About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

CNN's Lou Dobbs claimed Obama "didn't talk about NAFTA" during meeting with Calderón -- but Obama spokesman said they did

January 13, 2009 11:53 am ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: CNN's Lou Dobbs claimed that President-elect Barack Obama "didn't talk about NAFTA" during a meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderón and later claimed Obama and Calderón "didn't talk about NAFTA, after so much of it ... was made on the campaign trail." In fact, according to an Obama spokesman, Obama "expressed his continued commitment to upgrading NAFTA" and "proposed the creation of a consultative group to work on a host of issues important to the United States and Mexico, including NAFTA."

23 Comments

During the January 12 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, host Lou Dobbs claimed that President-elect Barack Obama "didn't talk about NAFTA [North American Free Trade Agreement]" during a January 12 meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderón. Dobbs later claimed that Obama and Calderón "didn't talk about NAFTA, after so much of it ... was made on the campaign trail." However, according to a statement by incoming White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, during the 90-minute private lunch meeting, Obama "expressed his continued commitment to upgrading NAFTA to strengthen labor and environmental provisions to reflect the values that are widely shared in both of our countries, and proposed the creation of a consultative group to work on a host of issues important to the United States and Mexico, including NAFTA, energy and infrastructure."

Following his private lunch meeting with Calderón, Obama spoke to the press but did not specifically reference NAFTA.

From the January 12 edition of CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight:

DOBBS: Up next, the pro-amnesty, open borders lobby is stepping up its assault on the men and women who are trying to enforce our immigration laws. We'll have that special report. And President-elect Obama -- well, meeting with President Felipe Calderón of Mexico today. They didn't talk about -- well, they didn't talk about NAFTA. I wonder what they talked about besides amnesty and, well, open borders.

[...]

[begin video clip]

LISA SYLVESTER (CNN correspondent): But the two leaders didn't reveal how they will proceed on one contentious issue: trade. On the campaign trail, Mr. Obama called for renegotiating NAFTA, saying the trade deal has not benefitted American workers.

MAURICIO CARDENAS (Brookings Institution senior fellow): That's certainly the elephant in the room, because with all the discussion during the campaign about the renegotiation of NAFTA, it's obvious that, in Mexico, there are many concerns about that. And it's been fundamental for Mexico's growth, you know, free access to the U.S. market, and any change in that regard is going to be very disruptive.

SYLVESTER: Despite Mr. Obama's interest in strengthening ties, Mexico is unlikely to be a focus point for the incoming administration, with war in Iraq and the Middle East garnering most of the attention.

[end video clip]

SYLVESTER: With the U.S. economy hurting, President-elect Obama is under enormous pressure to put Americans to work. So, proposals like comprehensive immigration reform or any efforts to try to implement a guest-worker program could be a tough sell in Congress, and if the economy continues to sour, we can expect more people will look at Obama's campaign pledge to renegotiate NAFTA, and they will expect him to follow through -- Lou.

DOBBS: You've got to give the Brookings Institution, Cardenas, credit for saying it exactly as it is. Mexico, with its dependencies that have been created, with free access, as he put it, to the U.S. market. That's going to be a significant issue, or should be a significant issue, for all of our principal trading partners, and it's interesting that with all that has preceded this, Lisa, that the two heads -- well, one head of state and one to-be head of state -- didn't talk about NAFTA, after so much of it, as you pointed out, was made on the campaign trail.

SYLVESTER: Yeah, a lot of eyes are gonna be watching to see what exactly Obama does. And I've got to tell you, I've made some calls and people who are looking to see if Obama actually renegotiates NAFTA, they are not all that optimistic, Lou.

DOBBS: Well, perhaps we've seen this movie before. Perhaps we haven't. We'll soon get a sense of what direction we're headed in. Lisa, thank you very much -- Lisa Sylvester.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by mk3872 (January 13, 2009 12:01 pm ET)
         

      LOL! "the pro-amnesty, open borders lobby is stepping up its assault on the men and women who are trying to enforce our immigration laws"

      Interesting how these right wing nut agenda pushing types make up interest groups to try to scare the public. Clearly, the majority of Americans do not share Mr. Dobbs' paranoia and fear of Mexican immigrants.

      And does anybody thing that Lou Dobbs actually has any influence whatsoever? He, just like Ann Coulter, ever since the Dems swept to power in November, just sound like nasty old codgers who will whine about anything.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (January 13, 2009 12:31 pm ET)
           

        MK, that's been one of my favorite imaginary interest groups, the "Open Border" crowd. The actual differences in policy probably aren't that drastic, but the media has successfully convinced some that there are two camps, "Stop the illegal invasion!" and "Open Borders!".

        Reminds me of my favorite wingnut bumper sticker (seen on the wall of a bar recently);

        I'll keep my money, guns and freedom-- you can keep the "change". 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by mk3872 (January 13, 2009 12:38 pm ET)
             

          Col - Exactly. Otherwise known as a strawman, yes? The old Bush administration style of exaggerating someone else's stance as overly radical.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (January 13, 2009 12:02 pm ET)
         
      Lou Dobbs. Making sh!t up since 1989.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (January 13, 2009 12:22 pm ET)
           

        Let Dobbs keep on yappin'. There's a reason the republican party is now thought of as primarily a party of white supremist racists, and until they take back control from idiots like Dobbs they will continue to lose elections.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by DAWUSS (January 13, 2009 2:22 pm ET)
             

          But Dobbs isn't a Republican

          Report Abuse
          • Author by mk3872 (January 13, 2009 2:35 pm ET)
               
            Irrelevant. He is pushing the right-wing agenda: hostile to immigrants, deny man-made climate change effects, Dems are corrupt, etc.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (January 14, 2009 11:44 am ET)
               

            I love it.  Yeah.  And neither is Bill O'Rielly or Glenn Beck.  I don't care if they're registered or not, how do YOU think they VOTE?!

            (Or were you joking?)

            Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (January 13, 2009 12:35 pm ET)
         

      The quickest way for Obama to take the bloom off of his presidency is to promote his amnesty plan for illegal aliens.

      For the most part...his plan to strrengthen border security, fix a dysfunctional legal immigration system, allow guest workers, and cracking down on employers who hire illegal aliens is nothing new...but definitely necessary.

      But whoa nelson...amnesty? A sure way to get his backside handed to him.

      And yes indeed...his plan calls for amnesty. No matter how it is spun...allowing 15-20 million illegal immigrants to remain in the country is amnesty. Don't make me laugh with the "pay a fine, learn english, and go to the back of the line" horse apples.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (January 13, 2009 1:00 pm ET)
           

        Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (January 13, 2009 1:22 pm ET)
           

        See, if those illegals are then made legal, you guys could stop crying about how they're taking away all of your benefits and gaming our system without paying anything into it. Wouldn't giving them a clear path to citizenship solve all of the "problems" that are always claimed are caused by illegal immigrants?

        And, yes, they are here illegally, I realize that, but being here illegally is akin to speeding in terms of breaking the law.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by wesley (January 13, 2009 2:01 pm ET)
             

          I'm not included in any group of "you guys" who have a fear of having anything taken away. It's a simple matter of the sovereignty of our nation...having and maintaining the right to determine who enters our country for any reason.

          Illegal aliens have violated that right...regardless of any plight that their own country has caused them or their own interests of bettering themselves.

          I'm for fixing the system that makes it nearly impossible for a poor immigrant to get here legally. I also favor a guest worker program that allows them to register to work here...report to immigration authorities and return home when the work is finished.

          I will not ever suport any form of amnesty that allows millions of illegal immigrants to remain in this country when they are discovered. They didn't all arrive here overnight and we can't deport them all overnight...but we can sure as hell get started.

          Simply changing the rules...and rewarding them for their illegal behavior is simple minded and cowardly. Eliminating all speed limits does not change the number of people who are driving faster than they should...the analogy is inane.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by foghornleghorn (January 13, 2009 2:19 pm ET)
               

            They didn't all arrive here overnight and we can't deport them all overnight...but we can sure as hell get started.

            Are you volunteering to help pay to deport them?  Aren't you against big government?  Haven't you heard of such a thing as reality, as in there are so many of them here now that we have to deal with them in a rational and logical manner and just can't load up the boxcars and dump them in the desert?

            Report Abuse
            • Author by wesley (January 13, 2009 2:29 pm ET)
                 

              Pay for it?...you must have slept through recent history. Pay for it? Hell all we have to do is conjur up another $750b to bailout the immigration authority. We pay for less and less today...we just borrow the money and make ourselves feel good.

              The people who have come here illegally from Mexico were and are today Calderon's problem. If he's serious about immigration reform...which I doubt...then he can deal with the boxcars.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by foghornleghorn (January 13, 2009 5:30 pm ET)
                   

                Hell all we have to do is conjur up another $750b to bailout the immigration authority

                As usual, all hot air with no real solutions offered.  How's that border fence coming along?

                Report Abuse
                • Author by wesley (January 13, 2009 5:56 pm ET)
                     

                   -- The government has completed 500 miles of fencing along the Southwest border, 170 miles short of its goal...the administration expects to have at least 600 miles complete by Jan. 20, when Barack Obama takes over as president, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said earlier this month. -- AP 12-16-08

                  Obama voted for this fence as a senator...but most recently has back tracked. It might have something to do with his cozy relationship with La Raza.

                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by mefirst (January 13, 2009 8:46 pm ET)
                       

                    what system is it that makes it "nearly impossible for a poor immigrant to get here legally"?  since when is that?  we take in an average of over a million or more legal immigrants a year, far more than any other country in the world, many based on little more than the fact that they have a relative already living here.  this is not a good thing for the country.  and what "guest worker" program are you talking about?  agricultural or something else?  supposedly there are lots of jobs "americans won't do" but a lot of them are jobs americans will do, and have done before, at decent wages.  construction for one.  supposedly all this cheap labor is "good for the economy", but a lot of the money earned goes back to mexico and is not recirculated here.

                    Report Abuse
          • Author by Old_Benjamin (January 13, 2009 4:58 pm ET)
               

            It's a simple matter of the sovereignty of our nation...having and maintaining the right to determine who enters our country for any reason. -wes

            That only applies in the US?  Remember Iraq? 

            Or how about the freakin' criminal kidnappers, I mean "bounty hunters", that go into "sovereign nations" and kidnap their citizens?

            Report Abuse
        • Author by coach777b (January 14, 2009 11:56 am ET)
             

          "being here illegally is akin to speeding in terms of breaking the law."

          This is the problem. being here illegally is LIKE BEING HERE ILLEGALLY! Try living in France or Germany or Russia illegally and use that defense. I praise all immigrants to this country who have decided to change their lives in this manner, completed the paperwork, learned the laws and history. They are true American citizens. But to have 15 million rush ahead of those in line  and expect to be given the same rights is ILLEGAL. No parking tickets issued. Go back to the line, fill in the forms and you are welcome to come to the USA.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by pete592 (January 13, 2009 1:04 pm ET)
         

      It's easy to point fingers at our politicians and say he or she is for or against amnesty, but until they start talking about an all-out crackdown on illegal employment, or (heaven forbid) working with Mexico to improve the lives of its citizens, it's all useless B.S. to me.  We keep drawing lines amongst ourselves between "pro" and "anti-open border" and "pro" and "anti-amnesty" when these arguments do absolutely nothing to address the forces of supply and demand.

      Until our immigration debate starts centering on the root causes, we're simply wasting our time and money and getting ourselves all worked up into a pointless political cluster****.  It makes for entertaining cable crap news and it gives right-wing professional liars something to gin up their drooling fans with, but that's about all it's accomplishing.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (January 13, 2009 3:42 pm ET)
         
      Maybe NAFTA is not really as important as Dobbs makes it out to be.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (January 13, 2009 4:25 pm ET)
         
      I just sent Lou an e-mail... I didn't think Lou was as bad as the rest of the right-wing loons on the corporate cable channels, but... It's looking more and more as if Lou is a serial liar with an agenda to push.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by wolf kotenberg (January 13, 2009 7:11 pm ET)
           

        Lou " huff'n'puff' Dobbs doesn't care. His job at CNN is reduced to throwing rocks at the upcoming Obama presidency for at leats four years. It might work and we will have Cheney back on the saddle again.

        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.