About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

AP reported McCain attacks on Dems' threats to withdraw from NAFTA, ignored his own 2000 ABM Treaty threat

March 12, 2008 11:45 am ET

SUMMARY: The AP's Glen Johnson reported Sen. John McCain's criticism of Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for considering U.S. withdrawal from NAFTA "to force Canada and Mexico to negotiate more protections for workers and the environment in the agreement." The report continued: "If that threat is made, McCain asked, 'What are the other countries in the world going to think about the agreements we've negotiated with them?' " But Johnson did not note that McCain himself threatened during his 2000 presidential campaign to pull out of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty.

26 Comments

In a March 12 Associated Press article, Glen Johnson reported that Sen. John McCain "said his potential Democratic opponents were wrong to threaten pulling out of NAFTA to force Canada and Mexico to negotiate more protections for workers and the environment in the agreement." The report continued: "If that threat is made, McCain asked, 'What are the other countries in the world going to think about the agreements we've negotiated with them?' " But McCain himself threatened during his 2000 presidential campaign to abrogate a treaty; he called the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty a "relic of the Cold War" and asserted that as president, he would unilaterally withdraw from the treaty if Russia were unwilling to renegotiate it. Johnson did not note McCain's statements on the ABM Treaty.

A December 7, 1999, CNN.com article reported that at a campaign event in New Hampshire, McCain said of the ABM Treaty, "I will withdraw from a treaty that has become a relic of the Cold War if it cannot be made relevant to our current security needs." From the article:

To avoid nuclear blackmail by so-called rogue states, McCain called for making a ballistic missile defense system a national priority.

He also suggested the United States may need to renegotiate the 1972 anti-ballistic missile treaty with Russia.

"I want to be candid with you: If these talks fail, I'll do what is right for the security of millions of Americans and for global strategic stability," he said. "I will withdraw from a treaty that has become a relic of the Cold War if it cannot be made relevant to our current security needs."

McCain repeated his assertion that he would be willing to withdraw from the ABM Treaty in a March 2, 2000, press release:

"Russia must be made to understand that we will not allow our people to be vulnerable to ballistic missile attack from North Korea, Iraq, or any other nation that may seek to threaten our nation," wrote McCain.

McCain believes the ABM Treaty with Russia is an outdated relic of the Cold War. He believes the U.S. should withdraw from the treaty if Russia will not agree to changes that will allow the United States to defend against missiles being developed by countries hostile to the United States.

President Bush unilaterally withdrew from the ABM treaty on June 13, 2002.

From Johnson's March 12 AP article:

On the Republican side, John McCain, a veteran Arizona senator and former Vietnam prisoner of war who wrapped up his party's nomination last week, criticized the two Democrats on Tuesday for proposing to force the renegotiation the North American Free Trade Agreement.

"We've got to stop this protectionist, NAFTA-bashing," McCain told a town hall meeting at Savvis Inc., an information technology company.

McCain said his potential Democratic opponents were wrong to threaten pulling out of NAFTA to force Canada and Mexico to negotiate more protections for workers and the environment in the agreement.

If that threat is made, McCain asked, "What are the other countries in the world going to think about the agreements we've negotiated with them?"

He said the government should instead focus on providing educational and training programs to those who have lost their jobs.

In a debate in Cleveland before the March 4 primary in Ohio, where NAFTA is blamed for the loss of industrial jobs, both Democratic presidential contenders endorsed threatening to pull out of NAFTA unless labor and environmental standards could be renegotiated.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by tommy (March 12, 2008 11:55 am ET)
         
      Huh?  Stretch much. One is 8 years ago and it totally irrelevant to NAFTA today.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (March 12, 2008 12:07 pm ET)
           

        The only thing I see that's irrelevant is John McCain and his right-wing wacko apologists.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by DTF (March 12, 2008 12:09 pm ET)
           

        If it is relevant that 20 years ago Sen. Obama took some drugs and if it is relevant that 10 years ago Pres. Clinton engaged in extramarital indiscretions (not sure what the filters will allow...this is SFW) then it is relevant that 8 years ago Sen. McCain held a completely opposite opinion on the  adherence to a treaty.

        The speaks to Sen. McCain's consitency.  Sen. McCain is touted as a straight-talker, so shy the reversal?

        Yes, NAFTA isn't ABM, but they are both agreements between nations...there is some relevance since we're about to negotiate an agreement regarding the status of our forces in Iraq that will extend into the next Presidency, maybe beyond.  I think it makes perfect sense to note that Sen. McCain now attacks a position that he once staked out for himself.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by notanotherconservative2254 (March 12, 2008 3:32 pm ET)
           

        I have to give this one to Tommy.  This is an enormous stretch.  I mean, even for MMFA it's a pretty lame point.

        The media is probably more interested in CURRENT EVENTS - such as Geraldine Ferraro's racist comments about Obama AND the scandal involving the Hillary Clinton supporter (Spitzer ) who had sex with a prostitue (and not an intern)

        Honestly, right now it is pretty sad and embarrassing to see so many
        scandals and racism involving my Democrat Party.

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (March 12, 2008 3:38 pm ET)
             
          Spitzer already resigned so it's a non issue.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by notanotherconservative2254 (March 12, 2008 3:46 pm ET)
               

            Actually, Hillary Clinton supporter (Spitzer) only announced his resignation, but he is still governor.

            ... also, you did it so cleverly that an amatuer might have missed it, but you only responed to HALF the controversy by ignoring Ferraro.

            Very "clinton-esgue" of you.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by DTF (March 12, 2008 4:00 pm ET)
                 

              Yup, but this is about the Republican nominee's inconsistent stand on treaties and agreements.  It is about Sen. McCain's experience, his choices...the only thing we have to go on when we weigh his ability to lead as President.  This tells me that he is inconsistent.

              I don't need to know about his taxes, I only marginally need to know about his health, but I definitely need to know how he makes decisions.  This information tells me that he once supported the unilateral decision to end a treaty but now argues that such a decision would hurt our Nation's standing in the world.  Since I don't think he can claim that he was young and made a rash statement 8 years ago in the 2000 presidential races, I can only assume that he is now against what he once was for.  Sen. McCain wasn't just making an off-the-cuff comment about ABM, he reiterated the same statement in a press release.

              This is what I want journalists to cover, not the crisis du jour of meaningless drivel, give me something I can look at and determine how Sen. McCain will make decisions.  Then I can decide.

              BTW...Gov. Spitzer, good riddance.  Sad state of affairs for his wife and daughters.  Hypocrisy from either side of any debate should be highlighted and addressed.  And speaking of hypocrisy, Sen. Clinton should follow Sen. Obama's lead and remove any member of her campaign that lowers the bar.  "Monster" and Ms. Ferraro's comments are both worthy of scorn.

              Report Abuse
            • Author by snoopy (March 12, 2008 4:36 pm ET)
                 

              Spitzer says his resignation is effective Monday, so as I said, a non issue. And you can find several statements by me on the subject of Ferrraro, go to today's Hume thread and yesterday's Hasselbeck thread to see my stand. Let me know what you find!

              Report Abuse
        • Author by Don Hussein Fabuloso (March 12, 2008 4:05 pm ET)
             

          "..my Democrat Party"

          You're not even trying anymore, NAC. You're even forgetting to start with "as an Obama supporter..."

          Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (March 12, 2008 12:00 pm ET)
         
      I'm all for pulling out of NAFTA. True, it did expand the economy, but it also opened up the borders to allow US companies to move manufacturing outside of the borders and still keep the "made in the USA" branding. We have plants in Ireland that supply "american made" equipment to the feds, KBR and Halliburton now based in Baihran avoiding US taxes while they feed off the taxpayer's teat, it's driving the US into a service based economy. We'll be competing for head fry cook at McDonalds if this keeps up.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by tommy (March 12, 2008 12:05 pm ET)
           
        Considering Canada and Mexico are our biggest oil importers, if we pull out of NAFTA, I doubt we will be at the front of the line in their oil exporting business anymore and our gas and oil prices will probably skyrocket.  Everything has a price.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (March 12, 2008 12:10 pm ET)
             
          We're already at $109 a barrel and the dollar is worth toilet paper. They'll be more than happy to continue selling to us.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by tommy (March 12, 2008 12:21 pm ET)
               
            Well, a Canadian diplomat recently said if NAFTA is ripped up they would be under no obligation to sell oil to the US, they will sell it to China, who could use it in a heartbeat.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by snoopy (March 12, 2008 12:23 pm ET)
                 
              Hey, there's always Venezuela!
              Report Abuse
              • Author by tommy (March 12, 2008 12:26 pm ET)
                   
                And ANWAR
                Report Abuse
                • Author by snoopy (March 12, 2008 2:35 pm ET)
                     

                  And Iraq too!

                  Gee, makes ya wish Tom Delay was a little more concerned about oil vs. the size of car we drive, huh?

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by open_mind (March 12, 2008 4:48 pm ET)
                       
                    If we were wise, we would not even need much oil at this point.  The technology is largely already there to greatly reduce our dependency on it.  Personally, I think political pressure to keep the price under control is misguided.  Higher gas prices naturally encourage conservation and make alternative energy systems more attractive in price comparison.  It is better to switchover sooner than later.
                    Report Abuse
        • Author by roundhouse (March 12, 2008 3:16 pm ET)
             
          "I doubt we will be at the front of the line in their oil exporting business" -T

          Big whoop. We need to invest that money on sustainable energy anyway.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by tommy (March 12, 2008 3:21 pm ET)
               
            That may be, but in the meantime your gas and oil prices would be even more crippling than they are now, which would affect most everything else.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by roundhouse (March 12, 2008 3:56 pm ET)
                 
              Not neccessarily true.

              If you had civic minded leaders running your country instead of these Oedipal Grover Norquist-type, "government is your daddy" conservatives in charge of killing all public institutions, you would have government taking ethical actions for you and the environment.

              You would have assistance to cope with and overcome the debilitating costs of living that the privatization hedonists have thrust upon you in the form of for profit healthcare and dirty energy.

              And you would have anti-trust laws that prohibit the concentration of control into the hands of the very few, which would enable equal opporunity in the market. This freedom from the strictures of paying CEO's billions for failing, this investment in your life, this freedom of opportunity would in turn spark the the creative fire of America once again.

              It can't be the conservative way of waste and arrogance any longer. Conservatism has failed to deliver on its promise of greater freedom prosperity and peace. The GOP has sacrificed its principles in the name of soul sucking materialism.

              Sorry if you disagree. I know my values and I know that what I see in the conservative movement runs counter to those values. So take it or leave it.
              Report Abuse
            • Author by dangrady (March 12, 2008 4:36 pm ET)
                 

              SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!

              Tommy's revising history to persuade that "free trade" and "free enterprise" is better than government tarriffs myth, as it all relates to anyone that would stil see NAFTA as anything but a willfull act to devalue the labor of Americans, devaluate the dollar while exploiting other countries cheap labor. and resourses.

              This while offering the products to American consumers at a lower cost that the local businesses cannot compete with, thereby not only shipping jobs, and industry overseas, NAFTA destroys American Small Business through the new monopolies of the 21st century like Walmart! Middleclass is the new urban myth as we have allowed a few rich moguls to buy up our government, our communications, our energy, and our economy until which time a very rich few will be sqeezing the whole nation with the government to enforce their will. American Fascism.

              We've been here as a nation before, and it was about the turn of the last century that the industrial revolution first created a sizeable middleclass and thus the thrust toward economic equality. Communism was born out of such disparities in history! Fascism was born out of hyper-inflation as a result of a World War which festered a cold war for decades afterward.

              So, where do we see ourselves now? Do we suffer at our own hands for the vulgar riches and excessess of a few behind the cloke of our own patriotism to the very principles they would deprive us for profit?

              Happy Thoughts; 

              Dan Grady

              Report Abuse
              • Author by roundhouse (March 12, 2008 4:40 pm ET)
                   
                Amen, Dan.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by tommy (March 12, 2008 5:33 pm ET)
                   

                Revising history, in what way Dan?  I am simply pointing out the very real possibilities that would result in our oil prices if we pull out of NAFTA.

                I know it's always fun to trash capitalism and call anyone who believes in  a fascist, but it doesn't address reality, it just shows your ignorance.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by edenscape246494 (March 12, 2008 7:32 pm ET)
                     

                  NAFTA is a bad deal and outsourcing really is that great sucking sound we all here in the air

                  Tommy, do you have any life insurance?

                  I ask because I am an insurance man and we are moving to Canada and India, so far the moves have been disastrous and have resulted in profit loss and service failure

                  Its not just the factory jobs anymore, its the office jobs too

                  Report Abuse
    • Author by dazedandconfused26 (March 12, 2008 12:27 pm ET)
         

      Screw NAFTA, and let's use our own oil. Besides we could pull out of NAFTA and negotiate a new treaty with Canada.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by dazedandconfused26 (March 12, 2008 2:31 pm ET)
         
      And to be fair to McCain, maybe he isn't flipflopping all over the place, I mean maybe he just forgot what his positions were before. It happens when you get older.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.

  • Associated Press
    Associated Press

    The Associated Press
    450 W. 33rd St.
    New York, NY 10001

    Main Number
    +1-212-621-1500