Posted on 01/10/2012 1:23:20 PM PST by americanophile
On Fox & Friends this morning, Newt Gingrich fought back against Rush Limbaugh's criticism of his rhetoric on Bain Capital.
FOX HOST STEVE DOOCY: I was driving around yesterday in my car, and I was listening to Rush Limbaugh, and he was talking about you and how you're going after Mitt Romney and Bain Capital.
And he said that you're using the language of the Left to beat up on Romney over Bain.
He said it makes him uncomfortable because that's what the Left will do if Romney is the nominee.
GINGRICH: Well, I don't think I'm using the language of the Left. I'm using the language of classic American populism.
Main Street has always been suspicious of Wall Street, small businesses have always worried about big businesses.... and I think people have a natural concern when they see financiers come in from out of town, take over a company, take all the profits, and then leave people who are unemployed behind.
(Excerpt) Read more at gop12.thehill.com ...
Define "profit".
I'll go out on limb here and say, No, and No.
You may have seen others noting that Romney may not have been with Bain when he did things that could be attacked. I’m not sure of those facts, nor do I care.
But Perry’s attack on ROmney has been much more focused than Gingrich’s, and while I still thought it was too “left”, it wasn’t as bad as Gingrich’s assault on “Bain Capital”, especially if Bain Capital wasn’t the culprit as some have argued.
I think you can attack Romney for HOW he ran a company, and what HE DID in the company, without attacking the very idea of private equity firms, like GIngrich appears to do.
That is the best description of the US Congress that I've heard in a long time. Go Newt!!
I believe in resurrection also and I’m not giving up on Perry.
But I’ve always said that Newt is my backup guy. I’d vote for Santorum if I had to, but it would be hard.
But what’s the deal with some people who get so devoted to their candidates, they cannot face dealing with negatives.
Rush was right and Newt needs to admit he went a little wheels off and explain that he DOES NOT think businesses are in it to share the wealth but to make it.
Why am I not surprised?
That is the best description of the US Congress that I've heard in a long time. Go Newt!!
Why do people always tell other people to ‘lighten up.’
I wasn’t calling Mr. B a racist. I have no idea who he is.
the original poster has posted those Mexican pictures on Perry threads about 300 times. I hate it and I’m sick of them and him.
So, why should I lighten up?
Definition of ‘Profit’
A financial benefit that is realized when the amount of revenue gained from a business activity exceeds the expenses, costs and taxes needed to sustain the activity. Any profit that is gained goes to the business's owners, who may or may not decide to spend it on the business.
Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/profit.asp#ixzz1j6DrbBxD
Comprende?
Obviously you don’t recognize the
“we don’t need no stinking badges” guy.
Newt has flaws, like his fraternizing with Pelosi over AGW, but he is a smart guy who can learn. We need him, even if not as POTUS. I hope when the dust settles and we have a nominee, all these candidates will do their part. Perry can make great speeches, if not debate performances. Cain can tell the black voters how they have been cheated by the statists. Sarah Palin can come out of the freezer and fight for us.
PLEASE! BAIN did not buy these companies. mitt romney and a gang of seven raiders bought these companies. romney had separated from the Bain main company to run his OWN pirate ship.
I like Santorum and would vote for him, however I’m to sure he can win nationally. At this point I am in favor of anyone who can defeat Romney. Should Romney be our nominee, I will have no choice but to vote for him agaimst obama.
When it comes to floridas primary, I will vote for the candidate who is polling closest to romney at that time in order to defeat romney if possible.
Should our nominee be Newt, certainly I will vote for him although I believe he is flawed. he may be a progressive, but he certainly can be rattled and taken off his game, and his opponents now know this tactic.
Whatever the case, I believe any of our guys are better than Obama, thus I will do my part to assist our win.
You're correct, I miss read one of your posts, #151 Yes, racist., I read that as you racist.
Anyway, I can't comment on MrB's posts on Perry threads but he is one of my favorite posters here....sometimes a little humor goes a long way, hence the lighten up comment.
The creative destruction of free-market capitalism is not always fair or pretty. Just remember that even maggots and cadaver beetles serve a purpose.
Suggest you watch the video link of Larry the Liquidator's speech in my reply #30.
Who cares how they make their money? Are the only business allowed in this country ones that create new ideas? I'm a business owner and I have not created one new innovative idea ever.
The fact is when Bain shows up on your doorstep, it is for one reason. Your company is failing or ready to go out of business. In some cases they turned companies around, sometimes they didn't. So what?
I feel that TARP is plenty ammo needed to go after Mittens if you want to dabble in Pupulism. Slamming the Free Market will do nothing put people off. Just look at the split on this thread over the issue. This move will not coalesce the Conservatives behind Newt, it will fracture it.
I think there are people who believe businesses exist to provide employment to people. That certainly is what Obama believes, and it’s a “populist” opinion.
Fact is, business exists to support the owners, to make them money. Usually, it takes employees, so others benefit from the primary purpose of making money for the owners. If an owner could replace every employee with a robot and make more money, that’s exactly what they would do, and what you would expect.
But some here would apparently attack that. If I RAN a business, but the owners were stockholders, and the stockholders decided I was an idiot and was wasting their money, some here think it would be wrong for those stockholders to act to preserve THEIR capital, but instead think the stockholders should work to make sure I keep a job, and my employees keep their jobs.
Just shows how much of the field we have lost in this battle, when populism is considered conservative and dismantling a company because it is so poorly run that it is worth more if it doesn’t exist is considered bad practice.
These people should take their own money and make their own companies. Nobody can take over a privately held company without the owner’s permission. They could run their company to maximize employment, and see how that works for them.
Herman Cain was considered a conservative stalwart, and many of the Gingrich folks were Cain folks. Cain brought Godfather’s back to “profitability” by SHRINKING the business and firing a quarter of the work force. As a result, Cain made a handsome profit, and those people never got their jobs back, Godfather’s never grew bigger so as to hire more people — not while Cain was in charge.
Now the same people who praised Cain are defending Gingrich. Seems like a contradiction to me.
Perry also said: "If you're a victim of Bain Capital's downsizing, it's the ultimate insult for Mitt Romney to come to South Carolina to tell you he feels your pain. Because he caused it," he said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.