Did Clinton Win Ohio on a Lie?

by Paul Rogat Loeb | March 6, 2008
from SmirkingChimp

(TM note: see also Toronto Globe and Mail article, further down.)

Suppose someone in the North Korean government released a false story that shifted a key American election. If Bush were negatively affected, we might be bombing Pyongyang by now. But this just happened with what Hillary Clinton called "NAFTAgate" Without it, she might never have won Ohio, or her margin would have been minuscule. But as a Canadian Broadcasting Company story reveals, practically the entire story was a lie, one that played so central a role in Clinton's Ohio victory that any claim she raises about emerging with a swing state mandate is thoroughly tainted.

As the Ohio primary approached, Obama was steadily closing what a month earlier had been a 20-point lead in the polls. He argued that the NAFTA trade agreement, a centerpiece of Bill Clinton's term on which Bill had staked his entire political capital, cost massive numbers of industrial jobs in Ohio and other manufacturing states. Instead of creating a trade-fueled boom, it helped hollow out America's industrial base, with over 200,000 manufacturing jobs disappearing in Ohio since the 2000 election. Even Republicans I talked with while calling Ohio before the vote made clear that they thought NAFTA was a disaster.

Given these sentiments, Hillary chose not to defend her husband's actions, but instead claimed Obama was distorting her position because she'd privately opposed the agreement at the time, had "long been a critic" and now similarly supported stronger labor and environmental standards. Echoing her reinvention on the Iraq War, these claims were flat-out nonsense. As David Sirota points out, she'd praised NAFTA repeatedly in public settings from the time of its inception. And as Obama highlighted their contrasting positions and approaches on this and other issues, he was gaining in the polls.

(Continued here.)

In Mexico, 100,000 protest NAFTA

But in the U.S., who cares?

The following article is over two weeks old, but the fact that it has just come to our attention indicates how poorly the U.S. media is doing at covering substantial issues in our neighboring country to the south. If there were a protest attracting 100,000 people in the U.S., it would be breaking news on all the major networks and splashed across the front page of every newspaper in the country.

While this article states that over 100,000 Mexican citizens participated in this protest, others indicate the number could be as high as 300,000 while the Mexican police says the figure was only 20-25,000.

Thousands in Mexico Urge Government to Renegotiate NAFTA

By Julieta Mendoza, International Business Times
Posted 02 February 2008 @ 10:25 pm EST

Tens of thousands of agricultural workers and their union representatives gathered at Mexico City's downtown plaza, the Zocalo, on Thursday to complain about the agriculture provisions in the North America Free Trade Agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico.

Agricultural workers with tractors, cows and banners — estimated over 100,000 by media reports — came together, urging the Mexican government to renegotiate the rules in the agricultural part of the Agreement that do away with customs tariffs for corn, beans, sugar and milk starting in 2008.

"We have lost our way as a nation. We have given up sovereignty over food and energy," said Cruz Lopez, the speaker of the National Agricultural workers Confederation (CNC for its acronym in Spanish) according to Spain daily ABC.

Different organizations representing land workers said rules in NAFTA will diminish competition in Mexico, mainly affecting farmers. They also asserted that the U.S. has better agricultural financial assistance than Mexico.

The rest is here. Yes, the protest was mentioned on CNN and AP, but it was more widely covered in France, the UK, China, Iran and Cuba. Not that all U.S. media outlets totally ignored the story. One that featured it was the North Platte, Neb., Bulletin.

Thanks to Minnesota Central for the tip.

Progressive Ponderings: "Labor Is a Commodity"

by Joe Mayer

Twice this year, in below zero temperatures, I was outside picketing with union laborers, joined by other non-union people in our community whose concern for unions brought us together. We spent this time outside the Holiday Inn Express in downtown Rochester – marching, singing, shouting, honking, and empathizing.

This past December the Holiday Inn Express was sold to a new owner(s). The week before Christmas all the union workers were fired, only the union workers. A union contract meant nothing.

In pre-Civil War times, a slave was taken to the slave/commodity market to be sold to a different exploiter. Under today's "market economy" the exploited, disposable worker/commodity is just dumped like leftover scraps. Approximately 60,000 other it-can't happen-to-me worker/ commodities in our city showed little or no concern possibly out of fear for their own jobs. Passivity regarding our neighbors' and our city's victimization by employers increases the opportunity for more victimization in the future.

"Labor is a commodity" is a quote from right wing, supposedly intelligent columnist George Will. He wrote a column with great concern that Congress might pass a law increasing the minimum wage. Will doesn't believe in people, just market "fundamentalism." "Let the market decide the minimum wage." In pre-Civil War terms this translates to market determination of the price and living/working conditions of slaves. Didn't we fight that war?

George Will advocates a minimum wage of $0.00. Influenced by Will and other market ideologues, an amendment to the proposed bill would have set the minimum wage at Will's recommended $0.00. Two right-wing presidential hopefuls voted for this amendment.

"Guest worker" programs, which corporations are encouraging Congress to pass, will allow employers to hire non-citizen workers at slave wages. These disposable "guests" would have no rights of citizenship or rights to pressure their employers without fear of deportation. They would have no workmen's compensation, no unemployment benefits, no disability insurance, no retirement benefits, no health insurance and no right to Social Security benefits so their joblessness would mean deportation. If Congress passes legislation for this "guest/commodity" arrangement, corporate America will employ slaves without any long-term commitments by either the employers or government.

Combine this guest/commodity/worker program with the exploitation of worker/commodities under the labor portion of the World Trade Organization (WTO), NAFTA, and CAFTA and you begin to understand the slave/commodity/worker objectives of corporate globalism.

Wealth proceeds from labor. Capital proceeds from labor. Art proceeds from labor. Free time proceeds from labor. Security proceeds from labor. Progress proceeds from labor. Dreams proceed from labor.

Class privilege proceeds from the exploitation of labor. Wars proceed from forcing or propagandizing soldier/commodities to kill for the benefit of class.

Is the world in turmoil? Does hatred abound? Follow the money. Follow the money.