Report: Newt set to back off Bain attacks on Romney?

posted at 4:50 pm on January 12, 2012 by Allahpundit

ABC reported on this earlier, claiming that Gingrich was starting to take heat from his own donors about the Bain chatter, and now here’s Stephen Moore at the Journal claiming that Newt’s own advisors are getting uncomfortable. I can’t imagine why. Complaining about pressure from “extraordinarily wealthy institutions” is standard boilerplate in a GOP primary, no?

Coming soon, presumably: Newt starts a tent city in front of Romney HQ.

The buzz is getting stronger that GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich will pull back on his planned $3 million ad campaign that accuses rival Mitt Romney of “looting” companies and ruining workers’ lives when he headed Bain Capital.

I’m hearing from Gingrich insiders that several top campaign brass want the former speaker of the House to withdraw the 28 minute ad — which has been universally panned by conservative leaders in recent days. Even Mr. Gingrich himself is said to be having reservations. But other senior advisors of the Gingrich Super PAC, Winning Our Future, want to continue full speed ahead. They dismiss complaints that the ad should be withdrawn and say doing so would only help the Romney campaign…

Some Gingrich advisors want to change tactics and use the Super PAC money — mostly donated by Las Vegas casino hotel owner Sheldon Adelson — to run positive TV ads on Mr. Gingrich’s economic growth ideas or to criticize Mr. Romney on issues such as healthcare and gay marriage.

In theory, Gingrich has no say over whether that anti-Romney movie disappears or not. It’s his Super PAC that’s running it, not the campaign, and legally they’re not allowed to formally coordinate. He could issue a statement saying that he hopes they remove it, but that would be bizarre now that he’s a spent a solid week pushing the anti-Bain attack himself. Sounds like, rather than abandoning it entirely, he’s going to finesse it a bit by shifting from an argument about corporate looters or vultures or whatever to an argument about crony capitalism and taxpayer giveaways to the rich. Which, actually, is also unfair to Romney but at least is in sync with the party’s anti-bailout orthodoxy.

I actually hope he sticks with the Bain attacks, not because I agree with them — even Huckabee, who once sneered that Romney looks like the sort of guy who’d fire you, is defending him — but because I’m curious to see how receptive the GOP base is to them in South Carolina and beyond. As Matthew Dowd said a few days ago, this ain’t your daddy’s Republican electorate:

While many still say the Republican party’s base is that of Wall Street and corporate America and big business, the real base of the Republican Party has become much more about working class (especially white males) in rural and small town areas of the country. This is where there is a great appeal of Sarah Palin’s and Ron Paul’s populist rhetoric attacking big government and corporate corruption and Wall Street excess. This is where a big part of the anger of the Republican Party is and of the Tea Party movement.

If the attacks on Romney related to Bain are done effectively and consistently and wrapped in a broader argument questioning his authenticity, it could really hurt him as he leaves New Hampshire and heads to South Carolina and then Florida. Those two stops on the nominating road could be problematic on the Bain issue because of their large segments of this angry populist vote.

For our grandfathers or our fathers this anti-Wall Street messaging might have fallen on deaf ears, but in today’s Republican Party there is a tremendous appeal to attacking excesses of both big business and big government.

If “creative destruction” is now anathema to Republican voters, we should try to find that out sooner rather than later so that the party can move left and start pandering appropriately, yes? Wouldn’t be the first case where ideological dogma breaks down once the rubber meets the road: In theory, the GOP is also opposed to Great Society statism, but good luck convincing Republicans of that when you poll them about cutting Medicare. If there’s now bipartisan consensus at the grassroots level that private equity is bad, even for a company whose record is as impressive as Bain’s, then we need to know ASAP. Look on the bright side: If Newt’s strategy works, it’ll spare us from nominating Romney, leaving us instead with a nominee who, as Rush Limbaugh put it, increasingly sounds like Elizabeth Warren. Progress.

Here’s Giuliani on Fox this morning sounding very un-RINOish indeed.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

If Perry had just gone against GingBat on this, instead of following him into the OWS Abyss, he could by now be the alternative to Romney. GingBat does crazy and Perry does stupid.

Carthoris on January 12, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Yep. I supported Perry even with all of “oops” moments. “Vulture capitalism” was a bridge too far and I jumped ship.

JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 5:36 PM

It’s really shocking how many conservatives think rinos only come from the NE. In fact they come from the South as well–as we see when we listen to candidates like Newt and Perry and Santorum, not one of which would qualify as a true fiscal conservatives, all of whom would be moderates on fiscal issues. So how come Romney–and Rudy before him and Christie as well–get labeled as such but Newt and Perry and Santorum don’t?

writeblock on January 12, 2012 at 5:30 PM

I think there is a three prong answer to that: abortion, gay marriage and the “cowboy hat” factor. Anyone who is not lock-step on the first two is considered a RINO by default. As for the cowboy hat factor… apparently a southern accent and a picture at a shooting range compensate for a multitude of sins.

What kills me is the way they make allowances for Perry’s squishy immigration policies because of the political realities of a border state, but refuse to do the same for north-easterners.

athenanyc on January 12, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Is Romney making money off of the taxpayer bailouts?

On his financial disclosure statement filed last month, Romney reported owning between $250,001 and $500,000 in a mutual fund that invests in debt notes of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, among other government entities. Over the previous year, he had reported earning between $15,001 and $50,000 in interest from those investments.

In addition to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the fund also has investments in investment agreements with several banks that received federal bailout money, including Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, and JP Morgan.

http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2011/09/romney-pummels-profits-from-fannie-freddie/a2YN7UoFKXQHW1RzAiaW4J/index.html

momoftxmomof3 on January 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Not really a Perry supporter anymore, in case you were referring to me.

Also, let’s not kid ourselves acting like Rudy’s a conservative. Being a RINO in New York City or Massachusetts (*coughs* Mitt *coughs*) doesn’t necessarily make you a conservative anywhere else.

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 5:32 PM

I was not referring to any one individual. I would not call Rudy ultra-conservative, but he is far from a RINO.

athenanyc on January 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM

I wish Palin would get in even now just to see the Nastiness Meltdown among the Mittbots.
ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:33 PM

This.
Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Meh. She would just be another not-Mitt and help to split the not-Mitt vote even more, which I don’t believe would upset Romney supporters a whole lot.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM

I do not think anyone ever argued that Bain did not make money under Romney. Gee, nice little talk up, but it has nothing at all to do with the deals Gingrich talked about.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Oh, right. The Newtron is talking about the nefarious deals of Bain Capital (key theme of the Orcs music).

The Newtron has no evidence only accusations. After all he has taken up the Dem play book. It is the nature of the CHARGE that is important and not the nature of the evidence (or lack thereof).

Go Newtron!!

Gunlock Bill on January 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM

A few words from Ronald Reagan about BAIN:

Ronald Reagan Weighs In On Bain Attacks
Forget all the particulars behind matters of high finance it’s not even clear Bain can fully disclose, Romney isn’t cooperating there, for what it’s worth. They likely don’t matter too much, any way. Think political narrative. Then read this bit about Reagan and assess what’s going on around the Bain Bashing fiasco and ask yourself, which side would Ronald Reagan want to be perceived as being on.

In late 1979, during an economic strategy meeting, Ronald Reagan was talking about his upcoming presidential campaign. At one point, somebody expressed concern that John Connally, the former governor of Texas and another presidential candidate, was gaining support among corporate chief executive officers, with all the financial support and credibility that that entailed. Reagan said this didn’t bother him at all. “Let him have the Fortune 500,” he said. “I want our campaign to stand for Main Street, not Wall Street. I want us to stand for the worker, the shopkeeper, the entrepreneur, and the small businessman.” Reagan’s instincts were right on the mark.

stenwin77 on January 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM

We should listen to Newt and dig deeper.

GMO on January 12, 2012 at 5:19 PM

And while you’re at it, be sure and get “the truth” about 9/11. Any Paultard can fill you in.

cicerone on January 12, 2012 at 5:40 PM

WHAT. A. DISASTER.

The self-immolation of Newt is now complete.

aquaviva on January 12, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Meh. She would just be another not-Mitt and help to split the not-Mitt vote even more, which I don’t believe would upset Romney supporters a whole lot.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM

You know better. Thus the habitual Mittbot trashing of Palin for the past 4 years.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Rush is right. Newt is using the language of the left.

Back off? Too late. The damage is done. I can no longer support Gingrich.

davidk on January 12, 2012 at 4:57 PM

That’s absurd. If I write a critical review of a Hollywood movie, does that mean I hate the film industry? Why should someone get a free pass because their profession was somehow related to capitalism? Even wealthy investors have the capacity to act in immoral ways that avoid breaking laws.

bayam on January 12, 2012 at 5:42 PM

“I want our campaign to stand for Main Street, not Wall Street. I want us to stand for the worker, the shopkeeper, the entrepreneur, and the small businessman.” Reagan’s instincts were right on the mark.

stenwin77 on January 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM

COMMUNIST CLASS WARFARE!!!!!! — Mittbot

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:43 PM

Meh. She would just be another not-Mitt and help to split the not-Mitt vote even more, which I don’t believe would upset Romney supporters a whole lot.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM

You don’t think Sarah could rob the other “conservative” candidates of their support?

If she gets in, I can see her poll numbers jumping to 25% immediately.

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 5:44 PM

We should listen to Newt and dig deeper.

GMO on January 12, 2012 at 5:19 PM

And while you’re at it, be sure and get “the truth” about 9/11. Any Paultard can fill you in.

cicerone on January 12, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Oh, there’ll be deeper digging into Romney, Newt or no Newt. It’ll be entertaining.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Is Romney making money off of the taxpayer bailouts?

On his financial disclosure statement filed last month, Romney reported owning between $250,001 and $500,000 in a mutual fund that invests in debt notes of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, among other government entities. Over the previous year, he had reported earning between $15,001 and $50,000 in interest from those investments.

In addition to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the fund also has investments in investment agreements with several banks that received federal bailout money, including Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, and JP Morgan.

http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2011/09/romney-pummels-profits-from-fannie-freddie/a2YN7UoFKXQHW1RzAiaW4J/index.html

momoftxmomof3 on January 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM

OMG, is this what the GOP has been reduced to? You’re going to indict everyone who has invested in these companies now?

gatorboy on January 12, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Connie on January 12, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Eh. It’s interesting but rather meaningless in the long run.

Look, consultants/media people/strategists move from campaign to campaign and cross the aisle, depending on who is willing to hire them. They’re not doing it out of loyalty to a candidate or party (Dick Morris comes to mind) they’re being paid to do a job. And of course, Romney was a huge supporter of Whitman’s gubernatorial run…

Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 5:45 PM

You don’t think Sarah could rob the other “conservative” candidates of their support?

If she gets in, I can see her poll numbers jumping to 25% immediately.

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 5:44 PM

…and Obama making an easy 100 million the first week after she jumps in.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Yep. I supported Perry even with all of “oops” moments. “Vulture capitalism” was a bridge too far and I jumped ship.

JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 5:36 PM

I still support Perry. It’s Gingrich who has done a poor job messaging. First he attacks Romney over Bain Capital tenure, When Mitt Romney Came To Town, then he’s backing off, then his PAC comes out with 28 minute movie that the MONEY folks really want taken down. Which is really too late, once something is on the internet it’s on the internet forever….So Gingrich states oh yeah he stands by his Bain Capital attack when the PAC releases the mini movie….then he claims he’s being pressured by Influential people to stop his Bain Capital attacks on Romney, and now Report: Newt set to back off Bain attacks on Romney?

I am down to

Perry
Huntsman

Dr Evil on January 12, 2012 at 5:46 PM

its not the names, its the emotional tug at the heart strings, Mitt is a bad man!! He’ll take away your SSA. You know its coming ,you just have your head in the sand.

Forget all the particulars behind matters of high finance it’s not even clear Bain can fully disclose, Romney isn’t cooperating there, for what it’s worth. They likely don’t matter too much, any way. Think political narrative. Then read this bit about Reagan and assess what’s going on around the Bain Bashing fiasco and ask yourself, which side would Ronald Reagan want to be perceived as being on.

In late 1979, during an economic strategy meeting, Ronald Reagan was talking about his upcoming presidential campaign. At one point, somebody expressed concern that John Connally, the former governor of Texas and another presidential candidate, was gaining support among corporate chief executive officers, with all the financial support and credibility that that entailed. Reagan said this didn’t bother him at all. “Let him have the Fortune 500,” he said. “I want our campaign to stand for Main Street, not Wall Street. I want us to stand for the worker, the shopkeeper, the entrepreneur, and the small businessman.” Reagan’s instincts were right on the mark.

JP1986UM on January 12, 2012 at 5:47 PM

If she gets in, I can see her poll numbers jumping to 25% immediately.

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Can you see those poll numbers from your front porch?

gatorboy on January 12, 2012 at 5:47 PM

On his financial disclosure statement filed last month, Romney reported owning between $250,001 and $500,000 in a mutual fund that invests in debt notes of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, among other government entities. Over the previous year, he had reported earning between $15,001 and $50,000 in interest from those investments.

momoftxmomof3 on January 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM

Rule 1. Never believe a hack journo. Okay

Many plain average people have money in GNMA funds, etc.

Many people have money in Ally Bank. This may come as a shock to you but that is GMAC…which was a huge bailout precipitant

Now I understand that most people have not a clue about bailouts, business, and finance or investing. After all most people’s net worth is close to zero…because they spend every dime on the new Air Jordans or Charlie sheen dolls

But if they have a pension…or if they go to a university…they own something that has been bailed out.

100s of banks were bailed out.

Not to mention money market funds…which everyone depends on (whether you know it or not)

r keller on January 12, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Meh. She would just be another not-Mitt and help to split the not-Mitt vote even more, which I don’t believe would upset Romney supporters a whole lot.
whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM

You know better. Thus the habitual Mittbot trashing of Palin for the past 4 years.
ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Nope. It’s a safe bet that the Romney camp is all up for “the more not-Mitts, the merrier”. If you wanna get a fist fight going just ask which not-Mitt candidate should get out of the race first.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:48 PM

So, Newt doubled down, Perry was for it before he was against it, and Santorum steered clear. And two of these guys need to go away in order to cobble together an anti-Mitt. And Santorum is a lil so-conny for the Americans, Perry can’t speak, and Newt can’t not speak. Is that it?

kunegetikos on January 12, 2012 at 5:48 PM

OMG, is this what the GOP has been reduced to?

gatorboy on January 12, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Yeah…Romney’s characteristic negative ads are flowering everywhere.

…and Obama making an easy 100 million the first week after she jumps in.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 5:45 PM

So you think Milquetoast Mitt is going to “stealth” his way past that Obama Money Machine? They’re chomping at the bit. The mythical 1% personified…and don’t discount those polls early on in the OWS crap showing broad support for OWS.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:49 PM

And while you’re at it, be sure and get “the truth” about 9/11. Any Paultard can fill you in.

cicerone on January 12, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Notice how leftist this guy argues. Calls you a 9/11 truther if you disagree with him. It is aimed to shut you up. It is how the progressives argue, which is the refuse to debate, they just work as hard as they can to shut you up.
Disagree with global Warming? your anti-science and (Holocaust implied) denier.
Disagree with any black Democrat? Your a Racist.
Want to cut spending by .01%? You want to throw grandma off a cliff.
Is it me, or are all of Romney’s supporters using the same tactics? You know who uses these tactics? People who cannot defend or debate the issue.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 5:49 PM

Newt can back off or continue on — it really doesn’t matter now. He is DOA as a national GOP candidate. He’s just a mess of a man. What matters now is if Romney lives or dies by Bain. The ball’s in Romney’s court. Newt will either go down as the guy who made the Romney a stronger candidate than anyone could have imagined, or he’ll be the guy who made Ron Paul the 2102 GOP candidate.

Rational Thought on January 12, 2012 at 5:49 PM

You don’t think Sarah could rob the other “conservative” candidates of their support?

If she gets in, I can see her poll numbers jumping to 25% immediately.

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Ok, so she would suck the oxygen out of the Not-Romney campaigns. Why would a “mitt-bot” have a problem with that?

Gunlock Bill on January 12, 2012 at 5:50 PM

WHAT. A. DISASTER.

The self-immolation of Newt is now complete.

aquaviva on January 12, 2012 at 5:40 PM

It won’t be complete until he flips out completely and they haul him away in straight jacket.

JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 5:51 PM

So you think Milquetoast Mitt is going to “stealth” his way past that Obama Money Machine? They’re chomping at the bit. The mythical 1% personified…and don’t discount those polls early on in the OWS crap showing broad support for OWS.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:49 PM

You think that there is anyone who could cause the Dems to give more money to Obama than Palin?

Sure, conservatives love her, but the dems, the dems would dig deep and send Obama everything they had, including the gold fillings from their own teeth to keep her from winning.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 5:51 PM

Nope. It’s a safe bet that the Romney camp is all up for “the more not-Mitts, the merrier”. If you wanna get a fist fight going just ask which not-Mitt candidate should get out of the race first.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Palin’s the one NotRomney all along that had and has the chance to derail him. You know it. Thus the nastiness. You wouldn’t be talking about a Santorum or a Cain anymore.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:51 PM

Romney = Obama. Romney is Obama’s dream candidate. Even if Romney beats Obama, the fact is, Romney is the one Republican that is the most like Obama.

IcedTea on January 12, 2012 at 5:17 PM

Well I can say that Romney’s campaign m.o. is most like Obama’s: acknowledge that you’re hollow and then plaster negative ads everywhere. His followers are most like O-bots, as well: it doesn’t matter what Romney has done or said or will do or say, it will always be rationalized; and the thing they engage in most often is trashing any possible competition. The Romney “juggernaut” is hollow once you get past the primaries. He’ll lose to Obama.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Right. Competition will be palinized. Savaging opponents is reserved for ‘the one’ Mitt Romney and his minions.

The Mitt Mantra: those attacked should realize their inferior place in the race to the whitehouse and just lay down and take it without responding. Under no circumstances shall any rival attack the aforementioned establishment choice.

Click heels.

IndeCon on January 12, 2012 at 5:51 PM

OMG, is this what the GOP has been reduced to? You’re going to indict everyone who has invested in these companies now?
gatorboy on January 12, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Nah, it’s just what Perry and Gingrich have been reduced to – but since they started from a place of “significant shrinkage” to begin with it makes little difference.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:52 PM

If Perry had just gone against GingBat on this, instead of following him into the OWS Abyss, he could by now be the alternative to Romney. GingBat does crazy and Perry does stupid.
Carthoris on January 12, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Perry could very well have been asked to be Mitt’s veep. Oh well, tant pis…

OMG, is this what the GOP has been reduced to? You’re going to indict everyone who has invested in these companies now?
gatorboy on January 12, 2012 at 5:45 PM

My father-in-law had the misfortune to have invested in GM senior bonds and Freddie Mac. He’s lost his shirt but if he were running for office I guess he’d be called a “vulture capitalist”. Which reminds me! During the GM senior bond holder debacle, Obama referred to the bondholders as “vultures”! Off to dig up the story.

Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Sure, conservatives love her, but the dems, the dems would dig deep and send Obama everything they had, including the gold fillings from their own teeth to keep her from winning.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 5:51 PM

Better to have conservatives love you than to be Mr Beatable Blah that leaves Dems feeling non-threatened. You’re going to see a vivid demonstration of that soon enough. AGAIN.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Now Hot Air is quoting Maureen Dowd, for Pete’s sake? That’s almost as good as Gingrich waving around his well-thumbed copy of the NYT at the last debate!

While many still say the Republican party’s base is that of Wall Street and corporate America and big business, the real base of the Republican Party has become much more about working class (especially white males) in rural and small town areas of the country.

This is new? This is insightful analysis? This is worth quoting? Has everyone forgotten the huge chunk of the GOP electorate that fueled Pat Buchanan’s populist run? Have we forgotten the hard-hat Reagan Democrats, or Nixon’s Silent Majority? The entire Midwestern wing of the Republican Party that coalesced around Barry Goldwater, and in an earlier incarnation was known as the Taft wing of the Party, after Senator Robert Taft of Ohio, was rural, small town, some times working class and sometimes farmer. As much as I despise Gingrich’s attacks, he is correct to state there has always been a strong populist segment of the Republican party, suspicious of Big Business, Wall Street, the Banksters, and Northeastern Republicans like Mitt Romney. This is not news to anyone with even the vaguest understanding of American history or Republican politics.

Unfortunately for Gingrich, the populist wing of the party is now more knowledgeable about economic and political matters, and understands that it is more often big government rather than big business that is giving them a screwing. They understand that, as I used to point out to my mother, when the 1% is doing well, the other 99% may or may not be doing well; when the 1% is not doing well, no one is doing well. It is now only the looter and parasite class, dependent of government, and personified by OWS, Michelle Obama, and Maureen Dowd, that responds to this ludicrous demagoguery.

Mr. Arkadin on January 12, 2012 at 5:53 PM

I think the reason “cutting Medicare” is such a polling mess is because no credible option has ever been fully explained or embraced by the media. It’s an almost impossible given how democrats and the main stream media line up against even reform.

BKeyser on January 12, 2012 at 5:53 PM

It won’t be complete until he flips out completely and they haul him away in straight jacket.

JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 5:51 PM

A fundamentally straight jacket.

aquaviva on January 12, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Nah, it’s just what Perry and Gingrich have been reduced to – but since they started from a place of “significant shrinkage” to begin with it makes little difference.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Mitt started that line of attack. You anti capitalist!

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Nope. It’s a safe bet that the Romney camp is all up for “the more not-Mitts, the merrier”. If you wanna get a fist fight going just ask which not-Mitt candidate should get out of the race first.
whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Palin’s the one NotRomney all along that had and has the chance to derail him.
ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:51 PM

Sorry – we been there, saw that, got the t-shirts.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:54 PM

stenwin77 on January 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM

JP1986UM on January 12, 2012 at 5:47 PM

oops…either a single poster, or two posters using the same talking points (i’m sure they were instructed NOT to post on the same thread w/in 10 min)

rofl

r keller on January 12, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Better to have conservatives love you than to be Mr Beatable Blah that leaves Dems feeling non-threatened. You’re going to see a vivid demonstration of that soon enough. AGAIN.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:53 PM

That does nothing to prove me wrong. In fact, I think you agreed with me.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 5:55 PM

…and Obama making an easy 100 million the first week after she jumps in.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 5:45 PM

Can you see those poll numbers from your front porch?

gatorboy on January 12, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Wow, I see the Palin hate is strong today. Good for the lulz, I guess…

I am down to

Perry
Huntsman

Dr Evil on January 12, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Yep, those two are the only choices left for me. Although I’m furious at Perry for the “venture capitalist” garbage, he seems to be backing away from that specific label. Even Huntsman backed away and came out in defense of Bain Capital:

http://www.thestatecolumn.com/articles/jon-huntsman-defends-mitt-romney-you-cant-criticize-bain-capital/

And yet, Newt still sounds like an OWS nutcase.

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 5:55 PM

Nah, it’s just what Perry and Gingrich have been reduced to – but since they started from a place of “significant shrinkage” to begin with it makes little difference.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:52 PM

Well the root of it is in Romney insecurity. He and the PAC he hides behind know that he wouldn’t have had a chance against Gingrich without going nuclear via attack ads in Iowa. And before that it was Perry. Now they’re retaliating. Human nature.

The funny thing is that Romney will be relatively speechless against Obama. Moderates can only get nasty towards conservatives.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Huntsman

Dr Evil on January 12, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Good news: Dude! Now there are four of us!
Bad news: we four are 25% of his total base.

kunegetikos on January 12, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Wow, I see the Palin hate is strong today. Good for the lulz, I guess…

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 5:55 PM

I point out that Dems hate her and would give their last penny to Obama to defeat her and that is somehow Palin hate??

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Sorry – we been there, saw that, got the t-shirts.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 5:54 PM

We’re just waiting for that Romney Juggernaut to show us its might. We’ve still got that t-shirt from 2008, in fact.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:58 PM

oops…either a single poster, or two posters using the same talking points (i’m sure they were instructed NOT to post on the same thread w/in 10 min)

rofl

r keller on January 12, 2012 at 5:54 PM

I do not see the similarity really. The wording and styles are way too disparate to be the same author.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 5:58 PM

That does nothing to prove me wrong. In fact, I think you agreed with me.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 5:55 PM

Hardly. You think a Dem Lite like Mitt is going to waltz through unscathed. You’ve got another thing coming.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:59 PM

My father-in-law had the misfortune to have invested in GM senior bonds and Freddie Mac. He’s lost his shirt but if he were running for office I guess he’d be called a “vulture capitalist”. Which reminds me! During the GM senior bond holder debacle, Obama referred to the bondholders as “vultures”! Off to dig up the story.

Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 5:52 PM

i kinda thought that was Chrysler. My mother had GM notes, that went down sharply, but since then have gone up to maybe 80c on the dollar.

If he held FRE equity, then yeah, that’s too bad. But the FRE bonds are doing fine

r keller on January 12, 2012 at 6:00 PM

Hardly. You think a Dem Lite like Mitt is going to waltz through unscathed. You’ve got another thing coming.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Funny, I didn’t say a thing about Mitt…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 6:00 PM

A fundamentally straight jacket.

aquaviva on January 12, 2012 at 5:53 PM

That would be profound.

Rational Thought on January 12, 2012 at 6:01 PM

I point out that Dems hate her and would give their last penny to Obama to defeat her and that is somehow Palin hate??

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Well, that sounds like hate, because, despite what the media says, Palin’s not the “most hated” among the Dems.

Perry is hated more simply because ignorant liberals see him as a caricature of George W. Bush, and those same ignorant liberals secretly fear Huntsman as the nominee, which is why they use reverse-psychology in saying he’s the most “sane” candidate (because they know people on our side won’t vote for him.)

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 6:01 PM

During the GM senior bond holder debacle, Obama referred to the bondholders as “vultures”! Off to dig up the story.

Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 5:52 PM

So I suppose Romney would agree with him. It was all to save the businesses, after all. Good Lord, talk about DNC ads writing themselves.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 6:01 PM

Newt recently posed for a pic in SC.

aquaviva on January 12, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Well, that sounds like hate, because, despite what the media says, Palin’s not the “most hated” among the Dems.

Perry is hated more simply because ignorant liberals see him as a caricature of George W. Bush, and those same ignorant liberals secretly fear Huntsman as the nominee, which is why they use reverse-psychology in saying he’s the most “sane” candidate (because they know people on our side won’t vote for him.)

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 6:01 PM

Gee, and here I figured that being hated by the Dems would be virtue… After all Mitt is just Dem Lite… ::eyeroll::

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 6:03 PM

You’ve got another thing coming.

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:59 PM

Funny, I didn’t say a thing about Mitt…

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 6:00 PM

And it’s suuuuuch a stretch to suppose a Mittbot is thinking of Mitt…LOL

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 6:03 PM

And it’s suuuuuch a stretch to suppose a Mittbot is thinking of Mitt…LOL

ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 6:03 PM

and a hate-bot to be projecting and pretending to mind read.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Huntsman

Dr Evil on January 12, 2012 at 5:46 PM

Good news: Dude! Now there are four of us!
Bad news: we four are 25% of his total base.

kunegetikos on January 12, 2012 at 5:56 PM

Huntmentum! GRIN.

Dr Evil on January 12, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Somehow though you don’t seem to be the best judge as to whether someone is “full of it”.
ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Do you dispute what I said about Romney’s tax returns not being dispositive or not?

Vultures. I ‘misremembered’. It wasn’t Obama, it was his lackey, Rep. John Dingel (D) who used the term.

Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Yep, those two are the only choices left for me. Although I’m furious at Perry for the “venture capitalist” garbage, he seems to be backing away from that specific label. Even Huntsman backed away and came out in defense of Bain Capital:

http://www.thestatecolumn.com/articles/jon-huntsman-defends-mitt-romney-you-cant-criticize-bain-capital/

And yet, Newt still sounds like an OWS nutcase.

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 5:55 PM

Here is Perry taking it to Laura Ingraham today,

INGRAHAM: You know I am going to raise the issue of Texans for Public Justice, their analysis of your campaign contributions.

Since 2000, you have received more than $7 million from private equity firms and private investment firms. Are any of those “vulture” firms?

PERRY: Listen, I didn’t paint with a broad brush and say that every private equity firm out there is…

INGRAHAM: Only Romney’s are vultures? None of your guys are vultures, only Romney’s?

PERRY: Look, Romney is running for president.

INGRAHAM: Yeah, you are running for president too, and you have benefited from these firms.

Perry: Correct, and I don’t have a problem with that.

Gunlock Bill on January 12, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Gee, and here I figured that being hated by the Dems would be virtue… After all Mitt is just Dem Lite… ::eyeroll::

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on January 12, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Mitt is Dem-lite.

Why else would I still be willing to support Perry or Huntsman?

inb4AizenhatesMitt.

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Vultures. I ‘misremembered’. It wasn’t Obama, it was his lackey, Rep. John Dingel (D) who used the term.
Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 6:04 PM

OOPS. Broken link^^.

Vultures

Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Gunlock Bill on January 12, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Why’d you have to post that? *sadface*

Great, now Perry sounds like a lib and a hypocrite, smh…

In other words, he’s becoming another Newt.

Aizen on January 12, 2012 at 6:08 PM

I do not see the similarity really. The wording and styles are way too disparate to be the same author.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 5:58 PM

riiiiight…ROFL

Forget all the particulars behind matters of high finance it’s not even clear Bain can fully disclose, Romney isn’t cooperating there, for what it’s worth. They likely don’t matter too much, any way. Think political narrative. Then read this bit about Reagan and assess what’s going on around the Bain Bashing fiasco and ask yourself, which side would Ronald Reagan want to be perceived as being on.
In late 1979, during an economic strategy meeting, Ronald Reagan was talking about his upcoming presidential campaign. At one point, somebody expressed concern that John Connally, the former governor of Texas and another presidential candidate, was gaining support among corporate chief executive officers, with all the financial support and credibility that that entailed. Reagan said this didn’t bother him at all. “Let him have the Fortune 500,” he said. “I want our campaign to stand for Main Street, not Wall Street. I want us to stand for the worker, the shopkeeper, the entrepreneur, and the small businessman.” Reagan’s instincts were right on the mark.
JP1986UM on January 12, 2012 at 5:47 PM

A few words from Ronald Reagan about BAIN:

Forget all the particulars behind matters of high finance it’s not even clear Bain can fully disclose, Romney isn’t cooperating there, for what it’s worth. They likely don’t matter too much, any way. Think political narrative. Then read this bit about Reagan and assess what’s going on around the Bain Bashing fiasco and ask yourself, which side would Ronald Reagan want to be perceived as being on.
In late 1979, during an economic strategy meeting, Ronald Reagan was talking about his upcoming presidential campaign. At one point, somebody expressed concern that John Connally, the former governor of Texas and another presidential candidate, was gaining support among corporate chief executive officers, with all the financial support and credibility that that entailed. Reagan said this didn’t bother him at all. “Let him have the Fortune 500,” he said. “I want our campaign to stand for Main Street, not Wall Street. I want us to stand for the worker, the shopkeeper, the entrepreneur, and the small businessman.” Reagan’s instincts were right on the mark.
stenwin77 on January 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM

r keller on January 12, 2012 at 6:09 PM

but good luck convincing Republicans of that when you poll them about cutting Medicare.

Well, when you take money from someone’s paycheck week after week, and show that it’s being earmarked for a specific program, you tend to feel more that you’re funding it and therefore deserve to use it.

Yes, this is true of everything the government does, and if I had a spot on my paycheck that said: Food Stamps, I’d expect to get some stupid food stamps eventually.

That’s the biggest problem with Social Security and Medicare. We’ve bought into the idea that we’re actually paying for a service that we’re going to get. If all of that was simply lobbed into taxes, it wouldn’t be such a big deal. But the nanny staters wanted to make sure that we don’t have to care for ourselves, and they got what they wanted.

I can’t blame anyone for wanting what they’ve been told they were paying into all their lives. If this were Citi Bank or Fidelity, we’d call them immoral if they didn’t pay, even if they couldn’t afford to.

Esthier on January 12, 2012 at 6:10 PM

Apparently one can not question anyone that uses “vulture” capitalism as thier means to profit.

All “vulture” capitalists are pure and untouchable.

In fact one cannot use that term (even though it is an actual phrase used in our business).

FYI, the term “corporatist” is forbidden too. Saying it makes you a socialist.

tonotisto on January 12, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Newt recently posed for a pic in SC.

aquaviva on January 12, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Calista should paint this on Newts butt.

JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 6:12 PM

First, note that Newt has not released his returns either and will not unless he’s the nominee. Second, and more to the point, Mitt’s tax returns won’t reveal a fracking thing about whether he did (or did not!) act as a “corporate raider” or “vulture capitalist” while at Bain, even if he were to release returns going back to that point in time. So once again, Palin is full of it…

Moreover, it’s common knowledge that he took only $1.00 in salary when asked to come back to Bain Consulting and save it (which he did), and he took no salary and donated a million to the Utah Olympics. with this in mind, it’s a bit difficult to portray him as Gordon Gekko.

Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 5:31 PM

But if Palin says it, it is law!

BettyRuth on January 12, 2012 at 6:12 PM

stenwin77 on January 12, 2012 at 5:39 PM

JP1986UM on January 12, 2012 at 5:47 PM

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 5:58 PM

btw…do any of you ‘guys’ have a cite for this little Reaganism????

thx

r keller on January 12, 2012 at 6:13 PM

Report: Newt set to back off Bain attacks on Romney?
Translation: Big money boys tell Newt to sit down and shut up.

tonotisto on January 12, 2012 at 6:13 PM

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/01/republicans-at-donner-pass.php

funny cartoon at Powerline…well, funny if you are a leftist

r keller on January 12, 2012 at 6:16 PM

Early on I would have easily voted for Newt, Mitt, even Perry. Newt and Perry’s decision to go psycho against a fellow Republican tells me all I need to know about them. And all this outrage over business venture that was totally legal and profitable with happy shareholders some of which are blue collar pension funds.

Both are trying to paint it as amoral, not because they really believe that, but rather because it suits their political need to tear Romney down.

Newt is clearly an intellectual thinker but emotionally his development must have been arrested during puberty.

Perry like someone said “is just George Bush without the intellect”.

Go Mitt ! You have a great opportunity to parlay your Bain experience into making you the best choice to work your creative destruction on big government ! If you will….

alQemist on January 12, 2012 at 6:19 PM

Gunlock Bill on January 12, 2012 at 6:05 PM

Ouch, that’s going to leave a mark.

JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 6:21 PM

Perry’s explanation on Laura Ingrams show about Bain and Venture Capitalist.

Perry’s record can not be matched!

Rick Perry is the most experienced and best qualified man in this race. He is the only Tea Party candidate left in the field.

Rick Perry has 11 years of executive experience running the world’s 13th largest economy.

45% of all the jobs created in the entire United States in the last 2 years have been created in Texas due to Governor Perry’s policies of low taxes, low regulation and tort reform.

Texas has gained 4 congressional seats under Governor Perry’s tenure because businesses and jobs are flocking to TX.

While Barak Obama and the US lost 2 million jobs, Texas under Perry’s leadership created 1 million new jobs.

Governor Perry is the only person running that volunteered and served in the US military. This was Vietnam. NOT drafted. NO deferment. When his country called he stepped up to the plate. He attained the rank of Captain in the US Air Force.

Governor Perry is pro-life and has always been. He signed the Parental Consent Bill, the Sonogram law and the bill to de-fund Planned Parenthood in Texas causing 12 of their clinics to close.

Governor Perry signed the Conceal and Carry law in Texas and has an A+ rating from the NRA.

Granted his first two debates did not go well but he had just had back surgery in late July and standing for 2 hours and possibly pain medication hurt his performance. You never get a 2nd opportunity to make a 1st impression but it will be America’s loss if Governor Perry is not given the opportunity to accomplish for the country what he has accomplished for Texas.

Governor Perry has done an exceptional job of job creation and conservative leadership for 11 years in Texas. He has been re-elected Governor 3 times. He has been down by double digits and counted out before.

Rick Perry is not of Washington nor Wall Street which got us into this mess in the first place.

Rick Perry is the ONLY person in this race that is ALL three legs of Ronald Reagan’s conservative stool. Economic conservative. Social conservative. National Security conservative.

Rio2010 on January 12, 2012 at 6:22 PM

i kinda thought that was Chrysler. My mother had GM notes, that went down sharply, but since then have gone up to maybe 80c on the dollar.
If he held FRE equity, then yeah, that’s too bad. But the FRE bonds are doing fine
r keller on January 12, 2012 at 6:00 PM

The last I heard (awhile ago) they were offered GM stock in exchange or negotiating some deal to that effect.

During the GM senior bond holder debacle, Obama referred to the bondholders as “vultures”! Off to dig up the story.
Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 5:52 PM

So I suppose Romney would agree with him. It was all to save the businesses, after all. Good Lord, talk about DNC ads writing themselves.
ddrintn on January 12, 2012 at 6:01 PM

What the hell are you talking about? Did Romney break contract law precedent, screw Senior Bondholders and hand the proceeds over to the UAW union as payback for their generous contributions to his campaign?

Do you even know the history of the GM/Chrysler deal? Like this. Or this. And so much more…

Buy Danish on January 12, 2012 at 6:23 PM

Perry’s explanation on Laura Ingrams show about Bain and Venture Capitalist.
Rio2010 on January 12, 2012 at 6:22 PM

You mean this take down by Laura Ingram that someone posted above?

INGRAHAM: You know I am going to raise the issue of Texans for Public Justice, their analysis of your campaign contributions.

Since 2000, you have received more than $7 million from private equity firms and private investment firms. Are any of those “vulture” firms?

PERRY: Listen, I didn’t paint with a broad brush and say that every private equity firm out there is…

INGRAHAM: Only Romney’s are vultures? None of your guys are vultures, only Romney’s?

PERRY: Look, Romney is running for president.

INGRAHAM: Yeah, you are running for president too, and you have benefited from these firms.

Perry: Correct, and I don’t have a problem with that.

She nailed Perry on his hypocrisy and made him look like a fool.

JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Perry’s explanation on Laura Ingrams show about Bain and Venture Capitalist.

Perry’s record can not be matched!

. . .

Rio2010 on January 12, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Thanks!

That explains EVERYTHING!!

/s

Gunlock Bill on January 12, 2012 at 6:32 PM

momoftxmomof3 on January 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM

And I’ll bet he owned some GM stock too. Why the dirty so and so.

/s

MJBrutus on January 12, 2012 at 6:35 PM

BettyRuth on January 12, 2012 at 6:12 PM

And he served as governor of his state for $1/year. The part time governor can’t say as much.

MJBrutus on January 12, 2012 at 6:37 PM

BigGovernment. com says he will NOT be backing down . . . I think it’s very smart of Newt to NOT back down. By the way, Mitt ‘Milquetoast’ Romney still sucks!

Pragmatic on January 12, 2012 at 6:38 PM

I’ve said from the begining that I will support whomever the Nominee may be because they are all better than the current president. Romney looks inevitable right now, and I will support him if/when he wins. It’s really that simple folk.

steel guy on January 12, 2012 at 6:39 PM

r keller on January 12, 2012 at 6:13 PM

I never used it. So I would have to say no.

astonerii on January 12, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Rick Perry is the ONLY person in this race that is ALL three legs of Ronald Reagan’s conservative stool. Economic conservative. Social conservative. National Security conservative.

Rio2010 on January 12, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Rick Perry is an imbecile who can’t even speak correctly, or put two sentences together. His only chance is that they implant a chip or make him wear earphones permanently so that his handlers instruct him what to say/how to answer..and even then there’s no guarantee that he won’t make blunders…time for him to go!

jimver on January 12, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Please tell me who you are accusing of being a vulture capitalist and why.

blink on January 12, 2012 at 6:15 PM

That is the point. It doesn’t matter “who”. The irrational knee jerk reaction of our party is “Shut up”, we can not go there.

It sucks, it really does. I always thought of the Repub party as being the idea party (my 1st vote was for Ronald Reagon). But we are no longer that party, certain words are to go unspoken for they are the “words of the left”.

We are irrational and unable to debate certain subjects without name calling and tearing down good people who have tremendous conservative Repub accomplisments.

The irony is that this is the same tactic the Left uses against thier dissenters, so we are now no better than them.

tonotisto on January 12, 2012 at 6:46 PM

Uhh ohh…

http://blog.chron.com/rickperry/2012/01/romney-strategist-attacked-meg-whitman-as-a-vulture-capitalist/

Hostile Gospel on January 12, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Not exactly. The ad says that Whitman invested in vulture funds, not that she was a “vulture capitalist”. There’s a little bit of a difference there.

alchemist19 on January 12, 2012 at 6:45 PM

alchemist19 on January 12, 2012 at 6:47 PM

She nailed Perry on his hypocrisy and made him look like a fool.

JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 6:32 PM

+ 100..I agree..:)

Dire Straits on January 12, 2012 at 6:48 PM

The irony is that this is the same tactic the Left uses against thier dissenters, so we are now no better than them.

tonotisto on January 12, 2012 at 6:46 PM

no, the irony is that people like you borrowed with great ease marxist memes and talking points from the left (greedy capitalism, vulture capitalism, 99% vs 1%) and are happy to parade it around, while at the same time whining about it when you are being called on your digusting tactics…

jimver on January 12, 2012 at 6:51 PM

priceless :-)….Rudy Giuliani: ‘Newt Gingrich acting like Saul Alinsky’…First Rush compared Gingrich to Elizabeth Warren, now this :-)….you got to love Rudy! :-)

jimver on January 12, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Hang in there Newt…!

… Go after Obowma!!!

Seven Percent Solution on January 12, 2012 at 6:54 PM

INGRAHAM: Only Romney’s are vultures? None of your guys are vultures, only Romney’s?

PERRY: Look, Romney is running for president.

INGRAHAM: Yeah, you are running for president too, and you have benefited from these firms.

Perry: Correct, and I don’t have a problem with that.

She nailed Perry on his hypocrisy and made him look like a fool.
JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Well, to be honest it’s not that hard of a task – making Perry look like a fool is like making a blueberry look blue.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Yeah, you guys are just gonna love what Obama does to the Miracle Man. Can’t wait for all the sob stories coming out in Oct about how Romney ruined their family, the dog committed suicide and grandma lost her pension.

And I’ll enjoy watching Uncle Harry and Aunt Suzie talk about how their lives have changed for the better once they got jobs at Staples, thanks to Mitt. Bain invested $600,000 in that company when it was just a twinkle in somebody’s eye. It now employs 70,000 workers. Are you going to give Romney the credit that’s due for nurturing that fledgling company to full maturity? If not, why not? WSJ estimates 22% of the companies Bain took over went bankrupt after 8 years. But most survived and prospered. And those that went bankrupt did so after Bain severed its ties with them.

writeblock on January 12, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Newt is whining again!!

Gingrich Campaign Threatens to Sue South Carolina TV Stations That Run Romney PAC Ad

JPeterman on January 12, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Not to be outdone, Rick Perry demands that a Federal judge decide it.

whatcat on January 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3