Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

From the Fact Check Desk: Clinton’s Out-of-Context NAFTA Mailer

February 26, 2008 12:03 PM

Having previously taken a gander at the misleading mailer on NAFTA sent to Ohioans by Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, we’ll now take a look at the misleading mailer on NAFTA sent to Ohioans by Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY.

(You can read her mailer HERE.)

"Ohio needs to know the truth about Obama's position on Protecting American Workers and NAFTA,” the Clinton mailer reads. "It's all on the Record.”

But what she offers is certainly not the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The quotes about Obama and NAFTA she uses are completely out of context.

The quotes are from Associated Press and the Herald & Review of Decatur, Ill., coverage of a debate about trade between Obama and his 2004 Senate opponent, Alan Keyes, who wanted to withdraw from trade deals. They attempt to portray Obama as a NAFTA supporter.

"Obama said the United States should continue to work with the World Trade Organization and pursue deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement,” the AP quotes says in the Clinton mailer – but Clinton has cut the AP quote off mid-sentence.

The full AP quote says: Democrat Obama said Keyes' ideas could lead to trade wars that would harm farmers, who are always looking for new markets willing to buy American crops. He said the United State should continue to work with the World Trade Organization and pursue deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement, but the country must be more aggressive about protecting American interests. ‘We don't want to set off trade wars. What we want to make sure of is that our farmers are treated fairly,’ Obama said. ‘The problem in a lot of our trade agreements is that the administration tends to negotiate on behalf of multinational companies instead of workers and communities.’”

Changes the meaning a tad, yes?

Clinton also quotes selectively from the Herald & Review, taking only this part: "Obama said the United States benefits enormously from exports under the WTO and NAFTA."

The full context is The Herald & Review quote states: "The candidates' views differed slightly on the World Trade Organization and the North American Free Trade Agreement.

"Keyes said he is not fond of the WTO and believes the United States has given away nearly half its negotiating clout on trade issues by entering into multilateral arrangements such as the WTO and NAFTA. He said powerful competitors can hide behind the veil of group interest and get more favorable treatment than if they were negotiating with America one-on-one.

"While some people believe NAFTA has been good for U.S. farmers, the trade results could have been better, Keyes said. NAFTA negotiators said the United States might lose manufacturing jobs but would become a service economy, but now those service jobs also are being exported, he said.

"Obama said the United States benefits enormously from exports under the WTO and NAFTA. He said, at the same time, there must be recognition that the global economy has shifted, and the United States is no longer the dominant economy.

"'We have competition in world trade,' Obama said. 'When China devalues its currency 40 percent, we need to bring a complaint before the WTO just as other nations complain about us. If we are to be competitive over the long term, we need free trade but also fair trade.'"

So it’s fairly clear that Clinton excerpts the stories unfairly, without the full context. That becomes even more clear when you read Obama's full quote from the 2004 event that these two stories are based on.

Asked if he supported 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."

The Clinton mailer also states: "FALSE ATTACK ALERT: DON'T BE FOOLED BE BARACK OBAMA. Yet again Barack Obama has misrepresented the truth about Hillary's record to hide his own. The Politico called Obama's mail 'bogus.' American workers can't afford Barack Obama."

What Politico’s Ben Smith called “bogus” (HERE) is what we’ve also taken issue with, Obama giving the impression that Clinton called NAFTA a “boon” when it fact that was New York Newsday’s language paraphrasing what Clinton thought.

That is bogus of the Obama campaign to have done, but as Smith goes on to note, “It's actually pretty hard to figure out where Clinton was, personally, on Nafta in the 1990s.”

Factcheck.org finds this Clinton NAFTA mailer “somewhat misleading” (HERE) since it “gives less than the whole truth.”

I agree with their analysis - what do you think?

- jpt

February 26, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (55)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Bogus,is a great word to describe O'Bama.But it could also be used for Mr.Thornburgh (Time magazine)because he still insist O'Bama isn't or wasn't muslim.Get your facts straight Thornburgh.
And "Me" one of the reasons he is treated so gingerly is another "O" which stands for Oprah,who has amazing influence over the media in this country.Again,lets use the "H" word and where has Michelle gone?Did she finally find a country she was proud of?

Posted by: choochoo52 | Feb 29, 2008 9:13:17 AM

This entire exchange is moot. The world knows that the american people have already made up thier mind as to the next president. Al you need do is count the total number of votes for each to date,Inhale, say the word "Woah!", utter something like insurmountable, and try to think of any other possible outcome. There is none. The only question is where are we going to find a vice president?.

Posted by: James Lee Anderson | Feb 27, 2008 1:59:04 PM

Both candidates are bringing out their best! someone should help me decide who go it right from day 1. May be, that is the best candidate.

Posted by: Ken Atwooki | Feb 27, 2008 11:03:07 AM

Energy Independence Now!


No more Oil Wars!


Stop funding the terrorists!


Drill in Anwar.

Build more nuclear power plants

Use More coal.

Use more natural gas


Turn trash into energy


Double the efficiency of windmills and solar cells.

If France can do nuclear power so can we.


If Brazil can do biomass/ethanol power so can we.


If Australia can do LNG power so can we.


Domestically produced energy will end recession and spur the economy.

Posted by: poetryman69 | Feb 27, 2008 7:49:29 AM

To Sean,
I like your thoughts about why the republicans and conservatives are behind Obama. I listen to talk radio a lot and much of it has a very conservative slant. They are encouraging republicans, conservatives and independents to support Obama because they believe he is the easier candidate to beat in the general election.

Posted by: Patrick | Feb 26, 2008 6:25:57 PM

Clinton is soooo desperate, she will say or do anything to get back into the white house with her hubby. Let's face it, Hillary is the chip off the old block, the Old Block being her Republican Senator Father, Rodan. Daddy would just be proud of his little Republican Yuppie Larva spewing her half truths, of which the Clintons are so famous for.

Posted by: Angie | Feb 26, 2008 5:17:12 PM

M First the picture is from Clinton supporters, now it's from "rogue staffers". And all to get media attention. Sorry, maybe the Obamabots will buy into that one but not the Clinton supporters. By the way, there is heavy media bias against Hillary Clinton and if you can't see it you are blind. Also, you will never control the world. A vote for Obama is a vote for McCain.

Posted by: Terry | Feb 26, 2008 5:14:01 PM

Terry you found us out!!!! Great job detective. The clintons should hire YOU to uncover all the dirt.

He never talked about the picture because it shouldnt have been an issue. But once again the Senator Clinton has no control over her campaign and rogue staffers are circulating junk to TRY to get the medias attention.

Im glad that we have the media in our pockets....now we can control the world!

(sarcasm has been expressed in my comments)

Posted by: M | Feb 26, 2008 5:00:33 PM

Previously undecided. Exactly how long were you previously undecided? 2 seconds. You don't sound like you were ever on the fence. Where did you read that the picture of Obama circulating on the net came from Clinton supporters? Why was this picture not addressed by the Obama campaign when they first knew that it existed? They certainly had to know about this picture. Were they afraid of the implication themselves? The bigger question should be why does Barack Obama seem to want to hide his Muslim roots? Both his father and his stepfather were indeed Muslims. His father was from Kenya and his stepfather was from Indonesia. If that ignites fear than that is not the fault of the Clintons. And for you to blame Clinton supporters with no evidence is just pathetic. Also, what is a statesman-like approach to debates? Is that your way of side-stepping his lack of preparation, and his lack of in-depth knowledge about the issues? Does a good commander-in-chief mis-state the facts in the last debate concerning a military story he told. And what about his ideas about Pakistan? Of course, Obama doesn't have to concern himself with "petty barbs and personal attacks", he has the media in his back pocket at all times to do the dirty work for him. As far as his strong Christian faith, I wish he would actually would talk about it and what it means to him.

Posted by: Terry | Feb 26, 2008 4:55:48 PM

Way to go previously undecided. Glad some people actually READ the facts and the campains of the candidates.

Senator Obama is indeed a man of great character. He has been playing the "game" the right way, which what Senator Clinton should be doing.

Meet us in Ohio Clintons....for ANOTHER debate!

Posted by: M | Feb 26, 2008 4:55:17 PM

Having read all comments on Mr Obama, I downloaded from his web site the 64pp Blueprint Plan for Change. An amazing outline of his views on the problems facing America today and some very impressive arguments for solutions to these problems. When you combine his strong position on the essentials with his statesman-like approach to debates, rallies etc, you can see the strength of a potential Commander-in-Chief, the wisdom of Solomon and the understanding of good diplomatic persuasion required in disjointed world politics.
Senator Obama's restraint, in ignoring petty barbs and personal attacks, heightens the obvious inability of opponents to prove their superiority in the Presidential bid. Senator Clinton has spoiled her own position by ignoring diplomacy in some of her personal attacks against the integrity and worth of Senator Obama. This is worrying, in that it indicates a possibility of her losing control when President.
The recent release of a photograph of Senator Obama, in custom Somali dress, inferring links to Islam and emanating from one of Senator Clinton's supporters was obviously intended to hurt Obama's position through fear-mongering. It was an insult to law-abiding Moslems in the US as well as a cruel deception to question Obama's strong Christian faith. Senator Clinton should have denounced this travesty immediately but chose to keep quiet, personally. I, for one, could not trust this woman as President, knowing that she could ignore an injustice for the purpose of personal gain.
We should support Senator Obama in his right to fair consideration as President of the United States and leader of the free world.

Posted by: Previously undecided | Feb 26, 2008 3:54:57 PM

SHAME ON YOU, HILLARY CLINTON!!!!

Posted by: Karl | Feb 26, 2008 3:48:43 PM


Remember this is the same HRC who when asked (at a debate) if Chicago and NY met world series who would want to win the series.

She weaseled around with her answer until when finally pinned by the moderator she said she would be routing for both teams to win.

So that's Hills in a nutshell. She's carefully position on both side of the issue (In this case NAFTA). She's the Dem version of Romney.

Posted by: The Commander Guy | Feb 26, 2008 3:46:39 PM

Here, again, is Obama having it both ways: He tells people in Ohio that Hillary said NAFTA was a "boon", which she did not; He is on the record pro-NAFTA saying that it has helped farmers with their products, and that it needs to be fixed for other issues, while he ignores what Hillary said in earlier debates about revisiting NAFTA to fix the problems. He can have it both ways. I hope the voters in Ohio get their information from more than one news source. Otherwise, they will follow all the starry-eyed groupies and believe that only Obama can fix their problems.

Posted by: georgia | Feb 26, 2008 3:45:39 PM

Once again Hillary Clinton wants her cake and to eat it too. I hope that Barack clarifys the differences in what her article says and the truth. Indeed we are electing George Bush all over again wearing a Hillary Clinton mask and a Democratic scarf. Don't be fooled. We will not survive another term of these tactics. Ohio don't vote what is left of your economy and infrastructure down the drain, elect Barack Obama and regain lost ground.

Posted by: Laura Crotty | Feb 26, 2008 3:35:36 PM

Wait a minute, what the heck are people hitting Obama for when it was Clinton who sent out false misleading mailers about his stand on NAFTA taking select words twisting them instead of his entire comments which clearly shows he was not in support of it.

Posted by: RuthieM | Feb 26, 2008 3:28:39 PM

M, you're right. Why do peoples opinion get deleted? Is there no free speech in this country. I guess anything against the Clintons isn't accepted. I'm a Republican and believe in free speech. This is not a communist country.

Posted by: Chan | Feb 26, 2008 3:10:03 PM

It is like what you sow what you gorw. Obama lied and has been hypocritical. Press has always given him positive coverage inspite of his negative campaigning. So Hillary going a little out of way is nothing as compared to the lies that Obama has been spreading.

Posted by: chiman | Feb 26, 2008 3:08:10 PM

I think Barack Obama since the start of this campaign has been given a free pass by the media. They treat him as the chosen one. They demand from him as much as his supporters do. Nothing. His supporters want desperately to believe in his messages of hope and change. But they don't really want to know the truth about him. They don't look up the facts. They don't want to know about his past. They don't want to have their dreams deflated. They believe what the media wants them to believe. They are being used and they have yet to realize it.
Hillary Clinton has been bashed from the start. And the media is relentless. Their attacks know no bounds. They will stop at nothing to have Obama win. I believe Hillary has to be aggressive at pointing negative things out about Obama because the media refuses to do their job. It makes her campaign look negative. But what alternative does she have? How can she fight the endless criticisms that she receives? And the neverending praises he receives.
There is still time to fight. Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island, you can make the difference! You can show the media and TPTB you will not be taken in by them. Just watch the debate tonight in Ohio. Hillary will not disappoint you.

Posted by: Terry | Feb 26, 2008 3:04:44 PM

I can't believe some of you didn't read the article completely. Westcoastmessenger, did you see where she (Hillary) lied about the quotes she copied and pasted. Are you people so close-minded that you can't see Hillary for what she is and definitely not fit to be president. Even her demeanor of the last 7 days is inconsistent and her inability to run a campaign should prove that she can't run this country. Get a clue vote Obama 2008

Posted by: rle | Feb 26, 2008 2:13:57 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS