When last we convened on this story, the entire traditional media, cable outfits
like CNN, and Obama blogs across the spectrum, were all in the tank for Obama.
They had collectively pronounced untrue the story CTV had reported about Mr.
Obama’s campaign aide(s) (senior staff, worker bees or whatever title you want
to include so as to incorporate all possible people that could have participated
in this story) tipping the Canadian government that Obama’s campaign rhetoric
on NAFTA was all hot air. Not to worry, Obama’s aide(s) said, whatever Obama
is saying in Ohio about revisiting NAFTA, it won’t apply in his presidency.
Obama’s campaign issued a statement declaring “inaccuracies,” while
Obama himself said during a plane press gaggle (likely the same one referenced
below) that the Canadian government had denied it happened. He really meant
embassy spokesperson, but let’s not quibble on a smoke screen. Meanwhile, the
embassy statement declared there was no story. None. Translation: go away you
silly media, there’s nothing here. Thus, like good little lambs, the media and
all those studious Obama bloggers went away. They’re so obedient.
Meanwhile, I reported this little nugget, after speaking personally to Greg McIsaac of CTV to get a statement:
“The facts of our story are accurate.” – Greg
McIsaac, Communications Manager, News Information and Current Affairs, CTV
Tonight, we get the video above, featuring CTV’s Tom Clark who reconfirms their original story, which they stood by in their statement to me.
Whenever I report actual facts, so many in the Obama world get their boxers
(briefs also included) in a twist. Thing is, what I report is the facts. Journalistic
stenography not applied.
However, it’s unlikely Obama will learn about what has developed, because traditional
media doesn’t care and Obama doesn’t read blogs. Explains so much, doesn’t it?
Obama, on campaign plane says he does not read blogs – Lynn
Sweet
NAFTA story, developing… into something that could be a problem
for Mr. Obama. Once again, it’s about a lot more than NAFTA. It’s the measure of the man’s character that comes into question. Saying one thing in public to the American people in order to to get vote, then promising a neighboring government something else. It’s anything but a new kind of politics.
Comments are closed.