if hillary steals the nomination my last glimmer of hope for the dems will be squashed. We NEED paper ballots, i don't trust DIEBOLD machines!

of course hillary supported NAFTA, she worked as a corpo shill for WARMART squelching any talk of WARMART employees unionizing. I won't touch her with a ten foot pole.

We do have paper ballots. Vote early. Absentee voting.

Harper's posturing brings to mind the statement: "The jury will disregard the testimony".

Right. Harper got what he wanted in Ohio.

kathyodat

Kathyodat, sounds like you understand how Harper operates.

Harper may have gotten what he wanted in Ohio, but lets be sure he doesn't get what he wants in New Orleans in April.

Just looked over the transcript of yesterday's Question Period (the easy way with the edit/find function) and Emerson, who is the Minister of Foreign Affairs, still isn't taking question (his Parliamentary Secretary Deepak Obhrai is). Usually when the Minister gets his/her underling to take questions for them, something underhanded is going on.

There are things that Emerson either knows (or should know) that he doesn't want to be on record answering questions on:

Thursday, March 6, 2008

Mr. Thomas Mulcair (Outremont, NDP): Mr. Speaker, Ian Brodie, the Prime Minister's chief of staff, is behind the NAFTA affair.

The questions are simple. Who was the anonymous source who fed CTV the story involving Senator Obama? Who was the source of the diplomatic memo illegally leaked to the Associated Press?

Can the Prime Minister assure us that these people will be relieved of their duties? They are not worthy of holding positions of public trust.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC): Mr. Speaker, as the Prime Minister has said, this kind of leak of information is a very serious matter and is very unfair against the Obama campaign.

As the Prime Minister has indicated in the House, the Clerk of the Privy Council has started the investigation with the Department of Foreign Affairs. As soon as the investigation is done and, upon legal advice, whatever action is needed to be taken this government will take the action.

Mr. Thomas Mulcair (Outremont, NDP): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister will not need to pull off a CSI-style investigation.

Associated Press received a Canadian diplomatic cable that was classified secret. He should start by reviewing the call logs in his own office and tell this House who the Associated Press spoke to when it called that office. That is simple.

What is not so simple is for the Prime Minister to do the right thing. Will the Prime Minister fire Ian Brodie because he cannot be trusted by Canadians?

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/housechamberbusiness/chambersittings.aspx?View=H&Parl=39&Ses=2&Language=E&Mode=1

I don't understand this! Since when is it a crime to reveal the hypocracy of our lying politicians?

Thank-you Canada. Thank-you Canada. Thank-you Canada.

USAn, you don't understand? This was a coup against Obama in Ohio. It was a deliberate distortion of his position. He specifically said in the Ohio debate he would amend NAFTA to make it more fair tp American workers or cancel NAFTA. He confronted Hillary to match that and she squirmed all over her seat and finally agreed she would too. Canada has not been a major problem with job losses, but Mexico has. More recently, even Mexican jobs (formerly US jobs) have been fleeing to Asia.

Harper is another neo-con, like Hillary, and inserted himself into the US primary process. His government has been as secretive as Bush's, and no one - NO ONE - is allowed to speak to the press without his express approval. So when his chief of staff "saunters over" for a chat with the press, it isn't someone going independent. Goolsbee didn't contact the Chicago Canadian consul, he was contacted. Who knows what was really said after Harper got his hands on the memo prior to the "leak". Harper's fingerprints are all over this story. Now do you understand?

What outrages me is how the US press is walking away from this story. You can tell who their masters want nominated.

kathyodat

"What outrages me is how the US press is walking away from this story. You can tell who their masters want nominated."

The ambassador to Canada, David wilkins, is telling canadians that a mistake was made, but no biggie, case closed. A republican, mind you.

Do we even know that what was leaked was what the media says it was? I mean, Obama says they misrepresented his position. If hes right he should take this further, and hold Clinton's feet to the fire for using false information as ammunition to win votes. This was a clear interference in the US elections, it seems that since 2000 theres been these series of vote rigging in US elections and now its just business as usual.

Now it emerges that it was the win-at-all-cost Clinton campaign that told Canadian officials not to sweat any changes in NAFTA; that it was just campaign talk.

Good on Jack Clayton & the NDP for flushing the truth out of Brodie!

Any talk of an Obama/Clinton ticket is absurd. Obama/? vs. McCain/Clinton is more logical.

Anybody see Jack Layton on the Lou Dobbs show the other day?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=N_MR7tL7tWs

Jack refers to a meeting between his trade critic Peter Julian and individuals in the American Congress and Mexican government. Has anyone heard of Congressperson Marcy Kaptur from Ohio? Sounds to me that she would make a good running mate:

"NAFTA has sucked good American jobs away, destroyed the Mexican countryside, deepened our immigration crisis, wiped out the Mexican and middle and small business classes, not brought about promised investments in infrastructure, and hammered communities across the continent. It's time for Mexico, Canada, and the United States to work together to change this flawed trade model", said Kaptur.

http://www.peterjulian.ca/page/595

Notice the difference in the quality of Canadian news reporting v the US. Though they initially got the story wrong, biting on the chief of staff's leak, they dogged it until they got it right.

(Hopefully, the Obama people will use this to their advantage). How about, "do you really want Hillary to pick up the phone and make a snap judegemnt without getting the facts right?"

Meanwhile US "news" organizations continue to pump out the line that Obama is two-faced on the issue and continue the bald-faced lie that Hillary (quietly) opposed NAFTA before the current primary.

The CBC is primarily a publically-funded organization. Could that have anything to do with the ability to distinguish the difference between news and govt press "leaks?"

Whoa whoa whoa, either Obama or Clinton is better than McCain. But simply put we have three peas in a pod here. What counts is to whom each must answer. This is certainly not the public. Clinton to alot of the group McCain will toss in Obama for some of them too. But in the end it appears Obama will have fewer and or lesser powerful people to answer to. Having said that will he have the power to get stuff done then ? Maybe not, Clinton will. Just what stuff will get done is the question.

If Hillary steals this nomination through backroom shennanigans, it will confirm her reputation as divisive. Could it also pave the way to a viable Third Party candidacy by Obama, taking the movement he has inspired away from Dem.Corp. and breaking from the the tyranny of the "two party" system from which we have suffered for so long?

Two assumptions everyone is making:
First: That NAFTA will mean anything at all when the dollar is only worth the brown stuff we'll be using it for in a very short time, thanks to our Fed Reserve's policies and our consumption culture of producing very little usefulness.
Second: That politicians are anything other than entertainment while the shadowy businessmen and their flunkies decide who you will vote for.

Oh yeah, and anyone who thinks this affected the pre-programmed Diebold machines in Ohio, well, good luck with that 'economic stimulus package'.

Don't even get me started on the IranContra-Whitewater-Mena-Monica-BinLaden-Abramoff trail. You think WantMart is pulling strings on campaigns...Hah! They will be the ONLY store still in business when this stuff gets through (notice their sales are CLIMBING with the recession...). The Republicans had better think about nationalizing Bentonville if you want anything to eat in 2009, regardless of who Dick Cheney places in power.

vote nader

This whole story of allegations that both the Clinton and Obama campaigns privately sought to reassure Canada not to be spooked by the campaign reminds me of when I was in New Zealand in 1987. This was the era of the charismatic, witty Labor Party prime minister David Lange who had won election on a campaign promise (massively supported by the New Zealand public) to make New Zealand a nuclear free zone, i.e. enforce in New Zealand's harbors the same policy that New York City has in its harbor: no nukes. This meant no US ships could dock in NZ without affirming no nukes aboard, which went against US policy to neither confirm nor deny nukes on its ships. The US was livid over New Zealand's action, threatened economic sanctions against New Zealand for this affront, and sought to discredit the Lange government.

But there is a back story to this which isn't so well known, told to me by a Labor Party insider speaking with firsthand knowledge. This was: David Lange in the midst of his campaign pledging to carry out the NFZ (nuclear free zone) privately assured the US that after the election they would work something out. The US calmed down, trusting this private assurance. After the popular Lange was elected some Labor Party activists learned of this private assurance and made Lange adhere to his campaign promise. The NFZ was implemented. The US was furious at Lange (furious that the private promise of Lange to work something out was not done, due to Lange being forced by his party to keep his campaign promise). The US thereafter had it in for Lange, and it was personal--the wrath of having been double-crossed by the private assurance not being carried out. When Lange visited the US the White House snubbed him, would not let him meet with the president. There were suspected US dirty tricks to embarrass Lange. Lange and the Labor Party were voted out in a landslide. But New Zealand had gained the admiration of the world in being the world's first nation to publicly declare itself a nuclear free zone.

Only a decade earlier, in 1976, the US had intervened in Australia's government and brought about the downfall of the Australian government. I do not think Canada's Harper's top official's leak about the Obama adviser's discussion was accidental. At some level high in Republican or White House circles a decision (one suspects) has been made: Obama will not be allowed to take power. What will happen remains to be seen.

RE: - The CBC is primarily a publically-funded organization. Could that have anything to do with the ability to distinguish the difference between news and govt press "leaks?"

Sure, there is a grain of truth in that. Remember that it was the CBC who solved that Klan Murder case in Mississippi and whose documentary led to the conviction of James Ford Seale. But one also has to look into the events which immediately preceded NAFTA-gate (and I don't just mean the Agents Provocateurs in Montebello).

Ethics committee has very recently been dealing with the testimony of Karlheinz Schreiber who said that what was going on in Canada during the Mulroney-Reagan era is still going on now. Then, NAFTA-gate follows on the heals of the Cadman Affair* (which broke days before NAFTA-gate.

Finally, Harper is notorious for keeping a tight reign on his staff and MPs so the idea that there is a leak and Harper doesn't appear to be too upset about it is suspicious enough.

* Remember when Belinda Stronach made CNN's political play of the week for 2005 when she dumped her party (the Conservatives) and her boyfriend (Peter MacKay, Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party) at the same time. Belinda Stronach crossed the floor and became a Liberal the day before a Confidence vote which could have brought down the the Liberal government. However, Stronach's defection and vote would not be enough, by itself, to keep the Liberal government from falling. Cadman, an Independent, was dying of cancer (and died a few weeks after the vote) and Harper's bunch tried to bribe him a million dollars to vote to defeat the government. This detail just came out because of a book written about Cadman's life.

CNN Political Play of the week:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/20/canada/index.html?iref=newssearch
CADMAN - CTV
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080228/cadman_bribe_AM_080228/20080228?hub=TopStories
CADMAN - CBC
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/02/27/cadman-book.html

RE: - First: That NAFTA will mean anything at all when the dollar is only worth the brown stuff we'll be using it for in a very short time, thanks to our Fed Reserve's policies and our consumption culture of producing very little usefulness.

Not everyone loses in a recession - there are a lot of foreclosed businesses which can now be purchased at bargain basement prices. The corporations don't want the government to offer relief for workers or for families - they want it to be so that workers either starve or fight each other for the few low paying jobs available.

The SPP(ie NAFTA on steroids) is apt to make things ever worse for you because it puts even more power into the hands of corporations and ties the hands of government to help people during a crisis. There is going to be an SPP meeting in New Orleans in April. Where will the Protesters stay in New Orleans?

In the US, do the homeless vote?

RE: - After the popular Lange was elected some Labor Party activists learned of this private assurance and made Lange adhere to his campaign promise. The NFZ was implemented.

Which brings up an interesting point concerning Clinton and Obama - which voters have to make there mind up on. Which of these is most likely to be coerced into keeping their promises and which of these is more apt to weasel out of it and come up with some excuse about how they tried to open it up but couldn't. Obama risks being booed if he shows up in New Orleans during the SPP meeting, but it increases his credibility on the issue if he does. A person who shows up at an anti-NAFTA protest stands to lose more if they fail to renegotiate NAFTA than one who manages to avoid the protest altogether.

The only thing keeping the NDP out of New Orleans in April is a Federal election - and maybe not even that. David Suzuki used to show up to these things but he has bad Asthma and the pepper spray aggravates it too much.

RE: - There were suspected US dirty tricks to embarrass Lange. Lange and the Labor Party were voted out in a landslide.

I think that you are saying that the Americans used their money and influence to determine the outcome of an Australian election. They may have done this to him even if he stuck to the alleged deal (when did this bit of information come out?).

This was the same time period that, according to Karlheinz Schreiber, Franz (Josef) Strauss was giving money to Schreiber (and presumably others) to go around the world trying to get Conservatives elected. We know for a fact that Schreiber was instrumental in insuring that Mulroney took over the leadership of the Tories from the more moderate Joe Clark. The rest of it is a bit more fuzzy.

David Lange (Australia) – 1984-1989
Brian Mulroney (Canada) – 1984-1993
Ronald Reagan (United States) – 1981-1989

Strange how Lange was alleged to be saying one thing to the Australian public and another to the Americans - yet kept his promise to the former.

What were the Cheneys and Bushes doing during the Reagan/Lange era?