The entire debate about oil should focus on one issue; how to conserve and reduce our dependence on oil.  I live in Canada and it saddens me that our country is adopted the worst possible oil policy in which the Alberta government is extracting the dirtiest and least efficient oil in the tar sands where there are over 300 billion barrels of oil in reserve.

Cross posted at Daily Kos

The Economic Club of Toronto has announced that John McCain will be speaking in Ottawa on June 20th.  NAFTA will almost certainly be the topic of the day.  It seems quite obvious to me that he will spend the entire time talking about how he would keep NAFTA and Obama would destroy it, along with Obama wanting to kill Hockey, Beer, and Beavers, and want to form a North American Union....I assume. I am sure people in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana, and numerous others, would love to see him defending NAFTA!  But little does John McCain know, he is a moron.  I could really end the diary there but I guess I could explain why he is a moron in this instance.

I realize as a diary this sucks, but it is worth sharing a recent article at www.sfgate.com (the online SF Chronicle).  It speaks for itself.  My response?  I'm buying property in Canada.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg i?f=/g/a/2008/06/06/notes060608.DTL& hw=morford&sn=002&sc=665

NAFTA-Gate first broke about a week ago and since that time we've seen flat out denials from Hillary's team regarding allegations that they discussed NAFTA with Canadian officials.  Today, the Canadian Press ran a story which confirms those denials...

OTTAWA -- Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton never gave Canada any secret assurances about the future of NAFTA such as those allegedly offered by Barack Obama's campaign, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's office said Friday.

With the NAFTA affair swirling over the U.S. election and Canadian officials skittish about saying anything else that might influence the race, it took the PMO two days to deliver the information.

After being asked whether Canadian officials asked for - or received - any briefings from a Clinton campaign representative outlining her plans on NAFTA, a spokeswoman for the prime minister offered a response Friday.

<bold>"The answer is no, they did not," </bold> said Harper spokeswoman Sandra Buckler.

A recent report tells of a Canadian official accusing the Clinton campaign of also "reassuring" the Canadian government about NAFTA:

TORONTO (AP) - The Canadian prime minister's chief of staff says someone in Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign told him to take the presidential candidate's tough-on-NAFTA talk with "a grain of salt."

That's according to a report by the Canadian Press. A Clinton spokesman says the campaign "flatly denied" the suggestion.

Something is perculiar about this accusation. If this is true, then it doesn't make sense why the Clinton campaign "flatly denied" the accusations.

On the contrary, earlier today it was reported:

But Clinton's camp has repeatedly denied there was any assurances given, and they continued to do it Thursday.

"We flatly deny this report," said Clinton spokesman Phil Singer. "It didn't happen."

Last week, Singer said the Clinton campaign was offering the Canadian government "blanket immunity to reveal any name" they might have in the reported contact.

The Clinton campaign remains firm in it's denials. Yet there is still a possibility that it all happened (though I pray not). But, it begs the question: Why would the campaign continue to deny it when they saw what happened to Barack Obama?

I don't know, honestly. An MSNBC report claims that it was Hillary, not Barack who made the calls. A report that I saw on the front page of Yahoo! said that they BOTH did. The Hillary Clinton campaign reasserts that they did not. My head is ultimately spinning on the issue. I really don't know what's going on. Does anybody know?

FALSE. ...........Rank-and-file workers in the U.S., Canada and Mexico benefit from NAFTA.
FALSE.............Worker protections, under NAFTA, cover unfair labor practices and unhealthy environmental conditions.
FALSE.............Since NAFTA began, U.S. corporations participating under NAFTA  have maintained or increased  their
number of U.S. employed workers.  
FALSE.............NAFTA's promise of more  jobs has been fulfilled.

TRUE..............NAFTA has caused rising income inequality.                                                      TRUE..............NAFTA has suppressed real wages for production workers.                                                         TRUE..............NAFTA has weakened workers' collective bargaining powers.                                                TRUE...............NAFTA is the direct cause of  a U.S. job loss from 1993 to 2001 for 879,280 Americans.

We're told by the President and members of both major parties in Congress that NAFTA is succeeding and good for our country, but how true is this?
Under NAFTA, the U.S. exports to Mexico,  parts and components that are assembled into final products that are then returned to the United States. The number of products that Mexico assembles and exports--such as refrigerators, TVs, automobiles, and computers--has mushroomed under the NAFTA agreement. Many of these products are produced in the Maquiladora export processing zones in Mexico, where parts enter duty free and are re-exported to the United States in assembled products, with duties paid only on the value added in Mexico. The share of total U.S. exports to Mexico that is represented by Maquiladora imports has risen from 39% of U.S. exports in 1993 to 61% in 2002.2 The number of such plants increased from 2,114 in 1993 to 3,251 in 2002.
Since March 2001, the U.S. has lost 2.4 million jobs that were primarily in the manufacturing sector.

Credit for information in this article:   Robert E. Scott, Economic Policy Institute

New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton tore a new one into Stephen Harper's administration today over the release of the memo written by a low level staff person at the embassy mischaracterizing a discussion with Austan Goolesbee regarding NAFTA.  The administration became very defensive and borderline apologetic.

Here's the video clip played on MSNBC today.  Somebody in the Harper administration wanted to play ball with Clinton, and Harper's going to get hit for it.

The damage is done however.  Hat's off to Hillary, sleezy as it is.

Of course the Obama people are denying it.  But then, they and their candidate aren't exactly known for rushing to take responsibility for anything.  

From the memo summarizing conversation with Goolsbee, which was circulated widely within the Canadian government:

"Noting anxiety among many U.S. domestic audiences about the U.S. economic outlook, Goolsbee candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign. He cautioned that this messaging should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."

Read the article at http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jrFPk leRZmbmPtPxHBGNAPSzfUtwD8V5OLP00