In the Financial Times, I argued that, unlike with Hillary Clinton, there were several reasons why one could be optimistic that Barack Obama would follow a pro-trade policy despite “prudential” protectionist talk on the primaries circuit (“Obama’s free-trade credentials top Clinton’s”, March 3 2008). But the US president-elect’s eloquent silence on trade issues – and his failure to balance his protectionist appointments with powerful trade proponents – require that we abandon these illusions and sound an alarm.
via FT.com / Comment / Opinion – Obama and trade: an alarm sounds. Read the rest.
Obama was not my first (or second, or third) choice for president. . . But I do/did want to give him a fair shake. I’m already quite disappointed in him, and he hasn’t even been sworn in.
Two words: Smoot-Hawley :-p (is there an emoticon for “tongue partially in cheek”?)