Obama vs. Obama: Free Trade

Today's AOL story about John McCain is his trip to South America, where he is talking about trade--including the desirable free trade deal with Columbia.  Not only is that deal more advantageous for the United States than it is for Columbia (although it benefits both), but Columbia has become one of the HEROES in the drug war. 

Meanwhile, Mexiso has become a FAILED COUNTRY, with drug cartels rnning amok and conducting a drug war along the Mexican border (including a cross-border MURDER home invasion in the Phoenix area to rub out an alleged drug dealer--with the murderors appearing to have military or police training).  500 people have been murdered in Juarez, Mexico (not 10 miles from where I am typing this).  Columbia deserves encouragement more than Mexico does.

Nor does free trade have anything to do witll illegal immigration (although not quite as bad as Obama and leftist Democrats). McCain is bad on illegal immigration.  He is right on free trade. 

Who knows whether Obama is right or wrong.  He argues with HIMSELF.  I quoted, in an entry a day or two ago, an AOL person who said that anyone (citing McCain) who is for free trade is a traitor or an idiot.  Of course, Obama has recently said he is for free trade.  Then there were those remarks in San Francisco, where Obama almost directly stated that people who oppose free trade are HICKS, doing so out of frustraton (as they cling to their guns and religion).  I am, of course, willing to be convinced that Obama is a traitor and an idiot--it will not take much convincing--but it is almost impossible to figure out where Obama stands on free trade.  He has been against the Columbia free trade deal, along with most Democrats, but there is a school of thought that such Democrat obstructionism is more a payoff to the AFL-CIO in a political year than "principle".  The AFL-CIO, by the way, BETRAYED American workers by joining a lawsuit to stop the Bush Administration from cracking down on fradulent social seucrity numbers, which would have HELPED American workers by making it very difficult for illegal immigrants to work in this country. Back to Barack Obama and free trade.

Here is today's AOL comment (under the story on McCani and Latin America) of the day--a rational one this time:

"obama said in february"i don't think nafta has been good for america--i never have"obama said on june 18"my rhetorichas been overheated and amplified" and that he now supports "opening a dialogue " on nafta's termswhat his is position today?anybody know?"

Indeed so.  You might remember the story, fairly early in the fight for the Democratic nomination, about the Obama representative who allegedly assured the Canadians that all of his tough talk about NAFTA was just campaign rhetoric, and that he did not really mean it.  If ever a story now seems almost certain to have been true, it is that one.  You have to admit, however, that Obama often says things WELL, even if they are often totally opposite things--and/or totally different from his RECORD.  If you don't like what Obama says one day, don't despair.  He will say soemthing you do like the next day (unless you finally realize he is a complete fraud, and decide--rationally--not to like anything he says, no matter how well he says it).

Today, for example, Obama has promised to EXPAND President Bush's "faith based initiative"--albeit with improvements.  You remember the RIDICULE and SCORN Democrats heaped upon President Bush for that, don't you?  You remember how it was supposed to be such a grave violation of the principle of separation of church and state.  But Obama is the MESSIAH, and says things so WELL.  Thus, Democrats have seen the light. 

That leads to an interesting questioin:  CAN Obama lead Democrats to the conservative light, out of their leftist darkness?  Remember that Obama also issued a statement SUPPORTING exceuctions for child rapists (albeit Obama knew his statement would have NO effect, and that justices Obama woul appoint will vote exactly the opposite on that, AND vote to eliminate the death penalty altogether). 

The answer to the above question is "NO".  Despite the willingness of Obama to say ANYTHING to get elected President, whether it contradicts what he said yesterday or not, Obama is a CAPTIVE of the far left.  That is why he has the most leftist voting record in the U.S. Senate.  Obama is all about RHETORIC, and not about substance.  When it comes to governing, Obama has no choice but to appease the far left, if we were stupid enough to elect him President.  Now he will likely NOT satisfy the far left, if he becomes President, but those are the people who will be running the country.  It is impossible to know what Obama truly believes, other than he wants to be President, but it is likely he is as far left as they come (just trying to DECEIVE by suggesting otherwise). 

P.S.  I KNOW that I have said we are stupid, as well, if we elect John McCain as President.  That is my dilemma, and also the good thing about this election.  I can't win.  But, then again, I can't lose (at this point).