I think it is safe to say who Sarah Palin is rooting for. I think she is just saving herself for an endorsement so she can actively endorse and campaign for whoever the nominee is.

of free market activity as exemplified by Bain on a thread earlier yesterday. That objection to the Gingrich/Perry tactic was not that Bain itself is unassailable; I am after all a longtime and consistent Perry supporter. My objection was rather that I have heard no specifics other that talking point style of general attack for the kind of free market business conducted, not that there were specific actions inconsistent with law or that Bain received bailouts. These issues rightly deserve scrutiny but a more specific scrutiny than I have heard the candidates raise so far. My contention is that the general attacks so far mounted, or at least publicized, are too general and do have the sound of a more sophisticated OWS flavor of attack. The populist sound of that is inconsistent with basic conservative thought and ties the conservative voice much to closely to that mindset in the mind of the general public.

As an aside, Romney’s pathetic defense that he behaved as the President did with the takeover of General Motors, is pathetically symptomatic of the Romney understanding of conservatism and very counter-productive to his attempt at wooing the conservative base. If that does not cause the base to pause before the “coronation” then we are in serious trouble as a party.

Excellent article Erik!

You make great points, but they are subtle and nuanced distinctions in the mind of the voter. The American voter doesn’t do nuance really well. The attacks on Bain are just as daffy as Romney’s defense. But if this will be our standard than we need to talk about Gingrich’s work on “K” street and lobbying for the health care industry and taking 37 million dollars in the process. During this time he was publicly advocating for mandates.

The bottom line for me is that Romney’s Bain baggage affects me a lot less than Gingrich’s being in bed with the Washington establishment trying to grow the size of government while lining his pockets. Gingrich’s work at FredieMac is another case in point.

As resident of MA I can give you a long list of reasons why I dislike Romney, but attacking his work at Bain is sending the wrong message. The Occupy Wall Street crowd is eating this right up. It opens the Pandora’s Box on all the candidates and plays into the Left’s chanting point of “GOP = rich, heartless fat cats.”

We can all sob into our hankies about how bad Romney is, but as you know, Erick, the time to choose the right candidate is during the RECRUITING phase of the election. It’s game day and the team is on the field. It’s a little late to cry about what a lousy quarter back we have. We get the candidates we deserve. Once again we have allowed the GOP to reach into the toilet and pull out the next batch of candidates. Once again we must hold our noses and vote.

I have a great idea. Let’s start recruiting solid candidates right now, and maybe we won’t be in this mess in 2016.

I’d like to ad my 2 cents as well. Capitalism can be defended until you are blue in the face. The perception of unethical business practices will be tough to defend and that perception is out there. Personally I am grateful for the fact that Gingrich and Perry have brought this up now. You know for a fact it will come up in the general if Romney is the nominee. I would rather know now how he will respond and how much of a hit his electibility will take. Once he is the nominee, there is no going back.

Way to go Sarah! I was afraid she had sold her principles to the highest bidder. Wake up people, and fight for our rights.

This proves my point about the “Left” within the GOP and their desire to marginalize conservatives.
Romney ought to be thanking his lucky stars that this assault by Newt and Perry is happening now, because this is nothing compared to what Obama , the DNC, ABC, and all the other media have planned for him.
The Left is going to chew Romney up and spit him out…just like McCain if he get the nomination.
Obviously “Everything” is fair game to Romney so let the war games begin on a candidate that up till now has not had a glove laid on him!
GET THE KEN DOLL !!!! LOL!

The GM bailout has been criticized by many for a number of reasons. One of which is the use of government money to prevent a large company from answering for its bad decisions and going bankrupt. While it may be argued that it saved jobs the flip side says it cost jobs by not allowing innovation to happen. Another problem with the GM bailout was the strong arm tactics employed to facilitate the refinancing and takeover. Which part was Romney okay with?
There is nothing wrong with making money legitimately even lots of it. But if this is a hint as to how Romney thinks then how will he lead? I have already seen how he reacts to hard questions that challenge his stand or multi-stands as it were.
I guess that the only way a decision can be made over this in the mind of the voters now and in the general is whether or not the actions he participated in at Bain were ethical or not. I do not want to hold my nose and vote.

but the conversation has morphed into whether or not Bain Capital is a moral or ethical entity, and attaching those attributes (or lack of same) to Romney. I, for one, won’t pass judgement on Bain or whether or not Bain is a good capitalist concern, but I take issue with Romney’s claims. Let’s be clear….Romney says his business experience and his “record of job creation” puts him above his competitors. OK, so why does he continue with claims and platitudes with no documentation? A study of PE firms like KKR , Bain, etc. shows 45% of Bain’s “investments” wound up in worse distress or bankrupt. That fact pretty much shows Romney/Bain were not very good at their jobs. If we don’t thoroughly vet Romney now, Obama will shred him in the runup to the general.

Look for yourselves at:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/mitt-romneys-defense-bain-capital-and-private-equity-industry-here-are-some-facts

Eric is not objective when its about Romney. You can hear the same rhetoric on msnbc chris matthew show.

Both the Wall Street Journal and Rush have leveled devastating criticisms of this Michael Moore-style attack of Newt and Rick.

The Wall Street Journals editorial began like this: “About the best that can be said about the Republican attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital is that President Obama is going to do the same thing eventually, so GOP primary voters might as well know what’s coming. Yet that hardly absolves Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry and others for their crude and damaging caricatures of modern business and capitalism.”

They go on to add “Mr. Perry, who has no problem using taxpayer financing to back his political allies in Texas, chimes in that “I have no doubt that Mitt Romney was worried about pink slips, whether he was going to have enough of them to hand out.” Politics isn’t subtle, and these candidates are desperate, but do they have to sound like Michael Moore?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204879004577108500491449164.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop#articleTabs%3Darticle

Rush was more pointed: to him, it is clear that these career polliticians, used to using taxpayer money, have no idea what capitalism actually is.

Among his many quotes from yesterday, hammering Perry’s contorted view of capitalism:
“I’m sorry, folks, that is indefensible. There’s no way you can try to dress that up. I don’t understand it. Well, politically I understand it, but that’s just absurd. It’s sad. ‘Cause I really, really, really like Rick Perry! I really do. I had such hopes! I did. I’ll tell you, I did, but all of this talk about “corporate raiders,” and as I listen to politicians start talking about capitalism, lights are going off in my head. “Maybe they don’t really know what it is. Maybe they’re under some misconception about what capitalism is, because this characterization of it? A distinction with venture capitalism and vulture capitalism? This bite from Perry doesn’t compute.
So now we’ve got all this talk about corporate raiders, vulture capitalists plundering companies and greed. All this talk about sucking the blood out of companies and leaving corpses? Limiting how much somebody can make in profits? This is the language of leftists like Michael Moore and Oliver Stone. They popularized this. This is the way Fidel Castro thinks, or says he thinks.”

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/01/11/gingrich_and_perry_blew_it_on_bain_attack_update_newt_admits_he_made_a_mistake

The lemmings will follow Perry off any clift, but the reality is that this attack is just the politics of personal destruction (loving pink slips, really?), not an effort to win. Neither Newt nor Perry have any chance whatsoever of winning and seem to be on angry, kamikazi missions. Newt came in 4th in Iowa and 5th in New Hampshire (latest results) and Perry came in 5th in Iowa and was a fringe candidate in New Hampshire, with about 1,000 votes out of 150,000 cast.

The good news from Newt’s angry attack and Perry’s dim-witted attack is that Santorum is now clearly and unequivocably the front-running conservative. He is my candidate and he will do very well. Newt and Perry are now afterthoughts and will clear the way for Santorum. They don’t even seem like they care to win at all — just angry they have done so poorly. Otherwise, they would be going after each other to become the conservative alternative to Romney.

…it’s not the argument that Perry and Gingrich have been using.

Gingrich’s video portrays Romney as a heartless ruthless corporate raider.

And Perry said that Bain was a “vulture capitalist” that “feasted on the blood of sick companies.”

So even if we want to attack Romney from the right (that FDIC forgiveness, which is commonplace in American business today), it still doesn’t make Gingrich or Perry look one bit better as to the tactics they’re using and the implications for the general election campaign.

Liberal Dems are already quoting Gingrich and Perry gleefully. They’re going to be using the video that Gingrich paid for against Romney, should he be the nominee.

Instead of this endless nonstop attack on Romney, how about you supporters of Gingrich and Perry demanding that THEY stop these tactics forthwith.

Rush and Levin call off the dogs. Perry and Newt anti-capitalists? Please. This is an election and everything is on the table. Trust me I am sure we will see more of Romney down and dirty w/ his opponents. I find it curious that Santorum supporter Levin and Rush are willing to use their mike to put down fellow conservative republicans in this manner. I have lost all respect for both of them. Santorum is a earmark loving, anti right to work, big spending establishment republican. Everything Rush and Levin has Railed against for years!

Limbaugh and Hannity have decided that criticism of Bain Capital’s methods of operation is unacceptable, period. If it is profitable, it is good, and criticism of these “All American” risk takers is verboten. The people in South Carolina whinnying about losing their jobs are socialists. Rick Perry is an occupy Wall Street sympathizer. Anyone who questions whether what they did to these companies was ethical is attacking capitalism.

Or Limbaugh and Hannity are wrong. Take your pick.

Mitt Romney’s Bain hired people and it fired people, it made money and it lost money, created business and destroyed businesses, won some and lost some and allocated capital as effectively as allowed in the real world and certainly more effectively and rationally than coercive government’s fiat could have or has.

This is creative progress in the best sense of the word.
Resources can be allocated in either of two ways by voluntary, cooperative free market or by government rationing, a system of coercive redistribution of resources tainted by selfish political power.

There is not a hint of Corporatism in what Mitt Romney’s Bain has done.

Rick Perry’s Texas Model personifies the Bain model. Less government; more jobs and a higher standard of living for all.

It is good thing that this primary is forcing us to articulate the case for the free market, where a productive order emerges spontaneously and evolves unpredictably. Turbulence in a turbulent world is not to be expected or feared.

Don Boudreaux and Russ Roberts at Café Hayek, where orders emerge, offers an accessible, clear and academically based explanation and defense of Free Markets. http://cafehayek.com

all good to Erick Erickson and the people of RedState

Capitalism as a word, is might become very dangerous to follow on its own.
Collectivists use it to satisfy or reach their goals. Wasn’t Lenin who said that if he wanted to hang a capitalist another capitalist would sell him the rope?
There are two types of capitalists on that statement and with Obama, the one selling him the rope is working very closely and it is the one lacking principle and looking only at the bottom line while his country goes down into the third world as a past dream. GE, GM and many others showing over and over again prove that point.
The other type of capitalism, is the one that only works in a free market, in freedom, of excessive regulations and government interference and oppression. This one, fights to stay away from government and it is not necessarily principled, but the people is the one who keeps it good as opposed to evil.
It is ultimately the people, under a very small government and limited one, who makes capitalism be good or evil.
Capitalism is not the word to become so obsessed about, freedom is and for freedom life needs to be first, and these are the anti-thesis of the Obama regime, who is clearly and unmistakably pro-death and pro-big-government as well as pro-sodomy an d many other evils that collectivism keeps in hiding so that the people get distracted with other words.

Romney has already been selected my the members of the club. The fix is in. He already has the endorsements of Christie, Coulter, Haley and now Bolton. Bolton was the real shocker fo rme. I feel like I’ve entered an alternate universe.

This is 2008 redux. Romney is a good guy, but then so was McCain. He’s another in a long list of moderate Republicans that will continue with business as usual. All I’ve heard from Romney is rhetoric. He hasn’t laid out any specific plan to address our serious problems. His job creation background is useless in the White House. Gingrich is the only one that has specific plans for addressing issues. I particularly like his plan to fire every White House czar on day one and sign up to 200 executive orders to undo much of the damage Obama has created.

I’m now convinced that the people of this country don’t have any interest in evaluating a candidate and only follow popular opinion to decide their vote. I’m not sure that we’ll ever see another conservative in the White House and contrary to Erick’s opinion, I don’t consider either of the Bushs conservatives.

I want to give Romney the benefit of the doubt, but pundits, talk show talkers, and news media personel are really busy lecturing Perry and Gingrich on their unrepublican, anticapitalist, attacks. Not one is actually bringing up these companies and letting us know if the accusations are true or not. Now I’ll admit I’m probably far behind many of in that I had no knowledge of anything controversial regarding Bain Capital until this last week. It is very difficult to find trustworthy information on the subject. Until reading Erick’s post, I didn’t know that government bailouts were involved. I have found the following and would like to know more.

On KB Toys I know that Bain was taken to court but don’t know what the outcome was.

http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/2006/03/27/story2.html

I know that Damon Clinical Labs was involved in Medicare Fraud and that Romney was on the Board of Directors from 1990-1993.

I don’t know how completely accurate this first link is

http://huckabeeblog.com/2008/01/01/romney-profits-from-government-fraud

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Damon+Clinical+Laboratory+Agrees+to+Pay+$119+Million+to+Resolve…-a018744617

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Damon+Clinical+Laboratories+agrees+to+$119+million+settlement+with…-a018749693

I know that Bain aquired KB Toys, then bought the assests of eToys. Bain then aquired Toys R us who then bought the assets of KB Toys. Seems a bit conflicted.

I know that Bain pops up in stories I find on Venture Capatilism and Leveraged Buyouts. Page 2 of this article talks about Bain and KB Toys according to this article, not only was KB hurt but also Big Lots. Unsecured creditors also sued Bain
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2006/0313/088.html

According to a Politico article, Romney has no plan to defend his actions where companies like KB are concerned. His plan is to counter them with good stories from people who’s jobs were saved because of Bain. So if he won’t discuss or defend the bad stories, and the media won’t tell us anything, what should we believe? And how can we defend who very well could be our nominee?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71352.html

I take no issues with examining the record of Romney and comparing it to what he has said- provided that analysis and methodology is applied equally to everyone in the race. You will forgive me, if I say that fair application is sorely lacking at the moment in some circles.

It seems some will stop at nothing and as a result have become the daughters of Phorcys, warning us away from the wreck that will come from getting too close to Romney. In the midst of that quest, they see no boundaries and have joined hand-in-hand with Mr. Obama and his acolytes, treating almost everyone in the financial business or with accumulated wealth as sons of Arius or denizens for some Lazar House. That curiously now includes Perry and Gingrich (oddly, I am trying to figure out how that brings us all together or what it says about their future plans for taxes on the wealthy, Dodd-Frank and in general, the financial markets. But I have digressed into logic). Gingrich, rightly is backing away because he now probably sees the illogical comportment with free market principles. But, frankly, that is probably mostly due to the fact he has a political sixth sense and knows this will be the final shot that will sink him. Too late in my opinion. If polling could go into negative numbers, Newt would be there. Perry? Well he is just doubling down with his Vulture Capitalism comment. Which is why he will never be President or poll much higher than he has to date. Does he really believe the people of SC are that shallow and unsophisticated? Why either of them is still in the race is simply beyond me. I suppose their sole purpose is to foil the eventual nominee under the pretense of adumbrating what will come in the fall. I would have thought the purpose from people on the same team was to form a phalanx around the core party principles and win the battle. That includes the free market. Which apparently some don’t feel is worth defending or is better used as a foil to make themselves the nominee. Either way in the end it is destructive and I can’t wait to see how this is all comes together in the fall if Romney is the nominee. That should involve some interesting argumentative gymnastics combined with a whispering that would rival Motto .

You also co-opted stories from the Left about how Bain was “bailed out” by the government. Nothing could be further from the truth and I suggest some fact-checking combined with the entire story of how Romney came back to the firm after it was run down (without him) and restored Bain’s fiscal health. I see that as a success and credit to his unquestionable fiscal genius.

Capitalism like society relies on self regulation and a moral code. Since thre are predators among us we have laws and cops for gross offenders. This lead op ed trends toward jumping on a safe bandwagon that is circling Romney and Bain.

Free enterprise need not be defended but the way blog and talk show hosts line up backing Romney , Bain as capitalism silences most of us. All the audible emotion goes to Bain and Romney. Romney is not capitalism because he got rich out of Bain.

Wal mart, Google Apple, Kentucy Fried Chicken, Sears and Robuck, John Deere, General Mills, AT and T, these guys don’t matter when we as a party want to show we are strong by making ruthlessness a fetish not a virtue

If that new standard of Bain gets a pass as some seem to think it must and anything goes, then off go more jobs to China and India. Afterall we can not expect White House jobs czar, Jeff Immelt of GE to stick around when he can cut a bigger buck in China, can we?

I have no respect for business people who rob and pilage legal or not and do not see them as inevitable or leaders in government. I want someone who has faith in my people right here on US soil.

Bain ain’t my model for free enterprise and Romney ain’t my choice for president.

While I can’t find the post anymore and therefore can’t quote it directly or remember if it was Erick (yes, it’s spelled Erick, not Eric or Erik like so many insist on doing) or one of the other front page contributors, but I remember a post about the idea of the OWS people and the tea party teaming up, because both hated the bank bailout. While I’m paraphrasing, the author basically said it was impossible. While both groups opposed the bailout they blamed entirely different people for the bailout. The OWS blamed the banks for taking the money. The TP blamed the govt for giving it, and even went so far to say it’s only reasonable the banks accept the money – their job is to make their businesses profitable, and they’d be doing a disservice to their stockholders not to explore and take advantage of any opportunity to do so. Expecting them not to was naive and foolish. To the OWS, because those at fault were the banks, the solution was more govt control over the banks. Because the TP blamed the govt, the solution was to shrink the govt. Therefore while there was a superficial connection between the groups, no real cooperation between the two was possible without one side changing who was to blame – the banks for taking the money or the govt for giving it.

Apparently now we do blame businesses for taking govt money. We’re all OWSers now!

I also like how it’s the GOP that has gone off the reservation. Yes, it’s the GOP attacking capitalism. Wouldn’t want to say that Perry is in the wrong. It’s the GOP as a whole.

Big Government under any-ISM is still big government. Power is centralized and those in power suck in their cut of making favorable policies decisions that benefit first themselves and their benefactors,2nd those controlling money ,3rd the Party and so on until the little people receive enough to keep them voting for more.
As to Charity . I recall every Christmas our Church doing fruit baskets and toy stuff for the “Needy”. All the women got tears in their eyes patting each other on the backs for their charity. The new year rolled around and those in need were forgotten. Their circumstances had not changed one bit. The lack of a job,income and/or the ability to provide for a family was never addressed.
In an enlightened society there should be an economic model that creates and maintains jobs for all able bodied individuals with a flexible retirement program so in old age one may have a sense of security.
There is a balance between Capitalism and Socialism but those pushing either system looks at their own greed first not the collective good of society.

as mentioned above and when I wrote about it. That isn’t capitalistic now is it? Big love from big gov. And pension payoff from one failure came from the pension guarantee corp created by the blues and the reds. Bain took care of itself and used gov to pay employee pensions.

There’s also a medicare scandal from a hospital buyout in the 1980′s so don’t make the mistake that Mitt is as honest as your mother.

The bank and the steel company. What kind of businessman wouldn’t take advantage of a government program that is in place and being used when they are trying to save a failing business? All kinds of people lose money when businesses fail, when government makes itself a stakeholder then it does as well.

Does Newt’s taking $1.6 million in government money to be a “historian” bother you also? Or is it selective outrage?

I think the real issue here is business ethics. Some people have the feeling that Bain’s activities may have crossed into the unethical.

However, instead of specific examples of this, we get fuzzy accusations about job losses and LBOs. Job losses are not unethical. They are unfortunate and might be due to unethical behavior but might not.

I’m pretty certain that Bain plays hardball from time to time and isn’t in business to make friends or win popularity contests.

These folks that want to attack Bain need to do some homework and find some examples of bad behavior that will stick to Romney if they want to get any traction with conservatives.

It’s one thing to criticize Romney, but it’s another to outright lie about his position here.

Erick: “The best defense he has so far offered about his time at Bain is that he did what the President did with General Motors.”

That’s not his defense and never was. That’s his response to the type of attack ads your boys Gingrich and Perry are running, the emotional videos of the employees who lost their jobs. Romney’s explaining how these ads could be run against anyone who has had to make tough decisions and therefore should have no relevance to a campaign. IOW, the ads are pure demagoguery.

Romney’s argument has always been that GM and Chrysler should have gone through normal, legal, bankruptcy. He’s repeated this many times, again highlighting the stark contrast with Obama. Yet here we have Gingrich and Perry blurring the distinction between Republicans and Democrats by not only emulating but condoning Obama’s emotional appeals.

Romney’s defense of Bain is his persistent defense of capitalism and free markets, but like his father, he’s also persistently noted that capitalism cannot be unfettered. The quotation you provided is not an attack on capitalism as you misrepresent. I once sat with George Romney as he explained how capitalism can only work when it’s governed by rules to guard against abuses, and Mitt knows this as well as anyone.

Somehow I suspect you know better but you’re so obsessed with defeating Romney that you’re stooping to the level of misrepresenting his positions and prior statements.

I agree the Bain record is a fair line of inquiry, but it has to be done objectively and honestly. What you’re doing here is neither.

According to an Insider Advantage poll conducted for The Augusta Chronicle and The Savannah Morning News, Romney has 23 percent support, and Gingrich has 21 percent. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum has 14 percent, Texas Rep. Ron Paul has 13 percent, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman has 7 percent, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry has 5 percent.

If you want to know who really supports capitalism, please compare Massachusetts and Texas. It’s not about the words; it’s about the actions.

Rick Perry was not attacking capitalism; he was attacking the way Mitt Romney does business. I disagree that Perry and Gingrich are trying to blurr the distinction between Republicans and Democrats. They are merely trying to show us who Mitt Romney is. Bain is just one piece of a large puzzle. As I put the pieces together for Mitt Romney, I don’t like what I see.

Rick Perry is for less government; Mitt Romney is for more.

For instance making money by evicting 98 year old widows from rent controlled apartments might be a plus for the real estate market, but could also make a political candidate unelectable.

It is is reasonable to inquire exactly what Romney was doing at Bain, and then judge whether he would succeed as the leader of the Republican Party. On the surface it seems that forcing companies to borrow large amounts of money to pay lavish management fees and “dividends” to Bain could be looked down upon by a large number of voters, particularly if those companies subsequently went bankrupt causing significant employment losses and pension-guarantee expenses for the US government. On the other hand, it could be that Romney can make a convincing case that the good he has done for society as a businessman outweighs any mistakes.

So what’s in your tax return Mitt? And what’s in your college records Barack?

Romney 41, Gingrich 19, Santorum 15, Paul 9, Huntsman 5.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/florida/2012_florida_republican_primary

So what else is new, right? Romney has flipped on every issue, so why should it surprise us that he flips on his corporate views? AND if he’s elected president, he’ll do the same thing. We need a leader whose principles are just that…prin-ci-ples, not ex-ped-i-en-cy.

Romney ain’t it.

If Romney is to be the great communicator of Republican ideas, and if he is an expert in the field of venture capitalism, he should be able to make a compelling case in support of his actions. If so, no problem, Obama attack pre-empted and diffused.
If there is something more than just the dealings of Bain Capital underlying this and it is a problem of perception, then this too gives him an opportunity to overcome the attack. Do not believe for a minute, that by giving him a pass, and having other surrogates explain and defend his positions, we are helping him or the GOP nominee.
Much of the problem with Romney as nominee, lies in the perception of him as Mr. Wall St.( and the negative image surrounding the bail-outs, crony capitalism etc). he has no part in those, so he needs to make that clear. He needs to explain how, what he has engaged in at Bain Capital has had positive effects on many lives. If he can’t win this argument, he doesn’t need to be our nominee. Number one priority : we need to beat Obama.

running around like rats trying to prop up Romney. They are scared, they know he’s a weak candidate. He won’t win.

Bain did not get TARP funds (Romney wasn’t even running Bain when TARP was passed) and bain also did not get TARP funds, but why let that get in the way of a good bashing.

Here’s an excellent rundown in National Review about this lie that the Left and now RedState is passing around:
Bain Did Not Get A Bailout

Don’t give cover to the Left just because your mad your guy isn’t going to win the nomination.

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani … professed himself “shocked” by Newt Gingrich?’s attacks on Mitt Romney?’s private-sector career …

Giuliani asked, “What the hell are you doing, Newt? I expect this from Saul Alinsky! This is what Saul Alinsky taught Barack Obama, and what you’re saying is part of the reason we’re in so much trouble right now.”

Giuliani broadened his criticism to include the attacks on Bain Capital launched by both Gingrich and Texas Governor Rick Perry, who he described as “a very close friend of mine.” “I’m shocked at what they’re doing,” said Giuliani. “It’s ignorant and dumb. It’s building something we should be fighting in America, ignorance of the economic system, playing on the dumbest, most ridiculous ideas about how you grow jobs.” He characterized the attacks on Romney’s private sector career as “unfair and bad for the Republican Party.”

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=48753

Gingrich is acting just like he did when he revealed that one of the reasons he spearheaded the shudown the US government was because Cliinton made him get off the back of the plane. His ego is so humongous, that no-one dares go against him. He is not even trying to win anymore, just do as much destruction as he can. And Perry just seems to have no idea what he is talking about. That Romney likes to give pink slips to workers while he makes millions? This is right out of the OWS/Obama/Michael Moore/Obama playbook.

http://graphics.thomsonreuters.com/11/12/Kansas_City_Steel.pdf

Best single detailed analysis of when Bain went into Private Equity Leveraged Buyouts to enhance Bain’s “shareholder value” because Venture Capitalism (Staples) was not as profitable.

There IS nuance in understanding Capitalism.

Someone above noted that the founding principles of America were:

“principle of private property rights, personal liberty and low taxation.”

Exactly! The early Presidential champions were Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, who were ANTI-Federalists, the forerunner of the Democratic Party.

2012 politics is not so simple as left versus right.

It is still the same argument over the the Federal government versus the States (10th Amendment)

I went to work for RJRNabisco in 1986 in large part because the Private Equity Leveraged Buyouts that started in 1978 were running amok. I thought RJRNabisco was TOO big to be bought with a tiny bit of Private Equity and a huge amount of loans. One year later, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts made their playm because some Wall Street MBA analysts thought RJRNabisoc’s publicly traded shares were “undervalued”.

Bidding war erupted. KKR paid too much for what was a very profitable company – yes, CEO Ross Johnson was a profligate glad-hander just as depicted in the book “Barbarians at the Gate” (NOT the movie where James Garner made Ross Johnson look normal – I was there!)

Every year, automatic headcount reduction of 10% at Christmas, to make the $Q balance sheet look better. Hiring resumed January 1.

Trust me, Vuulture Capitalism is too kind for the looting that characterizes many (not all) Private Equity LBOs.

Both of 2012′s GOP and Democratic Parties are unrecognizable to any student of American political history.

But, at least Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, and Sarah Palin understand the nuance in “Free Market Capitalism”.

Mr. Romney does not – once you see the economy as a Harvard MBA, everything from factories to machine tools to people are reduced to numbers on a spreadsheet.

When engineers/tinkerers started, or rose thru the ranks to run American companies, America had a booming (with some busts) growth economy.

When the MBAs and lawyers took over, starting in 1978, well, that is why we have been in a different economy since 1997.

Wall Street bought the Dems, not Romney wants Wall Street to buy the GOP.

It is truly sad to have been part of American manufacturing, and been a driect witness to the abuse of Capitalism.

Newt is correct – people need to study American history.

Perhaps Romney’s sole legacy will have been an urgently needed lesson in Economics during a raucous political year.

In the end, the Bond Market will determine the fate of America – the public debt is truly at a tipping point in history. Just as soon as the Bond Market figures out what to do with Europe…

oh, and Romney wanting to be “tough with China” Give me a break. He has a glass jaw, and Mitt Fits every time anyone challenges him. THAT is an Absence of Leadership.

Corporate greed, etc. GOP=Big tent. I get that. And OWS are tent freaks. I get that.

But this bickering back and forth is beginning to smell. If Romneys the winner (God help us all) the dems will bring it back in spades. Until then, lets find other concerns to vet our primary candidates. Or find new candidates.

I saw a clip on CNN this morning where someone asked Romney if he had a response to Palin’s, and other’s comments about Bain. His response was that he sticks by his statement that he created 100,000. He said that anyone who cares to can just go to the websites for Staples, and a few other companies he named, and to look at the number of jobs they are providing.

A couple problems with that statement. I am unaware that any of the websites cite the number of people currently employed with their company. The biggest problem with it is that Romney left Bain years ago, and the number of jobs they provide now have nothing to do with him. It seems that he has been caught with his pants down, and doesn’t have any adequate defense of his claims.

I’m also seeing articles that claim that many of those jobs created, when Romney was at Bain, were in Mexico and Indonesia. I think Palin may have touched on that fact also.

in the analogy, your house is a company. To examine Bain’s record you have to look at the process.

If they put on extensive leverage on a company, then pulled out management fees and dividends, they were not looking out for the business. Struggling businesses need capital and reorganization. Paying management fees and dividends isn’t for struggling or new venture type businesses.

Debt itself isn’t bad, its a form of capital that may be better than equity depending on circumstances. But over-leverage, meanwhile pulling out fees and dividends? Big red flag.

I’m sure Bain’s record is a mixed one. But it should not be out of line to look at the bad deals and what their real intentions were.

Since when is it incumbent on conservatives to endorse the kind of capitalism that sucks the capital from a struggling or dying company and throws away the husk? That may be a Republican value, but it is NOT a litmus test conservative value.

To buy a company when it’s down, suck out the good, and displace its workers is not responsible; it’s reprehensible. Newt and Perry are right to hit him on this. It seems some (many) are tone deaf to the actual values of working class conservatives.

They also took about a $12billion dollar piece of the Stimulus.

They take education money and over $100 billion in highway funds.

Is that a “bailout”? Over-reaching federal government? I am not saying it is, but I am simply curious.

Is that how this works, concocting alleged inconsistencies and throwing out buzzwords to make Pavlov’s dog’s salivate? Is there a point to this exercise?

the fact that there are huge swaths of the Conservative movement that do not trust Romney, do not believe that he can beat Obama and do not believe that he has the righteous, authentic conservatism necessary to save this country. It just isn’t there. He’s a hair piece

Perry supporters, take note.

It is nothing short of what we would expect if Michael Moore produced it with the help of some OWSers.

Seriously, if there weren’t such (irrationally) extreme antipathy toward Romney as insufficiently ideologically pure, any candidate whose superPAC produced this video would be subjected to the most severe scorn and ostracism by nearly all at RS, and rightly so. Principles matter, people. Ideology matters. Integrity matters. It’s not all just a matter of whether or not you dislike the Republican candidate being unfairly attacked.

The problem in any plant-closing is that there are a handful of guys who came out ahead on the deal and hundreds or even thousands of people whose lives are utterly ruined. It may make economic sense; but don’t ignore what has happened to the people who are laid off.

Their bills go into arrears within a month or two. That makes their credit report bad. Nowadays employers check your credit report and most of them won’t hire you with a bad credit report. After a while, there’s gap in employment, and most employers won’t hire anyone with a gap in employment. When that happens to thousands at the same time, the job market can’t absorb thousands of new unemployed people.

This is a real political liability for Romney. It is why, after leading Ted Kennedy in the polls in September, he lost pretty badly to Kennedy. The Ampad layoffs were a very sore subject in Hampden County, and there were other similar issues.

Finance does not equate to capitalism or to free markets. There is a difference. Yes, finance CAN represent both, but it can also exist and thrive in conditions counter to that free market capitalism stands for. Keep in mind that through abuse of finance we have gotten to the situation the economy is now in….

I know I am.

I was hoping Christie would jump in , but that aint happening. If Obama wins, he can use the next four years to get into shape. I love the guy, but hes obese, which doesnt help his chances.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ad_E8VXm4m0&src_vid=UYg_OdXNc1Q&annotation_id=annotation_812676&feature=iv

A 28 minute preview of the Obama fall campaign. If Mitt Romney is the GOP candidate, it’s going to be ugly.

By this I mean that there are no markets in this country that are unregulated. All markets are subject to distortions from a variety of legislative, regulative, and judicial acts.

Those who wish to style themselves “conservatives” ought to be cognizant of these many distortions. To truly understand America we must never forget the many losses that champions of economic liberty have suffered. To shrug off those losses today by “defending capitalism” as if it still existed is to let the enemies of liberty get away with murder.

I do not view the examination of Romney’s time at Bain Capital as being anti-capitalist. Examining the ethical business practices of a man running for President largely based on his experience as a businessman is completely within bounds. It amazes me how quickly GOP pundits will jump on anyone who dares to criticize businesses. Businesses are not off limits for criticism for Conservatives.

What differentiates Conservatives and Leftists on this issue is that Leftists want the government to step in and “stop” big, bad business. They demonize anyone who would dare make a profit or (shock) let people go. Conservatives, on the other hand, may not agree morally with certain business practices but we let the markets take care of themselves because we believe inherently in economic freedom. We know that without it, the government becomes infinitely worse than the most egregiously unethical business on the planet. In fact, I would argue that is exactly the state of our government right now.

I will add for the record that neither Perry nor Gingrich has argued for government intervention regarding the practices that Bain engaged in. While their messaging could be better, their attacks are completely within the bounds of Conservative thought.

And I don’t care if I get them Peery anti-capitalist… they don’t mean nothin’ in my book.

There is absolutely… NO… non-defense of capitalism.

Not perfect… and I could go on… BUT…

It is the greatest financial/monetary system that world has ever known.

Peery and Gingrich… should be ashamed… can’t help it… I was a Peery fan. (But that “do anythang to get elected” man… needs to be defeated.)

At one time… Peery… even after his gafts… I loved him. He is now an embarassment.

Ned

And I don’t care if I get them Peery anti-capitalist… they don’t mean nothin’ in my book.

There is absolutely… NO… non-defense of capitalism.

Not perfect… and I could go on… BUT…

It is the greatest financial/monetary system that world has ever known.

Peery and Gingrich… should be ashamed… can’t help it… I was a Peery fan. (But that “do anythang to get elected” man… needs to be defeated.)

At one time… Peery… even after his gafts… I loved him. He is now an embarassment.

Ned

Bain capital and companies like it are just an updated version of “bust out” schemes used by organized crime in the 70′s.

Basically the buyer purchases all assets and liabilities. Run up the debt with new purchases, sell the assets, and file for bankruptcy.

You can call that capitalism but it is still a scam.