Sure, but don't expect me to vote for them as President, if they stick us with the tab.
Gingrich and Perry have been sounding a lot like socialists.
Sure, but don’t expect your average Joe to like it one bit when you pocket $12 million from a failing company, go out of business and expect the taxpayer to foot a $44 million underfunded pension liability.
I hope this particular charge sinks the “invincible” Romney in South Carolina so a REAL Republican can get the nomination — not an Obama-lite socialized medicine, gay marriage-loving RINO.
Because if this tact doesn’t work now, the REAL socialist Obama will be using it come October to get four more years in the Oval Office.
Darn tootin.' Gingrich and Perry should go into a permanent doghouse for this. Neither of them are fit to even run for dogcatcher.
Conservatives should band together and back Santorum -- yes he's not perfect, but he's the best we have who is running. He is an honest, decent man and he did not stoop low like Perry & Gingrich.
Darn tootin.' Gingrich and Perry should go into a permanent doghouse for this. Neither of them are fit to even run for dogcatcher.
Conservatives should band together and back Santorum -- yes he's not perfect, but he's the best we have who is running. He is an honest, decent man and he did not stoop low like Perry & Gingrich.
It is a truly fascinating thing to observe arguments for what amounts to ideological purity being dredged up by “the usual suspects” in a vain attempt to protect Romney, of all people, from the political consequences of his past depredations.
The sooner the Party Hacks tumble to the fact that populism is going to play a role, a big role, in the upcoming election the sooner they might actually salvage something of their flagging political careers and oust the Kenyan from the White Hut. But I won’t hold my breath waiting for it. Like the Obamoids, they only talk to each other and have no clue about what is going on outside their gilded salons inside the Beltway.
These nimrods have zero relevance to my life and the world that I live in. A pox on all their houses.
Romney=Gun Grabber
Bain borrowed 10 million from the fed and never paid it back. Romney stuck US with the bill while he used the 10 million to pay himself and his partners bonuses of 4 million bucks.
Does that sound like Fannie/Freddie to you?
Bain would buy a company, borrow enormously after manipulating its appraisal, take out huge sums from THE BORROWED MONEY to pay themselves, and then stand by as the company naturally went bankrupt since the earnings appraisal had been manipulated.
It isn’t a matter of fair. It’s a matter of treating this the same way as we treat insider trading...it’s destructive of a free market.
Romney manipulated the laws of bankruptcy, corporation, and appraisal.
The democrats will destroy him, pound him to a pulp in a campaign against Obama.
It looks to me like Gingrich and Perry, in a 48-hour period, somehow managed to ruin at least one component of the obama team’s well-planned, very expensive October Surprises for Romney. The Dems are probably watching all this and cursing a blue streak because their Scorched Earth, “Wall-Street-is-Evil” lynching of romney has just been pre-empted. Bwaaa haaa haaa!
Yeah, boy. Those GOP elites sure picked themselves a winner in romney, didn’t they? They’re all so compromised themselves, they couldn’t even see just HOW unelectable romney is!
I mean... What did they think the Occupy Movements were ABOUT?!
I’m sitting here watching Rove bloviate on Hannity and had a epiphany. There is a direct relationship between his Pucker Factor and the number of times he begins his sentences with the word, “Look...”
Lord, forgive me for enjoying this so much.
Every time I read the company name “Bain Capital”, and what it has done with some companies it has purchased, I keep hearing “Cerberus/Dan Quayle/Chrysler”.
Is it just me, or is there a lot of selective indignation going on?
I pray every night that mittens is NOT the pubbie nominee, but puhleez get over the whole asset stripping thing. That’s what some companies do, and do well.
Having studied the Founders speeches and writings in defense of what they considered to be the economic dimension of liberty, Gingrich should use this opportunity to expose the founding concept for generations who have never been taught how America became a place of opportunity, prosperity and plenty--until the so-called "progressives" reinvented the concept into one of their own making which is, in fact, "regressive."
The word "capitalism" is being thrown about without definition as to its relationship to liberty or to America's founding ideas.
How do current talking points on "capitalism" relate to ideas contained in the following essay, excerpted from "Our Ageless Constitution,"a 292-page history of the ideas of liberty in America.
"Agriculture, manufactures, commerce, and navigation, the four pillars of our prosperity, are the most thriving when left most free to individual enterprise." - Thomas Jefferson
"The enviable condition of the people of the United States is often too much ascribed to the physical advantages of their soil & climate .... But a just estimate of the happiness of our country will never overlook what belongs to the fertile activity of a free people and the benign influence of a responsible government." - James Madison
America's Constitution did not mention freedom of enterprise per se, but it did set up a system of laws to secure individual liberty and freedom of choice in keeping with Creator-endowed natural rights. Out of these, free enterprise flourished naturally. Even though the words "free enterprise' are not in the Constitution, the concept was uppermost in the minds of the Founders, typified by the remarks of Jefferson and Madison as quoted above. Already, in 1787, Americans were enjoying the rewards of individual enterprise and free markets. Their dedication was to securing that freedom for posterity.
The learned men drafting America's Constitution understood history - mankind's struggle against poverty and government oppression. And they had studied the ideas of the great thinkers and philosophers. They were familiar with the near starvation of the early Jamestown settlers under a communal production and distribution system and Governor Bradford's diary account of how all benefited after agreement that each family could do as it wished with the fruits of its own labors. Later, in 1776, Adam Smith's INQUIRY INTO THE NATURE AND CAUSES OF THE WEALTH OF NATIONS and Say's POLITICAL ECONOMY had come at just the right time and were perfectly compatible with the Founders' own passion for individual liberty. Jefferson said these were the best books to be had for forming governments based on principles of freedom. They saw a free market economy as the natural result of their ideal of liberty. They feared concentrations of power and the coercion that planners can use in planning other peoples lives; and they valued freedom of choice and acceptance of responsibility of the consequences of such choice as being the very essence of liberty. They envisioned a large and prosperous republic of free people, unhampered by government interference.
The Founders believed the American people, possessors of deeply rooted character and values, could prosper if left free to:
|
|
Such a free market economy was, to them, the natural result of liberty, carried out in the economic dimension of life. Their philosophy tended to enlarge individual freedom - not to restrict or diminish the individual's right to make choices and to succeed or fail based on those choices. The economic role of their Constitutional government was simply to secure rights and encourage commerce. Through the Constitution, they granted their government some very limited powers to:
Adam Smith called it "the system of natural liberty." James Madison referred to it as "the benign influence of a responsible government." Others have called it the free enterprise system. By whatever name it is called, the economic system envisioned by the Founders and encouraged by the Constitution allowed individual enterprise to flourish and triggered the greatest explosion of economic progress in all of history. Americans became the first people truly to realize the economic dimension of liberty.
Footnote: Our Ageless Constitution, W. David Stedman & La Vaughn G. Lewis, Editors (Asheboro, NC, W. David Stedman Associates, 1987) Part III: ISBN 0-937047-01-5
“If what Bain did wasn’t “fair”, should we change the law so the government can decide whether owners of companies are being “fair”? “
It has nothing to do with fairness or even what is legal. If the goal is to make president the biggest predatory (but legal) vulture capitalist, then you ought to be voting for George Soros.
This debate is about whether Romney created anything or just stripped assets and piled pensions onto the government. As far as I can tell, it is a mixed bag. So game on, Mitt you have some ‘splainin to do!
And I have to tell you, if we were all to become vulture capitalists there would be nothing left, no matter how legal it is.
Apparently, and we shall see, Mittens has been performing legal abortions on the American employees.
bookmark
Oh, come on, WSJ. I watched the Bain video-there is some disturbing questions about him knowing when to buy, inflate the stocks and when to dump/close down good companies and then walk away with millions and destroy jobs. Did he have inside help? I see what Newt and Palin are talking about. Romney is a money man and cares about that. Some of you people there need to wake up. This wasn’t about bashing free market and making profits. Rush and Hannity went overboard and Palin tried to explain it is ok to ask these questions. But WSJ is doing damage control for their candidate.