OK, you make an interesting point. I can understand it better if Newt’s superpac did this as part of a strategy, countering what they felt were inaccurate ads by Romney with similar attacks of their own, with the intention all along of backing off after the damage is done. Maybe something analogous to a boxer getting in a couple of “low blows” to soften up his opponent early in a fight.
Don’t get me wrong, I think Newt is the best anti-Romney choice, I just didn’t think that attacking capitalism was the way to go.
I am not 100% sure about Bain...I actually know someone personally here in Nashville that was in their local office where they worked on healthcare starts....they are just another boutique capital firm
But they also were big into leveraged buyouts..something I am familiar with on a small scale from experience and I am not a fan. They often reward management and the buyout firm at the expense of shareholders and debt holders....and yes employees and yes I am old school...I do think a business has some responsibility to it’s employees
It’s debatable that is good for capitalism. Rush in his hurry to stay neutral (putting it nicely) treated these attacks as on capitalism itself...as though anything goes in capitalism..something I see folks say here on occasion which I do not agree with...we have reigned it in on occasion...monopolies and collusion etc
and Rush aped the establishment GOP and Roger Ailes in doing so...Rush must think one not critique business period.
I disagree and to quote another freeper...
“To claim if Newt attacks Mitt on Bain is an attack on capitalism”
is akin to:
“Saying to be anti abortion is an attack on the medical profession”
Romney can defend himself or not.
“Attacking capitalism” is right-wing hyperbole hype line. Yeah, I went there. If criticizing the practices of ANY business is now akin to “attacking capitalism” then I must have missed the part of the bible where it was declared that anyone who calls themselves a “business” is automatically absolved of all their sins.
Bain’s profits relied in large part on making sure that they paid no penalties when the companies they took over went bankrupt and they took advantage of government funding to cover the cost of pensions that they underfunded. They socialized their losses. That is a valid criticism with a moral basis. It’s not anti-capitalism. Once you start profiting off of other people’s money (banks, governments, insurance) and not your own, you are out of the capitalist realm.
As I understand it, the criticism of the long Bain ad is that some of the stuff that happened to 1 or 2 of the companies in it happened after Romney supposedly left Bain. But even in the ad it says there is evidence Romney worked there after he claims he left, and I believe he still collects a paycheck from them to this day as sort of a pension.
There is a heck of a lot more to capitalism and the free market system than venture capital, leveraged buyouts, and management consulting. Heck, up until 30 years ago LBO wasn't even an every day phrase.
The GOP E and their syncophants in the media are the ones that have turned a vetting of Romney's claims and record into an indictment of capitalism. He is on record making his private sector experience the main reason he should go against Obama and no one else.
If I were to criticize a bounty hunter for questionable decisions, would that be an indictment of Law Enforcement? All this outrage about protecting Capitalism is just protecting Pubbies “anointed” one using Alinsky tactics.
This issue was used by Kennedy to defeat Romney in the senate race years ago. He has had years to prepare to demonstrate how he made good management decisions, walked off with profits for Romney & Associates, and left a weakened company which went bankrupt shortly after leaving shareholders and creditors in the cold, and workers as collateral damage.
Management(Bain) has a fiduciary responsibility to make profit not only for Bain, but also the shareholders of the company they are helping to manage to not only make profits for the short term, but keep the firm healthy enough to survive. I want to know whether they fulfilled this responsibility for both companies or just Bain. Did they make decisions that benefited Bain to the detriment of the shareholders of these companies?.
There were some lawsuits out there which creditors brought against Bain. I want to know those details. What was charged, and what was proved, and what was the evidence?. All I've heard so far, is how dare you ask. How dare you attack capitalism.
As a former auditor, if all this reaction happened when I asked a question about management's decisions, it would make me so suspicious, I would insist on seeing every smidge of information and documentation there was before I would sign off on it..
Well as a voter, I feel the same way. Tell me the story, show me the evidence, and I will make up my mind about whether you have demonstrated you deserve my vote.