UNDP - Turkey;
Eldrup, Anders - President, DONG A/S - Denmark;
Elkann, John - Vice Chairman, Fiat S.p.A - Italy;
Feldstein, Martin S. - President and CEO, National Bureau of Economic Research - USA;
Geithner, Timothy F. - President and CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of New York - USA;
Gigot, Paul A. - Editor of the Editorial Page, The Wall Street Journal - USA;
Gleeson, Dermot - Chairman, AIB Group - Ireland;
Graham, Donald E. - Chairman and CEO, The Washington Post Company - USA;
Halberstadt, Victor Ð Prof. of Economics, Leiden University; Netherlands;
Sutherland, Peter D. - Chairman, BP plc and Chairman, Goldman Sachs International - Ireland;
Tremonti, Giulio - Vice President of the Chamber of Deputies - Italy;
Trichet, Jean - Claude-Governor, European Central Bank - France/International;
Vinocur, John - Senior Correspondent, International Herald Tribune - USA;
Wallenberg, Jacob - Chairman, Investor AB - Sweden;
Wolf, Martin H. - Associate Editor and Economics Commentator, The Financial Times - UK;
Wilson, Ross - U.S. Ambassador - Turkey;
Wolfensohn, James D. - Special Envoy for the Gaza Disengagement - USA;
Wolfowitz, Paul - Outgoing Head of the World Bank Ð USA;
Wooldridge, Adrian D. - Foreign Correspondent, The Economist Ð UK;
Zoellick, Robert B. - Deputy Secretary of State - USA;
Zumwinkel, Klaus - Chairman of the Board of Management, Deutsche Post AG - USA;
Now all Obama would need to do to reassure his Canadian co-horts of his globalist allegiance is pick up the phone and call one of these traitors and ask them to spread the word. Unless of course if I am wrong about him and he is not a globalist puppet. If that were the case why has the globalist owned press put him in the front runners?
You will notice Rick Perry in the above list. This was his first visit to the secret meeting. Bill Clinton was also summoned to the meeting before he was elected, he then began to enforce the globes will in Eastern Europe and began the sanctions on Iraq, long before 911.
by
john riggs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 353 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 6:22:39 AM
The Globalist/Bilderburger crap is old hat. I can assure you that we all know those theories ad nauseum. Now, could we stick to the subject instead of taking it to the offshoot you're pushing?
No offense intended.
by
C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 571 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 6:47:46 AM
I just got back from the Texas primary election. There was only one party primary in Maverick county, dimo. Kucinich,Mckinney and Gravel were not on the ballot. In the congressman, fed judge, and other slots only one candidate was on the ballot. The caucus information was not posted as stated by election law. I know just how it must have felt to vote in totalitarian Russia. You guys wished for Hillery or Obama, looks like you will get your wish. Another old saying, be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
by
john riggs (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 353 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 11:26:53 AM
They were the absolute last on my list. Well, McKinney was grouped right beside them (I'm a resident of Atlanta and witnessed her so-called representation as a congresswoman firsthand, and let me tell you most of us in her district were overly tired of her non-accomplishments, playing of the race card in every conceivable scenario, her flamboyant behavior, general B.S., and obvious desire to become a career politician) -but I digress. I will say, however, that I've witnessed just as much of the same sort of thing you are talking about and that was also detailed in McKinney's documentary (you know the one about all the voting machines and scandals... the one that was really good until it became a sales pitch for her candidacy about midway). I favored Kucinich overall -but will have to settle for Obama as the only hope to stopping a definite continuation of Bush policy under either McCain or even Hillary. Admittedly, it's just another 'lesser of' choice now...
It, honestly, disgusts me. And I agree that the Dem. Congress is nearly the lousiest bunch of invertebrates I've ever seen! At least under the GOP's control, I expected to get shafted at every avenue...
by
C.Bid (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 571 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 5:21:40 PM
I believe that Obama is trying to straddle the fence. And that he was aware of the conversation, after all, he is a politician.
Why has the WTO agreement not been brought up? Clinton signed NAFTA in January of 1994 and the WTO agreement in January 1995, effectively gutting Middle America forever (and that's a long time). In contrast, the WTO is far more invasive and punitive than NAFTA.
by
Mike Folkerth (105 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 507 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 10:15:27 AM
And your point is? I don't remember Hillary Clinton signing any trade agreements then. And any number of people who are in a position to know have come forward and stated quite clearly that she was against it and lobbied her husband vociferously against it. He didn't listen to his wife. He did it anyway. So now she must take the blame for the thing? And I'm at a complete loss as to Rob's reasoning that the Canadian government has some ax to grind in this fight. In what way? Also, Obama's staff approached them, not the other way round. What was the purpose of getting in touch with the Canadian "right wing nut government"? Nobody has given a reason yet, except the Canadian government and their reason given is to allay any fears that the Obama's anti-NAFTA rhetoric might have aroused. Makes sense to me.
You "kool-aide" drinkers need to check out the Chicago Sun-Times collumnist Lynn Sweet collumn today, also the LA Times. I forget the name of the collumnist, maybe Boren?, both will give you the facts. I don't want to throw cold water on your Obama fever, but you need to know these facts before you vote. Attacking the message or messenger won't make the story more or less true. Facts are facts, wherever they come from.
by
bmobley (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 11:04:13 AM
Sorry. Just watched an Obama presser on CNN. He makes the point that they ( the Canadian Embassy in Chicago) contacted Goolsby, that the subject of NAFTA only came up in the course of the conversation. Which seems overly strange to me, but I'll take his word for that untill a credible source says otherwise. But I stand by my remarks regarding Clinton's stance, past and present, regarding NAFTA. In point of fact, as someone pointed out, they're stances are identical.
by
bmobley (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 11:43:14 AM
I wish the MSM would spend more time reporting on the Canadian government's apology, & other factual updates, rather than on the Clinton spin. As an Obama supporter, I fear that the "kitchen sink" approach is having an effect.
by
Amy Fried (37 articles, 48 quicklinks, 36 diaries, 160 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 12:35:58 PM
