follow-up regarding Obama’s dishonesty on trade
Earlier today I suggested the lack of consistency and candor on free trade would not significantly harm Senator Obama’s campaign.
Daniel Ikenson has a related post at Cato-at-liberty: “Some are cynical enough to excuse [the inconsistency] as par-for-the-course pandering, but I don’t. The reason that there is a backlash against trade – that there is even a debate – in this country is that lies like those are uttered with such frequency that they are believed. Those myths are all the more reinforced when spoken by someone as apparently likeable and charismatic as Senator Obama.”
A fair enough point. I just want to clarify that I don’t excuse Obama’s dishonesty; his inability to be straightforward when it comes to trade reflects negatively on his ability to tell the truth should he become president.
My earlier point remains, however. Although dishonesty should never be passed over, I unfortunately doubt that in this instance it will have a major impact on the campaign.
