Harold Meyerson called it like it is in a recent Washington Post op-ed.  Referreing to China as the world's "leading protectionist power," Meyerson noted that those who promoted normalized trade with China 10 years ago were simply wrong:

Advocates' central contention was that the deal would eventually lead to a political liberalization of China -- which it hasn't -- and would enable the United States to so increase exports to China that our Chinese trade imbalance would end -- precisely the opposite of the effect that normalizing trade relations has actually had.

Meyerson cites Kenneth Lieberthal, who was senior director for Asia on the National Security Council.  Lieberthal praised the new trade relationship with China in 1999, saying, "The most fundamental thing we get out of this deal is an enormous increase in our access to the Chinese economy."  And of the U.S. trade deficit with China, Lieberthal predicted, "Over time, clearly it will shrink with this agreement." In fact, Meyesron pointed out, the "U.S. trade deficit with China was roughly $60 billion in 1998, the year before we reached the accord granting China permanent normalized trade relations. Over the following decade, it ballooned to $268 billion, and tens of thousands of U.S. factories closed down." Since trade with China has proven to be such a disastrous mistake, isn't it time to rethink the U.S. approach to Beijing?