The Democrat's NAFTA Two Step

The Democrats have long lionized the economic period of the Clinton years. It is important to note that during the Clinton years, the Democrats believe that we not only saw outstanding economic growth but we saw across the board economic growth. At the same time, the Democrats have long vilified NAFTA. NAFTA was enacted in 1994. The Democrats see the next seven years as a period of sustained growth that saw all parts of the economy benefit. How then can the Democrats blame NAFTA for anything?

Here we have a rather nefarious two step by the Democrats. They blame NAFTA for causing jobs to leave small town America. Yet, they proclaim that jobs grew everywhere for the seven years directly following its inception. If we are to believe the Democrats, then NAFTA was enacted. For some unknown reason it had no negative effect for its first seven years, and then suddenly just in time for a Republican to enter office, it became a drag on jobs in small towns.

With regards to NAFTA and Bill Clinton, the Democrats are playing the worst kind of cynical politics. The lionize his economic years as a period of remarkable growth. Yet, they, at the exact same time, blame NAFTA from taking jobs away from the heart of America, the middle class. Not only does this not add up but it is totally hypocritical.

The fact is that you never heard one Democrat belie the "corrossive effects" of NAFTA anytime during the Clinton years. That's because they were too busy crediting President Clinton with every part of what they saw was a successful economy. They couldn't possibly blame NAFTA for moving jobs overseas because jobs moving overseas wasn't part of the carefully scripted narrative the Democrats built throughout the 1990's.

It wasn't until the next administration that the Democrats discovered that NAFTA was suddenly the scourge that caused jobs to move overseas. None of this, according to the Democrats, actually occurred for the seven years prior. Instead, it suddenly appeared seven years after its passage. Well, frankly they can't have it both ways. Either the 1990's were a period of sustained across the board economic growth, or NAFTA was the scourge that caused jobs to move overseas. Both narratives simply can't coexist with any semblance of logic.