Why does Gore seem to get a pass on NAFTA?

[TwilightZone]

I posted this question elsewhere, but I thought it would make for an interesting thread. Bill Clinton gets a lot of (deserved) blame and criticism for NAFTA, but the memory many people have from that time frame is Gore and Perot on Larry King, debating NAFTA.

Obviously, Gore was instrumental in getting NAFTA passed, yet I don't see much criticism of him (if any) on that subject.

Opinions?

[Gman]

1. Oh, give me a fucking break

you're posting this today? The day he wins the Nobel Peace Prize? Why are you pissing on this day?

---on edit---

If you're sincere, then fine. I'm just trigger happy because of people that bash Democrats, any Democrat for any reason. Saw you're from Austin, so you've got to be OK. But If the intent is to put a shadow over the celebrations today, then maybe save it until tomorrow.

[TwilightZone]

7. I'll agree that my timing is poor, but my question is a sincere one.

The approval of Al Gore on DU seems pretty close to universal. I would definitely support his candidacy, though I think he likes his current "job" a bit too much and I don't really see him giving that up for the grind that is the presidential campaign.

The criticisms of Gore are few, and in most cases, the lack of criticism is obviously warranted. He's had an incredible post-White House life, and his impact on issues that he finds important will be felt (hopefully!) for generations.

I do honestly find it curious, though, that NAFTA is quite often mentioned as a criticism of Bill (and Hillary, for that matter) Clinton, yet the conversations rarely seem to involve Gore's involvement. The intent of my post was to see what people really think.

[kestrel91316]

9. Gore wasn't in charge - CLINTON was in charge.

The VP is virtually powerless in national policy

Blame NAFTA on Clinton.

[Clintonista2]

12. So darth cheney is blameless for everything?

Good to know.

[kestrel91316]

19. Whatever Cheney is doing as Caligula's puppeteer is outside his

official duties.

[TwilightZone]

13. That's an interesting perspective.

I'm not sure I'd agree with it, though, at least not completely.

One of Al Gore's responsibilities when he was VP was to look for items to reduce the Federal government's budget. With a couple of notable exceptions, he tried to do so by recommending cuts that eliminated waste, as opposed to the usual cut-the-social-programs Reagan/Bush method. I think that was largely Gore's responsibility, even though he was "just" VP at the time.

I'm not sure how that compares to the NAFTA situation. Perhaps Clinton was solely responsible. Or perhaps Gore had more influence than we might have expected. No idea, honestly.

[Kurovski]

2. I've seen criticism.

He fucked up.

Clinton was his president.

Has any one asked Gore about it? Has he said anything about it already?

And: he's gotten a lot more right than wrong in the past six years.

[TwilightZone]

8. "a lot more right than wrong"

Quite certainly. His post-WH impact on society rivals that of President Carter.

[redqueen]

3. He doesn't.

Most don't see politicians as being 'once this way always this way' creatures... and he's said / done a lot lately to ameliorate any bad feelings about that stuff.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. I Like When He Spanked Perot On Larry King And Gave Perot The Picture Of Smoot And Hawley

That's a fond memory...

[Uncle Joe]

10. My favorite part was when Al Gore exposed Perot's own private NAFTA monopoly

on national television, I believed the game was over at that point.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Remember When Gore Gave Him The Picture Of Smoot And Hawley

He looked like he wanted to hit Gore over the head with it...

[TwilightZone]

17. I think that debate helped show voters that Mr. Perot was a bit of a wacko.

Here's the deal, see?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. I Miss Him...Ron Paul Reminds Me Of Him...

"We need to look under the hood."

[PurityOfEssence]

24. He was right about the "giant sucking sound"

The sound was of jobs being sucked out of the country. He was not only correct, he was REALLY correct and he made no bones about it.

Yeah, he was a wacko, yeah he was a narcissistic nincompoop, but he was an original and he was seriously correct about this folly.

(I was a Brown supporter that year and didn't much care for Clinton. I came to like and respect Clinton more, but I also came to dislike him more at the same time.)

[Just-plain-Kathy]

5. I trust Al Gore had a nobel reason. ...I just trust him period.

NAFTA Approval
Al Gore would only approve of NAFTA if it truly brought economic prosperity to the world without sacrificing American jobs. The fact that during the Clinton-Gore years we actually added 23 million new jobs, is only proof it can work if instituted properly.

If you remember, NAFTA came in at a time when a global economy was just taking hold. The original idea of NAFTA was that it would incorporate the Koyto Treaty and force corps to pay decent wages in foreign countries and had environmental provisions that were geared to be increased as time went by because most third world countries (where corps could hire slave labor) had no environmental laws at all. Now corps are free to hire at .15 to .25 cents per hour and work sweatshops with no environmental restrictions at all and Bush wants to dump the Koyoto Treaty altogether. Can't have any restrictions on his war chest monies! This is why the Rio Grande River is so polluted that it actually catches fire from time to time, brain cancer is epidemic in new births, Texas residents are screaming about air pollution, and nothing is being done by Bush & crew about it.

http://algore2008.net/goretruth2.html#anchor_117

[redqueen]

11. "I just trust him period."

That's exactly the reason I think he'd be a shoo-in if he were to declare.

I think there's enough people out there who share that view.

[Xithras]

6. Early on, NAFTA was seen as a good thing.

Don't forget that after the infamous Gore/Perot debate on NAFTA, polling showed that the vast majority of Americans supported it. It was conceived as a tide that would lift all boats...American wage jobs in Mexico would create a large middle class there, pull the nation out of poverty, and increase the market in that nation for American goods. The Mexican government claimed many times that they wouldn't allow their people to be exploited, and how they planned to use this as a way to build wealth in the general population.

None of that happened, of course. NAFTA was conceived as a good thing, but was quickly twisted when the Mexican government backed off and allowed American companies to hire it's people at slave wages. The treaty that might have saved North America became the treaty that killed American industry and consigned Mexico to it's status as a source for cheap labor.

Then again, many people have pointed out over the years that Mexico may simply be biding their time. If they wait until U.S. companies are completely settled in the country and THEN jack up minimum wages, they'll have those companies by the cajones. Nowhere for them to run at that point.

[TwilightZone]

16. I agree that intent and execution were two different things.

As that relates to my initial question, if Gore doesn't deserve blame for NAFTA because the idea was, in theory, a good one, should Clinton be blamed, either?

I don't mean that as sarcasm. I'm just trying to understand why we seem to blame Clinton for NAFTA, but Gore doesn't seem to share that blame. Part of it, of course, is that Clinton was president at the time, but I tend to believe that Gore had a fairly active role in helping shape policy, at least early in the presidency. I could, of course, be completely wrong.

[Solon]

25. The only problem with your last paragraph is that Mexico is facing the outsourcing pinch the...

same as the U.S.

Mexico is a member of the WTO as well, and they pay their workers too much for many U.S. companies, companies that moved operations to Mexico are now offshoring those jobs to even cheaper labor markets, such as China.

[Truth2Tell]

15. I worry about this too Twilight.

I'm not convinced that Gore has fully shed his "internationalist" establishment outlook. But I'm pretty sure he'd be a damn sight better than Hillary in that regard.

Sadly, this is the stuff you always have to wonder about every American politician. Edwards raises the same concerns, IMO. How much of these guys real views do we get to actually know? :shrug:

[illinoisprogressive]

20. he is out of politics and alot of time was overruled by Hillary in the WH

[Zandor]

21. Many DUers will turn on Gore

if / when Gore enters and becomes the frontrunner, this being among the reasons.

[TwilightZone]

22. I'd be surprised if that happens.

Most people should already be aware of NAFTA, and the credit/blame Gore gets for the rest of the Clinton/Gore years seems to be considered largely irrelevant compared to his recent accomplishments.

That being said, it doesn't take much to trigger the switch from love to hate around here, so who knows?

[Zandor]

23. The frontrunner will always be too 'corporate'

If anyone overtakes Clinton, the far left here will discover reasons to turn on the latest 'sell-out'.