McCain: Dems Wrong On Renegotiating NAFTA

GOP Frontrunner Says Renegotiating Trade Agreement Could Jeopardize U.S.-Canada Relations

(AP)  Republican John McCain said the desire by Democratic presidential rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement would jeopardize crucial military support from Canada.

McCain used a town-hall style meeting Friday at Dell Inc. headquarters to emphasize his support for NAFTA. The effects of the 1994 trade pact are still hotly debated, but studies indicate the deal has resulted in record exports from Texas to Canada and Mexico.

Trade and national security are "interconnected with each other," the Arizona senator said.

"One of our greatest assets in Afghanistan are our Canadian friends. We need our Canadian friends, and we need their continued support in Afghanistan," McCain said. "So what do we do? The two Democratic candidates for president say they're going to unilaterally abrogate NAFTA.

"How do you think the Canadian people are going to react to that?" McCain said.

Canada has 2,500 troops serving in Afghanistan along with 29,000 U.S. soldiers.

In fact, Clinton and Obama did not say they would abrogate the agreement; the word "abrogate" means to abolish or repeal.

Rather, both Democrats said at a debate Tuesday in Cleveland they would insist on renegotiating NAFTA and would threaten to opt out of the agreement unless Canada and Mexico come to the negotiating table. NAFTA is unpopular in Ohio, which has lost blue-collar jobs to other countries, and has become a key campaign issue heading up to Tuesday's primary.

"I will say we will opt out of NAFTA unless we renegotiate it, and we renegotiate on terms that are favorable to all of America," Clinton said.

Obama agreed: "I will make sure that we renegotiate. ... I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced."

McCain, speaking to reporters later Friday, allowed, "maybe they're not saying 'abrogate."'

"They're saying 'radically restructure,"' he said. "I think Canada would view that as a betrayal of the long years of negotiations that we agreed to."

[barryrose1]

It''s getting bigger just like Bush''s (nose), but they have to trim that back daily or it would resemble a skud missle. NAFTA,CAFTA-SHOULD BE RETRACTA.Maybe we could trade some Mexicans to China to help offset the balance deficit.

[cattlekate]

Why is McCain''s left jaw getting larger?

[jack3213]

OBAMA IS A SUSPICIOUS CHARACTER WITH A GOOD STUMP SPEECH. UNDERNEATH THE WORDS THERE IS NO SUBSTANCE. PEOPLE ARE SUCKERS AND CONTINUE TO FALL FOR THIS AND SHOULD BE MADE AWARE HE IS NOTHING MORE THAN AN EMPTY SUIT. CLINTON IS NOTHING MORE THAN A LIAR. NEITHER CANDIDATE IS QUALIFIED OR CREDIBLE AND SHOULD BE IGNORED FOR THE SAFETY OF THE USA.

[watcher269-2009]

According to McCain - the Dems are wrong on NAFTA -


BUT - McCain wants to give All major corporations immunity for any past indiscretions over the past 7 years. Right now it''s the phone companies - next it will be the Oil companies, Halliburton, Military suppliers who knowingly supplied defective equipment to the troops, then food suppliers for selling tainted foods, then on and on and on.............

Who would you VOTE for?

[cfin5]

I think he just blew it for Ohio with this being more worried about international relations than their job loss stats,......Ron Paul will do better with statements like this.

[johnbc1-2009]

Excuse the spelling on that last post.

[johnbc1-2009]

Its safe to assume that most Americans do not know that most Canadians would love to cancel NAFTA. Without NAFTA, you would not have fair and equal access to our water and oil. The reason we cannot subsidize our oil for domestic comsumption is because of NAFTA.

Scrap NAFTA, and I can guarantee that China or any other country would be mre then happy to buy any surplus oil we have, after all, you have so many other reliabel sources, such as the Mexico and Venezuela.

Oh, hang on to the thought.. you want to shaft Mexico also, so I guess that rules them out also.

Good luck.

[libra127]

"can you tell me why Clinton deserves our vote?"
Posted by Vet_SK at 06:49 AM : Mar 02, 2008

Because she is amazingly smart, hard-working, and knowledgeable about all of the issues which the President must deal with - foreign affairs, military issues, economic issues, health care, education, working with BOTH parties in Congress (she has co-sponsored legislation with Repubublicans far more than Obama has).

Because as First Lady she was President Clinton''s chief advisor and, while not always totally agreeing with him on all issues (i.e., NAFTA), she saw the Presidential decision-making process from the inside for 8 years.

Because as Senator for 7 years, she sponsored MORE LEGISLATION PER YEAR than ANY OTHER of the 546 members of Congress. (www.govtrack.us/data/us/110/repstats/enacted.xml)

[pilgrimsway-2009]

You know what I think?
I think there is 8 or 9 different post names as the same person saying both sides.
Thats what I think!

[pilgrimsway-2009]

I gonna think really hard if Mcain wants to keep NAFTA!
It destroyed manufacturing jobs here in America tremendously! What a skilled laborer who was making $20.00 an hour now has to go to school and be educated for $10,00 an hour while supporting His family?

[b-easy63]

NAFTA was not that bad a deal. We need an avenue to trade our products with other countries. That avenue was opened with NAFTA. The question is, what are we going to trade since Mr. Bush opened up the highway for American corporations to export JOBS! That wasn''''t part of the original deal!

Posted by RowdyTexan2 at 06:49 PM : Feb 29, 2008


Puhleeese. Jobs have been leaving since the early 1990s. At that time, Chrysler relocated entire plants to Mexico and got rid of thousands of workers--this was a joint effort of Bush and Clinton and we all know this. Try your fvcking spin bs somewhere else.

[b-easy63]

"to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement would jeopardize crucial military support from Canada.



And yet, somehow...does anyone recall Canada''s participation in either Afghanistan or Iraq being crucial? McCAin''s handler''s must have told him that his only hope on economic issues is to try to find some sort of military component, then wax lyrically about it. LMAO

[samthetvcat]

kmccliment, I look forward to Rush Limbaugh getting another humiliating meeting with reality when after all his urging of Republicans to vote for Hillary she not only loses Texas and Ohio, but also loses Rhode Island and Vermont.

It''ll be almost as sweet as when Claire McCaskill and the great people of Missouri gave him the smack-down in the name of Parkinsons and stem-cell research.

Hard to believe anybody listens to him any more when he''s clearly only supporting McCain to maximize his listenership . . .

[samthetvcat]

The more I think about it, the dumber this idea of McCain''s seems to try and link Canadians pulling out of Afghanistan to NAFTA - because he supports NAFTA as-is, and Canadians are STILL going to be pulling their troops out in a couple of years because it has nothing to do with our position on NAFTA.

So now, not only is McCain going to have to explain why Canadian troops are threatening to pull out of Afghanistan while he the NAFTA supporter is the front-runner, he''s also going to have to explain why Mr. ''straight-talk'' tried to make the situation out to be something other than it was.

Rove must be losing his touch . . .

[kmccliment]

Attention all republicans in the Primary States soon to vote... I know it will be hard to keep the vomit down. But, vote for Hillary. This was cause the Democratic Party to continue to tear itself apart. Make a donation to McCain''''s campaign next week and pull the lever that says Hillary.. We''''ll thank you for taking one for the Team!

[jerryz7936]

All you women who supports Hillary. Why don''t you read the report online MSMBC. See how much she cares!!!!!!!!!!

From MSMBC Online, front page:

Sen. Hillary Clinton has declined to return $170,000 in campaign contributions from individuals at a company accused of widespread sexual harassment, and whose CEO is a disbarred lawyer with a criminal record, federal campaign records show.

Where are her morals?????

[prinzowhales]

NAFTA is great! Americans don''t need any good paying manufacturing jobs...not when we can all get rich buying real estate for no money down!...and then investing our gains in lottery tickets!

[skymountain3]

I thought this was cool...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=2r2Da-GJ-_o

[smartprimate]

Guns and butter; everything is connected. Within one generation after the EU finally gets its act together it will be an economic powerhouse. Within two generations China will get the hang of a state-controlled semi-free market economy. Russia will side with whichever it feels will support its policies a Russia/EU pact or, more likely, a new Sino-Russian Alliance. This is the next generation%u2019s issue%u2026 not terrorism, but economic domination. Already many in the EU consider themselves European%u2026 not German, not French, and not Spanish. The only thing slowing them down is adding Eastern Bloc countries. But the addition of these countries will also eventually help the EU with %u201Cnew blood%u201D that will invigorate tired old Europe.

While NAFTA is causing some pain now, we need it for our future. North America has all the natural and social resources to be a match for any emergent future economic conglomerate. But NAFTA is the start; the other part of the equation is immigration, more specifically the Mexican question. Mexico needs to change. Trade and diplomacy is needed to transform that country into a viable partner and not a country we keep at arms distance.

Worker re-training and education needs to be improved and NAFTA is not perfect but we cannot become protectionist... it will cripple us in the end.

[incog-nito]

So, McCain is willing to let a flawed agreement that hurts U.S. workers stand, all for 2500 Canadians troops. Incredible.