In a clear sign of his increasing desperation, John Edwards attacked former President Clinton in Iowa today. Amy Lorentzen reports for the Associated Press:

Democratic presidential contender John Edwards on Monday criticized former President Clinton, arguing that he allowed corporate insiders to shape the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement that has cost U.S. jobs.

Edwards' complaints about the former president beloved by voters in his own party was a defiant move meant to highlight rival Hillary Rodham Clinton's relationship with special interests. It comes two days after Clinton refused Edwards' challenge to stop taking campaign donations from lobbyists, saying many represent good causes.

"It's time that the president stood up and fought for American workers," Edwards told a crowd of about 300 people at a union hall in Cedar Rapids. "It's time to have a president that always puts the interests of the American people first."

Read the whole article at the above link. Edwards is full of malarkey, of course.

First of all, Clinton had little to do with "shaping" the agreement. It was pretty well a done deal by the time he took office, with little left to shape. He did shepherd it through the Democratic Congress, and deserves full credit for that since it would probably not have passed without his support.

The idea that NAFTA or other trade agreements "cost American jobs" is utterly laughable, although it has become a mantra of the economic illiterates. Unemployment today is far lower than it was in the decades preceding NAFTA, and total employment is much higher. Wages are higher, too, as are personal income, median family income, disposable income, etc.

The "giant sucking sound" Ross Perot kept hearing was only Clinton's dressing room, apparently.

Oh, and yes - manufacturing output continued to grow steadily, too, and is at an all time high today.

Naturally, John Edwards has never let the truth get in his way, whether he was arguing to a gullible jury or campaigning for political office. He won't find the latter as lucrative as the former this time around, though.