« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Attacking Bain

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  January 10th, 2012 at 09:07 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I have to be honest that I do not have a problem with or feel the level of outrage some of you do about Newt Gingrich attacking Bain and Mitt Romney. It’s not because I necessarily agree with Newt on the attacks, but because these are the attacks the left will throw at Mitt and, should he be the nominee, the early attacks help him refine his message.

The Perry attacks are, actually, a bit more carefully nuanced and, I think, work better. According to Perry, “There is nothing wrong with being successful and making money, it’s the American Dream. But getting rich off failure and sticking someone else with the bill is indefensible.” His attack was based on one aspect of Romney’s work, not the entirety of it.

All that said, I think it is important for us on the right to remember that we typically have an intrinsic faith in the free market and understand the creative destruction of capital in a way most voters do not. We eat, breathe, and sleep this stuff. The typical voter does not. The typical voter does not understand private equity, leveraged balance sheets, etc. They see it as some mystical black magic abused by greedy people on Wall Street.

There are, frankly, a lot of Republican primary voters who view it that way too.

We can disagree with the strident attacks against Romney as a greedy vulture capitalist, but the reactions of many on our side surprise me because many are premised on the idea that no person could agree with the attacks and the attacks are inherently wrong.

First, I am willing to bet there are a lot more people in the country who are likely to agree with the attacks than most of us realize and second, there are a lot of people even on the right who see private equity as a collaborator in the economic mess.

While we should be prepared to defend capitalism, we should not be caught unprepared by the attacks and act as if no one could think differently from us on the issue when, I venture to say, we are in the minority on this issue. Frankly, I think these attacks are what Barack Obama is going to use to try to win the election. And I think they are going to work much better than Romney backers expect.

Just wait for the Batman tie ins over the summer with Bain. You ain’t seen nothing yet folks. It is a sad day when Republicans attack a Republican for being a capitalist, but it is equally sad that the Romney camp seems flat footed by attacks that will be central to Obama’s strategy to defeat him.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.planettron.com NickDeringer

    It comes to this: Under capitalism some people will be poor. Under Communism all people will be poor.

  • williamjameson

    that must be examined and Romney opened the door attacking Newts consulting slash lobby work as a private sector capitalist so what’s fair is fair. Romney will be cross examined if he faces Obama as well with 30% failures and bankruptcies there’s going to be dirt and bad stories from employees. Layoffs can be painful, especially when some employees were escorted out by security guards.

    Newt was on Morning Joe and made a good argument for why Bain is fair game, smart answer as always. The gloves are off, if Newt wants to win or take down Romney with him.

    http://video.msnbc.msn.com/morning-joe/45940700

  • jaykali

    I tend to agree, it is troubling hearing candidates and so-called conservative purists using #OWS arguments to attack Romney. I think when you’re down you will use any weapon you can find, so I guess I understand it but it’s still sorry. Romney’s job at Bain was not to create jobs, it was to make money. Even he has gotten sucked in to the ‘how many jobs’ did you create. He should be touting knowledge of business and how companies succeed and fail more than just how many jobs were created. I think its fine for job creation numbers to be examined while you are governor or president.

    What will hurt him is if Bain is seen as a chop/shop type deal where the fat cats get rich off of a bunch of people getting fired.

  • lizzie

    (the ultimate swing vote because we have so much time to go vote and I think we might be > TEN million voters who no longer show up in official unemployment %)

    Bain Capital and many other Private Equity LLCs created a new model of “Locust Capitalism” that gives genuine Free Market Capitalism a bad name.

    While technically legal, legal does not always mean moral and ethical.

    Venture capitalists help build companies and jobs.

    Private equity LLCs who did ANY LeveragedBuyOuts de-industrialized America 1978-2000 by diverting huge amounts of capital into Financial Engineering.

    Private Equity and Hedge Funds monetized and destroyed the housing market 2000-2008.

    Romney does NOT understand how the REAL economy works.

    I have a BA from an elite college and three master?s degrees, and transitioned from manufacturing management on the factory floor in 1975 to manufacturing operations to industry-specific global technical consulting, and then global supply chain management in 2000, and published forecasts of the USA economy between 1992-2002. Exactly what all the politicians say everyone should do – education and climb the value chain.

    and my career still ended by age 49 because I should have just gotten one of those Harvard MBAs and stolen millions that way.

    Instead, every year 1978-2001, I delivered one million dollars to one or another private equity locust’s personal bottom line, and then got ?downsized? when I got ?too old?. Never about my performance, never.

    Leeches are more beneficial to humanity than private equity LBO locusts like Romney, who has NO SOUL.

    Romney should retire to his four homes and find a new hobby.

    I am so glad that Newt is willing to fall on his sword in order to expose Romney for being the wrong candidate to represent the GOP at ANY time in history.

  • jaykali

    The democrats/liberals have been defining the argument for years and you notice now a good company is only one that creates jobs. If you use that definition then you can punish companies that don’t create jobs. Well facebook doesn’t create a lot of jobs but its a billion dollar company. The goal of companies is not to create jobs, its to make money. Most companies will add productivity to society and benefit society in multiple ways, some direct like creating jobs, some in other ways. Would we rather have facebook here or somewhere else?

  • pdawk

    The desire to beat Romney exceeds the desire to stand for free market principals. Your acknowledgement that Perry’s line of attack is acceptable should be troubling for fiscal conservatives to say the least.

    Everyone expects this attack in the general, and in a degree it may be better for him to get softened on it in the primary where it doesn’t have as much of an impact against Obama (see Rev. Wright). However, to have conservative leaders basically endorsing this method of attack is ludicrous and the clearest example that most peoples conservative principals are predicated upon how well their candidate is doing in the polls.

  • satchman3

    or a Marxist.

    Or you are willing to advocate socialism in the interest of winning an election.

    If you’re a capitalist it’s a lot harder to attack Bain. If you understand business cycles and free markets you’ll have to do a lot of hard work to come up with criticisms that stick. Hint: “laying off workers” is not a criticism that will stick with folks that believe in capitalism..

  • jgge

    during the primaries it is certain that he is not going to survive it in the general elections. Wake up folks, the majority of voters in this environment are not going to elect a Wall Street banker for President no matter how bad is Obama. Romney and his supporters have to be the most delusional people in America to think that Bain Capital is not going to destroy Romney in the general and even more insanely delusional is that many of them think that Bain Capital is a positive thing for him. Delusions mixed with arrogance is a very dangerous thing.

  • jgge

    “While we should be prepared to defend capitalism, we should not be caught unprepared by the attacks and act as if no one could think differently from us on the issue when, I venture to say, we are in the minority on this issue. Frankly, I think these attacks are what Barack Obama is going to use to try to win the election. And I think they are going to work much better than Romney backers expect.

    Just wait for the Batman tie ins over the summer with Bain. You ain?t seen nothing yet folks.”

    And that is folks.

  • acat

    He’s gonna get called on it by the Dems.

    I want to know what he’s going to say.

    Crickets ain’t cuttin’ it.

    Mew

  • flgal208

    Mr. No Spin (ha) spent THIRTY FIVE minutes last night defending Willard/Bain and when I flipped to Fox Biz, they did the same. Of all the Perry speeches yesterday, ALL they showed was the pink slip remark, and then attacked it.

    Perry should let Newt and Santorum and Paul excoriate Willard on this and just FOCUS on HIS message. Let them spend their money on attack ads, let them do the dirty work. FNC/GOP/RNC will destroy whomever goes after Mitt on this (look what they did to Newt), so it’s a no-win if there’s a camera around. Perry can use TEXAS v MASS if he wants to go after Willard and that’s a very good attack, but mostly he just needs to tout himself, his message and HOW he plans to make it happen. Repeat after me: JOBS JOBs JOBS (and in S FL—SS SS SS)

  • http://www.RightFace.us dkolonia

    There is nothing wrong with what Romney did at Bain. In fact, he did a lot of good things with that company that helped people. But the question is will his work as a Wall Street Capitalist make him un-electable as President.
    Why do you think Obama’s people fostered (or even started) the Occupy Wall Street movement? It was all about them thinking Romney would be the nominee and they could destroy him with the Occupy movement.
    Think about what it will be like with 20,000 Occupy members protesting everyday at the Republican convention this summer?
    People say Newt can’t win because he has too much baggage. I contend that Romney’s issue with being a Wall Street tycoon will doom him this summer. It is like a trap being set by Obama and we are falling right into it.

  • JSobieski

    Out of that dichotomy, is where Republican populism can arise from. It is the reason why socially liberal fiscally conservative was always a loser before 2010 and may still be a loser today.

    So it is no surprise that the Bain attacks would be effective in a Republican Primary.

    It is however disappointing—both that they are made and that they will work..

    Defending, marketing, and selling capitalism is the underlying core to fiscal conservatism. It is a foundation that is difficult to build and all to easy to destroy.

  • tailfins1959

    So Romney’s profession is a venture capitalist; Gingrich is a lobbyist, Perry is an elected official; Santorum is an attorney.

    Unless we start seeing a resume with things like illegal liquor distributor, money launderer, extortionist, etc., etc., etc., who cares what the candidate’s profession is?

  • dpmapper

    Sorry, you’ve completely lost me on this. Yes, there are voters, even in the GOP primary, who might be inclined to agree with the thrust of the attacks. There are also voters in the GOP primary who think we can fix the deficit just by cutting foreign aid and stopping the wars, even though that’s completely false too. Pandering to objectively misinformed beliefs is the opposite of leadership, it’s demagoguery.

    It is a terrible mischaracterization that Bain was “getting rich off failure and sticking someone else with the bill”, and the notion that it “is indefensible” is utterly false, and Republican candidates who ought to know better are just lending credence to these talking points. They’ll get used again, and not just against Mitt Romney, but against anyone who ever turned around a business by letting people go.

    Yes, we should think about whether Romney can win a general election. But dishonest, demagogic attacks are not the right way to do it.

  • http://www.ArchitecturalShots.com mdyou

    First thing is, I’m not a Mitt fan, but this is a horrible thing for the uninformed to see.

    To witness the other candidates jump on this bandwagon is horrifying to me, and it’s pandering to people who will never vote Republican, anyway. This is not much different than McCain pandering to the media. They only supported him because they considered him easier to beat. Our guys are pandering to the same media that will turn against them as well.

    And Mitt doesn’t need a warm-up on this subject. Or shouldn’t. Anyway, it’s destructive to the overall effort.

  • williamjameson

    restore the country. His 130 page plan complicates the tax code and has been scored less than Newts plan. Anyone who claims to know how the country works should give details.

    You guys know this is a fight till the end, Romney was dirty last time,maybe you didn’t follow him but he used liberal tactics on his opponents in 2008. This time its a circular firing squad, if he wins it will be an OWS style Obama drive by liberalism firing squad.

  • williamjameson

    sway opinion protecting oppo research that matters. Romney used this attack style first so now everyone is on him. And I could care less if he loses to one of the other 4 viable candidates

  • bonnman

    There are various business strategies under capitalism, some like Romney and Bain focus on making large profits quickly for themselves and a few partners. Others focus on strategies that create jobs and integrate into a community which might result in smaller profits but will yield longer term returns with stability. I think Newt’s criticism of Romney’s business experience claims is spot on, not ALL forms of business will be good for our current economic climate, people want jobs and don’t want to be layed off.

    I have a cousin whose former company sold most of their manufacturing capabilities, industrial cutting blade manufacturing equipment, to China. Essentially they did what Bain did, they were struggling and another company came in sold of all their assets, mostly manufacturing equipment. Anyway, he got fed up and pulled some savings with a couple buddies and he’s trying to pay back a few of the machines and re-start the company, although smaller. He’s taking a huge risk and won’t make millions but he’s hellbent on bringing back some manufacturing here. And that’s the business experience you want now, not Bain’s way.

  • Tman8

    win over grassroots conservative voters? I know a lot of tea party folks who resent that they are sometimes labeled “populists”. Now it is Perry and Newt making the populist pitches against Mitt – and Mitt comes across looking like the great defender of free market capitalism. Does this help Mitt win over conservative voters? I hope not.

    I actually think part of the Huntsman attack against Romney was the best – whether or not you you think what he did at Bain was OK, is this really the profile of the type of candidate we want to put up against Obama in 2012? Personally I am sick of this line that Romney is uniquely qualified to be president because he is some sort of magical job creator.

  • Ender

    because the left will do it too is a very strange argument that only makes sense if you are extremely biased against Romney, which explains what is going on here.

    So because the left will attack Romney using class warfare rhetoric, we should vet Romney by using class warfare rhetoric? What about other issues? Should it be ok to attack everyone using Dem tactics because they will do it too?

    Attacks from the Left should not come from Conservatives.

  • williamjameson

    since you brought it up RomneyCare is socialism because the FED pays half the costs that this so called business man mis-projected by over $800 million a year

  • kamiller42

    Newt, etc are not calling into question capitalism, just how it was used or misused.

  • acat

    Erick was quite clear – Romney will get hit with this in the general, if he is the nominee, so it is not unreasonable to ask him to explain his defense now.

    Crickets ain’t cuttin’ it.

    Neither, frankly, is somehow expecting the general public to develop the same level of faith in free markets that fiscal conservatives and libertarians have.

    This is especially true with unemployment hovering just below 9%, and with actual unemployment much higher because so many have stopped looking and started on welfare.

    Romney’s got some ‘splainin’ to do.

    Mew

  • federalfarmer1

    I just don’t see an alternative

  • explodinghead

    For me it has come down to, who can beat Obama? Whether you think this line of attack is unconservative or not, we are left with the following:
    1) Romney: Bain Capital will be tied to Wall St/corporate raiding by the Dems;
    Romneycare (takes way a strong argument for us against Obamacare)

  • rickperryreport

    Erick is right on in his analysis of Perry’s nuanced attacks on Romney-Bain. The Perry remarks yesterday on Romney-Bain were quite accurate.

    Erick is also right on about this issue whittling away at Romney’s “electability” vis a vis Obama. The Democrats are masters of the art of “feeling your pain.” How many fired and laid off victims of Bain Capital will be paraded out in a $1 billion advertising campaign?

    Finally, I’ll take Erick’s point a step further. Bain Capital wasn’t furthering the American Dream. It was smashing thousands of American Dreams to make Romney’s American Dream of running for president possible. Romney is a predator. He runs his campaign like a predator too. I don’t care what Rush Limbaugh says about defending capitalism, and Bain Capital.

    As the Chicago Tribune notes, the actions of Bain to “spend little, borrow big, evade taxes and get control of a lucrative asset” is not the American Dream at all; it is theft.

    You got me started Erick, so I continue here: The Evil Ways of Mitt Romney, Vulture Capitalist (opens in a new window).

    Joe @ The Rick Perry Report

  • lizzie

    what y’all used to call Reagan Democrats.

    Sean Trende made that point very clear yesterday at AEI, on C-Span2
    Think Trende said GOP needs 60+% of that segment.

    Do you wantthem to stay home and do target shooting of that Romney Bain photo?

    or do you want them to vote for the GOP?

    Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, even Michigan –

    Plus, add in Romney on letting the Free Market let the housing market find it’s “bottom” and there goes Florida and Nevada.

    Huntsman’s father created a manufacturing business from nothing.
    THAT is what Free Market capitalism is about, not paper-pushing MBAs doing financial engineering.

    Maybe Bain Capital was more moral than Kohlberg, Kravis, Roberts, but there are at least TEN million voters like me who will NEVER vote for a Private Equity Locust who also knows NOTHING about the REAL economy or even team sports and has “Mitt Fits” on the debate stage.

    The only reason why Romney is perceived as electable is NAME RECOGNITION.

    I applaud every candidate who is revealing the SOUL-LESS LOCUST named Romney.

    and I am Obama’s target demographic – highly educated in a Blue State , but he is a disaster.

    GIVE the 60% of America who wants a new choice a REAL choice.

    NOT-NAMED ROMNEY.

    sorry, am just flabbergasted that the conservatives are decrying this “assault on Free Market Capitalism”

    you should understand what capitalism means – take a hard look at SC Johnson and see how it really works.

    Even the Rockefellers created their wealth with oil – and a lot of dirty tricks, but at least they produced something other than work for high priced lawyers and MBAs.

    rant over for now.

  • explodinghead

    2) Gingrich : Fannie Mae,adultery,ethics violation/DC insider

    3) Santorum: moral zealot/homophobe/racist/Dc insider

    I am not belittling any other candidates by not including them, but it seems that these, like it or not, are the frontrunners. This is how they will be portrayed by the MSM so look closely and look at their records and take your pick. Who do you think will play best with voters, that could be persuaded, in the general?
    As always, you know I would vote for Perry, but going with the top 3,
    I would grudgingly go with 2) or 3) solely for their Supreme court nominees, but which of 2) or 3) would be the most electable, baggage and all.

  • dpmapper

    Attacking him over it, as if you believe the attacks are legitimate, is another. The first I have no problem with, but the second is highly dishonest.

    Do you think it would be OK for Republican candidate X to attack candidate Y’s plan to reform Medicare in order to prevent it from overwhelming the budget, by arguing that the only things needed to reduce the deficit are drawing down the wars and cutting ‘waste’, and that Y only wants to ‘cut Medicare’ in order to keep taxes low on ‘the wealthy’? After all, candidate Y would have to deal with that argument in the general.

  • Tman8

    Remember, it is Romney who offers the least pro-growth, least supply-side economic plan. It is Romney who plays into the class warfare of the Democrats with a timid economic plan that offers little in terms of pro-growth tax cuts and all his talk about “the wealthy are doing just fine” It is Romney that attacked Rick Perry from the left on Social Security reform. And oh yeah, it is Romney who was the only governor in America to do Obamacare before Barack Obama did Obamacare.

    Mitt Romney may have the looks and career that free market conservatives dream of in a politician – but his record as governor and his policy proposals in this campaign represent should be any pro-growth conservatives’ nightmare.

  • znjs

    To argue that the attacks that Obama will use are valid is an entirely different. Certainly given that Romney’s only campaign message seems to be “I’m electable” it makes sense to question whether people will support him given the fact that these types of attacks can and will be made. But to argue Obama is right to make these attacks against capitalism is a bridge too far.

  • lineholder

    not only can it be difficult to build and easy to destroy, but if we genuinely believe that capitalism has the potential to provide greater freedoms (economic and otherwise) for people within our society, then doesn’t it also become something that we should protect and preserve?

    I was reading Erick’s comments in another post today, about shifting focus to a few other things for the time being, or at least focusing on them a bit more than we have been of late. And it occurred to me that there is still time for us to take on the role of protecting and preserving those elements of capitalism that do contribute to the freedoms of people in our country.

    Even if it is nothing more than investing the time, energy and efforts to make sure that there will a strong group of citizens coming up behind us who do comprehend and understand the advantages of capitalism via setting up some type of organization that provides them with opportunities to be directly involved…there are still things we could do, outside the realm of government and politics.

    The problem is that for all we say about protecting and preserving freedoms, Conservatives haven’t been as proactive in establishing things of this sort…not in comparison to what our opponents have been striving to do, or even at this point what Ron Paul has been striving to do.

    Wouldn’t it seem that this is one of the biggest changes we need to make first?

  • JSobieski

    People aren’t so much defending Romney as attacking the attacks

  • lizzie

    whereas Locusts devour every living thing in sight.

    I have to go to Staplestoday to make some copies, and I hate having to go to Staples because it makes me think that Romney is buying the American Presidency.

    btw, no matter how many pundits make fun of George S’ questions on contraception, y’all better bet that exchange handed gave the Dens “Romney was asleep at Harvard Law school and is ignorant of Griswold v CT, which was the precedent for Roe v Wade, and what a Mitt Fit!”

    Why anyone would trust Romney to do anything he promises, let alone be able to not have a Mitt Fit whenever he is challenged is beyond my comprehension.

    Go Perry! but fix that Iraq comment – nailed by both Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert last night. Daily Show even edited the comment to make Perry look far worse that it was.

    Mitt Fits = ZERO Presidential temperament.

  • JSobieski

    I end up making for case for capitalism quite a bit, whether in person over a drink or online on Facebook, etc.

    Do you have something bigger in mind?

    Media
    Education

    To bastions of liberalsim that need to be cracked open

  • acat

    Like I said, crickets ain’t cuttin’ it.

    Mew

  • satchman3

    Where we would disagree is who should do the asking. If the media or even conservative talk-shows want to play ‘what if Obama asks you…’ that’s great.

    What I don’t like is so-called conservative candidates putting on their anti-capitalist hat to spar about Bain. That’s a big negative on the attacker and on my scorecard they aren’t getting any points.

  • acat

    The media aren’t going to ask. They want to run Obama, a guy who lives and breathes class warfare, against Romney of the silver spoon…

    (this points out another reason why we need more independent moderators for the candidate forums/debates …)

    Romney hasn’t said much about it other than “capitalism works”… which is a truth but not enough of a defense for the general election.

    Who’s left?

    Mew

  • sethellis

    Romney has responded multiple times explaining that more jobs were created than lost, and defending how markets work in general. I’m sure we well hear plenty more from surrogates after NH.

    I would love to write a whole book on the matter for you, but for some reason the system won’t let me post my own diary. For now I think it’s important to establish that while we should bring up vulnerabilities, using such attacks as part of an all out offensive against another Republican is not conservative. By agreeing with the argument as Newt has he poisons the very platform of conservatism it’s self.

  • burke

    I think many voters — maybe particularly working class voters — think that there is a difference between making money by creating and selling something and something like Romney’s background, which is more indirect. I think many would acknowledge both are capitalism, but that one is more virtuous and important to the economy than the other. That’s why I think voters resonated more with Cain’s business background than Romney’s. Cain ran a service business. It’s easy to see how that could directly lead to jobs. Romney’s background…not so much. When you’re not actually making something, it’s easy to be portrayed as a looter, moving money around but not creating any, figuring out how to get government kickbacks for companies or for yourself, and getting paid by the businesses that are actually doing stuff. A “vulture capitalist” as many of you put it above.

    This is a long winded way of saying: I’m not sure how easy it will be to persuade people to be outraged on principle by Perry and Gingrich’s attacks. I just don’t think that “if you’re a capitalist, you should be outraged by these attacks” is enough of a response to Perry and Gingrich. I don’t even find that to be a great response, and I personally find nothing objectionable about Romney’s business experience. Romney needs to do better to explain himself to voters. He shouldn’t apologize, but not everyone understands what he was doing, as as long as there is confusion, many will view him with suspicion. He should explain it to those who don’t understand. After the fall of the banks, the mortgage crisis, and the bailouts, I don’t know that everyone’s going to have blind faith in market processes they don’t understand.

  • pdawk

    There are bad businesses in the morals sense. Gingrich laid out his argument on Fox News last night that Romney profited to much and should have profited less in an attempt to keep failing businesses viable. Essentially what Gingrich wants to say is that making money off of losing ventures is immoral. To believe that you have to have no grasp on what exactly makes free enterprise work and what it is to have responsibility to shareholders.

  • acat

    Asserting “I created jobs”, in the current economy, is great.

    The trouble is, it’s not the zero-sum game Romney’s statements paint it as. For every Staples job created, several smaller stationers and office supply merchants lost everything.

    I don’t have a problem with this. I would look at someone who had the sense to see a disruptive answer – even if it was just cloning WalMart for office supplies – as a good thing… in 2008.

    Today, the explanation – especially to the independents – needs to be better than “I created jobs” .. and Romney hasn’t offered it without being attacked.

    You can stick your fingers in your ears and say “capitalism capitalism capitalism” all you like, Seth. It’s true that capitalism *should* be a defense. Unfortunately, it’s not one that’ll work in the general.

    Mew

  • dpmapper

    And I’m not one for “ends justify means” arguments, really. Especially these means…

  • jgge

    I do not care also what any conservative pundit or talk radio is saying about not right to attack Romney Bain Capital.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    They believe in American exceptionalism unless they can outsource or insource cheap labor for the Chamber of Commerce types who fund a lot of candidacy.

  • acat

    Romney hasn’t responded. He hasn’t said how he will answer the charge in the general. At all.

    Your hypothetical is flawed – you clearly gave Candidate Y’s general election explanation in the question.

    If she were still in the race, I would have no problem with other candidates asking Bachman how she squares the idea of not reducing benefits to existing retirees with not raising taxes. The two cannot both be true.

    Willard cannot both claim to have created jobs when there’s clear evidence of failed companies in his wake, the two cannot both be true.

    He must explain this. Period.

    Mew

  • trickamsterdam

    Remember when Romney called Newt “zany”? His surrogate John Sununu (who gave us Justice D. Suitor) called him basically “mentally unfit”. And there were other similar attacks. Many, many of them.

    This is classic Leftism since Barry Goldwater (“in your guts you know he’s nuts”- LBJ ). They also tried to say Reagan was crazy. Even McCain was depicted as a crazed Vietnamese War veteran who wanted to bomb Iran because he made a joke.

    So now they want to blame Newt (or whoever) for using attacks against “capitalism”? That would be like N. Korea using a nuke against us, and then complaining we used two against them..

    If the argument is that damaging capitalism hurts all Republicans, but “crazy” attacks only hurt Newt…wrong. The depiction of the most successful R Speaker in our lifetime by other Rs as insane hurts all Rs…because it is a standard D attack.

    Newt was the clear front-runner and people like Romney, Sununu, J. Rubin, G. Will, T. Coburn, “Morning Joe”…and many, many others…all used attacks that would clearly have damaged Newt in the general. Now they’re worried because these attacks might hurt Romney in the general?

    Romney also said Newt “shouldn’t complain about negative ads, because it would be nothing compared to ‘Obama’s Hell’s Kitchen’”. Very true. So now Newt and others will apply the same logic to you and your campaign w/ “King of Bain”, O ye wise Romney.

    Lastly, if they’re (his surrogates) going to distort Newt’s record (he was a failed Speaker, despite his lifetime 90% acu rating he was never a conservative) then how can he complain that his Bain record is being distorted? Um….he can’t. Although I’m sure Jennifer Rubin will try to do it for him..

    Sorry. It just doesn’t work that way. You don’t play tackle football and then suddenly switch the rules to flag, because you’re winning. Other people want to tackle as well.

    For technical reasons I am not sure if Romney can actually be beaten by another candidate at this point…

    But it may well be worth the risk of wounding him in the general, so that we can perhaps force a brokered convention. I honestly think a brokered convention is now a realistic goal.

  • lineholder

    pertaining to education. If the EEOC’s recent memo provides indication of the direction the situation is heading in, we’ll have to fight tooth and nail on that front as well, just to make sure we have citizens coming up behind us who establish reading comprehension and basic math skills.

    In your chats with people, do you ever hear any business people who fall to the Conservative side talking about internships or allowing shadowing within their business?

    Or perhaps even young entrepreneurial groups? There are a few that exist, I know, but how well are we supporting them?

    What kind of options do you think would be effective?

  • jj2012

    “The Perry attacks are, actually, a bit more carefully nuanced and, I think, work better.”

    Amen. And there goes the MSM (including the GOP establishment, which unfortunately seems to include Fox News these days) meme that Perry is somehow intellectually inferior. He’s a smart, but plain-spoken guy. Remember, they thought Reagan was a dumb cowboy, too.

    Perry 2012!!!

  • texastaxpayer

    I think people are forgetting one simple truth “perception is reality” especially in politics. We can all argue the merits of the free market until we are blue in the face. I have a few times in my life. But that isn’t going to magically sweep this back under the rug. Americans as near as I can tell don’t mind profits even insane ones. What Americans seem to dislike is the idea of someone making those profits from the suffering of others. All the high browed arguments in the world aren’t going to change this simple truth. If Mitt can’t defend effectively his positions to conservatives arguably the most sympathetic group to his cause. What chance does he have defending himself in the general? Faux News, the pundits at large and business leaders can all continue to cry foul. But we have a decision to make. What do you want the 2012 election to be about? If Romney can’t do a better job then “ah schucks I created jobs too” we need to move this guy off the stage quickly. Obama wants to run against the evil greedy republicans and Mitt Romney is a walking talking caricature of this very villain. Wake up folks we need this election to be about jobs, the economy and Obama’s record. Anything else and we loose.

  • Lesstressrx

    Oh my, you are so right. Rush is livid today that Perry has jumped on this bandwagon. Instead of attacking Mittens he is attacking capitalism and this is causing him all kinds of negative results and with his numbers he can’t afford to do this. Several people called in supporting Perry & Rush said he was out there doing the same thing Newt was doing. It isn’t helping his fiscal conservative followers. As you said his message should be Jobs, jobs, jobs, and getting rid of Obama. He has to stay focused not follow the crowd & win this election. I would love to know who is advising him to do this stuff, they are really out of touch with the American people. I hope someone in his campaign reads what we are saying. We are looking out for him.
    I tweeted him today asking him to stop his attack on Mittens & Bain, get back to issues & let Newt do the attacking. Hope others tweet him too.

  • profnickd67

    that — I think for certain conservatives, ensuring that their candidate is right on certain social issues far exceeds whether or not that candidate is a “crony” capitalist, big government conservative, “compassionate conservative,” or for that matter an out-and-out socialist.

    For example, to even consider Rick Perry over Romney on the issue of free market capitalism is, well, indefensible — Perry has never created anything, never been in the private sector, never created one cent of wealth or one job. It’s likely he doesn’t even understand what capitalism is and certainly could not discuss it in any but the most embarrassing of ways.

    But, see, Perry is unambiguously pro-life and that, for certain conservatives, trumps everything else.

    So, those conservatives could care less whether Romney’s amazing and enormously productive career in venture capital is being criticized with outright leftist/socialist terms.

  • JSobieski

    Some otherwise serious people (smart in many ways) are absolute idiots when it comes to public policy.

    Last week I got sucked into a discussion about NYC’s city ordinance saying that a company was not a person. 30 minutes of evil corporations, etc. It was stunning. Corporations are just a legal status given to a bunch of individuals. But to these folks, Corporations were a true source of evil.

    Stunning stuff. How one defeats that, I have no idea.

  • JSobieski

    How is stopping outsourcing different from say just arbitrarily making everything 50% more expensive than it already is?

    That is the converse to outsourcing.

  • Lesstressrx

    Fine let Newt do this, but Perry needs to stick to the job of getting rid of Obama and creating jobs.

  • bonnman

    to be President and lead the Nation.

    If given the current economic climate Romney says ‘hey I’m a job creator because I worked in the business sector’ you should be damn sure that folks are gonna look at what you did.

  • Lesstressrx

    Perry is left if he will get off Newt’s bandwagon and stay on message. This stuff is distracting…
    Loud and clear: Take Obama out!!!

  • lineholder

    I think we still have the people around who would know how to go about doing it. After one or two generations are gone…I doubt it. I genuinely do.

    The type of questions I continuously ask myself is do they recognize the need, will they put the effort, and how can it be done without the government getting involved in it? It would have been somewhat organized, even if it is just on local levels, wouldn’t it?

    But even in the discussions that I’ve had with people pertaining to opportunities in education, a lot of them are just apathetic at this point, have become too dependent on government to define these things for us, and wouldn’t know where to start.

  • texabama

    I think I’d have to call you on that one. Perry started out as a rancher, working with his father. From there he became agricultural commissioner. Now I don’t know exactly what all was “created” on that ranch but I’m sure there was some product—be it horses or cattle. It was definitely a business and as such had to worry about making a profit.

  • aesthete

    IMHO, the best thing that one can do to increase appreciation for fiscal conservatism is to teach logic, rhetoric, and basic economics in middle/high school, and make them a mandatory part of the curriculum for graduation. So much of economics is based on simple, intuitive principles which are directly relevant and applicable to public policy, and which are based on more concrete data/logic than the other social sciences. Logic and rhetoric might be a harder sell in that they are somewhat more difficult, but their relevance to public policy cannot be denied.

  • texabama

    You’ve set the scene perfectly and I agree. This is not about “right or wrong”. Perry supporters are being told he is “unelectable” because of a brain freeze. Never mind that most people have them from time to time. Never mind that he was saying what most people wanted to hear when he had it…he forgot something and couldn’t remember it! He is unelectable! We have to go with Romney, because he is smooth and never forgets anything. He is electable.

    Then when people start pointing out that maybe Romney isn’t so electable, maybe he has some things in his past that voters might have problems with; then we are the problem—not the candidate.

  • dpmapper

    “They?re vultures sitting out there on the tree limb waiting for the company to get sick, And then they swoop in, they eat the carcass, they leave with that and they leave the skeleton.?

    “We have allowed these greedy people on Wall Street to take advantage of small companies that may be going through some tough times. And instead of trying to work with them to find a way to keep the jobs and get them back on their feet it’s all about how much money can we make, how quick can we make it and then get out of town and find the next carcass to feed upon.”

    This passes for nuance these days? Wow.

  • acat

    Not that I’m a conspiracy nut, but .. there’s something to the argument that dumbing down the curriculae makes for more a more manageable peasantry…

    Mew

  • texabama

    may not be the best preparation for the job they want. There’s nothing wrong with being the county dog catcher, but he’s not ready at this moment in time to become President.

  • lineholder

    would be appropriate, aesthete. How would you suggest we go about doing that? What do you see as being an appropriate plan of action? Do you see it as being something that we could accomplish through our current system and have it maintained long-term? Or is something that we should do, outside the system, simply as citizens within our society?

    Did you see the memo from EEOC that came out in Dec? Apparently, they are considering the possibility of recommending that employers will no longer be able to require high school graduation as a prerequisite for a job unless the employer can substantiate that this level of education is required for the job. The rationale for this recommendation is that requiring a high school graduation imposes on the rights of people who are “educationally challenged” or have learning disorders.

    There are jobs that wouldn’t necessarily require a high school diploma, but we’re getting into another portion of murky territory of having government “micromanage” business activities of the private sector and what the unintended (or deliberate, as the case might be) consequences of such a decision would ultimately be.

    Still, if we hope to have any long-term degree of success in protecting and preserving capitalism and free-market, not to mention basic education, I think Conservatives need to be more proactive, whether it is on the business front, economic front or both.

  • aesthete

    is that conservatives, for several reasons, haven’t been able to successfully market themselves as consumer-minded education reformers. This, I think, is the key to winning over women, to making a real dent in an education monopoly dominated by liberalism, and in making the sorts of reforms that make sense. Poll after poll shows that the public trusts Democrats more on education. Changing that should be a long-term priority for conservatives.

    Regarding what we can do? I would first suggest that conservatives need to become more involved in public school boards, or in setting up charter schools. Second, I believe that opening up more teaching positions to those who don’t have Education degrees, but who have degrees or work experience in the relevant teaching field, would be a good way to attract better teachers. Lastly, attempting to find existing networks with similar goals of reform, and coordinating, might be helpful. IMO, this is more likely to happen in a smaller state first, if it happens at all. In candor, I have not seen much enthusiasm or interest for education reform as a long-term project in the conservative activist groups I’ve been involved with here in AZ.

  • aesthete

    Most people with an Education degree I’ve encountered tend to be remarkably incurious and mentally un-disciplined. You can’t teach something you don’t know, after all. However, it would not surprise me if there was some loosely-organized conspiracy around this idea: universal education in the US was the brainchild of a relatively small number of people of similar philosophical inclination, all progressive and most socialist or fellow travelers.

  • lineholder

    But if I can share something purely anecdotatal…I was discussing this with a few ladies that I work with, all younger than myself, and several of them with small children. Just in talking to them about the EEOC had recommended, they could see the implications of what it might end meaning right off the bat, aesthete, i.e. that the quality of education their children might have access to would ultimately decrease.

    The kind of comments they made ran the gamut of “even in my age group, we didn’t learn enough about basic math, english or reading to let us get decent jobs out of high school…how in the world do they expect my kids to do that if they end up putting all these rules in place that could drop the standard even lower?” And these weren’t just Conservatives, per se. It ran the entire width of the political spectrum, yet they all had similar responses.

    Extremely small sample size of public opinion, I know, but I wonder how many other people are thinking the same way? If they are, then there could be far more support for change than we would think, and if there is, would it leave an open door to get changes in the curriculum that are more “free-market friendly” at the same time?

  • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

    even though Newt came in 4th, Perry 5th, but Perry won a couple counties, and Newt did not. I am not even sure this is it, but I suspect it may be.

  • aesthete

    but I have no idea how to tap into it at this point. My efforts here have not been substantial, but even so I was surprised at the lack of interest in curriculum reform coming from conservatives. I am interested in reform efforts in FL and IN, and I believe that both states (especially FL) are models in how to reform education towards a more free-market direction. Hopefully, curriculum reform (beyond the creationism v evolution debate, which I personally consider tangential) will get a decent showing in such states, as well.

  • JSobieski

    How do you give 5th graders logic homework that their parents can’t pass?

  • JSobieski

    He is the most prominent national figure in terms of education reform.

    Frankly, if I was disctator for a year, I would put the Bazilian Fathers in charge of education. Fr. Menner was the most effective teacher of mathematics that I have ever heard of. There were more than a 1,000 people at his funeral, and he had long since retired.

  • lineholder

    programs in those states? I’d agree, along with other states like LA and even NY (see Manhattan Charter Schools for reference) But as far as curriculum goes…I’ve been somewhat disappointed in FL’s program pertaining to civics. It’s not that much different from what is being seen here in NC, set out by the School of Gov’t at UNC.

    From the elementary level up, the civics/social studies program has a liberal bent. And when they get to high school level, if they get education in economics at all, they are taught free-market capitalism, along with Keynesian theory and state managed capitalism, with greater emphasis on the latter of the three.

    Those kinds of topics are right up my alley, LOL, so I notice them.

  • lineholder

    volunteer mentors, JSobieski. Or organized study groups of some kind.

    Any thoughts????

  • lineholder

    Could any of it be written into an interactive computer study format of some sort?

  • JSobieski

    Put the best teachers online, and let them have classrooms of thousands. Particularly in subjects like math and logic, we can make sure that people don’t fall behind.

  • dpmapper

    But would you be OK with Republican X making that attack, and giving the excuse that Democrats will do it? That’s the question.

    Your counterhypothetical about Bachmann is not analogous, since the argument against her position is not based on anti-conservative principles.

    I do agree that Mitt would do well to counter the charges.

  • lineholder

    Then again, I’m an adult and know what it means to take initiative.

    But if this application is utilized, there are millions of things we could be doing. Everything from Conservative books on CD or downloadable access to textbooks, interactive study, games, etc.

    So, question…is there anyone on the Conservative side actively pursuing this?

  • JSobieski

    Fr. Menner taught algebra 1 in my high school. 1/3 of the class was “up at the board” at all times. Weekly quizes. The key point was that if you weren’t “getting it” he would know, and the problems could be addressed before you fell weeks behind.

    Persistent “testing” is the key to stop disadvantaged youth from falling behind in precisely subjects such as math or logic.

    There is so much content out there nowawadays–how are we doing so poorly in educating kids

  • lineholder

    It isn’t so much a matter of the students falling behind now as it their dying of boredom from lack of being challenged!! At least that’s the kind of feedback I’ve gotten from younger parents.

    If that is true, then Conservatives really need to step up and provide some alternatives! And putting it into a computer format could be a great way to succeed in it.

  • aesthete

    and would support him for President. Too bad his brother and dad ruined the family name.

  • aesthete

    I agree that online education is the future, esp as it becomes even more clear how inflexible labor-intensive approaches can be (see teachers’ unions, for example).

  • jakeofalltrades

    Jeb Bush has a great education record. Instead of doing affirmative action in Florida colleges, he did the “One Florida” plan that gives tutoring assistance to underperforming kids so that they can qualify for higher education on an equal basis. Combined with the Florida scholarships and guaranteed admittance, I consider his education performance to be the best in the country.

    And I am a product of Florida public schools under Jeb Bush.

  • dpmapper

    I teach math for a living so I’m very invested in fundamental logic and reasoning skills. I think there’s a great point to be made that a lot of Republican voters, even some who identify with the Tea Party, don’t really have a firm grasp of the absolute bedrock principles that we need to start building a conservative ideology from, and thus can get swayed too easily by emotional appeals that sound a lot of catchphrases. A system of conservative education using sound logic and first principles would be fantastic.

  • thosjefferson

    What’s really sad about this whole direction the race is taking is that instead of making it a teaching moment for the country, Gingrich and Perry are demagoguing it and making it that much more difficult for real conservatives and champions of free enterprise to get the message across.

    Americans are woefully ignorant of economics and how business works, and Gingrich and Perry are adding to that ignorance. They need to come out clearly in favor of capitalism and recognize that Bain created far more jobs than even Romney is taking credit for, when we factor in all the wealth Bain created that went back to the Bain investors and then on to other investments.

    Americans don’t understand how our country became wealthy in the first place and Gingrich and Perry apparently don’t, either. Unless they’re really so cynical that they are intentionally misleading the American people in a fit of revenge.

  • dpmapper

    Here’s a catch phrase: Taxes are bad.

    OK, sure, but given that they are needed, how should we think about what an optimal tax system would look like? Most conservatives, alas, haven’t thought about how to really answer that, and it just devolves into “Whatever system lowers my taxes by the most”. We need to be smarter.

  • thosjefferson

    Like Tman8 and many other anti-Romney RedStaters, it’s all about revenge now.

    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/01/10/gingrich_goes_perot_on_romney

  • aesthete

    Even libertarians, who I think are somewhat more rigorous than conservatives by virtue of both more internally consistent founding principles and their position as a less mainstream set of philosophies, tend to run into serious problems when it comes to linear thinking, logic, and optimization (taxes being a perfect example). This lack of rigorous thinking could, methinks, be rectified by a better curriculum that concentrated less on memorization, and more on critical thinking and civics. An increased focus on logic, rhetoric, math, and economics, and less emphasis on the sciences, social sciences (besides those specifically relevant to our political system), and a more focused approach to essay-writing would help move us in the right direction.

  • actuarius

    Because the current managers are failing. They took their eyes off of the ball: delivery of value to shareholders. Or, they are in businesses that have been overtaken by history (buggy whips, retail book stores with brick and mortar stores, etc.), but have not recognized it yet.

    LBOs are part of Joseph Schumpeter’s “creative destruction,” which is why investors will find the next opportunity, and government will not. Look at education: it is still using the same business model as it was 150 years ago. Why? Government has no inspiration to find a better way. They just keep pouring more of our money down a rat hole.

    It is a necessary and desirable part of capitalism.

    And it sucks. Workers, many of whom were not at fault, and may have been hugely valuable, end up getting axed by people who are in a hurry and pay off the very managers that got the company in the mess in the first place. It happens, because it happens quickly instead of evolving over time. The current managers took years to screw it up, the break up will happen in weeks. A discontinuity, in math terms.

    That’s the reality: layoffs and LBOs and the liberty to make employment and investment decisions are vital components of capitalism. And the freedom to make those choices are and should be protected in our form of government. And innocents will lose their jobs.

    Many have a bad taste in their mouths from a down-sizing, LBO, etc. in their personal lives. No amount of defending it as vital will appease them. So, Republicans have to determine whether they want their candidate to have that as his experience. We have to ask questions and poll to determine that. It seems that even the conservative Redstate community has plenty of problems with sending a vulture to do battle with Obama.

    For me, this is way down the priority list, and everything pales to his actions relative to RomneyCare.

  • JSobieski

    Using a random number generator, rolling dice, or requiring administratively excessive documentation are bad ways to devise tax policy even if they result in low taxes.

    Ross Perot was a systems guy. For fhe first couple of weeks of his political tease, I was actually thinking some good might come of it.

  • williamjameson

    to even suggest Perry doesn’t understand capitalism is to say you also don’t understand conservatism. Clearly job creation and budget cutting and defict reduction……..Perry wins. Romney is a Big Gov Moderate Progressive and the Vulture Captialist name is out there and fair game considering he attacked capitalism with lies first.

    Romney has used the liberal playbook from day one just as he did in 2008, Ron Paul came second so thanks to Romney others had to shift in order to take on a dirty player. 1 firm win isn’t exactly enspiring let alone has Iowa certified in his favor so Santorum could eek out the win.

    Perry has created many jobs, Romney was 47th in job creation, as big a loser as Charlie Sheen! You RomneyBots clearly have nothing to lose using liberal tactics of flat out lying while knowing you are marked for life.

    Unlike your liberal leaning Romney, his career is on trial, not capitalism, you’d know that if you weren’t brainwashed with liberal talking points.

  • jaykali

    I mean I don’t think anyone touts his 50 point plan or whatever it is but overall he has run a solid campaign whether or not you agree with his candidacy he hasn’t imploded like Newt or some of these other guys. I am willing to give him a chance, it appears that he could have the nomination wrapped up by January if things go his way, then he’ll be able to focus on Obama.

  • acat

    when training for an Ultimate Fighting Champion bout.

    What I find problematic, dpmapper, is that you’re blaming Newt and others for attacking Romney .. but you’re giving the MSM, whose job it is to attack Romney on this, a pass for ignoring the chink in Romney’s armor.

    I have no problem with a weakness of Candidate Y being brought up, especially if it’s one that the Dems will use. I have a problem with blaming the messenger.

    Mew

  • acat

    Whether the attacks are valid is not important. What matters is that they will be effective, especially given high unemployment and #OWS coverage.

    Mew