The abysmal incompetence of the non-Romneys; Huntsman, Gingrich, Perry all go Occupier; Santorum declines
Sigh. Let me say that again: Siiiiiiiiiiiiiigh.
If you were unfortunate enough to watch Saturday night’s GOP debate in New Hampshire, you saw a pageant of feckless non-Romneys fail to step up to the plate and forcefully challenge Mitt Romney’s presumptive claim to the GOP presidential nomination. Newt Gingrich, who has spent the last week whining about the liberal media, hid behind the liberal media when asked about attacks of Romney’s private-sector record at Bain Capital:
NEWT GINGRICH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, I — I haven’t seen the film, but it does reflect “The New York Times” story two days ago about one particular company. And I think people should look at the film and decide. If it’s factually accurate, it raises questions.
I’m very much for free enterprise. I’m very much for exactly what the Governor just described, create a business, grow jobs, provide leadership.
I’m not nearly as enamored of a Wall Street model where you can flip companies, you can go in and have leveraged buyouts, you can basically take out all the money, leaving behind the workers. And I think most…
STEPHANOPOULOS: Is that the Bain model?
GINGRICH: Well, I — I think you have to look at the film. You have to look at “The New York Times” coverage of one particular company. And you have to ask yourself some questions.
The Governor has every right to defend that. And I think — but I think it’s a legitimate part of the debate to say, OK, on balance, were people better off or were people worse off by this particular style of investment?
STEPHANOPOULOS: Back in December, you said that Governor Romney made money at Bain by, quote, “bankrupting companies and laying off employees.”
GINGRICH: That was, I think, “The New York Times” story two days ago. They took one specific company. They walked through in detail. They showed what they bought it for, how much they took out of it and the 1,700 people they left unemployed. Now that’s — check “The New York Times” story, but that’s their story.
Leaning on the Fishwrap of Record as a crutch instead of owning up? This isn’t just cartoon-ish behavior. It’s poltroon-ish behavior.
With his incessant bashing of how the private equity industry works in the real world, Newt (along with Rick Perry) is morphing into an Occupy Wall Street zealot.
Or a David Axelrod:
His rivals have sought to turn his Bain tenure against him. Rick Perry has run an ad saying Mr. Romney “made millions buying companies and laying off workers.” Newt Gingrich has said Mr. Romney should “give back all the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain.”
Mr. Gingrich laced into Mr. Romney at this weekend’s debates, and a group associated with the former House Speaker plans to release a 28-minute documentary blistering Mr. Romney’s Bain tenure. Meanwhile, on ABC on Sunday, Obama strategist David Axelrod criticized Mr. Romney as “a corporate raider.”
Mr. Romney describes job losses and bankruptcies as an inevitable byproduct of the capitalist system, and has said that in some cases, eliminating some jobs may save the rest of the company. In response to Mr. Gingrich, Mr. Romney said: “Doesn’t he understand how the economy works? In the real economy, some businesses succeed and some fail.”
Asked in an interview about Bain’s bankruptcy and failure rate, Mr. Romney said that in buyout deals, “our orientation was by and large to acquire businesses that were out of favor and in some cases in trouble.” He added that Bain wasn’t the type of firm that stripped companies and fired workers, but instead, “our approach was to try to build a business. We were not always successful.”
FYI, the Wall Street Journal analysis of Bain’s mixed record during Romney’s tenure is here. Takeaway:
The Wall Street Journal, aiming for a comprehensive assessment, examined 77 businesses Bain invested in while Mr. Romney led the firm from its 1984 start until early 1999, to see how they fared during Bain’s involvement and shortly afterward.
Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost.
Another finding was that Bain produced stellar returns for its investors—yet the bulk of these came from just a small number of its investments. Ten deals produced more than 70% of the dollar gains.
…The Journal analysis shows that in total, Bain produced about $2.5 billion in gains for its investors in the 77 deals, on about $1.1 billion invested. Overall, Bain recorded roughly 50% to 80% annual gains in this period, which experts said was among the best track records for buyout firms in that era.
All of that will get lost as the Occupy rhetoric seeps into attack ads by Republicans that will send tingles down the legs of anti-capitalists everywhere from Gingrich’s new favorite newspaper, the New York Times, on down. Click on that link to read about the $5 million boost to a pro-Gingrich super PAC (yes, super PACs — those evil entities that Gingrich was whining about last week after his Iowa drubbing) that will saturate South Carolina with Occupy-style demagoguery. With Newt’s explicit approval and endorsement.
The latest evolution of anti-capitalism bashing by pathetic GOP candidates? Distorting Romney’s remarks about the private-sector ability to fire people who aren’t doing their job:
CBS News reports via Twitter:
Huntsman tells reporters in Concord: “Governor Romney enjoys firing people; I enjoy creating jobs.”
It’s a reference to this:
Mitt Romney, who’s under attack for his business record, said Monday that he likes to have the option of firing people.
“I like being able to fire people who provide services to me,” he told business executives from the Nashua Greater Chamber of Commerce, adding if he isn’t getting a “good service, I want to say, I’m going to get someone else.”
The point will get lost down the demagogic rabbit hole:
He added: “You know, if someone doesn’t give me the good service I need, I want to say, ‘You know, I’m going to get someone else to provide that service to me.’”
Mitt Romney’s chronic flip-flopping political career is teeming with reasons to oppose his nomination — from his support for racial preferences, to government funding of abortion, liberal judges, global warming enviro-nitwittery, TARP, auto bailouts, the Obama stimulus, gun control, and of course, individual health insurance mandates that presaged Obamacare.
Instead of focusing on his long political record of expedience, incompetent non-Romneys have morphed into Michael Moore propagandists — throwing not just Bain Capital under the bus, but wealth creators of all kinds who take risks in the private marketplace.
We’re screwed.
***
More…
Lori Ziganto advises: “Fight like a girl or lose, candidates!”
Kurt Schlichter nails the depressing conundrum:
My friend Jeff Emanuel makes a point that Bain is a general weakness for Romney in a jobs/class warfare general election race with Obama — and several other Twitter friends point out that it is useful for Romney to be forced to answer Bain-bashing attacks now rather than later — but Jeff also acknowledges that “pro-market Republicans aren’t the ones who should be beating” the anti-capitalism drum.
Jim Pethokoukis: Romney has nothing to apologize for in his Bain career…
Of course, Romney and Bain weren’t in the game to create jobs. They were in it to make money for their investors and themselves. Then again, the same would go for Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell, Warren Buffett, and just about every other successful entrepreneur and investor you could name. But that is the miracle of free-market capitalism. The pursuit of profits by creating value benefits the rest of society through higher incomes, more jobs, and better products and services. This isn’t “destructive creation”—like, say, crippling U.S. fossil fuel production before “clean energy” sources are viable—but “creative destruction” where innovation and efficiency sweep away the old and replace it with a more productive and wealthier society.
Update: Good for Rick Santorum…
Leaving the frozen event, Santorum also declined to take a shot at Romney over a remark earlier from the front-runner that he “likes to fire” workers who are not doing a good job.
“We try to hire good people, we try to keep them employed. If someone if obviously not performing their duty and their mission, obviously a business has a responsibility for the greater good of the business and the other employees to make sure that everybody there is pulling their weight,” Santorum said.
Asked whether Romney’s corporate takeover experience at Bain Capital would be a liability, Santorum said: “I’m not making it a liability. I believe in the private sector.”
Via The Right Scoop, Rush Limbaugh takes Newt to task.
Heckuva job, non-Romneys…
National Journal headline via Allahpundit: Capitalism Comes Under Fire in Republican Primary Campaign
***
Via The Right Scoop on MRC, here’s a Fox News video montage of the Occupy Republicans:
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama’s latest campaign angle: I’ve been saving America from wild Republican debts
May 24, 2012 04:33 PM by Doug Powers
55 Comments
Biden: Tea Party stopped us from growing the economy
May 23, 2012 01:55 PM by Doug Powers
44 Comments
Catholic lawsuit against Obamacare mandate cites 1993 legislation written by Ted Kennedy and Chuck Schumer
May 22, 2012 04:35 PM by Doug Powers
48 Comments
A 2012 campaign must-read: The conservative survival guide to Mitt Romney
May 21, 2012 10:23 AM by Michelle Malkin
159 Comments
Biden: Hey, I don’t blame people for voting for a convicted felon instead of my boss
May 18, 2012 01:21 PM by Doug Powers
73 Comments
Elizabeth Warren touted Cherokee heritage in 1984 collection of recipes
May 17, 2012 10:26 AM by Doug Powers
124 Comments
Categories: 2012 Campaign,Mitt Romney,New York Times,Newt Gingrich,Ron Paul
JustOneMinute
» Barack, Youthful Leader!JustOneMinute
» Patterico And The Brett Kimberlin GangBabalu Blog
» U.S. Manned Space Flight in The 21st CenturyVillainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the Year
If these user accounts were accompanied by photos, you wouldn’t dare suggest I could be your son.
I was born in 1975 anyway. At least that’s the story my parents have told me. I do have a birth certificate which confirms the date, but as has been suggested within your recent political history, anyone can get a piece of paper with a birth date printed on it. I mean, if the CIA is able to produce fake documents for its operatives, how hard would it be for the President to get a set of fake papers?
Okay then. I am a bigot. I have been told. So it has been said.
Did you not read the HR link I provided.
We pulled into Esquimalt, near Victoria, after 89 days at sea.
And, yes, Canadian Mist and LaBatt’s were involved.
DirkBelig #130:
My man, you don’t get it. It doesn’t matter how much you rip the other candidates, the moment you say anything bad about Ron Paul, the Paulbots go berserk, hysterical, nuts. Like you said they’re childish and unAmerican. They don’t want to hear anything bad about their lord and savior. As far as they’re concerned, he walks on water, and his crap doesn’t stink. You mention the term “cult leader”. I’m so afraid you’re right. They’re so hateful of all other GOP candidates, they might as well be Assistant Democrats. If they don’t get their heads straightened out, they’ll give Obowtome the 4 years he needs to finally destroy the country.
Repubs trying to stop Bush II was tried with Bush II on a handful of issues and still they passed a lot of his socialist policies: No child left behind, Prescription drug program, the budget, and that hateful attittude of ‘compassionate conservatism’. The only thing I recall that Repubs in congress were able to stop was Bush II’s desire to re-enact the Assault Weapon Ban, and that’s because the decision would have been on an election year (2004).
By the way how tough were those Tea Party Repubs during the budget battle this year, or in stopping NDAA 12 which lays the legal groundwork for making Obama or any sucessor a dictator (by at least destroying Habeas Corpus as we’ve known it by merely accusing you of being a terrorist-very handy, isn’t it?). Most of them voted for it.
Obama, if he gets to destroy this country, had a LOT of GOP/DEM help along the way during his reign and well before he ever was elected, and switching him for Obama with an R will not change anything. Start thinking for a change.
Excellent comparison, Stacey, and I agree with it. A thug is a thug, no matter what side of the aisle. Christy is doing a good job in New Jersey because thuggery is all they understand and relate to. The rest of the country is NOT O.K. with that.
Well, I do have a learning disability, so it is possible I could be yours.
And he has accepted responsibility for them because his name was on the masthead. And he has also disavowed their content. You harp on something that happened over twenty years ago, while ignoring Ron Paul’s actions on behalf of poor minorities before and since, and also ignore the fact that the president of the NAACP has stated unequivically that he’s known Ron Paul for over twenty years, and states that he is not a racist. But you go ahead and keep regurgitating that MSM puke. You got nothing!
I go nuts when others try to control me or vote for those that want to control me.
There is nothing to think about. We’re stuck with the candidates who are running. I keep hoping the candidates will start explaining their positions and stop bashing each other. That would be useful.
Au contrare, I also liked Cain and Bachmann, Santorum not so much. Next!
I have the same issues, not thyroid but same situation with the doctor. I have been taking the same prescription every day for the last 25 years. There has been NO side affects. I need the medicine. Yet, I have to renew it every month and after one year, I have to trot over to my doctor’s office for a physical before he will renew it for another year. In addition, I have to be sujected to the ridiculous tests that all women are “supposed” to get. After 50+ years of annual pap tests and not one abnormal one, I am opting out of that test as of the next visit. I am almost 70 years old and am tired of going through the humiliation. Same with colonoscopy’s. Never had one…never will. My doctor sets up the appointment for one and I cancel it.
This is MY decision. The medicine works for me, and I pay for it. The tests are expensive and I don’t want them. Is that so bad?
He also says he wuld “bed” Nan Pelosi. Wow…what does his fiance look like? Curious minds want to know!
I have very little enthusiasm for any GOP candidate, but I refuse to vote for anyone who devalues my American citizenship enough to call for rewarding foreign invaders with their ill-gotten goods — i.e., “legalized” residency.
Such a policy is at best muddled thinking, and at worst, treason.
Check this list.
Check point 6 here.
Especially tragic when there is no need to cater to the open borders crowd.
I was fooled in 2000. I held my nose in 2004. I REALLY held my nose in 2008. I refuse to hold my nose any more.
Right Said Fred!
5’2″ tall, 105 pounds with 25% of her weight located within her backside. She reminds me of a sexier version of Moemoe Yamaguchi, circa 1970′s.
But looks aren’t that important to me anyway, for all individuals – both men and women – once they reach mid-adulthood become unattractive. So, if I were to marry a woman simply for her looks (and considering my age), my enjoyment of her beauty would only persist for 5+ years, maximum.
If I was a man and had been drafted back during the Viet Nam War…I would now be a Canadian citizen. I would not have gone into that war. Is that anti-American? I don’t know. But in the 60′s, and to this day, I abhored that war and what it did to our country and all those wonderful draftees who went against their will and lost their lives. The biggest tragedy in this country’s history and I include the Civil War in that. At least in the Civil War, you knew what you were fighting about and did so voluntarily.
Sorry…you don’t publish a newsletter under your name and with your picture on it, showing ownership of it, and then blame the person who wrote the article. If it is YOUR newsletter, YOU are responsible for its content. If you have no control over its content, then you shouldn’t claim it under your name. That makes you nucking futz, my description of Ron Paul. Geez!!!
Again, he has accepted responsibility for it and disavowed the content. Again, over twenty years ago. What in his words and actions recently, say, the last nineteen years, and the president of the NAACP’s words notwithstanding, makes you still think he is a racist nut?
He wants to reduce the size of government and there are so many people with an interest in seeing big government continue. One of the ways they have learned to attack others is to call them racist. Another derisive term is to label an opponent old. When that’s doesn’t work, they attack Ron Paul’s earmark history. Even when Ron talks about his specific inclination for earmarks because his belief that such spending activity more easily identifies where monies go, they still use the same attack.
The biggest tragedy of the Viet Nam war is people that said men that were killed there died for nothing.
I had two friends that died in V N one from the CG. Fuk anyone that says they died for nothing.
Rogue Cheddar:
Really? Then how come you don’t support Rick? Even you should know he has a much better chance than Ron of winning the nomination. How do you think Ron’s ideas will play in SC and FL? I tell you what: FL has a closed primary, meaning that all the Dems and drug addicts can’t corrupt the process. Not sure of SC, but methinks that his dog don’t hunt there. After that, he’s finished.
Rogue Cheddar:
Really? Then how come you don’t support Rick? Even you should know he has a much better chance than Ron of winning the nomination. How do you think Ron’s ideas will play in SC and FL? I tell you what: FL has a closed primary, meaning that all the Dems and drug addicts can’t corrupt the process. Not sure of SC, but methinks that his dog don’t hunt there. After that, he’s finished.
600K in 4 years, vs 50k in 10 years… more men of draft age died on American highways at the height of Viet Nam than died in combat.
Many of the participants in both wars knew what they were fighting for (particularly if they were Southerners). Most of the Unionists during the Confederate War were under the misapprehension that the war was about “freeing the slaves”.
We were fighting the expansion and acceptance of communism, just as today’s young men fight in Iraq and Afghanistan and around the world to stop the expansion and acceptance of fundamentalist Islam. Pure and simple. More young men of draft age would have understood what we were fighting for had they not been exposed to the false, lying, traitorous propaganda put out by their own fellow citizens who believed in communism more than they believed in freedom or America.
I give you an excerpt from general Matt Ridgeway’s “Proud Legions”; it deals with Korea, but the issue is the same:
From the Confederate War to Viet Nam, to the current conflict with Islam, the issue always seems to be the same.
I’m becoming convinced that, if there is a Biblical Armageddon in our future, it will be fought as a test between the philosophies of socialism and individualism.
Lest someone gets the wrong impression, “We were fighting the expansion of communism” refers to Viet Nam, not the Confederate War.
Quite so.
Did your Mother have bright red hair, one green eye, and a large tattoo on her chest saying, “Wine me, Dine me, Sixty-nine me?”
They didn’t die for nothing. If nothing else, their deaths assured that the men coming home from Iraq and Viet Nam will be met with love, appreciation and gratitude, and that the leftist minority that abused them repeat their abuse at their own peril, at the hands of ordinary citizens. Many of us who learned the truth of Viet Nam swore “never again!” and we mean it. Whether the leftist scum is John F-ing Kerry, Jane Fondle, or Ron “Old Granny” Paul.
And a big F-U to Ron “Old Granny” Paul and any other leftist scumbag who’d badmouth our troops, or denigrate their service, including the officer corps!
Because Rick is a Big Government rino. Next.
Gah, I need to calm down before I start typing..”men coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan…”
(I swear I thought that’s what I was typing at the time…)
Sorry, I know it’s easier to pretend you don’t understand, and rational concepts and big words throw you, so let’s make it simple.
Where (specificall has Michelle (or Doug) said, or even implied Romney would be AS BAD as another Obupkus term?
And where have they advocated a third party?
If Ron Paul has done this, why does he get more contributions from active military than all other candidates including the current CinC (barf) combined?
On the contrary, merely point out something positive about Ron Paul and you’re a robot, racist, loon, kook, etc. They said the same things about Pat Buchanan.
Semi-OT, but I just thought of something.
The illegal alien political conflict has something in common with the Confederate War’s political conflict.
The agrarian South had a time-honored, treasured tradition of black slavery which it wanted to protect.
American industry of today has a time-honored treasured tradition of importing cheap wage-slave labor that it wants to protect.
I was just thinking about it; yes, slaves on plantations were worked hard, physically abused, and sometimes neglected. But, slaves cost money to acquire and maintain. The slave owner had a vested interest in the survival and ability to work of his slaves. He was invested in them.
Not so the industrialists. They could work free men, women and children, under however horrendous conditions they chose. They didn’t have to worry if the men, women or children had shelter, food, medical care, any of that. They were paid a wage and the rest was up to them. And if they were injured, non-productive, or ill… he could just replace them with the boatloads of immigrant labor that we continually allowed to flood our shores.
That’s where the false paternalism towards illegal aliens comes from.
Who turned out to be an anti-Semitic nut. I know, I supported Buchanan before he jumped the shark.
I could support Paul’s fiscal policy and support of Constitutionality.
I can’t support his anti-Americanism. His “our problems are our fault” attitude. His “everybody would just like us if we’d just stop protecting the world from them” philosophy.
And I can’t forgive his abject, insulting ignorance with regard to Viet Nam.
It would seem, according to Paul, that the U.S. has *never* been on the right side of a conflict.
I don’t know. Ask them. They’re experts at making war, not at running a country.
Again, do you want to let the military rule America? The Founding Fathers didn’t. And if Ron Paul is as loyal to the Constitution as he pretends, every last career soldier who supports Paul is writing his own pink-slip.
Because the Constitution does not allow for a standing army.
Maybe the active military are still sexist enough that they don’t want to support a woman candidate, so that leaves them with Paul.
Maybe they’ve decided that whoever else gets into office is going to waste their lives in “nation building” and therefore would prefer someone who wouldn’t send them out in the first place.
Again, ask them.
An anti Semite who has for his entire career surrounded himself with Jews??? No. He’s called an anti-Semite because he’s an American First and dares to challenge the pro-Israeli lobby that puts Israeli interests before our own. If it were Ireland instead of Israel I’d bet my bottom dollar Buchanan’s position would be the same.
People like you deserve the government you get.
Don’t ask, and they won’t tell.
I work with those guys on a daily basis and nothing could be farther from the truth. Try again!
Perhaps the real reason is they’ve gotten wise to the Establishment using their patriotism for their own ends.
Absolutely 100% wrong, but people like you read what you want to read, not what it actually says.
I wanted Mitch “TRUCE!” Daniels to jump in a lake with his combined dismissal of social conservatives followed by his refusal to back right-to-work. Whoops, you got me wrong. Why am I not surprised?
My point is, not that you care, is that Santorum’s backers are for him for ONE ISSUE ONLY: SAVING THE BABIES!!!! He’s a big government spender who voted for TARP, voted for the Bridge to Nowhere, backed Snarlin’ Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey, voted against National Right To Work. He can in no way be considered a conservative except for his poorly espoused pro-life, anti-gay views. These are facts.
If there’s something that single-issue pro-life militants need to understand, not that they want to, but the messenger is as important as the message and when your spokesman is ineffective, your cause is lost. Look at how Dubya fumbled and bumbled the message of the wars and how his simpy turn-other-cheekism let him get bulldozered by the Left and every smear and lie stick until everyone was sick of him. It doesn’t matter if he was right, his lack of communication skills meant he was wrong.
Santorum comes off terribly even before the media gets done editing him into a monster. A commenter at NRO’s The Corner nailed it when he said, “Santorum has the ability to make the moral views of the majority of Americans sound radical and extreme. He keeps talking like that, DOMA will be repealed.”
When the literal future of the nation is at stake, to throw the country away for a Big Government bleeding heart spendthrift because he speaks the baby-saving, gay-bashing shibboleths that tickle a small minority of conservative stereotypes is insanity on stilts. When the nation has gone into default, our economy is ruined, Israel is nuked and the Eastern Hemisphere is the New Caliphate, what good is it to be able to smugly sneer, “At least them Sodomites ain’t in the military and them baby-killers are in the hoosegow and the BABIES IS SAVED!!!!”?
I’m not an enthusiastic supporter of Romney. I’m a sane, pragmatic person who knows that re-electing Obama is national suicide and that those bitterly clinging to their favored fringe nutcases are as much of a threat as the Left because they’d rather lose and kill us all than win and have a shot at saving the Republic with someone who hasn’t proven antithetical to our survival.
Get over yourselves. How many babies will Obama save vs. Romney? Exactly. To vote for an unelectable militant pro-lifer is the same as voting for a militant pro-deather. WAKE UP!!!!
123upnorth,
All kidding aside (especially the stale drunken sailor jokes), I have really enjoyed my visits to Canada, and always tried not to act the ‘ugly American.’ I have always tried to act the gentleman around ladies, as well.
I even had all my US currency converted to pretty Canadian currency.
I especially love Halifax, N.S. and Victoria, B.C. Not quite so fond of Goose Bay, NL, however.
Where did I say they did? You noseholders just make it up as you go along. Re-read what Michelle posted and then re-read my comments. If you don’t like what Michelle or Doug post, don’t attack me for agreeing with them, attack them.
So other than strawman arguments and just making things up, do you actually have something? Anything? I know, nose holding and vote for liberals. I get it.
If Romney cannot deflect attacks from fellow Republicans then how is he going to handle Obama?
The DNC will pile on 500% more. What you thought no one would find out what Bain Capital was all about?
It was about making money. At least Bain did not loot the taxpayer like Obama’s crony capitalism. Romney’s Bain Capital experience will not help when it comes to shrinking the Federal Government. As our old pal Herman Cain said: Apples & Oranges. When you drag the other candidates into the mud like Romney did to Newt & Perry, this is what he reaped.
OT, slightly, but just read that Buchanan has been “suspended” from MSNBC for his views, and for the book he has just written.
Yes, I agree that he jumped the shark a while back, but NOW how many viewers will there now be for MSNBC? 2?!?
Larry the Liquidator defends Mitt Romney
DirkBelig: It’s “national suicide”, really Dirk, It’s “national suicide”? You’re not an enthusiastic supporter of Romney it’s just if you don’t elect Romney it will be “national suicide”.
Your impression of how you think people speak that have a strong opinion about religion and abortion, ” At least them Sodomites ain’t in the military and them baby-killers are in the hoosegow and the BABIES IS SAVED!!!!?, was so so. The “bitterly clinging” was the jewel. Taken right from Obama.
Your choice of insulting people, I suppose, is one way to get them to vote for Romney, or not. WAKE UP!!!
It is silly isn’t it. I had one doctor tell me my problems were all in my head, then I had to go to one of the “quacks” a naturopath to find and cure a problem I had when I was 25. From that point forward I trusted my own opinion and took responsibility for my health and sought my own doctors. That is what freedom is all about. So I can make a case against everyone who has ever run for president as none of them supported stopping this nonsense. But then I would also be voting for myself since I am the only one who thinks and believes as I do.
So I have excepted that there is socialism in all candidates even the libertarians.
I hope that is not what you took away from my post, Paratus! I supported the troops all the way. My own brother was drafted, although he didn’t end up going to Viet Nam. He ended up dying in a car accident at age 21. Anyway, I would have fled to Canada. But those who answered the call and fought were true pariots and heros. To this day, if I need something done, like the driveway re-tarred or roofing put on, I go to Viet Nam vets for the job. I honor them, and still feel sick in my stomach when I remember how they were treated when they came home. What they went through over there and then to come back to the trash they encountered was pure evil.
I’m sorry, but I have been skipping your posts. YOu may have had something important to say, but I don’t have time to read the equivalent of the obamacare bill (lengthwise). I post some long ones occasionally, but yours all seem to be that way. Again, nothing against you personally, but I just can’t get through your posts.
Excellent piece Michelle. I agree, we’re screwed.
Romney will lose graciously to The Won Again, President For Life.
All the candidates have to do is take a page from Ronald Reagan’s playbook, and one from Bill Clinton’s:
1. Ronald Reagan v. Jimmy Carter: “Are You Better Off Than You Were Four Years Ago?”
2. Bill Clinton: “It’s the economy, stupid!”
Those two sentences are all they need. They should also refuse to answer any asinine questions and remind the “journalists” that there are more important things on the voters minds than some made up/might happen incident, etc.
Also, on tv tonight, there was a newscaster who previewed some upcoming programs on the lives of Rick Santorum, etc., with photos, etc., all the way back to childhood. Uhhhh, why don’t/didn’t they do that with you-know-who? It is outrageous that this country’s voters elected a man so cloaked in secrecy without any “history” that could be substantiated? And his audacity is not of hope, but of sticking it to the citizenry because he knows he can get away with it due to a complicit senate (the house not so much).
It will take a bit of time to turn our ship of state around and put it on the right (meaning correct) course. It’s name is The Constitution, not the Titanic.
Virginia Voters!
Hold your nose and vote for Ron Paul if your candidate is not on the ballot. If you can hold your nose for McCain, you can do this. Deny Romney 49 delegates.
By the way, that comment by Huntsman that Romney “enjoys firing people” was so stupid! Why would he even say that? It was a nasty personal attack with no basis in fact. Some of these candidates are no better than 7th graders! Spit.
Which ones remind us who they are ultimately running against and which ones throw dirt. (rhetorical question, that)
I’m still undecided who I will vote for in the primary here. Lots can happen. I have a couple I’m leaning toward and want to see what goes in the next few weeks.
Hey Happy! As one of those guys you mentioned, I hereby give you a pass at any misinterpretation and attest to the fact I “got your back”. As far as GOP candidates, I seem to remember the invectives thrown at us Minnesotans about our weak candidates at the state level. How’s it feel now, folks? Y’all got yer own bottom dwellers to consider. You still don’t get it. We gotta beat Obama like a bass drum.
Paratus,
I happen to think we committed national suicide on Usurpation Day January 20, 2009
Swearing in a non-natural born citizen allowed him to shred what remained of the Constitution.
After which you ramble and rail against pro-life voters for 5 paragraphs.
Thanks for again proving my point, but I got it the first time.
They think we are so stupid that we will rally to it. Much like Dirk’s insulting bad grammar portrayal of moral conservatives, they think we are so dumb that we’ll respond positively to class warfare and the rest of it.
Oh yeah, thanks. I forgot the “straw man” in the list of logical falicies the other day. Projecting again I see.
For the last time. Romney and Newt are not nearly as conservative as we need, but they are hardly “liberal”. Ignoro medius (disregarded middle) again. It’s a false dichotomy. While you claim alignment with our hosts, you completely ignore that they are both avowed noseholders.
Truth be told, I agree with 95% of your speal ’till we get to the acceptability of a second Mao term. It can not be allowed, for the reasons already stated. Regulation by executive fiat and the prospect of stacking SCOTUS.
That and the fact that your scenario, while very attractive has little chance of happening in the real world. If you can’t convince conservatives here to get on board, you have zero chance with the middler Indies who actually decide the election. Sacrificing an Obupkus reelection for a shot at ’16 is far too dangerous. If you think Hillary can’t win then, you’re not thinking straight my friend. I’ll guarantee the only reason she’s not in this fray is she made a deal with Barry for the SOS gig. Per the polls, if she were in it now she could win it. Out of the frying pan, into the fire.
Certainly better than the others, but I would have liked to see a more vocal defense of the free market for him. That one was a little tepid.
So let’s not try. Let’s just do the easy things that guarantee losing in the end.
And I will leave it up to Michelle and Doug to tell me that they are “both avowed noseholders”. Even if that is true, persuading Michelle to change her mind would go a long way in getting other conservatives to stop voting for liberals. Neither is too shy to speak for themselves.
The central assumption of your argument is that we can’t win so let’s not even try. Where does that come from? The “spirit of ’76″? “We can’t beat the British so let’s round up the patriots and stop them before they insult the lobsters! We can’t win anyway!”
The second part of your argument is ludicrous and I have explained why so many times already. It’s like Michelle has explained so many times, Obama happened because the all-Republican government that was led for six years by Bush 43 “pre-socialized” the economy for him. The Republicans CREATED Obama. So reinstating the very people who are backed by the very same special interest money committed to delivering on the same globalist agenda gives us hope for 2016? How does that work? Are you embarrassed to be arguing for something so obviously illogical?
Why don’t you allow those of us who are willing to try something different give it a shot? Why do you guys so determined to make sure these threads remain an exclusive noseholder echo chamber? What are you really afraid of?
You keep mouthing the establishment narrative as if it is self-evidently true. It can’t be. You keep voting for the same corrupt people backed by the same money and beholden to the very same interests every single election. Stop doing that!
Stop telling yourself and the rest of us that you can’t vote for conservatives because conservatives are unelectable because conservatives never vote for conservatives so you can’t either or else the world will explode. Try voting for conservatives for a change and don’t worry what everyone else is going to do. If we all vote for a conservative next November, it will change everything.
Hopefully, we can shake up the establishment before then and force open conventions. Otherwise, we need to force a constitutional crisis over the electoral college. That Perot garnered almost 20% of the vote in 1992 year failed to win a single electoral vote is not an argument of hopelessness, it’s an argument of just how rigged and insular our national elections have become. We need to break the one-party system before the shooting starts. We probably don’t have until 2016.
It’s only hopeless because of the stupidity loop that seems to be a terminal condition with the Stupid Party. The solution is on the ballot every November. If everyone who claims to be a conservative votes for a conservative for a change, we win. Let’s try it.
Is there any MORE proof needed that the RINOpublican party has been assimilated by Marxists?
The candidates don’t want to touch the Marxist Romney!
Sheriff Brodie: You’re gonna need a bigger carrot!
In this election, we are not running against Obama. It seems too many noseholders have this misperception and won’t let go of it.
I don’t care what you think of Obama, personally. I won’t voice my opinion of him, because he sits in the White House.
We are not fighting Obama. We are fighting a political machine. It is the machine that has to be beaten, and broken. I’m not talking about Democrats; I’m talking about progressives.
If we replace Obama with, even Michele Bachmann, or Ron Paul, let alone Romney, and the Senate stays in progressive (even if those hands belong to Republican progressives), what happens? The Republican President is stymied. He won’t be able to do all that has to be done for a conservative solution to work; the progressives will see to that. So when things don’t get better, or even get worse, he’ll be blamed for it. He’ll be hated by conservatives for not undoing the damage the progressives have already done, he’ll be hated by everyone else for the lowered standard of living they experience.
There is no way conservatives will not take the blame for that; the progressives of both parties will see that we do. And then in 2016, conservatives will be locked out of power for as far into the future as the eye can see.
Let’s say we get a progressive like Gingrich or Romney in the White House, but manage to get conservative control of both Houses. Then there’s a battle royale between the White House and the Congress. It’s still strongly possible, even likely, that he’ll be able to stymie doing everything that needs to be done to reverse the damage. He may take it on the chin, but he’ll be certain to take the conservative-controlled Congress with him. And again, conservatives will be locked out of power.
Now, this scenario can be avoided with sufficient conservatives in control of both houses so as to lock the progressives out of influence. Then they can override Presidential vetoes, which a Republican conservative will be reluctant to hand out, knowing they stand a good chance of being overridden. He’ll attempt to appoint progressive judges, but with true conservative control of the Senate, the first time one of his progressive appointees is knocked down, he’ll have to come up with a conservative appointee who can pass muster, or risk being labeled a lame duck in his first term.
So, all the noseholders who want to give in and allow a progressive have the Republican nominee, okay. But that just means you have to hold your nose and let us load the Congress with as many conservatives, real conservatives, as possible. You have to either let us have our purity test in Congress, or accept that in 2016, it’s all over; the wolf will have eaten everyone else and at the last will finally turn on you.
The key phrase in all of that is “…everything that needs to be done”.
You can argue that half a loaf is better than none. How about half a baby?
How about making half a pie? That is, make a pie with half the ingredients. Flour, but no eggs. Water, but no filling. You don’t have a pie.
This is the same thing. Some reforms, by themselves, will have no effect. Some reforms, if other things are left as they are, will have a deleterious effect. At this point, we can’t compromise on the changes that need to be made. Obamacare needs to be ended; so does the ban on incandescent lightbulbs; so does the entire green energy agenda. The budget also needs to be cut; but you can’t cut it if we continue to pour billions of dollars into Solyndras and Volts. We need to bring jobs home, but we can’t bring those jobs home if we don’t both A) deregulate so the companies will want to come home and B) protect American interests from predatory international trade policies (Hello Japan and China et al). You do one and not the other, nothings going to happen and you’re going to look like the ugly, impotent hate-filled right-wing extremist the progressives will paint us as.
You are omitting a very important lesson from 2011. A mere 20 House conservatives managed to stand Washington on its head over the budget. They didn’t have the numbers but the one-party establishment saw the thread as existential and reached across the aisle to unite in opposition while trying to maintain the kabuki. We have power beyond our numbers.
Were we to succeed with Operation Counterweight and double those twenty, the fence sitters would swing over to catch the wave. We are closer to victory that just looking at numbers would suggest. They are selling cancer. Cancer requires complicated explanations and lots of money to sell. We aren’t selling cancer. It’s a big advantage.
threat, not thread.
Thanks, David…that means a lot to me!
OT, but disgusting none-the-less. Apple just gave 1 million shares, currently valued at about 365 million dollars, to its new CEO Tim Cook. Isn’t that special.
Even if the company does poorly under the new CEO, in 2016 and 2021, Cook can cash in if he wishes and take home hundreds of millions of dollars.
This will be the start of the demise of Apple. I would sell the company on this news, for sure!
Phil, with any due respect, you’re arguing for noseholding.
If I understand what you’re trying to say, you’re arguing that, with 40 conservatives, we could pull the Congress back toward the center.
My point is, that’s not enough. We’re not dealing with amateurs. As you said, they united in opposition to the conservatives, and they will again. Oh, they’ll let some things get passed, in a watered-down way. 40 conservatives in the House would have to compromise in hopes of getting *anything* passed… and once they do that, the fine print in the compromises will A) subvert their efforts B) water down their efforts and/or C) make them look ridiculous, corrupt or both.
This isn’t a tea party anymore. This is a knife-fight in a broom closet.
OT Question: what happens if I start a Mom & Pop incandescent lightbulb manufacturing business out of my garage, making 100 watters?
I don’t think they’re that hard to make; Edison figured out how long ago. They’re not dangerous like CFLs.
I’d like to see the Tucker like circus when they try to shut me down.
If I had the money, I just might give it a try…
And Disney paid Johnny Depp $300 million for the last “Pirates of the Caribbean” movie.
I’ve never owned Apple, not because I don’t believe in the company but that I don’t believe in chasing stocks that are always over-priced. It’s like paying $50 for a $10 bill confident that someone else will pay you $100 for it later.
Well…a couple of very wordy and Loooooong posts, one by Phil, one by Hiraghn. I saw a word in P Phil’s post…something about “noseholding” so I skipped that epistle. Then got to Hiraghm’s post and saw the same word, so skipped that overly verbose one too. I just don’t have the patience for fillibusters any more. I am packing it in and saying goodnight.
P.S. Next time you are tempted to vote third party, thus giving the election to Obama…remember the Mao ornament hanging on the WH Christmas tree in OUR house. Then decide…should the disgusting traitor who allowed that piece of sh!t to hang on our tree get four more years?
I’m really tired of all the “Doom and Gloom” on this blog, beginning with Michele’s “We’re screwed.” I think the nomination is between Romney and Santorum, either of whom would defeat Obama. (I personally prefer Santorum.)
Gringrich needs to stop his personal vendetta against Romney – Gingrich’s only purpose in running now is to drag down Romney.
Ron Paul is too Looney-Toons to even consider as a candidate.
Huntsman would be McCain-Lite, if that’s even possible.
I still like Perry, but he seems to have veered-off into his own personal agenda.
Just a couple suggestions: I think a Romney/Bachmann ticket could be effective, as could a Santorum/Condoleeza Rice ticket.
I didn’t realize the future looks so bright. All we have to do is reinstate the very same Republicans who created Obama and everything will be right again? Tell me more!
It bothers me that company executives can just grant this windfall as they see fit. They are stealing and such behaviour is no different than that which a street thug does by robbing a liquor store. I don’t own Apple either – I go for boring and safe, such as WMT (Walmart), XOM (Exxon) and AFL (Aflac), but still, this pisses me off. I will never buy HD (Home Depot) after they gave Nardelli $200 million plus to leave and now Apple has made my poorly managed companies list which means I will never buy their stock. I think I will extend my dislike to their products as well. No IPad for me (and I was planning to buy one).
123upnorth:
It’s called capitalism. If he screws up, his stock options will be worth spit. You should try it sometime up north. In the end, it usually works. And BTW, I don’t own Apple stock or buy Apple products. Wish I had invested back in ’06. I would have made 4-5 times my investment by now, plus earnings.
happyscrapper:
I love your P.S…. Puts everything into perspective.
Come again?
Which is exactly why I may take up drinking, at least for one day in November.
Or for fear she would damage her brand for 2016 if she had in this crowded field and lost or ended up dropping out later.
Although I do not consume adult beverages, I may take November 7th off if Obama wins.
Virginia Patriot:
Do you mind getting together, and downing a couple of bottles of Jack Daniels Single Barrel, Wild Turkey Rare Breed, Barcelo Imperial, or an 18 or 21 year single malt Scotch?
***
HI CONSERVATIVE_HISPANIC–#283. Not a bad list of Obama Painkillers for possible use if The Good Comrade gets reelected on Nov. 6, 2012. I prefer the Jack–but for serious work I think that unfortunate event would call for Camarena Tequila–100 proof–with lime and salt on the back of the hand. No sissy Margarita stuff.
***
John Bibb
***
Amen. That’s one of the few sane comments I’ve read on this blog in a while. I like both Romney and Santorum and would gladly vote for either one of them. A Romney/Bachmann or Santorum/Romney ticket would be just fine.
I was beginning to like the new Newt when he was Mr. positive. But when he lost in Iowa, he gave in to the hate and went over to the dark side. He’s not only made himself damaged goods but he wants to take the rest of the Republican candidates down with him.
The same people who condemned the Occupy Wall Street movement as a Leftist, anti-capitalist, class warfare propaganda machine are now sounding just like the occupiers. Suddenly, our “true conservative” candidates in this race are now condemning the top 1% in this country as evil capitalists. If you can find a worse flip-flop for a conservative to make than to turn against the free market system, I’d like to hear it.
Where will this country be when we get to the point that only those with government backing are willing to take risks anymore? One thing’s for sure. We won’t be a country where an average American wage earner who makes more than $34,000 a year can count themselves in the world’s top 1%, like they can now.
The very clause to which I refer. Let me highlight the relevant text:
One cannot “raise” a standing army. Nor is there any reason for the limitation to two years of appropriating money if the army is to be perpetual.
The Founding Fathers intended us to use the marines as we now use Delta Force, the Navy Seals, etc, and only raise an army in situations where we needed one, such as WWII, the Confederate War, and so on.
I disagree with this policy in the modern world, with America’s current situation in the world. But, it is how Ron Paul thinks.
And it is precisely the kind of questions I would continually be hammering him with if I were an Obama apparatchik.
A Romney / Bachmann ticket would be “McCain / Palin: 2012″. Just a remake of the 2008 election.
Too bad, because mine was mostly on the importance of getting Congress into conservative hands.
How did that traitor get his first four years? How? Everybody knows he’s a traitor. Everybody knows he’s a vile Marxist who wants to subvert the country into a European style socialist state. So how’d he win the first election? He said EXACTLY what he wanted to do, and people still voted for him. People still like him, according to the polls.
So, what’d he do? Bamboozle the American populace? Are you saying that the majority of people are too witless to be trusted with the franchise? Gee, where have I experienced that attitude before… why, emanating from the left.
IF conservatism is right, IF the basis of our conservative principles is true, and what is needed to fix the country, then we should be able to put the most conservative candidate in existence out there, and win in a 50 State landslide, shouldn’t we?
Why should we have to move to the “center”, to compromise the principles which we believe will rescue the nation? To play the left’s game?
If you don’t think conservative principles presented by a conservative candidate can win the election, then you don’t believe in conservatism… or you don’t believe the majority of Americans are truly conservative. If they aren’t, don’t they have the right to have the kind of country they want? Don’t they deserve 4 more years of Obama? Or are we the same kind of elitists as Obama, thinking we know better what the people want than the people themselves?
You’re upset about a Mao ornament on a Christmas tree? What about Bush Sr bowing over Hirohito’s grave? What about Nixon opening up trade relations with China while Mao still lived?
Either the majority of Americans are conservative, or they aren’t. If they are, we need to get to them and get them out to vote… and they’ll want to vote for a conservative, not Romney. If they aren’t conservative, then it doesn’t matter who our candidate is; they will still support the socializing agenda. Unless we can educate them. I know of no surer education than letting them live under European style socialism for awhile.
I consider the notion that “criticizing Romney on aspects of his work at Bain” is comparable to OWS/Leftist tripe to be nonsense.
To me, this is instead an example of the Right’s form of “Political Correctness,” trying to censor/limit just what someone can be criticized for.
I heard the same yammer – again in defense of Romney – that calling him an “Establishment” or “Country Club” Republican was “class warfare.”
I CALL BULL ON THAT NOTION.
From: Ace of Spades HQ
Argument I’ve Been Making: How Come Romney Is Allowed To Go Cheap-Shot On Everyone Else, But the Minute He Gets Some Cheap-Shot In Return, It’s a Crime Against America?
When Romney went after Perry claiming he wanted to end Social Security, and hitting him generally for calling it unconstitutional (it arguably is) and a ponzi scheme (it likely is), people said, “Hey, these are general election liabilities; Perry should have to respond to these charges. The left will make them.”
Well, same deal with Bain Capital. This is a general election liability; Romney should have to respond to these charges. The left will hit him on this (and in fact already is).
From: Legal Insurrection (Prof. Jacobson)
“Republicans should thank Newt for bringing up Bain now”
As you know, I knew this day would come. The only question was whether it would be early enough in the primaries to make a difference, too late in the primaries, or in the general election.
But the day surely was to come when Mitt Romney’s years at Bain would come under scrutiny. After all, Bain is Romney’s entire claim to business experience, and business experience is Romney’s primary claim to the White House.
Yet the reaction among the conservative punditry to any mention of possible trouble in the Bain narrative was met with indignation that Newt was attacking capitalism. Charles Krauthammer famously said Newt was talking like “a socialist” for mentioning that Bain bankrupted companies.
The hyperventilated reaction to Newt’s mention of Bain problems was similar to the use of the race card, it was intended to shut down the conversation. And it did for a while in Iowa, and it provided ammunition to those who didn’t like Newt to begin with.
The argument that Newt was being anti-capitalist was rank hypocrisy from the get-go. While being a corporate raider — if that’s what Romney was, and it remains to be proven — may be legal and part of capitalism, it is not necessarily the type of business experience that makes one worthy of the White House or helps electability.
Thanks for the non-raging feedback to my slightly rage-y rant, roadrage (#84). Good to know that you’re still planning to vote in the primary and that you’ll be voting for one of those left in the running whom you think can best do the job. If everyone would do the same instead of staying home or settling on the poll- and media-driven status quo, I think we’d have a race on our hands.
Michelle….anti Venture Capitalist Fund managment and actions is NOT anti-capitalist…far from it. VC firms today are responsible for most of the recent stock market bubbles and crashes, by promoting totally unreasonable and unsupportable “valuations” on new stock offerings and stock run ups via the Stock Market. Most notable was the Dot.Com bubble….that disaster lies totally at the feet of VC greed and promoters. Bain is just like the Wall Street derivative sales operations…they do not make profits NOT do they promote long term solid business creations, and thus solid employment bases. Mitt is just another speculator using other peoples money to get rich along with the 250 other Harvard Graduates he hired at Blain.
Newt is correct to point this out, but most Americans, and sadly, apparently you, are too busy promoting the GOP agenda of Mitt no matter WHAT to knock off Obama….Newt may not say what you LIKE, but the man has more substance in his little finger than Mitt has in his entirity.
AboutContactArchivesRSSColumnsPhotos Michelle Malkin The abysmal incompetence of the non-Romneys; Huntsman, Gingrich, Perry all go Occupier; Santorum declines
By Michelle Malkin • January 9, 2012 10:36 AM
Sigh. Let me say that again: Siiiiiiiiiiiiiigh.
If you were unfortunate enough to watch Saturday night’s GOP debate in New Hampshire, you saw a pageant of feckless non-Romneys fail to step up to the plate and forcefully challenge Mitt Romney’s presumptive claim to the GOP presidential nomination. Newt Gingrich, who has spent the last week whining about the liberal media, hid behind the liberal media when asked about attacks of Romney’s private-sector record at Bain Capital:
NEWT GINGRICH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, I — I haven’t seen the film, but it does reflect “The New York Times” story two days ago about one particular company. And I think people should look at the film and decide. If it’s factually accurate, it raises questions.
I’m very much for free enterprise. I’m very much for exactly what the Governor just described, create a business, grow jobs, provide leadership.
I’m not nearly as enamored of a Wall Street model where you can flip companies, you can go in and have leveraged buyouts, you can basically take out all the money, leaving behind the workers. And I think most…
STEPHANOPOULOS: Is that the Bain model?
GINGRICH: Well, I — I think you have to look at the film. You have to look at “The New York Times” coverage of one particular company. And you have to ask yourself some questions.
The Governor has every right to defend that. And I think — but I think it’s a legitimate part of the debate to say, OK, on balance, were people better off or were people worse off by this particular style of investment?
STEPHANOPOULOS: Back in December, you said that Governor Romney made money at Bain by, quote, “bankrupting companies and laying off employees.”
GINGRICH: That was, I think, “The New York Times” story two days ago. They took one specific company. They walked through in detail. They showed what they bought it for, how much they took out of it and the 1,700 people they left unemployed. Now that’s — check “The New York Times” story, but that’s their story.
Leaning on the Fishwrap of Record as a crutch instead of owning up? This isn’t just cartoon-ish behavior. It’s poltroon-ish behavior.
With his incessant bashing of how the private equity industry works in the real world, Newt (along with Rick Perry) is morphing into an Occupy Wall Street zealot.
Or a David Axelrod:
His rivals have sought to turn his Bain tenure against him. Rick Perry has run an ad saying Mr. Romney “made millions buying companies and laying off workers.” Newt Gingrich has said Mr. Romney should “give back all the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain.”
Mr. Gingrich laced into Mr. Romney at this weekend’s debates, and a group associated with the former House Speaker plans to release a 28-minute documentary blistering Mr. Romney’s Bain tenure. Meanwhile, on ABC on Sunday, Obama strategist David Axelrod criticized Mr. Romney as “a corporate raider.”
Mr. Romney describes job losses and bankruptcies as an inevitable byproduct of the capitalist system, and has said that in some cases, eliminating some jobs may save the rest of the company. In response to Mr. Gingrich, Mr. Romney said: “Doesn’t he understand how the economy works? In the real economy, some businesses succeed and some fail.”
Asked in an interview about Bain’s bankruptcy and failure rate, Mr. Romney said that in buyout deals, “our orientation was by and large to acquire businesses that were out of favor and in some cases in trouble.” He added that Bain wasn’t the type of firm that stripped companies and fired workers, but instead, “our approach was to try to build a business. We were not always successful.”
FYI, the Wall Street Journal analysis of Bain’s mixed record during Romney’s tenure is here. Takeaway:
The Wall Street Journal, aiming for a comprehensive assessment, examined 77 businesses Bain invested in while Mr. Romney led the firm from its 1984 start until early 1999, to see how they fared during Bain’s involvement and shortly afterward.
Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost.
Another finding was that Bain produced stellar returns for its investors—yet the bulk of these came from just a small number of its investments. Ten deals produced more than 70% of the dollar gains.
…The Journal analysis shows that in total, Bain produced about $2.5 billion in gains for its investors in the 77 deals, on about $1.1 billion invested. Overall, Bain recorded roughly 50% to 80% annual gains in this period, which experts said was among the best track records for buyout firms in that era.
All of that will get lost as the Occupy rhetoric seeps into attack ads by Republicans that will send tingles down the legs of anti-capitalists everywhere from Gingrich’s new favorite newspaper, the New York Times, on down. Click on that link to read about the $5 million boost to a pro-Gingrich super PAC (yes, super PACs — those evil entities that Gingrich was whining about last week after his Iowa drubbing) that will saturate South Carolina with Occupy-style demagoguery. With Newt’s explicit approval and endorsement.
The latest evolution of anti-capitalism bashing by pathetic GOP candidates? Distorting Romney’s remarks about the private-sector ability to fire people who aren’t doing their job:
CBS News reports via Twitter:
Huntsman tells reporters in Concord: “Governor Romney enjoys firing people; I enjoy creating jobs.”
It’s a reference to this:
Mitt Romney, who’s under attack for his business record, said Monday that he likes to have the option of firing people.
“I like being able to fire people who provide services to me,” he told business executives from the Nashua Greater Chamber of Commerce, adding if he isn’t getting a “good service, I want to say, I’m going to get someone else.”
The point will get lost down the demagogic rabbit hole:
He added: “You know, if someone doesn’t give me the good service I need, I want to say, ‘You know, I’m going to get someone else to provide that service to me.’”
Mitt Romney’s chronic flip-flopping political career is teeming with reasons to oppose his nomination — from his support for racial preferences, to government funding of abortion, liberal judges, global warming enviro-nitwittery, TARP, auto bailouts, the Obama stimulus, gun control, and of course, individual health insurance mandates that presaged Obamacare.
Instead of focusing on his long political record of expedience, incompetent non-Romneys have morphed into Michael Moore propagandists — throwing not just Bain Capital under the bus, but wealth creators of all kinds who take risks in the private marketplace.
We’re screwed.
***
More…
Lori Ziganto advises: “Fight like a girl or lose, candidates!”
Kurt Schlichter nails the depressing conundrum:
“Romney ought to turn Bain to his advantage. It should be a plus. But then, he’s handicapped by being Romney.”
My friend Jeff Emanuel makes a point that Bain is a general weakness for Romney in a jobs/class warfare general election race with Obama — and several other Twitter friends point out that it is useful for Romney to be forced to answer Bain-bashing attacks now rather than later — but Jeff also acknowledges that “pro-market Republicans aren’t the ones who should be beating” the anti-capitalism drum.
Jim Pethokoukis: Romney has nothing to apologize for in his Bain career…
Of course, Romney and Bain weren’t in the game to create jobs. They were in it to make money for their investors and themselves. Then again, the same would go for Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell, Warren Buffett, and just about every other successful entrepreneur and investor you could name. But that is the miracle of free-market capitalism. The pursuit of profits by creating value benefits the rest of society through higher incomes, more jobs, and better products and services. This isn’t “destructive creation”—like, say, crippling U.S. fossil fuel production before “clean energy” sources are viable—but “creative destruction” where innovation and efficiency sweep away the old and replace it with a more productive and wealthier society.
Update: Good for Rick Santorum…
Leaving the frozen event, Santorum also declined to take a shot at Romney over a remark earlier from the front-runner that he “likes to fire” workers who are not doing a good job.
“We try to hire good people, we try to keep them employed. If someone if obviously not performing their duty and their mission, obviously a business has a responsibility for the greater good of the business and the other employees to make sure that everybody there is pulling their weight,” Santorum said.
Asked whether Romney’s corporate takeover experience at Bain Capital would be a liability, Santorum said: “I’m not making it a liability. I believe in the private sector.”
Via The Right Scoop, Rush Limbaugh takes Newt to task.
Heckuva job, non-Romneys…
National Journal headline via Allahpundit: Capitalism Comes Under Fire in Republican Primary Campaign
***
Via The Right Scoop on MRC, here’s a Fox News video montage of the Occupy Republicans:
~ For the latest breaking news, be sure to join Michelle’s e-mail list ~
Posted in: 2012 Campaign,Mitt Romney,New York Times,Newt Gingrich,Ron PaulPrinter Friendly comments (293) See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com’s community of registered readers. Please don’t assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
« Older Comments
#201On January 9th, 2012 at 3:38 pm, 123upnorth said:
Okay then. I am a bigot. I have been told. So it has been said.
#202On January 9th, 2012 at 3:40 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:12 pm, Mister P said:
Nothing says those rules and regulations can’t be addressed by Congress.
But why isn’t Ron Paul addressing them?
Did you not read the HR link I provided.
#203On January 9th, 2012 at 3:40 pm, Hangfire said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:37 pm, 123upnorth said:
If these user accounts were accompanied by photos, you wouldn’t dare suggest I could be your son.
We pulled into Esquimalt, near Victoria, after 89 days at sea.
And, yes, Canadian Mist and LaBatt’s were involved.
#204On January 9th, 2012 at 3:42 pm, conservative hispanic said:
DirkBelig #130:
My man, you don’t get it. It doesn’t matter how much you rip the other candidates, the moment you say anything bad about Ron Paul, the Paulbots go berserk, hysterical, nuts. Like you said they’re childish and unAmerican. They don’t want to hear anything bad about their lord and savior. As far as they’re concerned, he walks on water, and his crap doesn’t stink. You mention the term “cult leader”. I’m so afraid you’re right. They’re so hateful of all other GOP candidates, they might as well be Assistant Democrats. If they don’t get their heads straightened out, they’ll give Obowtome the 4 years he needs to finally destroy the country.
#205On January 9th, 2012 at 3:44 pm, love2rumba said:
Exactly right. Come on everyone, let’s settle on Mitt and get some REAL CONSERVATIVES IN CONGRESS to keep him in line! Or else bitterly cling to your delusions that one of the other Dwarves are more electable. *snort* Just don’t whine when Obama finishes his destruction of the country and you WISH there was someone as milquetoast as Romney around.
Repubs trying to stop Bush II was tried with Bush II on a handful of issues and still they passed a lot of his socialist policies: No child left behind, Prescription drug program, the budget, and that hateful attittude of ‘compassionate conservatism’. The only thing I recall that Repubs in congress were able to stop was Bush II’s desire to re-enact the Assault Weapon Ban, and that’s because the decision would have been on an election year (2004).
By the way how tough were those Tea Party Repubs during the budget battle this year, or in stopping NDAA 12 which lays the legal groundwork for making Obama or any sucessor a dictator (by at least destroying Habeas Corpus as we’ve known it by merely accusing you of being a terrorist-very handy, isn’t it?). Most of them voted for it.
Obama, if he gets to destroy this country, had a LOT of GOP/DEM help along the way during his reign and well before he ever was elected, and switching him for Obama with an R will not change anything. Start thinking for a change.
#206On January 9th, 2012 at 3:46 pm, happyscrapper said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 2:52 pm, StaceyOfLiberty said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 11:05 am, happyscrapper
A word about Chris Christy. NO!!! Just to clarify…he is a thug. He is nasty and insulting. That is working for him in Jersey. It won’t work in the rest of the country. Please, God, not Christy!!
So…he’s like the Rahm Emanuel of the right? Although he is kind of moderate rather than far right, I think. (Moderate in his views, not necessarily how he expresses them.)
Excellent comparison, Stacey, and I agree with it. A thug is a thug, no matter what side of the aisle. Christy is doing a good job in New Jersey because thuggery is all they understand and relate to. The rest of the country is NOT O.K. with that.
#207On January 9th, 2012 at 3:46 pm, 123upnorth said:
And, yes, Canadian Mist and LaBatt’s were involved.
Well, I do have a learning disability, so it is possible I could be yours.
#208On January 9th, 2012 at 3:46 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:27 pm, Captain Blasto said:
I don’t care if he authored one of the books in the Bible. He wrote those newsletters or at least is responsible for them.
And he has accepted responsibility for them because his name was on the masthead. And he has also disavowed their content. You harp on something that happened over twenty years ago, while ignoring Ron Paul’s actions on behalf of poor minorities before and since, and also ignore the fact that the president of the NAACP has stated unequivically that he’s known Ron Paul for over twenty years, and states that he is not a racist. But you go ahead and keep regurgitating that MSM puke. You got nothing!
#209On January 9th, 2012 at 3:48 pm, 123upnorth said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:42 pm, conservative hispanic said:
DirkBelig #130:
My man, you don’t get it. It doesn’t matter how much you rip the other candidates, the moment you say anything bad about Ron Paul, the Paulbots go berserk, hysterical, nuts.
I go nuts when others try to control me or vote for those that want to control me.
#210On January 9th, 2012 at 3:49 pm, Captain Blasto said:
There is nothing to think about. We’re stuck with the candidates who are running. I keep hoping the candidates will start explaining their positions and stop bashing each other. That would be useful.
#211On January 9th, 2012 at 3:50 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:42 pm, conservative hispanic said:
They’re so hateful of all other GOP candidates, they might as well be Assistant Democrats. If they don’t get their heads straightened out, they’ll give Obowtome the 4 years he needs to finally destroy the country.
Au contrare, I also liked Cain and Bachmann, Santorum not so much. Next!
#212On January 9th, 2012 at 3:53 pm, happyscrapper said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:04 pm, Mister P said:
I write my own prescriptions because if I don’t, it takes too long to get the medicines I want to try, being that I have to wait so long to see a specialist in my country.
I have no thyroid, so I must take some form of T3 and/or T4 the rest of my life. But every year I must trot into some doctors office and then have to take his series of blood tests so he can find a jillion other problems. Its a nuisance. Worse all doctors go by the outdated TSH test that does not apply to my situation at all. Just let me fill my own prescriptions.
I have the same issues, not thyroid but same situation with the doctor. I have been taking the same prescription every day for the last 25 years. There has been NO side affects. I need the medicine. Yet, I have to renew it every month and after one year, I have to trot over to my doctor’s office for a physical before he will renew it for another year. In addition, I have to be sujected to the ridiculous tests that all women are “supposed” to get. After 50+ years of annual pap tests and not one abnormal one, I am opting out of that test as of the next visit. I am almost 70 years old and am tired of going through the humiliation. Same with colonoscopy’s. Never had one…never will. My doctor sets up the appointment for one and I cancel it.
This is MY decision. The medicine works for me, and I pay for it. The tests are expensive and I don’t want them. Is that so bad?
#213On January 9th, 2012 at 3:55 pm, happyscrapper said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:06 pm, T-Bone said:
It’s true what they say: There’s someone out there for everybody
Russian mail order bride? Or, if I am correct, 123 likes the Asian women. Perhaps a bridezilla.
He also says he wuld “bed” Nan Pelosi. Wow…what does his fiance look like? Curious minds want to know!
#214On January 9th, 2012 at 4:01 pm, fred5676 said:
I have very little enthusiasm for any GOP candidate, but I refuse to vote for anyone who devalues my American citizenship enough to call for rewarding foreign invaders with their ill-gotten goods — i.e., “legalized” residency.
Such a policy is at best muddled thinking, and at worst, treason.
Check this list.
Check point 6 here.
Especially tragic when there is no need to cater to the open borders crowd.
I was fooled in 2000. I held my nose in 2004. I REALLY held my nose in 2008. I refuse to hold my nose any more.
#215On January 9th, 2012 at 4:03 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:
Right Said Fred!
#216On January 9th, 2012 at 4:06 pm, 123upnorth said:
5’2″ tall, 105 pounds with 25% of her weight located within her backside. She reminds me of a sexier version of Moemoe Yamaguchi, circa 1970′s.
But looks aren’t that important to me anyway, for all individuals – both men and women – once they reach mid-adulthood become unattractive. So, if I were to marry a woman simply for her looks (and considering my age), my enjoyment of her beauty would only persist for 5+ years, maximum.
#217On January 9th, 2012 at 4:06 pm, happyscrapper said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:27 pm, Mister P said:
One more thing on Ron Paul. He talked about his getting drafted. I imagine it had to do with a need for doctors. But what has been his take on the draft? As a draftee myself, I know all my civil rights were taken away the moment I got drafted and stayed away till I got out 2 years later.
If I was a man and had been drafted back during the Viet Nam War…I would now be a Canadian citizen. I would not have gone into that war. Is that anti-American? I don’t know. But in the 60′s, and to this day, I abhored that war and what it did to our country and all those wonderful draftees who went against their will and lost their lives. The biggest tragedy in this country’s history and I include the Civil War in that. At least in the Civil War, you knew what you were fighting about and did so voluntarily.
#218On January 9th, 2012 at 4:13 pm, happyscrapper said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:46 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:
Sorry…you don’t publish a newsletter under your name and with your picture on it, showing ownership of it, and then blame the person who wrote the article. If it is YOUR newsletter, YOU are responsible for its content. If you have no control over its content, then you shouldn’t claim it under your name. That makes you nucking futz, my description of Ron Paul. Geez!!!
#219On January 9th, 2012 at 4:19 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:
Again, he has accepted responsibility for it and disavowed the content. Again, over twenty years ago. What in his words and actions recently, say, the last nineteen years, and the president of the NAACP’s words notwithstanding, makes you still think he is a racist nut?
#220On January 9th, 2012 at 4:25 pm, 123upnorth said:
What in his words and actions recently, say, the last nineteen years, and the president of the NAACP’s words notwithstanding, makes you still think he is a racist nut?
He wants to reduce the size of government and there are so many people with an interest in seeing big government continue. One of the ways they have learned to attack others is to call them racist. Another derisive term is to label an opponent old. When that’s doesn’t work, they attack Ron Paul’s earmark history. Even when Ron talks about his specific inclination for earmarks because his belief that such spending activity more easily identifies where monies go, they still use the same attack.
#221On January 9th, 2012 at 4:29 pm, Paratus said:
The biggest tragedy of the Viet Nam war is people that said men that were killed there died for nothing.
I had two friends that died in V N one from the CG. Fuk anyone that says they died for nothing.
#222On January 9th, 2012 at 4:30 pm, conservative hispanic said:
Rogue Cheddar:
Really? Then how come you don’t support Rick? Even you should know he has a much better chance than Ron of winning the nomination. How do you think Ron’s ideas will play in SC and FL? I tell you what: FL has a closed primary, meaning that all the Dems and drug addicts can’t corrupt the process. Not sure of SC, but methinks that his dog don’t hunt there. After that, he’s finished.
#223On January 9th, 2012 at 4:30 pm, conservative hispanic said:
Rogue Cheddar:
Really? Then how come you don’t support Rick? Even you should know he has a much better chance than Ron of winning the nomination. How do you think Ron’s ideas will play in SC and FL? I tell you what: FL has a closed primary, meaning that all the Dems and drug addicts can’t corrupt the process. Not sure of SC, but methinks that his dog don’t hunt there. After that, he’s finished.
#224On January 9th, 2012 at 4:31 pm, Hiraghm said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 4:06 pm, happyscrapper said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:27 pm, Mister P said:
One more thing on Ron Paul. He talked about his getting drafted. I imagine it had to do with a need for doctors. But what has been his take on the draft? As a draftee myself, I know all my civil rights were taken away the moment I got drafted and stayed away till I got out 2 years later.
If I was a man and had been drafted back during the Viet Nam War…I would now be a Canadian citizen. I would not have gone into that war. Is that anti-American? I don’t know. But in the 60′s, and to this day, I abhored that war and what it did to our country and all those wonderful draftees who went against their will and lost their lives. The biggest tragedy in this country’s history and I include the Civil War in that. At least in the Civil War, you knew what you were fighting about and did so voluntarily.
600K in 4 years, vs 50k in 10 years… more men of draft age died on American highways at the height of Viet Nam than died in combat.
Many of the participants in both wars knew what they were fighting for (particularly if they were Southerners). Most of the Unionists during the Confederate War were under the misapprehension that the war was about “freeing the slaves”.
We were fighting the expansion and acceptance of communism, just as today’s young men fight in Iraq and Afghanistan and around the world to stop the expansion and acceptance of fundamentalist Islam. Pure and simple. More young men of draft age would have understood what we were fighting for had they not been exposed to the false, lying, traitorous propaganda put out by their own fellow citizens who believed in communism more than they believed in freedom or America.
I give you an excerpt from general Matt Ridgeway’s “Proud Legions”; it deals with Korea, but the issue is the same:
Everywhere Matt Ridgway went, however, he found the same question in men’s minds: What the hell are we doing in this godforsaken place?
If men had been told, Destroy the evil of Bolshevism, they might have understood. But they did not understand why the line must be held or why the Taehan Minkuk – that miserable, stinking, undemocratic country – must be protected.
The question itself never concerned Matt Ridgway. At the age of fifty-six, more than thirty years a centurion, to him the answer was simple. The loyalty he gave, and expected, precluded the slightest questioning of orders. This he said:
The real issues are whether the power of Western Civilization, as God has permitted it to flower in our own beloved lands, shall defy and defeat Communism; whether the rule of men who shoot their prisoners, enslave their citizens, and deride the dignity of man, shall displace the rule of those to whom the individual and his individual rights are sacred; whether we are to survive with God’s hand to guide and lead us, or to perish in the dead existence of a Godless world.
From the Confederate War to Viet Nam, to the current conflict with Islam, the issue always seems to be the same.
I’m becoming convinced that, if there is a Biblical Armageddon in our future, it will be fought as a test between the philosophies of socialism and individualism.
#225On January 9th, 2012 at 4:32 pm, Hiraghm said:
Lest someone gets the wrong impression, “We were fighting the expansion of communism” refers to Viet Nam, not the Confederate War.
#226On January 9th, 2012 at 4:36 pm, Hangfire said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:46 pm, 123upnorth said:
And, yes, Canadian Mist and LaBatt’s were involved.
Well, I do have a learning disability, so it is possible I could be yours.
Quite so.
Did your Mother have bright red hair, one green eye, and a large tattoo on her chest saying, “Wine me, Dine me, Sixty-nine me?”
#227On January 9th, 2012 at 4:38 pm, Hiraghm said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 4:29 pm, Paratus said:
The biggest tragedy of the Viet Nam war is people that said men that were killed there died for nothing.
I had two friends that died in V N one from the CG. Fuk anyone that says they died for nothing.
They didn’t die for nothing. If nothing else, their deaths assured that the men coming home from Iraq and Viet Nam will be met with love, appreciation and gratitude, and that the leftist minority that abused them repeat their abuse at their own peril, at the hands of ordinary citizens. Many of us who learned the truth of Viet Nam swore “never again!” and we mean it. Whether the leftist scum is John F-ing Kerry, Jane Fondle, or Ron “Old Granny” Paul.
“If you are able,
save for them a place
inside of you
and save one backward glance
when you are leaving
for the places they can
no longer go.
Be not ashamed to say
you loved them,
though you may
or may not have always.
Take what they have left
and what they have thaught you
with their dying
and keep it with your own.
And in that time
when men decide and feel safe
to call the war insane,
take one moment to embrace
those gentle heroes
you left behind”
Major Michael Davis O�Donell
1 January 1970
Dak To, Vietnam
And a big F-U to Ron “Old Granny” Paul and any other leftist scumbag who’d badmouth our troops, or denigrate their service, including the officer corps!
#228On January 9th, 2012 at 4:39 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 4:30 pm, conservative hispanic said:
Rogue Cheddar:
Really? Then how come you don’t support Rick?
Because Rick is a Big Government rino. Next.
#229On January 9th, 2012 at 4:39 pm, Hiraghm said:
Gah, I need to calm down before I start typing..”men coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan…”
(I swear I thought that’s what I was typing at the time…)
#230On January 9th, 2012 at 4:40 pm, swede said:
Pasadena Phil said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 1:52 pm, swede said:
That is one incoherent post. Seriously.
Sorry, I know it’s easier to pretend you don’t understand, and rational concepts and big words throw you, so let’s make it simple.
Where (specificall has Michelle (or Doug) said, or even implied Romney would be AS BAD as another Obupkus term?
And where have they advocated a third party?
#231On January 9th, 2012 at 4:41 pm, Rogue Cheddar said:
And a big F-U to Ron “Old Granny” Paul and any other leftist scumbag who’d badmouth our troops, or denigrate their service, including the officer corps!
If Ron Paul has done this, why does he get more contributions from active military than all other candidates including the current CinC (barf) combined?
#232On January 9th, 2012 at 4:42 pm, LiveFreeOrDie_2011 said:
On January 9th, 2012 at 3:42 pm, conservative hispanic said: It doesn’t matter how much you rip the other candidates, the moment you say anything bad about Ron Paul, the Paulbots go berserk, hysterical, nuts.
On the contrary, merely point out something positive about Ron Paul and you’re a robot, racist, loon, kook, etc. They said the same things about Pat Buchanan.
#233On January 9th, 2012 at 4:48 pm, Hiraghm said:
Semi-OT, but I just thought of something.
The illegal alien political conflict has something in common with the Confederate War’s political conflict.
The agrarian South had a time-honored, treasured tradition of black slavery which it wanted to protect.
American industry of today has a time-honored treasured tradition of importing cheap wage-slave labor that it wants to protect.
I was just thinking about it; yes, slaves on plantations were worked hard, physically abused, and sometimes neglected. But, slaves cost money to acquire and maintain. The slave owner had a vested interest in the survival and ability to work of his slaves. He was invested in them.
Not so the industrialists. They could work free men, women and children, under however horrendous conditions they chose. They didn’t have to worry if the men, women or children had shelter, food, medical care, any of that. They were paid a wage and the rest was up to them. And if they were injured, non-productive, or ill… he could just replace them with the boatloads of immigrant labor that we continually allowed to flood our shores.
That’s where the false paternalism towards illegal aliens comes from.
THIS IS SO CORRECT AND RECOGNIZED HOW “POLITICAL CORRECTNESS” ON THE LEFT HAS CHANGED THE FACTS TO PROMOTE “CIVIL RRIGHTS” RE: ECONOMIC SLAVERY OF AFRICAN AMERICANS TODAY.
If anyone would just objectively and without a bunch of emotional oppinions look at the fact that Southern Plantation owners has a LOT of money invested in their workers, and they provided them with food, clothing, shelter,….the basics of survival, which is better than today’s minimum wages provide for employees without skills…then you see that this Plantation system suffered ONLY from the GOVERNANCE model…that the OWNER took away FREEDOM….but is that any different from the EROSION of FREEDOM that the Obama/Progressives are implementing today for ALL Americans….in return for what? PROTECTION?? ALLOWING us to keep enough of the value of our LABOR to just pay for the living necessities?
The Southern Plantation owners had an interest in SURVIVAL and CARE of their slaves….the US Government and the greedy abusive businesses that exploit workers like the illegal aliens are the SLAVE OWNERS today….and they count on the TAXPAYERS to provide the SOCIAL SERVICES required for the rest of LIFE necessities…..so where was the MORAL HIGH GROUNG OF THE LINCOLN NORTHERN ABOLITIONISTS???? CHEAP LABOR???
Have you heard the commercials? Embarrassing pablum for economic illiterates! They most certainly do sound like OWS. Even the local talk show guy who in my opinion knows nothing of politics made the connection.
I detest Romney. I don’t believe he can win, but there is no value in (or excuse for) abandoning our principles and engaging in class warfare! None!
Hey Rufus, be careful with that quote button, or Michelle will have to add another server for storage!
(yawn) Another water carrier for the MSM. Too lazy or too stupid to dig in. Next!
Could you please explain to the rest of us the correct operation of the preview button and demonstrate the consequences of failing to use it properly?
Thanks.
When answering a complaint about long posts, it is best not to reply with a long post.
Granted Rufus Levin just may have set a record for a long post, but the point still holds.