Replies

I really hate Romney and I hate sounding like I’m defending him, but what Newt and his merry band of Socialists are doing in their crusade against Capitalism is much worse than some politician embellishing his accomplishments.

Newt and his supporters do not understand Capitalism.

Newt’s idea of Capitalism is taking a $1.6 million payoff from Fannie Mae, which he equated to free enterprise.

Newt and his supporters are dangerous.

Newt and his supporters dangerous lack of understanding of free markets, free enterprise and Capitalism will undoubtedly result in even more regulations against “evil businessmen” like Mitt Romney and Bain Capital.

Please do not feed the Newt Gingrich Socialists. They are trying to destroy everything we’ve built — free markets were supposed to be the Republicans main debating point for 2012.

Please do not support Newt Gingrich.

You have no credibility for understanding economic matters yourself when you completely get wrong the facts about Newt and FREDDIE MAC, NOT FANNIE MAE.

Newt’s consulting firm collected $1.6 million gross from Freddie Mac over several years time. Newt got $30,000 a year for his involvement. Freddie Mac was not funded by taxpayer money then and Newt gave a speech insisting the government not bail out Fannie and Freddie with taxpayer money in 2008.

People owe it to themselves to actually listen to Newt's explanation. Unfortunately, many Republicans don't seem to understand it, and are projecting it as an attack on capitalism.

But this isn't some Left-tard kind of attack at all. Newt's case is simple:

1) Romney's vaunted "private sector experience", is of a particular kind (private equity management, not 'venture capitalism') that's going to represent a huge liability in the general election. Nobody's asserting that Bain Capital's actions were necessarily illegitimate nor unlawful, but it's obvious that Romney was no white knight of heroic, entrepreneurial capitalism.

2) Questions on business ethics are legitimate inquiries that one should have to answer for, especially if they're running for public office—these are not attacks on capitalism, and it's completely goofy that some are construing it that way. Those advocating a "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" attitude towards private enterprise activity, aren't doing capitalism any favors—rather, they're ironically validating the Left's destructive sophistry against capitalism.

See Selling out capitalism in the defense of Romney and Bain

Even ZeroHedge doesn't defend Romney's record as a 'capitalist':

"Lately, Bain founder and GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has found himself in a spirited defense of the private equity industry, doing all he can to spin decades of data which confirm, without failure, that PE Leveraged Buy Outs are nothing but "efficiency maximizing" transactions whose only goal is the "maximization" of EBITDA in the pursuit of dividend recap deals, IPOs or outright sales, while loading up the company with untenable amounts of leverage. All this with a 3-5 year investment horizon, which ignores the long-term viability of a company and seeks to streamline (read fire as many as possible) operations as quickly as possible in the goal of maximizing short-term returns. We wish him luck in his endeavor."

Also take note that Romney relied on corporate welfare.

Shame we have so many wannabe Capitalistas here at FR and elsewhere, who adamantly defend this kind of shuck and jive financial paper shuffling from corporate welfare bums, as exemplary acts of free-market enterprise.