So now I’m really confused. A socialist is being attacked by conservatives for being a capitalist, taking the word of the socialist mainstream media who is criticizing said socialist for being a socialist.
He’s not being attacked for being a capitalist, but for being untruthful. Romney tried to pretend that his business experience was somewhat like his father’s (head of GM), but he was actually not in a productive industry but in a speculative area of the financial industry that profited off of dying companies or even off of killing other companies. This may have its purpose (within reason), but Romney has to be honest about it and defend it.
He’s especially got to explain that inconvenient part about the bailout (which is the same kind of crony capitalism that Obama’s crowd has engaged in).
Romney supported TARP.
Romney is the preferred guy of big capital, i.e., private equity, hedge funds, pension funds, etc.
IMHO, big capital is going to be looking for bailouts within the next few years.
This is why Bachmann was vilified and shoved out of the primary, since she could not be relied on to push more bailouts.
Romney supporting TARP is at this link...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aX6T—U8Ll8
No, the theme of this thread is that if you take a $10 million dollar federal bailout and taxpayers get stuck with the bull, you are not pro-free enterprise.
And if workers get tossed and you get $4 million, too, then you are a corporate raider vulture capitalist to boot.