The Wall Street Journal spent yesterday analyzing Barack Obama’s Columbia free trade answer and, well, let’s just say that the paper wasn’t happy. The editorial pointed out that the accusations made against Alvaro Uribe’s government are mostly just distortions by the protectionist union leaders who oppose free trade. As Ed points out, the old liberal media aren’t interested in pointing that out, though. Here’s the video:

And the paper’s conclusion:

In Wednesday night’s debate with John McCain, Barack Obama defended his opposition to the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement this way: “The history in Colombia right now is that labor leaders have been targeted for assassination, on a fairly consistent basis, and there have not been any prosecutions.” Among the many falsehoods in this Presidential campaign, this is one of the worst.

It is true that Colombia has a history of violence. But since President Álvaro Uribe took office in 2002, that violence has been substantially reduced. The homicide rate through the end of 2007 was down by 40.4% and the rate among union members was down almost 87%. There is nothing “consistent” about a drop to 26 union member murders in 2007 from 155 in 2000.

As for prosecutions: In union-member killings, there were zero convictions from 1991-2000 and one in 2001. But from 2002-2007, there were 80. According to the Colombian attorney general’s office, 29% of those murders were “found to have been results of theft, petty crime and random violence unrelated to union activity.” Mr. Uribe has nonetheless created a special investigative unit for crimes against union members, and he expanded a special government protection program for unions.

So while Obama adamantly opposes the agreement, he’s operating under very old information and apparently hasn’t researched it lately. Not a promising sign for an Obama Administration.