Club for Growth rips Newt for criticizing Romney’s investment income

posted at 4:56 pm on January 25, 2012 by Allahpundit

Ed touched on Gingrich’s comments earlier (lefty Greg Sargent gleefully titled his post on the subject, “Capitalism on trial”), but now that big conservative outlets like CFG are pushing back, I figured they deserved a second post. Again, here’s what the putative GOP nominee had to say about Romnney’s outrageous scheme of making big money off of smart investments:

When asked about Romney’s position on immigration, Gingrich said that deporting all undocumented immigrants is unrealistic.

“You have to live in a world of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and making $20 million for no work, to have some fantasy this far from reality,” Gingrich said.

Over to you, Club for Growth:

“Newt Gingrich says he’s a student of history, but he must have gone to the same school as Barack Obama if he is reaching the same wrong conclusion about economic freedom, “said Club for Growth President Chris Chocola. “Mitt Romney made his money from putting capital to work to create jobs and economic growth. We should encourage, not criticize, such behavior. Newt Gingrich’s comment that Mitt Romney made money from ‘no work’ is ridiculous and continues his poisonous attack on economic freedom.”

Says Sargent, “Romney is half right when he says his critics are putting capitalism on trial. This election is putting his brand of capitalism on trial.” Does Newt agree? If so, what does he think is the difference between Romney’s “brand of capitalism” and the real thing given that no one’s accused Mitt of having dodged any taxes with his Swiss and Cayman accounts? Note that there’s nothing about Bain in what Gingrich said this morning so this isn’t a critique per se of corporate takeovers. His objection seems to be more basic, that Romney’s so far out of touch with America’s problems by dint of being rich — or rather, idly rich — that his policy proposals are bound to come out of left field. I’m curious to know what he thinks Romney should do to remedy that. Should he start a charity and manage it just so that he has something to do all day and some reason to interact with people? If that’s too white-collar, how about him taking a nine-to-five job manning the counter at Starbucks? Evidently none of Romney’s decades of work in finance and as governor are sufficient to pull him out of the super-rich “fantasy”-land he currently inhabits, so he needs to take dramatic action to ground himself in real-America’s concerns. Thank goodness there’s a guy with a $500,000 line of credit at Tiffany’s around to give him advice.

Philip Klein asks a question that’ll send a chill down your spine: Is Newt Gingrich a “Saul Alinsky Republican”?

In his seminal 1971 work, “Rules for Radicals,” left-wing community organizer Alinsky laid out his method for instigating change. Many of the tactics he spoke about — such as exploiting resentment and pitting oneself against the establishment — have become a central part of Gingrich’s strategy for securing the Republican presidential nomination…

Gingrich has continued his class warfare strategy in Florida, referring to Romney on Wednesday as somebody who was “liv(ing) in a world of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and making $20 million for no work. …”

It may be odd for somebody claiming to be a conservative to employ the tactics of the left, but Alinsky wrote an entire chapter on the arbitrary ethics of when the ends justify the means, noting that, “generally success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics.”

Follow the link for more examples of Newt’s Alinskyite strategy, especially vis-a-vis debate moderators and the media. In fairness to Gingrich, it does reflect some sort of genius on his part that he could use tactics championed by one of conservatives’ foremost boogeymen to help turn himself into the conservative standard-bearer in the race. In lieu of video of Newt discussing Romney’s finances, here’s millionaire liberal Jon Stewart goofing on millionaire moderate Mitt Romney for making too darned much money for what he does. Exit quotation: “In the time it took Jon Stewart to say ‘That’s almost $57,000 a day’, the gov’t spent $180,000 (3.3 seconds).”


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

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:33 PM

Newt’s history is the only thing that keeps me even slightly interested. I like his pugnaciousness but with it comes the never ending possibility of his shooting himself in the foot.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:43 PM

The question before us is which moderate are 51% of voters most likely to pull the lever for.

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:33 PM

The one that doesn’t have a history of infidelity, corruption, and erratic behavior would be my guess.

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 6:43 PM

The truth is that Romney was risking very little of his own money, and had assurances from Bain that if the enterprise failed, his future and income was secure. Romney started out interested in venture capital investments, but then decided to focus on LBOs because venture capital was too risky for his temperament (and there’s nothing wrong with that decision). However, when Romney steered away from venture capital, he also left behind the opportunity to grow the economy and create new jobs. His claims of massive job creation stand on very weak evidence, given the common outcome of an LBO is ‘greater efficiency’ and improved ‘shareholder profits’ aka layoffs. Make no mistake of that.

bayam on January 25, 2012 at 6:40 PM

Read the post. Look at the poster’s name. Now connect the dots. Are they connecting? Are the synapses in the brain firing? The Obama Marxists like Newt’s rhetoric. The Obama Marxists agree with Newt about the evils of making money from investments. Connect. The. Dots. Can any of you do that?

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:44 PM

hanzblinx on January 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Really, that’s the real question?

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Envy sells, and it sells very well.

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:02 PM

It worked beautifully for Mitt Romney in 2002-03 in MA.

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 6:48 PM

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Even if he has a valid point, it’s hard to work that information into a winning campaign commercial. Obama would rather just come up with some horrific lie. And he will.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:49 PM

As president, Newt wouldn’t hesitate to sell out conservatives – he’s done so repeatedly during his years in Congress and as Speaker. Moreover, deep down, Newt regrettably wants to be liked by the Georgetown cocktail crowd – the very people who hate him (like Nixon).

Romney would be terrified of straying too far because he’d invite a fatal primary challenge in 2016. We can keep Romney on a short leash.

Newt’s ego would never allow a leash.

matthew8787 on January 25, 2012 at 6:50 PM

You can argue that Erickson isn’t trustworthy, or that Domenech could be lying, I guess. But would either of these men wreck their reps by making this stuff up?

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:30 PM

I’m not going to pay whatever it costs to subscribe to the newsletter of an admitted plagiarist. But I am going to point out you’ve moved the goal posts since you were wrong when you shot your mouth off before and have been called on it.

You started out saying

Meanwhile, Romney plans tax increases and a VAT tax. “Republicans” cheer.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 5:01 PM

and now the evidence you bring me is

As Ben Domenech notes in his Transom, Mitt Romney’s advisors have now advised him to support “a $2 gas tax, a VAT, and open Taliban talks.” Add to that list not repealing Obamacare.

See what you did there? You went from “Romney plans” to “Romney’s advisors have advised him”. You were wrong. Demonstrably so. Even if Romney’s advisors say it there’s no guarantee he’ll do it. He’s distanced himself from their position on the VAT and has staked out a position that isn’t far from what some conservatives have been talking about for years.

Look, there are plenty of reasons not to like Mitt Romney. You should have to be making things up like that to come up with one.

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 6:52 PM

… wow. Just wow. I didn’t realize Domenech had gone off the deep end.

Okay. I’ll retract my statements on VAT and the gas tax with apologies.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Sorry. Didn’t see this before I responded above. I take back some of the snark from my last post. :)

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Punchenko on January 25, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Holy Cow, that guy was a crack pot! Too funny, I’m bookmarking that.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Read the post. Look at the poster’s name. Now connect the dots. Are they connecting? Are the synapses in the brain firing? The Obama Marxists like Newt’s rhetoric. The Obama Marxists agree with Newt about the evils of making money from investments. Connect. The. Dots. Can any of you do that?

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Watch the video starting at 4.15. It was a BIPARTISAN bill that Romney and his lobbyist douchebags attacked to prevent closure of the carried interest loophole. Charles Grassley isn’t a liberal or friend of Obama, but that didn’t stop Wall Street from protecting its standing as part of the ‘entitlement’ status quo.

bayam on January 25, 2012 at 6:56 PM

I’m sorry, but I see Romney as having an even bigger ego than Newt. I know his supporters from 2008 saw him as the chosen one, just like Obama and it’s playing out this time around. You should have seen the knashing and wailing on his site when he suspended his campaign to support McCain. It was truly something to behold and as an INDEPENDENT, it was on the scale of the obamabots. I mean, he suspened his campaign, surely that would make him the “next in line” for 2012 wouldn’t it, or at least that was the common thread among his supporters. I see they haven’t disappointed this year. Won’t ever pull the lever for this man, ever. I’ll vote down ticket and do a write in. And don’t bother telling me that I’ll be the cause of Obama winning. Own your own sh&*ty candidates.

noneoftheabove on January 25, 2012 at 6:56 PM

See what you did there? You went from “Romney plans” to “Romney’s advisors have advised him”. You were wrong. Demonstrably so. Even if Romney’s advisors say it there’s no guarantee he’ll do it. He’s distanced himself from their position on the VAT and has staked out a position that isn’t far from what some conservatives have been talking about for years.

Look, there are plenty of reasons not to like Mitt Romney. You should have to be making things up like that to come up with one.

alchemist19 on January 25, 2012 at 6:52 PM

My assumption is Romney’s advisers generally speak for him and provide insight into what is going on in his campaign. I don’t believe I moved the goalposts in any way.

As I said earlier, though, I apologize given that Domenech is a plagarist and has no credibility. And citing Domenech calls Erickson into question too unfortunately.

Doomberg on January 25, 2012 at 6:57 PM

And I’m also curious about Illuminati. Maybe he’s one of those Illuminati guys…

cicerone on January 25, 2012 at 5:57 PM

As one of the five Primi, I can assure you he is not.

But perhaps, I’ve said too much…

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 6:59 PM

1. Neither McCain nor Dole could string 3 coherent sentences together. Mitt, by contrast, is telegenic and articulate.

matthew8787 on January 25, 2012 at 6:25 PM

I see a handsome man with no warmth or charm; a man prone to stutter and speak too fast when agitated; a man who loves his wife and America but who dislikes Americans.

Fallon on January 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Read the post. Look at the poster’s name. Now connect the dots. Are they connecting? Are the synapses in the brain firing? The Obama Marxists like Newt’s rhetoric. The Obama Marxists agree with Newt about the evils of making money from investments. Connect. The. Dots. Can any of you do that?

Rational Thought on January 25, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Being patronizingly lectured to by a Mittbot on dot-connecting is only marginally more revolting than listening to Obama on job creation.

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:01 PM

I see a handsome man with no warmth or charm; a man prone to stutter and speak too fast when agitated; a man who loves his wife and America but who dislikes Americans.

Fallon on January 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

That’s unfair, he only detests conservative and libertarian-minded Americans. He loves statists and political pseudo-elitists.

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Despite Newt Gingrich’s momentum within the Republican Party, he would be a weaker contender than Mitt Romney in a general election contest against President Barack Obama, according to a Suffolk University/7NEWS (WSVN-Miami) poll of likely voters in Florida.

Romney led Obama by 47 percent to 42 percent in the Florida survey, while Obama topped Gingrich by 9 points, 49 percent to 40 percent. Among independents, Obama led Romney 44 percent to 38 percent and opened up a 56 percent to 29 percent advantage over Gingrich. Gingrich grabbed 12 percent of registered Democrats, while Romney secured 18 percent of registered Democrats.

In the popularity contest, Gingrich again did not fare well. He holds a 29 percent favorable and 58 percent unfavorable rating statewide among all likely voters. By contrast, Romney had a 44 percent favorable and 37 percent unfavorable rating. Romney’s popularity was lower among independents: 37 percent favorable and 36 percent unfavorable, while Gingrich’s popularity among independents imploded to 19 percent favorable with 70 percent unfavorable.

https://www.suffolk.edu/50641.html

haner on January 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

noneoftheabove on January 25, 2012 at 6:56 PM

I think I came on board HotAir after McCain had already won or at least after Romney was out so I don’t remember their reaction. They sure are wound up now. You have to have more than your fair share of ego to run for president, I think Gov. Romney’s is considered more socially acceptable.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

His claims of massive job creation stand on very weak evidence, given the common outcome of an LBO is ‘greater efficiency’ and improved ‘shareholder profits’ aka layoffs. Make no mistake of that.

bayam on January 25, 2012 at 6:40 PM

you know something went profoundly wrong when a lot of staunch conservatives talk like and use the same line of argument against Romney like bayam……

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Yea, socially acceptable, that’ll get that “target” of independents and moderates…lol

He’s a fake, and I was talking about Mitt’s campaign website and blog site, not HA, wasn’t sure if I made that distinction. It was absolutely hilarious. If he doesn’t get the nomination, which I’m sure he will because I think he was “promised”, they will explode this time. People thought Palin followers were crazy, they should see Mittbots in action. This site is just a small taste. And they can’t figure out why he’s having so much trouble getting traction. Of course, they also don’t know what the hell an Independent or moderate is, so there’s that. But I’m sure the talking points will be coming out soon with the fact that’s he gaining ground with them. lol

noneoftheabove on January 25, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Suffolk poll today:

Despite Newt Gingrich’s momentum within the Republican Party, he would be a weaker contender than Mitt Romney in a general election contest against President Barack Obama, according to a Suffolk University/7NEWS (WSVN-Miami) poll of likely voters in Florida.

Romney led Obama by 47 percent to 42 percent in the Florida survey, while Obama topped Gingrich by 9 points, 49 percent to 40 percent.

In the popularity contest, Gingrich again did not fare well. He holds a 29 percent favorable and 58 percent unfavorable rating statewide among all likely voters. By contrast, Romney had a 44 percent favorable and 37 percent unfavorable rating. Romney’s popularity was lower among independents: 37 percent favorable and 36 percent unfavorable, while Gingrich’s popularity among independents imploded to 19 percent favorable with 70 percent unfavorable.

https://www.suffolk.edu/50641.html

haner on January 25, 2012 at 7:11 PM

you know something went profoundly wrong when a lot of staunch conservatives talk like and use the same line of argument against Romney like bayam……

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Yes, it truly is disgusting that they would advocate penalizing investment income and job creation. I am utterly revolted that Gingrich is following the lead blazed by Massachusetts’ governor in 2002-03 in demonizing such individuals and attempting to part them from their hard-earned money by jacking up taxes and fees.

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM

Gingrich’s popularity among independents imploded to 19 percent favorable with 70 percent unfavorable.

Ouch….bye bye Florida if Newt gets in.

Zybalto on January 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM

haner on January 25, 2012 at 7:11 PM

Posting it twice as though it will make a difference? lol I think people probably read it the first time. But I’ll give you you’re obligatory response to show that someone saw it.

noneoftheabove on January 25, 2012 at 7:17 PM

I make that 50 k a year, and my federal taxes are going to be less than 10% of my income.

Count to 10 on January 25, 2012 at 7:17 PM

I see a handsome man with no warmth or charm; a man prone to stutter and speak too fast when agitated; a man who loves his wife and America but who dislikes Americans.

Fallon on January 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

but why do you need the charm or warmth for? and how can you gauge someone’s warmth through the ‘glass’ anyways? :-)…Some people are just not charming, same like others have too much to the point of using and abusing it (see Bubba)…neither (the presence or absence of charm in a person) is a guarantor of good/bad presidential skillz…Churchill had the charms and the charisma of a rag, yet he was the most tenacious, pugnacious, and most likely loved PM Britain ever had…

and what is this thing with his dislike for Americans??? where did that one come from?

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Yes, it truly is disgusting that they would advocate penalizing investment income and job creation. I am utterly revolted that Gingrich is following the lead blazed by Massachusetts’ governor in 2002-03 in demonizing such individuals and attempting to part them from their hard-earned money by jacking up taxes and fees.

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:16 PM

fees not taxes…there – a distinction that even you can understand…

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 7:24 PM

fees not taxes…there – a dis

tinction that even you can understand…

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 7:24 PM

While Romney can take credit for a $275 million capital-gains tax rebate, property-tax relief for seniors, and a two-day, tax-free shopping holiday, he also must take responsibility for signing $740.5 million in higher taxes, plus that $85 million in business taxes that he requested and legislators rejected.

“Romney did not even fight higher death-tax rates,” notes former California State Assembly Minority Whip Steve Baldwin, a Romney critic. “When the (Massachusetts) legislature considered this issue, Romney’s official position was ‘no position.’ This echoed Barack Obama’s ‘present’ votes in the Illinois State Senate.”

As Romney drained his constituents’ pockets, the Public Policy Institute of New York’s Cost of Doing Business Index rated Massachusetts in 2006 as America’s fourth costliest state in which to practice free enterprise. The Tax Foundation dropped Massachusetts from America’s 29th most business-friendly state to No. 36. The Tax Foundation also calculated that, under Romney, Massachusetts’ per-capita tax burden increased from 9.3 percent to 9.9 percent. In real dollars, the Romney-era per-capita tax burden grew by $1,175.71.

As if impoverishing his own taxpayers were not bad enough, Romney’s March 5, 2003 signature raised taxes on non-residents retroactive to that January 1. Perpetrating taxation without representation, Romney’s law declared that, “gross income derived from… any trade or business, including any employment,” would be taxable, “regardless of the taxpayer’s residence or domicile in the year it is received.”

Consequently, according to data furnished by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue, between 2002 and 2006, New Hampshire residents who work or do business in the Bay State shipped Massachusetts $95 million above what they paid when Romney arrived. The average tax paid by New Hampshirities to Massachusetts grew by 19.1 percent, from $2,392 in 2002 to $2,850 in 2006.

Notwithstanding the higher taxes and fees that Romney himself advocated, he claims that he was a powerless victim of a left-wing legislature. Nonsense.

The profusion of Democrats on Beacon Hill did not prevent Romney’s GOP predecessors from dramatically cutting taxes. Former Republican governors William Weld and Paul Cellucci signed more than 40 tax-cut bills while Democrats ran the state house.

Romney seems stuck at 25 percent support among Republicans. That’s because 75 percent of GOP voters simply don’t trust him. There are at least 740.5 million reasons not to trust Romney on taxes, either.

http://www.standard.net/stories/2012/01/06/romneys-tax-hikes-should-worry-taxpayers

Romneybots love to lie and lie again.

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:29 PM

who dislikes Americans.

Fallon on January 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Slanderous. Cite a source or at least a statement from Romney that makes you infer such a thing.

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Mr. Norquist acknowledged that he had been deeply disappointed by Mr. Romney’s corporate tax overhaul. Unlike the governor, Mr. Norquist regards the changes as tax hikes.

“They changed the laws and the rules to significantly raise taxes,” he said. “That is a tax increase.”

But he is willing to look past it now. “The important thing,” Mr. Norquist said, “is that his stated position is that it won’t happen again.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/us/politics/romneys-strategies-as-governor-bucked-his-ceo-image.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Independents souring on Mitt

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 7:38 PM

noneoftheabove on January 25, 2012 at 7:10 PM

My experience here has been that the biggest most vocal Romney supporters are also the biggest most vocal Palin antagonists. I am sure the correlation is purely coincidental.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 7:39 PM

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 7:38 PM

How ironic is that, considering that is who he has been courting most diligently.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 7:39 PM

lol, yep purely coincidental. lol

noneoftheabove on January 25, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I see a handsome man with no warmth or charm; a man prone to stutter and speak too fast when agitated; a man who loves his wife and America but who dislikes Americans.

Fallon on January 25, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Slanderous. Cite a source or at least a statement from Romney that makes you infer such a thing.

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Who needs sources or statements? As Fallon correctly observes, we can see it in Romney, in his speech, in his bearing, in his expression. The stiff bearing; the disdainful tone; the condescending blink; the rictus grin struggling to hide the sneer waiting in the wings; it’s all there to see on the stage. It is obvious that Romney loathes the Democratic process vital to the American Spirit and System; he despises having to pander to what he sees as the mob, the rabble, the great mass of average Americans, the good conservative folk who unfortunately have a say in his coronation. Romney thought he had this thing wrapped up in the board rooms of Wall Street and the halls of the Capitol; all he had to do was take his dog and pony show into the sticks for a couple of months, hold his nose in a few diners and at a few state fairs, and he was in.

Fortunately, great Americans like Sarah Palin have called him out, and another great American, Newt Gingrich, will kick his aristocratic arse back to lib-land in MA.

Mr. Arkadin on January 25, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Emmett Tyrell Opens Up On Newt

Those of us who raised the question of character in 1992 were confronted by an indignant Bill Clinton, who treated the topic as a low blow. To listen to him, character was the “C-word” of American politics. It was reprehensible to mention it.

By now, we know. Character matters. Paul, Santorum and Romney have it. Newt has Clinton’s character.

Brutal. Positively brutal.

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 7:51 PM

I’ve come to believe that all the candidates are too damaged to challange Obama. This is all so destructive and quite depressing. I haven’t really settled on any candidate and at one time or another I think I supported each one of them, depending on who I thought could actually win the general. Now I don’t think we can win with any of them. I’m hoping for a brokered convension.

steel guy on January 25, 2012 at 5:38 PM

My sentiments also. I feel like a pin ball in a pin ball machine. Being bounced around all over the place.

Mirimichi on January 25, 2012 at 7:52 PM

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Why would a source be needed for an option?

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

you know something went profoundly wrong when a lot of staunch conservatives talk like and use the same line of argument against Romney like bayam . . .

Yeah, I’ll say something went wrong. Willard, Lord Romney is what’s wrong. The dogs just won’t eat it.

Yes, it truly is disgusting that they would advocate penalizing investment income and job creation

I don’t see how the ability of Willard, Lord Romney or anyone else, to collect unearned income creates jobs. The money that Willard, Lord Romney stashes in the Cayman Islands or in a Swiss Bank could be better used creating jobs by being invested in real enterprises in the US.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Mr. Arkadin on January 25, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Really, in his “bearing”? You don’t like the way he smiles so he’s anti American? Bizzare. That flow of consciousness is revealing.

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 7:51 PM

And I care about Mr. Tyrell why?

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 7:56 PM

Why would a source be needed for an option?

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

She didn’t state it as an opinion. She stated as a fact.

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 7:56 PM

Ah phooey Not strike out. Quote. Sorry

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Newt has Clinton’s character.

Clinton was a winner.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Really, in his “bearing”? You don’t like the way he smiles so he’s anti American? Bizzare. That flow of consciousness is revealing.

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Mr. Arkadin is a fan of this man’s music:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tL48gAsyAE&feature=related

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:59 PM

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 7:56 PM

It’s a fact to her. As for the strike, I totally relate, I do it all the time.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 8:00 PM

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 7:56 PM

I suppose because it is an article about Newt that says he’s “bad”. Romney good. lol

There isn’t a nickels worth of difference between the two parties and if you nominee Romney, it won’t even be a nickel. But hey, it will be “your side” this time. Pathetic.

noneoftheabove on January 25, 2012 at 8:01 PM

I thought we were looking for a conservative?? Nothing conservative comes out of MA

Bullhead on January 25, 2012 at 8:02 PM

While my sympathy for Newt’s style of going full on mad-dog after the media and Obama is obvious, I wasn’t kidding about remaining non commited, and this is why.

Newt’s treading some dangerous ground using these attacks on Romney. He’s re-inforcing the view of many he’s unstable in his conservative views. The global warming thing was another. I wish to God he weren’t this way, but he is…

That said..

The resentment against Romney’s venture capitalist days is real. I worked for Krogers when they were taken over by Penn Traffic, the one which later went bankrupt itself. The result was a huge amount of worker resentment as higher level managers got golden parachutes to walk away, while thousands got wage cuts, and were laid off.

You can argue that it was in the companies long term interests, but too many folks won’t see the good of that, when the moneyed executives get well paid for failure, the stock holders got their’s, and the workers who made that money for them..

got screwed..

Regular capitalism, we have no beef,.. you invest, you get your earnings, the workers get paid, they in turn show loyalty to the company.. all good.. but the hostile take overs were not about any of that, they were about making a quick buck by snatching up companies, milking every last dime out of them, leaving a hollowed out shell to move on to the next target. I don’t say Romney did that, I don’t really know exactly what Bain did.. I’m saying, folks did get hurt by these kinds of manuevers, so the preception is there that Romney made his money off other peoples misery.

Now,.. just because it’s a capitalist act, doesn’t mean it’s the moral or ethical choice.. like prostitution is a capitalist act,.. but we know where that goes.. just as Newt can’t say anything to win, if we know it’s not conservative.. here in the working class, you can’t win the middle or right, by claiming since it’s a form of capitalism, it’s good and right and beyond reproach..

I detect a huge amount of folks here who made their money, and feel it’s proof that everyone who didn’t become rich, is fat and lazy, not hard working or even very smart… I hate to break it too you, but not everyone aspires to be rich. Many, just want to be comfortable, no debt, living within their means.

I wanted a military career, a hearing loss prevented that. I don’t regret anything, not even the physical injuries which retired me.. we do ok,.. not wealthy, our combined income is about 40,000… but we don’t owe anybody anything. What most conservatives say they want.

So, the ugly sneering about the working class is just driving me even further from a Romney Vote.. and while I can understand in a large economy people hurt when change happens,.. I know more than a few independents who take it personally, and won’t vote for the venture capitalist. They might go for the history professor, warts and all, before going for what they see as a vulture picking their bones clean..

It may not be fair, but it’s how people feel when the economy is a mess.

Newt’s dead wrong to go there.. but Romney comes across as detached and cold, uncaring about what it takes to survive when your family neve

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 8:03 PM

I don’t see how the ability of Willard, Lord Romney or anyone else, to collect unearned income creates jobs. The money that Willard, Lord Romney stashes in the Cayman Islands or in a Swiss Bank could be better used creating jobs by being invested in real enterprises in the US.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

It certainly could if it wasn’t the object of punitive taxation in this country, the kind of taxation Lil’ Willard himself advocated during his tenure as MA governor from 2003-07. Mittens is an example of REAL chutzpah, which is not murdering one’s parents and asking for clemency as an orphan, but committing parricide and then framing the victims for the crime.

These morons love to portray Romney as John Galt or Hank Reardon, when he’s really Orrin Boyle.

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Fine. But part of his investment was in Freddie bonds. Which we are to celebrate. But at the same time we are to demonize Newt for working at Freddie. You really don’t see the hypocrisy in that?

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Romney’s investments are in a Blind Trust, and have been since 2002. He has no knowledge or direction of what stocks, or bonds or other investments his money is in. In addition, because it is highly diversified, there are probably small amounts (percentage wise) in other “objectionable” places in addition to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Molinari and Weber are NOT paid staff, they are among many politicos who are advising the Romney

Romney owned shares in a bond fund which included Fannie and Freddie bonmds. In a blind trust. As part of a diversified investment portfolio.

rockmom on January 25, 2012 at 5:27 PM

Careful. After all that spinning you might get dizzy.

angryed on January 25, 2012 at 5:32 PM

“I don’t think that word means what you think it means.” In what sense is that spin?

robm on January 25, 2012 at 8:05 PM

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:59 PM

HA!!!!!

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 8:06 PM

I don’t see how the ability of Willard, Lord Romney or anyone else, to collect unearned income creates jobs.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

New republican creed: to the left of the Castro regime. Interest earnings, dividends and capital gains are “unearned income”.

Well done, Newt Gingrich.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 8:09 PM

sorry, fingers are numb,. posted before editing it..

I’m just saying, We see, many of us, Romney as being little different than Obama, a cold hearted uncaring machine. Who loves his theories,.. but people?

not so much.

I may vote for him if he gets the nod.. but Reagan’s party will be dead, taken over by passionless middle, the lowest common denominater kind who care more about power, than what is done with it. Nothing will change, Romney won’t rock the boat, won’t risk anything to accomplish great things.. and he’ll cut nothing.

Even if he wins, we all lose then.

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

I don’t see how the ability of Willard, Lord Romney or anyone else, to collect unearned income creates jobs. The money that Willard, Lord Romney stashes in the Cayman Islands or in a Swiss Bank could be better used creating jobs by being invested in real enterprises in the US.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Blind Trust – full taxes paid – Cayman a small percentage of his overall investments anyway.

What do you do with your savings, if you have any? Do you invest them anywhere? Are you opposed to making a return on those investments? Are you a Marxist?

robm on January 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:59 PM

HA!!!!!

bluealice on January 25, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Yep, he’s a Mittbot pretending to be a Newtonian.

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 8:20 PM

I may vote for him if he gets the nod.. but Reagan’s party will be dead, taken over by passionless middle, the lowest common denominater kind who care more about power, than what is done with it. Nothing will change, Romney won’t rock the boat, won’t risk anything to accomplish great things.. and he’ll cut nothing.

Even if he wins, we all lose then.

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

You naive optimist, you…

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 8:21 PM

Blind Trust – full taxes paid – Cayman a small percentage of his overall investments anyway.

What do you do with your savings, if you have any? Do you invest them anywhere? Are you opposed to making a return on those investments? Are you a Marxist?

robm on January 25, 2012 at 8:10 PM

The lowest of the middle class has no savings,.. when you make less than 50,000 a year,.. what is there to save? Kids, rent, car, utilities,.. food, all spiraling upward, the luxury of what?.. cable?

There’s a serious class break here,.. I thought Hotair was pretty much middle class, but it seems more than a couple are way above that. Fine, you earned it, keep it,.. no beef.. but it’s the optics a Caymen account, when people are loosing their jobs.. and savings are the thing you hope to do next year.

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 8:23 PM

You naive optimist, you…

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 8:21 PM

not the worst thing said about me,. I see it as being a realist, not a pessimist.

I’m naive probably in hoping to have a president to believe in again. I miss Ron.. I miss a leader who brought the party together instead of kicking it apart, hoping to walk away with the most shards.

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 8:35 PM

The lowest of the middle class has no savings,.. when you make less than 50,000 a year,.. what is there to save? Kids, rent, car, utilities,.. food, all spiraling upward, the luxury of what?.. cable?

There’s a serious class break here,.. I thought Hotair was pretty much middle class, but it seems more than a couple are way above that. Fine, you earned it, keep it,.. no beef.. but it’s the optics a Caymen account, when people are loosing their jobs.. and savings are the thing you hope to do next year.

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 8:23 PM

Why do we keep approaching this from a “classist” perspective? Has this become a Marxist site?

If middle-class folks can’t save money (which isn’t really true; and, for that matter, most of the people who benefited from Romney’s success at Bain Capital were middle-class guys through their pension funds), they can thank that to the politics of envy and resentment that demagogues like Obama and Newt Gingrich have been promoting.

If middle-class guys would want to be in some other class, politically attacking investors and capitalists is certainly a great way of achieving that. The middle-class will get a lot less populated in a hurry.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 8:40 PM

I thought we were looking for a conservative?? Nothing conservative comes out of MA

Bullhead on January 25, 2012 at 8:02 PM

…or California.

oceansidecon on January 25, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Interest earnings, dividends and capital gains are “unearned income”

Yes, “unearned.” That’s what the Internal Revenue Service calls those three things. And that’s something you would know, if you had any of those types of income.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 9:19 PM

The lowest of the middle class has no savings,.. when you make less than 50,000 a year,.. what is there to save? Kids, rent, car, utilities,.. food, all spiraling upward, the luxury of what?.. cable?

There’s a serious class break here,.. I thought Hotair was pretty much middle class, but it seems more than a couple are way above that. Fine, you earned it, keep it,.. no beef.. but it’s the optics a Caymen account, when people are loosing their jobs.. and savings are the thing you hope to do next year.

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 8:23 PM

But isn’t that just what you are doing……

Barred on January 25, 2012 at 9:28 PM

Why do we keep approaching this from a “classist” perspective? Has this become a Marxist site?

If middle-class folks can’t save money (which isn’t really true; and, for that matter, most of the people who benefited from Romney’s success at Bain Capital were middle-class guys through their pension funds), they can thank that to the politics of envy and resentment that demagogues like Obama and Newt Gingrich have been promoting.

If middle-class guys would want to be in some other class, politically attacking investors and capitalists is certainly a great way of achieving that. The middle-class will get a lot less populated in a hurry.

joana on January 25, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Because folks like you take it there, and you didn’t understand a word I wrote.

It’s not about jealousy or upward mobility, it’s about people who believe they are being screwed by the top few. It’s not about all of the top 1%, but the tiny subset which seems to exist to buy up struggling businesses, break them apart, and sell off the pieces.

Entire communities have been ravaged by that kind of thing.

What you don’t get, is that criticizm isn’t aimed at all capitalism, or all businessmen. What you don’t get, is just because it’s legal and profitable, does not make it the right kind of thing to do.

Why is that such a difficult thing for you to grasp.

Reagan, would have been on my side of this, he deeply believed in free markets. But he never would have said buying companies just to kill them for a quick profit was moral. He had compassion for the working class. All I detect from you, is disdain..

sniff,..

If middle-class guys would want to be in some other class, politically attacking investors and capitalists is certainly a great way of achieving that

…….. sneer,..

Nobody is attacking investers,..

or capitalism..

we’re saying, some acts are unworthy.

If Romney bought up companies to restructure, and put them back on their feet, then he’s one of the good guys and I don’t dispute that. But I have seen the opposite, as have many others…

again, it’s all about perception, and Romney isn’t coming across as a caring guy. He needs to sell himself a Hell of alot better, and just attacking Newt won’t work, if he’s seen as unlikable, uncaring, and apathetic to the conditions the lower middle class lives under.

Snarking at them won’t get you a single vote.

Lecturing them that they should squirrel away a few hundred a year when things like a car breakdown, or a plumbing issue destroy what little you have set back..

What is alien, is somebody who always has a few grand tucked away.. that’s nice for you, but please, when you count out change to grab that last gallon of milk before payday for the kids, do not take vacations away from home, do not buy expensive clothes or goods..

You’re speaking bullsh*t.

You can save no matter what if you want your kids to go without those pesky things like shoes or school supplies.. my end of the working poor is just like that.. I hope to get my children in college,.. but it won’t be easy, or saved for, we’ll pay as we go, as we can.. but they will live better..

I just hope they never end up feeling contempt for the class they were born in, and their father remains a part of, for no other reason than they feel superior to those ignorant peasants.

That is why it’s about class.. because you act as if there were something wrong with people for not being like you. Something dirty,.. it’s the way you condescend, you lecture, you roll your virtual eyes… we’re American, we’re proud..

and we won’t be talked down to by folks who were mostly born to money, yet act like they earned it themselves by digging ditches.

To get respect, you give it…

We’re not feeling that respect, that’s why Romney is struggling.

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Newt has wisely decided to accept the votes of the working class white voters that Obama has discarded this campaign.

Romney is so arrogant that he thinks his shit doesn’t stink. So he demands/expects to be rewarded for owning the stock of corporations that need to restructure long enough for a profit to be made from the stock going up as borrowed monies create the appearance of a new success …until he finishes paying himself bonuses for that restructure work that has the postponed day of failure approaches.

This is capitalist’s best technique for old businesses with no future. It is called the “Pump and Dump.”

To Romney investors all are pawns in this game of investing. Workers are pawns. Banks are pawns. Buyers of the stock temporarily rising in price are pawns. The Bain Bastards are called the winners.

Now shut up and lose the game you stupid loyal workers!

Newt is smart enough to realize that Romney is acting like a lawyer who arrogantly demeans and cusses out the people that will decide his fate in the Jury Room, also called the vote in the swing states.

But Romney is too stupid to quit doing that.

Which is why the Dems have set their entire 2012 story line on income inequality. Romney is dead meat in Obama’s trap, But Newt is to fast footed to let that trap spring on him.

jimw on January 25, 2012 at 11:13 PM

A few Facts about Mitt Romney – After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar, but never worked as an attorney. As a venture-capitalist, Romney’s first major business deal involved investing in a start-up office supply company with one store in Massachusetts …that sold office supplies. That company, called Staples, now has over 2,000 stores and employs over 90,000 people. Romney or his company Bain Capital (using what became known as the “Bain Way”) would go on to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino’s, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others…Got your calculators handy? Let’s recap. Volunteer campaign worker for his dad’s gubernatorial campaign – 1 year. Unpaid intern in Governor’s office – 8 years. Mormon missionary in Paris – 2 years. Unpaid bishop and stake president for his church – 10 years. No salary as president of the Olympics – 3 years. No salary as MA governor – 4 years. That’s a grand total of 28 years of unpaid service to his country, his community and his church. Why? Because that’s the kind of man Mitt Romney is.

Swerve22 on January 26, 2012 at 2:02 AM

Being patronizingly lectured to by a Mittbot on dot-connecting is only marginally more revolting than listening to Obama on job creation.

ebrown2 on January 25, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Hint: Look at all the well-established, trusted, reliable conservative voices LINING UP AGAINST Gingrich and his FROM-THE-LEFT attacks on Romney on Bain, investments, etc.

Krauthammer. Limbaugh. Mark Steyn. Glenn Beck. Michelle Malkin. Etc., etc., etc.

So I’ll take up the call and repeat it: CONNECT. THE. DOTS.

And I’ll take it one step further: GINGRICH. IS. A. PROGRESSIVE.

What is with so-called conservatives flocking to a man who calls FDR the greatest President of the last century and describes himself as a “Realpolitik Wilsonian”!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/beck-can-hardly-believe-that-gingrich-actually-calls-himself-a-realpolitik-wilsonian/

Newt loves FDR, models himself after Woodrow Wilson and admires SEIU’s Andy Stern
http://www.glennbeck.com/2011/12/13/unbelievable-newt-loves-fdr-models-himself-after-woodrow-wilson-and-admires-seius-andy-stern

CanofSand on January 26, 2012 at 5:29 AM

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 10:02 PM

You feel helpless. We get it. Everyone is envious of others with more and we ascribe negative motives behind their actions and backgrounds. When we don’t have wealth, we say those that do haven’t earned it.

No one forced you to have a family. Nor to live where you live. Many refuse to move to places with jobs. That is your choice. Newt no more connects with poor people than Mitt.

We used to look up to the people that made it and said “that will be me one day.” Now many have bought in to the stuff sold by Marxists and charlatans.

You are a lost soul.

antisense on January 26, 2012 at 10:13 AM

mark81150 on January 25, 2012 at 10:02 PM

I hear you and understand what you’re saying, but your message is getting lost in your personal story.

We all know how Romney’s success will be portrayed by the media and the dems (but I repeat myself). And I think you’re correct that a sizeable chunk of the electorate will buy into it. I think current polling reflects that. I also think obama will be well insulated by the media from the fact that he takes more bribes from wall street and fannie/freddie than all republicans combined. Your point about the perception is right on.

So keep saying that, but stop whining about your situation. It’s not my responsibility that you find yourself in a difficult situation, and it’s not Romney’s either. I won’t vote for Romney because I know nothing will change under his leadership. All I need to look at are the results of his leadership as compared with Newt’s. Your situation is just a blip on the screen, making you just another disaffected voter who will reject Romney, but for the wrong reasons.

runawayyyy on January 26, 2012 at 12:38 PM

Philip Klein asks a question that’ll send a chill down your spine: Is Newt Gingrich a “Saul Alinsky Republican”

After Newt’s attacks on capitalism just to spite Romney, I would say emphatically YES.

scotash on January 26, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3