Remember that Obama voted to EXPAND NAFTA

[Clinton Crusader]

For those who use NAFTA as a tool to screech and oppose Hillary Clinton's candidacy because of President Clinton's support for NAFTA, you need to know that Barack Obama -- when he had the chance to vote against NAFTA -- voted, instead, to EXPAND NAFTA.

"Obama Says He Will Vote for NAFTA Expansion" at: http://tinyurl.com/29rovu

Obama is the first presidential candidate to officially declare his/her support for the NAFTA expansion moving through the Congress. His announcement is not necessarily surprising, considering he was the keynote speaker at the launch of the Hamilton Project -- a Wall Street front group working to DRIVE A WEDGE between Democrats and organized LABOR on globalization issues. His announcement comes just days after a Wall Street Journal poll found strong bipartisan opposition to lobbyist-written NAFTA-style trade policies. Clinton and Obama vote for Peru NAFTA
deal at: http://tinyurl.com/2qn59q

Vote for Barack Obama if you want to, but please do it with your eyes open and with the knowledge that Rupert Murdoch -- possibly the worst corporate media CEO around -- has endorsed Obama and is using all the resources of his media empire to help Obama and destroy Hillary Clinton (one has to wonder what Rupert Murdoch hopes to gain from an Obama presidency and fears from a Clinton presidency). And bear in mind that Obama chose as his senate "mentor" the loathsome Joe Lieberman, whose gleefulness in voting with the Republicans and against the Democrats
made Lieberman (at the time Obama chose him as his mentor) one of the most despised Democrats in the senate.

So, to sum up: When Barack Obama had the chance to vote against NAFTA, he voted, instead, to expand NAFTA.

And, Obama voted FOR the Oman Free Trade Agreement. (H.R. 3045, 7/28/05; S. 3569, 6/29/06).
OBAMA: "I believe that expanding trade and breaking down barriers between countries is good for our economy and for our security, for American consumers and American workers." http://www.aflcio.org/issues/politics/issues_trade.cfm

Public Citizen - Common Dreams
Dec. 4, 2007

WASHINGTON - December 4 - Although not one U.S. labor, environmental, Latino, consumer, faith or family farm group supported the Peru free trade agreement (FTA), a majority of Senate Democrats today broke with their base, dismissed widespread public opposition to more-of-the-same trade policy and joined Republicans to deliver another Bush NAFTA expansion to the large corporations pushing this deal.

The debate in the Senate contrasts with that in the House of Representatives last month. There was little focus on the Peru NAFTA expansion deal in the Senate, but in the House an intense, multi-month debate resulted in a majority of House Democrats, including 12 of 18 House committee chairs, voting against the Peru pact and signaling that it is not an acceptable model for future trade agreements. The breakdown of this vote vividly demonstrates two phenomena: the distance between most senators and the American public on trade issues, and the depth of the American public's negative opinion about NAFTA-style trade deals. All but two of nine Democratic freshmen senators who recently campaigned extensively in their states opposed the Peru NAFTA expansion today. Most of the Democratic presidential candidates oppose it, including Sens. Joseph Biden of Delaware and Chris Dodd of Connecticut.

In contrast to most of the Democratic presidential candidates who oppose the Peru NAFTA expansion, Sens. Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois support it. Clinton and Obama's support for the Peru FTA – after BOTH opposed the 2005 Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), which contained identical provisions and now campaign against NAFTA in Iowa, should make voters wonder just what sort of trade policy Clinton and Obama really support. None of the senators running for president voted today, although all four have issued public statements taking positions on the Peru pact. Read the rest at: http://www.commondreams.org/news2007/1204-20.htm

[UALRBSofL]

1. Thanks for reminding me and posting

I'll save it for future reference. :)

[Benhurst]

2. Shhh! Details like this only take away our

Hope.

It's not what you stand for, it's what you project that counts.

Reality sucks.

[Orwellian_Ghost]

3. Yes you are right

He also has a career built by PAC's and lobbyists but these facts are of no importance to the true believers.

No matter how much factual information one posts it will be ignored or diverted.

Very odd thing we are experiencing. Perhaps people are so damaged from the Bush years that feel-good slogans will suffice.

And yet here we are on a political board where by and large much political information is cast aside.

I wonder sometimes who are the true cynics.

K&R

[UALRBSofL]

4. Hey Orwellian, I enjoyed reading your posts last night

They were very insightful, factual, and gave me good insight into Obama the politician. Again, thanks for the posts. :)

[Sarah Ibarruri]

5. Did anyone else vote for it? ? Did Kucinich? Did Edwards? We need to know this

I'm guessing Hillary was for it. After all, she was married to Clinton and he was the one that completed the promotion of NAFTA.

[Zynx]

6. I'm going to speak heresy here, but I'm generally in favor of most free trade

agreements with South America. Certain measures to ensure labor and environmental protections should be taken of course, but generally I am fully in favor of removing trade barriers. Protectionism is a vile thing for the most part. There are only select circumstances where it is warranted.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

7. Obama is a HYPOCRITE and a liar

[rodeodance]

20. Must Read: Newspaper Cited in Obama's OHIO NAFTA Mailer Calls it “Misleading” FWI

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=5994

2/15/2008
Must Read: Newspaper Cited in Obama's OHIO NAFTA Mailer Calls it “Misleading”

From Newsday:

"Obama's use of the citation in this way does strike us as misleading...It's an example of the kind of slim reeds campaigns use to try to win an office."

To see Senator Obama’s "misleading" mailer: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/The_boon_quote.html

Below is the full text of today's Newsday story:

http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/blog/2008/02/_the_democratic_campaign_has.html

NAFTA: Us, Hillary and the "Boon"

The Democratic campaign has moved in earnest to Ohio, where times are tough and NAFTA has become a dirty word. In an effort to score points, Barack Obama has been dropping a mail-piece (left) that repeats a charge he has made several other times during the campaign -- that "Hillary Clinton believed NAFTA was 'a boon' to the economy."

This attack has attracted a flurry of attention, from Clinton's campaign and some reporters. As it turns out, the primary source is us. Back in Sept. 2006, an abbreviated chart printed on Newsday's Spin Cycle page compared Hillary with her Democratic US Senate primary challenger Jonathan Tasini on a variety of issues. The issues chart included this:

[ElsewheresDaughter]

8. Vote for Barack Obama if you want to, but please do it with your eyes open MURDOCH ENDORSE OBAMA

[ananda]

9. NAFTA and..

.. all the free trade agreements are pure evil.

Just evil.

[Cameron27]

10. K&R

[Lisa0825]

11. Fact Check:

http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/11/19/fact_check_obama_never_said_we.php

Fact Check: Obama Never Said We Should Support Trade Deals Like NAFTA
November 19, 2007

Today's New York Times quotes a Clinton spokesperson pointing to a 2004 story claiming Obama had been in favor of NAFTA-like trade agreements. In fact, Obama has consistently opposed NAFTA-like trade deals and the 2004 the report that the Clinton campaign cites is inaccurate.

2004 Chicago Tribune Cited Its Difference With Obama's Opposition to NAFTA. The Chicago Tribune wrote in an editorial, "We sharply differ with some of those views, particularly Obama's opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement."

New Yorker: Obama Opposed NAFTA. The New Yorker wrote, "This is a regular theme with Obama: supporters who disagree with him. The two big Chicago daily papers both endorsed him enthusiastically in the primary, even though they disagreed with him on major issues-his opposition to the war in Iraq and, in the case of the Tribune, his opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement."

Obama Said NAFTA And CAFTA Were Not In The Best Interest Of The American Worker "Because They Did Not Contain The Sorts Of Labor Provisions And Environmental Provisions" That They Should Have. "The AP reported, "Obama said he supports the foreign trade deal, which is especially important to labor and U.S. manufacturers. He said active trading is a key way to keep the United States competitive. 'We're not going to draw a moat around the United States' economy. If we do that, then China is still trading, India is still going to be trading,' said Obama, who voted against the recent Central American Free Trade Agreement and opposes the pending trade deal with South Korea. 'I think that NAFTA and CAFTA did not reflect the interests of American workers but reflected the interests of the stock owners on Wall Street, because they did not contain the sorts of labor provisions and environmental provisions that should have been embedded and should have been enforceable in those agreements,' he said."




Obama Said He Supported "Restructuring NAFTA." "Do you support rolling back NAFTA or GATT?" Obama said, "I would support restructuring NAFTA and GATT to make sure that environmental protections, labor protections and so on are in place. And I also think that we've got to enforce some of these provisions more aggressively, the same way other countries are doing. I use the example of China. If China is devaluing its currency by 40 percent and we are not challenging them on that, then there's not much point of having China in the WTO, if they're not respecting our trademarks and our copyright laws. If we have countries that continue to present barriers to us - non-tariff barriers - to our products getting to market, then those are all issues that I think we've got to challenge these countries on. And that's the responsibility of the Administration. The problem in a lot of our trade agreements is that the Administration tends to negotiate on behalf of multinational companies instead of on behalf of workers and communities. If we had a shift in orientation in terms of who are we negotiating for, then I think you'd see some different outcomes."

[ElsewheresDaughter]

13. hahaha like the link..... BarackObama.com

[Iceburg]

25. ooo that's gotta hurt ... I'm for it... no wait--against it. Definitely for it, I mean against it./n

[cooolandrew]

12. Michelle Obama "can barack change his miind yes I help change it every day"

[rodeodance]

22. so if he gts in it will be the NEW 2:1

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

14. S 3569 Roll Call

Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---60


Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Roberts (R-KS)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

NAYs ---34
Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Coburn (R-OK)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dole (R-NC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Snowe (R-ME)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 6
Boxer (D-CA)
Chafee (R-RI)
Gregg (R-NH)
Leahy (D-VT)
Murray (D-WA)
Stabenow (D-MI

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00190

[Freddie Stubbs]

15. Just because you call something a NAFTA Expansion does not make it such

This is a separate trade agreement with Peru completely unrelated to NAFTA.

[rodeodance]

21. take it up with the authors of the article.

[Iris]

16. How DARE you bring that up!

:sarcasm:

[rodeodance]

17. Must Read: Newspaper Cited in Obama's OHIO NAFTA Mailer Calls it “Misleading”

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=5994

2/15/2008
Must Read: Newspaper Cited in Obama's OHIO NAFTA Mailer Calls it “Misleading”

From Newsday:

"Obama's use of the citation in this way does strike us as misleading...It's an example of the kind of slim reeds campaigns use to try to win an office."

To see Senator Obama’s "misleading" mailer: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/The_boon_quote.html

Below is the full text of today's Newsday story:

http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/blog/2008/02/_the_democratic_campaign_has.html

NAFTA: Us, Hillary and the "Boon"

The Democratic campaign has moved in earnest to Ohio, where times are tough and NAFTA has become a dirty word. In an effort to score points, Barack Obama has been dropping a mail-piece (left) that repeats a charge he has made several other times during the campaign -- that "Hillary Clinton believed NAFTA was 'a boon' to the economy."

This attack has attracted a flurry of attention, from Clinton's campaign and some reporters. As it turns out, the primary source is us. Back in Sept. 2006, an abbreviated chart printed on Newsday's Spin Cycle page compared Hillary with her Democratic US Senate primary challenger Jonathan Tasini on a variety of issues. The issues chart included this:

[rodeodance]

18. REC

[rodeodance]

19. That is a lovely photo of Hillary (off issue)---but very nice

[dcindian]

23. You bunch of anti union clintonist should read the bill.

Earlier this year, the Government of Oman made several commitments to the United States to enact additional labor law reforms by October 31, 2006. On July 9, 2006, Oman issued a Royal Decree covering many of the commitments it made. According to the Government of Oman, this decree cancels or supersedes all provisions of the labor law that contravene or contradict its provisions. Among these important reforms was changing the terms of reference for workers’ organizations to “unions” (formerly “representative committee’) and “federations” (formerly “main representative committee.”) Specifically, the decree:
• Directs the Minister of Labor to issue regulations to allow for collective bargaining
• Prohibits dismissal of workers for union activity
• Amends the law to allow for more than one union per workplace
• Prohibits dismissal for union activity and established tougher penalties for employers who engage in anti- union activity
• Guarantees right to strike
• Guarantees unions and federations the rights to practice their activities freely and without interference from outside parties
• Prohibits dismissal for union activity and establishes penalties, including fines and imprisonment for depriving workers of their rights to carry out lawful union activities
• Raises penalties for child labor violations, including fines and imprisonment
Although the Government of Oman had committed to implement these changes by October 31, Oman has instead taken an extraordinary step by doing so almost four months early and clearly demonstrated that it takes labor law reforms seriously. Oman is preparing further regulations to address the remaining issues and is committed to adopting those Decisions by October 31.

[ProSense]

24. You keep posting this misleading information. The Peru agreement is not the Clintons' NAFTA

Here is information about the bill.

Obama never said he was against trade. NAFTA was a horrible bill, which Bill Clinton signed into law and Hillary has defended.

[ProgressIn2008]

26. His website says he does not want to repeal NAFTA, he wants to "amend" it

We'll see how that goes. It's a bullet point on the Economy page, but doesn't seem to be in the PDF at the bottom.

Obama's Wall Street money is the kind of thing that makes me wonder how those "amendments" will work.