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 ...
I’ve researched the Ampad story myself. They really did borrow themselves to bankruptcy, and they really did pay creditors just pennies on the dollar, and Romney really did siphon off millions upon millions of those borrowed funds as FEES for Bain.
That will not play well on main street, magritte.
In my opinion, between McCain and Romney, it was a close race as far as the worst candidate. I share your unease about Romney, but McCain just lacked the temperament needed to be president. Recall his "suspension of campaign" during the financial meltdown, and extremely irresponsible foreign policy statements, especially regarding Russia (post Cold War).
But I have a question: in states and cities with zero chance of electing a conservative / Tea Party Republican, would you just cede those completely to Democrats? Isn't it better to have Christie, Giuliani, Romney in Democrat states, and conservative Republicans in conservative states? How about the 2 Maine Senators, Scott Brown? If we had someone like Scott Brown earlier, Obamacare would have never happened.
Or even somewhat sane Democrats (sometimes running as Republicans, like Bloomberg), rather than insane Democrats.
I live in New York City, so this issue is very relevant to me.
Why not? If that is indeed the case, the business is liquidated. The investors are the ones who took the risk and started the business.
You might want to relook. A google search mostly pulls up left-wing sources, which essentially parrot the Boston Globe’s “look what Romney did to unions, that’s why you should vote for Kennedy because he’s in the union’s pocket” article.
Ampad was a failing company when Mead dumped it. Bain pumped some money into it, closed a union factory or two, pissing off the AFL-CIO, and eventually the business went public, then bankrupt, like a bazillion other business do.
Romney is a lefty Republican, which is enough to hit him on, but attacks on the free market by conservatives is biting off our noses to spite our face.
Do tell me smart ass how a company can continue to pay wages when there is no profit?
Many time when companies stop making profit and cannot pay their employees, "private equity" brings in cash to keep the business running, paying the employees, taking a chance to turn the business around. Most of the time the outcome is either of the following: 1. They are successful making a windfall, 2. They lose the money they invest and have to shut down return the business, laying off workers and selling off the assets trying to salvage what little they can from the failed venture.
In the eyes of the left both outcomes are evil. In my opinion, the real reason they hate private equity is it is a purer form of capitalism with minimal government intervention.
It’s late, can you focus that a little more?
All I got is that you think Bloomberg, Romney, Giuliani, Christie, the Maine Senators, and Brown are the way to go, but McCain was worse than all of them, and a conservative would be worst of all.
exactly...Rush, Hannity...even beloved Levin has fallen short on this
none of them will make a stand and we will end up in the end with Romney while so called social conservative talk radio sat on their hands
sad...very sad
Roger Ailes and the establishment GOP are going to force Mitt on us and talk radio does jackshite to help stop it so they can keep their precious conduits or access to power open
we waited 4 years for someone real...Palin we hoped...she flaked out
now we have watched the media, fellow GOP and basically everyone of influence in so called conservatism do little or nothing but help get Romney anointed
speaking of Palin...does she too support Mitt...if not then why so silent
Bachmann...honey you can forget Mitt asking u to the dance sweetie
Mitt Romney is nothing more than George Bush the First,..another patrician northeastern Yankee who wouldn't know down home conservatism if it sat on him...pro gay...pro baby killing...a lying sack of shite...i could puke
he will be worse than George II was and way way short of what we need...
I'm old..older anyhow ...and tired of these beltway GOP bastards...there is a reason my ancients hated em..two faced pricks...the whole lot of them...nearly every TV hack...men and the women..however lovely...all on their knees for Lord Romney
only Levin has hinted he really dislikes Romney...I don't know but I assume Michelle Malkin does not like Mitt?
maybe we need to sink even further...maybe the purists are right
Glenn Beck...race card playing asshat...why did anyone here ever like anyone who thinks MLK was a conservative hero while Uncle Ho smiles from his eternal tomb
we don't need Obama to destroy the country...we can do it just fine ourselves
this is what I'm leaving my kids?
this is the very first time in my 54 years I have considered maybe we need to dissolve the GOP and start something real....the national leadership is Godawful and these open primaries...nuts...and having wacko states go first?
states where Ron Paul almost wins?.....are we joking?...it's as crazy as letting leftist journalists frame our debates time and again
not only does the GOP not know how to wield power when they have...they have forgotten how best to even obtain it
/rant
Ampad borrowed enormously, and Bain took multi-millions in fees out of that borrowed money. Ampad went bankrupt.
Since then it has had multiple owners, and it’s starting to come around. No thanks to Romney.
As Marlowe says, if Bain had done in the Founder era when they did with Ampad in our era, they would have been imprisoned or hung.
Look at it as your getting a friend to borrow enormously, pay you huge fees to sock away, and then filing bankruptcy. That is corruption.
I was going to vote for Newt , but I’ll have to pass on that now that he’s embraced leftist arguments against capitalism. There are plenty of legitimate points on which to attack Romney, but anyone who stoops to this kind of argument simply isn’t a real conservative.
My point is to move the ball to the right. You don't get a touchdown every time, but you move the ball.
Giulliani was able to move New York City electorate (and governance) to the right. Chris Christie is able to do the same in NJ. I am positive that it is impossible to move the ball to the right in NJ or NYC more than these 2 gentlemen have done.
So Christie and Giulliani are successes to be celebrated. As a result of their tenure, people in NYC and NJ get to live under far more competent government compared to liberal Democrat alternatives (Corzine in NJ, David Dinkins in NYC).
But to a lot of freepers, Giulliani, Christie are hopeless RINOs, even enemies. It is a self defeating strategy on part of the freepers.
As far as liberal New England senators (Snow, Collins, Brown), quantity has a quality of its own (as Joe Stalin said). You need certain quantity to filibuster, or to break a filibuster, and any RINO will make a difference between success and failure. We were one RINO short of defeating Obamacare (or too late).
What is the best play in todays presidential election to move the ball to the right? I wish the answer was simple. I wish the answer was as simple as defeating Romney. I think it is a lot more complex.
1. If we lose this election, we lose the country, because Obamacare will be impossible to uproot with Obama in the office. (Vote Romney to get a first down, overturn Obamacare?)
2. If we don't follow Ron Paul's 1 trillion budget cuts, the country will go bankrupt. (Vote Paul or Perry to get serious cuts?)
3. If we are not vigilant to the dangers from abroad (islamo-fashists, Iran), terrorists may inflict a serious blow to the US. (Vote Santorum or Gingrich?)
I think a lot of Republicans are asking themselves these questions, and are often shouted down for not conforming to the strict anti-Paul, anti-Romney orthodoxy of FR.
I think Giuliani was a fine Mayor for my son’s home of New York city.
That is two posts and you haven’t gotten to the presidency of the United States yet.
I think Giuliani was a fine Mayor for my son’s home of New York city.
That is two posts and you haven’t gotten to the presidency of the United States yet.
True, because I am undecided. Unlike a lot of people here who hate certain candidates, I like some qualities of all of them, I find them all to be adequate, desirable replacement of Obama. I am not sitting this one out, even if GOP nominated Gary Johnson orHuntsman. My preferences are issue by issue:
Taxing: Herman Cain
Spending: Perry, Paul
Economics: Paul
Debate skills: Romney, Gingrich
Looks (attractiveness): Romney, Bachman
Foreign Affairs: perhaps Huntsman
Social Issues: all except unsure about Romney
Ability to stand ones ground: Santorum, Gingrich, Paul
Campaign discipline: Romney
We only get one President, who do we choose?
Agreed...
I believe he hates us every bit as much as Obama does.
Newt knows it for sure.
You have posted some great comments today in advance of Rush’s show (in about ten minutes from now). It should be great theater today to see how Rush reacts to FR comments.
by the way, I like Rush’s show and I enjoy Danny DeVito movies, but that does not mean I need to be swayed by either one.
You have posted some great comments today in advance of Rush’s show (in about ten minutes from now). It should be great theater today to see how Rush reacts to FR comments.
by the way, I like Rush’s show and I enjoy Danny DeVito movies, but that does not mean I need to be swayed by either one.
That's just silly. Obama hates free enterprise and the private sector. Romney does not.
Point taken. Thanks for clarifying.
I don’t count Gingrich in the list; my list was Santorum, Bachman, Cain, and Perry.
Hence my confusion because I saw both Cain and Bachmann as OUT and included Gingrich.
I do think I’m too hard on Gingrich though. He’s certainly conservative, or was at one time. He’s not “consistant”, and the others were more so, and after 2008 I don’t want to settle unless I have to.
I support Gingrich but fully understand many conservatives dislike/distrust of him. For me, looking at the available field and trying to pre-empt a brokered convention brought on by "the establishment" to hand the nomination to Jeb Bush I see Newt as the most likely warrior to prevent that end and have the largest number of conservatives and Republicans rally to defeat Obama in the fall.
FWIW,
TS
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.