January 12, 2012

A minute-by-minute summary of "King of Bain."

A helpful guide... in case you're thinking of watching the big anti-Mitt video.

83 comments:

Andy R. said...

Next Gingrich is cribbing his attacks on Romney from Occupy protesters. I mean, what's going on?

Seven Machos said...

If it's any other set of facts, I just can't get my head around it. Gingrich -- a millionaire many times over -- is pillorying Romney for being wealthy and in exactly the way the left will pillory him. The theory that Gingrich is in the contest solely as a sort of sparring partner for Romney is the only one that makes any sense.

Remember that guy who Peter Sellers's character paid to stalk and attack him in The Pink Panther? That's Gingrich.

Alternatively, Gingrich is the Washington Generals.

Geoff Matthews said...

I'm sure Crack will be all over this.

Scott M said...

I'm more interested in finding out why Obama said he has sons. Anyone catch the video? What did Michelle's face do when he said that?

Scott M said...

Remember that guy who Peter Sellers's character paid to stalk and attack him in The Pink Panther? That's Gingrich.

Correction. Cato was both effective at his job and entertaining.

Andy R. said...

Remember that guy who Peter Sellers's character paid to stalk and attack him in The Pink Panther? That's Gingrich.

When this is the best explanation for Newt's behavior, I think we can all agree his campaign has become a joke.

It's so hard to keep track which of the Republicans we are still taking seriously and which have become nothing but a punchline. Romneybot is still serious, but who else? Can someone help me out here? Are we even still pretending that the Republicans are having a primary?

The Crack Emcee said...

Geoff Matthews,

I'm sure Crack will be all over this.

I'm about to do a blog post on this latest episode of The Newt and Miss Show - and Newt is still right.

I wish there was some way to tether you to reality - so you'd *stay* there - but, alas, you guys will let spin get you every time,...

Palladian said...

It's so hard to keep track which of the Republicans we are still taking seriously and which have become nothing but a punchline.

...says the man-child with the crooked cap!

Seven Machos said...

Andy -- The fact that you thought that Gingrich was a serious candidate speaks more volumes about your sad inability to understand the world around you.

Go to school, Andy. Learn something.

Andy R. said...

The fact that you thought that Gingrich was a serious candidate speaks more volumes about your sad inability to understand the world around you.

I never thought this, it's the Republicans who did. I've been saying since day one that he was a total joke. Now, I'm just asking if everyone finally agrees with me.

If you want someone to argue with, take it up with all the commenters who take him seriously, especially those who say he is their preferred candidate.

Carnifex said...

@ Andy R

There are no more Republican candidates we can take seriously. Truth be told every one of them sucked in some manner or other. Big government Rino's like Newt, or elitist Democrat lites like Romney just highlight how bad the field is. Perry's soft on illegals, Bachmann was too parochial. I kinda liked Cain, but his ties to the Fed kinda had me disturbed, but money people are gonna be needed to figure out the mess we're in.

Trump was a stalking horse, designed to split the Conservative vote.
Christie, see Romney.
Rubio has the same constitutional drawback I believe Obama has, not a natural born citizen as defined by the Supreme Court.

Would love Allen West in '16 but I worry that he's not sneaky enough to survive in DC.

I like what I've seen of Rand Paul so far. If he keeps it up, I could vote for him again.

Speaking of Junior, he returned money to the CBO yesterday. I imagine that was a first for them.

ic said...

Did Romney take "stimulus" money? Did he take "bail out" money? Was he paid over a million to be a historian of a crony-mortgage company that played a significant role in the 2008 crash?

Gingrich is more repulsive than ever.

Jay Retread said...

I can not believe Republicans are about to nominate their weakest candidate. The worst that can happen is that we get the most liberal Republican as president since Ford. But this video is just the tip of the ice berg of what is going to be rolled out against Romney.

Jay Retread said...

"Tails I win, heads you lose."

Seven Machos said...

I never thought this

You only said it. You didn't think it.

Retread -- Which candidates are stronger than Romney? Is it Santorum? Is it Paul? Probably Huntsman, right? You leftists love you some Huntsman.

Andy R. said...

I was asking if people finally agreed with my original assessment that Gingirch is a joke. Some people are still fighting the idea that Gingrich is a total joke. Most have seemingly now agreed with my original assessment. I'm glad you're someone who agrees with me.

Eventually, I imagine we will all agree that everyone except Romneybot is a total joke, although that might take a little more time.

Jaske said...

An adjective plus noun with injection is descriptive of panic.
Gelid verb.

mccullough said...

Maybe the boys at Bain can help Newt turn his campaign around. Or put him out of his misery. In fairness to Newt, Perry is joining him in the Huey Long rhetoric. Its not too late for Perry to become a Democrat again. This is fun to watch.

Seven Machos said...

McCullough -- I view it differently. Romney sees a struggling entity run by a wasteful, utterly inept CEO. He'll get himself installed at the helm and get business roaring again. Also, hopefully, liberty.

cokaygne said...

This is shaping up as a very interesting general election. Newt, asshole that he is, should get a lot of credit for getting this on the table. 0 has tried and tried to gin up the public with his attacks on millionaires and billionaires, and couldn't close the deal. The election will be about a simple question.

We borrowed way too much money. We are in over our heads. How are we going to get out of this mess? This stuff has a long history. It goes back to Shay's rebellion and on up to Pretty Boy Floyd. The bank's gonna take our house and put us out on the street. Let's rob the bank. it is time to find out how many people seriously believe in that as a solution.

Florida Gator said...

Newt, after an initial screw up by calling Paul Ryan’s budget plan “right-wing social engineering,” slowly redeemed himself by being the elder statesman at the Republican debates and staying positive. His, Victory or Death, positive ad of Washington crossing the Delaware on Christmas day 1776 was met by Mitt running misleading negative ads in Iowa for three weeks without a counterattack from Newt. Newt was expected to “take it” and not respond, presumably because Mitt has been coronated the “presumptive nominee” by the “Republican establishment,” and the media. Newt's answer to this is show Mitt that the Pequod also sails from Nantucket on a Christmas day. If Mitt is going to become the eventual nominee, he needs this scrutiny, on both his record as Massachusetts governor and his tenure at Bain Capital. It's not like the Little zero and his billion dollar campaign aren't going to play this in an even worse light. Call me Ishmael!

The Crack Emcee said...

I'm glad some of you can see what's happened.

The only "helpful guide" needed is staying in touch with reality,...

The Crack Emcee said...

Andy R.,

Next Gingrich is cribbing his attacks on Romney from Occupy protesters. I mean, what's going on?

There you go again, Andy, showing your smarts,...

Andy R. said...

Crack, that's the best satire I've seen so far about the Republican primary. Really pitch perfect.

Jason (the commenter) said...

Andy R.: Next Gingrich is cribbing his attacks on Romney from Occupy protesters. I mean, what's going on?

Newt is a demagogue, he listens to his audience and makes his message match what he thinks it wants to hear. Over time he has to switch his tone over and over again, and by now he's become so contorted that yes, he sounds like a Democrat.

edutcher said...

As I've said before, Newt has done Milton a huge favor. Clearly, his campaign staff wasn't ready for this.

Now, they can mount a real rebuttal.

OTOH, I think it's clear Newt just ended the nomination race. With Perry losing his main SC backer, he'll go home and Newt's already starting to pull back, so even he sees he blew it.

Andy R. said...

Remember that guy who Peter Sellers's character paid to stalk and attack him in The Pink Panther? That's Gingrich.

When this is the best explanation for Newt's behavior, I think we can all agree his campaign has become a joke


Just like that guy in DC running for re-election saying the same stuff as Newt.

mccullough said...

Maybe the boys at Bain can help Newt turn his campaign around. Or put him out of his misery. In fairness to Newt, Perry is joining him in the Huey Long rhetoric. Its not too late for Perry to become a Democrat again. This is fun to watch.

Cyndi Lauper sends her regards.

Rialby said...

We are the most unserious people on the planet. We are $16 TRILLION dollars in debt. The money we pay on our debt service is now going to build the Chinese military.

If everyone who ever lived ever gave the US Treasury $1,500 today, it would eliminate the debt until tomorrow when it would be $4 Billion again.

And we're not going to elect the guy who was charged of fixing broken companies (and Olympic events) because he might have fired people while doing it??

We're done.

edutcher said...

Actually, I think that's what's going to get him elected, assuming Milton's the nominee, but, yeah, the Demo "compassion" scam will try to paint him as Simon Legree.

Cedarford said...

mccullough said...
Maybe the boys at Bain can help Newt turn his campaign around. Or put him out of his misery. In fairness to Newt, Perry is joining him in the Huey Long rhetoric. Its not too late for Perry to become a Democrat again. This is fun to watch.
===================

On Newt - I'm afraid it isn't over for Newt. To respond to the inevitable Obama/Democrat line that could happen that "Even the genius Newt, Former Speaker of the House agrees Romney is a jobs-killing Satanist 1%r" - it will be necessary to discredit or destroy Newt as a credible person.
As you know from the Clinton years, Newt is an unstable person who has no ethical compass or things he really believes in. He only believes in advancing Newt by any means necessary. This is a man not in control of his emotions - who proved himself not only unfit for the White House..but who already proved himself unfit as a Speaker or as head of a campaign organization.
A little heat will also be going at arch-Zionist Sheldon Adelson, America's 3rd-richest man...hopefully by other uber-rich Jews of clout and money. Hey, Shelly, we think it's not a great idea to be a Sugar Daddy to an unstable, vindictive nasty guy in Newt - that starts a war against capitalism, the rich like you and us, and which wants another 4 years of Obama giving Iran the green light..Walk away before you are front page news on tracking money from your Chinese gambling investments..."

On Perry, McCullough is spot on. He is channeling Huey Long, and the guy is too stupid to realize it...Or that Huey said one thing to crowds and another to the plutocrats on what he Actually would do for the fatcats gathered in back rooms shoving manila envelopes full of money at him.

How do you become an AF pilot and a 10-year governor in a huge state with lots of well-educated people when you are as big a moron as Perry is??? This has to be inspiring news for any parents realizing that a child is as stupid as a sack of rocks...Perry proves you can go far.

Pogo said...

Andy R is the face of the demise of the American citizen.

Glib, slavish in devotion to his leaders, and childlike in his tilted cap, he is the adolescent who won't grow up, the permanent leech on the paternal dole, the credulous fool who believed all the stupid socialism taught by his equally stupid schoolteachers.

That he can post here his half-formed opinions and snide comments without embarrassment is testament to how far the American public has fallen.

A nation of Eddie Haskells.

So apparently all we can hope for is electing Romney, who would decades ago have been somewhat left of a Kennedy Democrat.

Is that enough to stop our dissolution by debt?

Or will the Andy R-tards prevail, and demand more and more free ponies, while simultaneously demanding we kill the "profiteers" and "the rich" and whatever his Marxist brethren now name the objects of their envy?

Looking at Europe, I fear the latter. When a grown man can post like Andy R and not after awhile be ashamed, we can little expect more than stupidity to reign in the voting booth.

Hand out the crayons.

rhhardin said...

You work in a business because the business has found a way to make you employable.

That happens your work is worth more to the employer than what he pays you.

It happens when your work is also worth less to you than what he pays you.

There's always a mutual profit made possible by that disagreement over the value of what you do. You value it less, he values it more. You specialize and trade.

When for any reason the value of what you do falls below the value to the employer, say the business model no longer works, a leveraged buyout may or may not fix the situation for you, as the business model changes. If it fixes it, great. If not, you lose your job.

That's creative in that it frees you up to find an employer with a working business model, which is why capitalism works better than government.

When you work in a working business model, your work raises the standard of living of the nation, by the amount of the disagreement over the value of your work - the value to you and the value to your employer.

When you work in a non-working business model, your work lowers the standard of living of the nation. The disagreement goes negative.

Government employees work in non-working business models. Private sector employees work in working business models.

The former lower the standard of living of the nation; the latter raise it.

Provided they're not locked in their jobs by populist economics.

That's a hidden consequence of good intentions. The nation falls into poverty.

Freeman Hunt said...

Someone showed me Newt's new ad where Romney speaks French at the end.

"That's hilarious. It can't be real."
"It's real."
"No, that's obviously a parody. No one would make an ad like that for real."
"It's real."

Oh my.

This film sounds similar.

Rialby said...

"Is that enough to stop our dissolution by debt?"

Probably not. Show me the true electable conservative in this race. It's sure as shit not Ron Paul. That's guy's been huffing too much bat guano.

pm317 said...

Remember that guy who Peter Sellers's character paid to stalk and attack him in The Pink Panther? That's Gingrich.

I am waiting for Romney/Sellers to come back with "no, no, no, this is not the time" when his 'trainer'/Gingrich comes at him and shoo him away only to pounce on him as the trainer turns his back on him, saying "this IS the time!"

{Watched those movies too many times}.

Tank said...

Ironically enough, this Bain thing, and the way Romney talks about capitalism, is the first thing I really liked about him. Not enough to vote for him, but ... hey, at least he isn't making OWS arguments.

Here's a real worrying fact. Courtesy of Vox Day.

Mitt Romney's top ten campaign contributors:

Goldman Sachs
Credit Suisse Group
Morgan Stanley
HIG Capital
Barclays
Kirkland & Ellis
Bank of America
PriceWaterhouseCoopers
EMC Corp
JPMorgan Chase & Co


So ... when the next banking crises comes, and it's coming, who will Romney bail out?

Two choices:

1. The Bankster Party.

2. Ron Paul.

Just sayin.

yashu said...

Andy R is obnoxious. But Newt & Perry sure are doing their damnedest to substantiate his view of the not-Romney GOP candidates.

In fact, today, any of Andy's (tiresomely repeated) disparagements strike me as understating the case. And I say that as someone who's said good things about both Newt & Perry on this blog. So disappointed & disgusted. I feel so much contempt for them.

I hope capitalist vultures swoop in and eat their carcasses.

pm317 said...

Seven Machos said...

McCullough -- I view it differently. Romney sees a struggling entity run by a wasteful, utterly inept CEO. He'll get himself installed at the helm and get business roaring again. Also, hopefully, liberty.
-------------

YES!! I hadn't thought of it this way. America under Obama is like one of those near bankrupt struggling companies that Romney saved when at Bain. The analogy is perfect.

Toshtu said...

I used to like Newt.

Toshtu said...

How far has this country sunk when a successful private-sector career is a disqualification for the Presidency?

Tank said...

Toshtu said...
How far has this country sunk when a successful private-sector career is a disqualification for the Presidency?


Yes, Mitt has been convicted of committing Capitalism.

Reminder to self: Lotta people don't really like freedom and Capitalism, even a lotta people who say they do.

The Crack Emcee said...

Toshtu,

How far has this country sunk when a successful private-sector career is a disqualification for the Presidency?

Funny, but I don't ever remember that ever being a qualification for a wartime president,...

garage mahal said...

Thing is, the people in the film look like Real Murkins. And I don't think Romney has it in him to explain to America why these people needed to give up their houses and livelyhoods for Bain. Then Romney is going around saying people are just envious, and he enjoys firing people? Dayum.

machine said...

The problem for Mitt is not that Bain made money...its how it made a lot of its money.

Bain bought company, had company take out loans to pay bonuses/fees to Bain management, loot remaining value from company, company eventually goes bankrupt leaving employees without jobs or the benefits (health and retirement)they paid into while working for company...

Rent "Other People's Money" and guess who plays Mitt...

Pogo said...

" to explain to America why these people needed to give up their houses and livelyhoods for Bain"

Instead, garage, machine, and the tilty-cap buffoon voted that the America people need to give up their houses and livelihoods for Goldman Sachs, and socialist crony capitalism.

Pogo said...

Indeed, garage, machine, and the tilty-cap buffoon preferred this:

"In the 30 months since the recession officially ended, nearly 1 million people have dropped out of the labor force — they aren't working, and they aren't looking — according to data from Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. In the past two months, the labor force shrank by 170,000."

Not just morons, evil morons.

harrogate said...

Ha, Seven Machos' responses to Andy R. are disingenuous. Par the course for that commenter. Keep settin up them straw men, Machos, and keep knockin em down!!!!

BTW, a general response after reading this thread. Had Romney not tried to frame his work in the private sector as "job creation" (He created hundred thousands jobs dontcha know!!!!!!), then the Bain commercial would not be phasing him. He should have just said up front, that he got wealthy creating wealth for investors, and let it go at that, let people decide if they want Richard Gere from "Pretty Woman" (pre Julia Roberts character) to be their President.

Buyt in any case Mitt Romney does not deserve to be known as a "job creator" because he isn't one, and he never ever will be known as one.

Another thing that shows the silliness and shrill demagoguery of Gingrich is he keeps describing Mitt Romney as a "Massachusetts Moderate." I mean for Christ's sake, if you are no more politically informed than to think Mitt Romney is moderate on any important political question, than you are no more politically informed than the average 5 year-old.

DADvocate said...

Funny, but I don't ever remember that ever being a qualification for a wartime president,...

You're arguing against something that wasn't said.

Spread Eagle said...

...then the Bain commercial would not be phasing him.

Were the phasers set to kill or just stun?

pm317 said...

machine said:
The problem for Mitt is not that Bain made money...its how it made a lot of its money.

Bain bought company, had company take out loans to pay bonuses/fees to Bain management, loot remaining value from company, company eventually goes bankrupt leaving employees without jobs or the benefits (health and retirement)they paid into while working for company...
---------------

Well, isn't that what Obama has done in the last three years running this economy into the ground, looting the remaining value for his donors/corporations -- Solyndra, anyone? That is just the Obama bailout/stimulus tip of the iceberg.

DADvocate said...

Pogo - I was just reading that article. Another line jumped out at me too:

If you adjust for this drop, the unemployment rate would be close to 11%, instead of the official 8.5%.

It's easy to claim unemployment is going down when you control the definitions. Inflation works the same way, the figure the government uses doesn't include increases in food and fuel costs. Combined, these two areas are my greatest expense, but the government doesn't want to count it in the inflation figures becaue it will make them look bad.

Pogo said...

". Had Romney not tried to frame his work in the private sector as "job creation" ..., then the Bain commercial would not be [fazing] him."

That is false.

Socialists practice the religion of state-sanctioned envy, and so must destroy wealth not owned by the State.

Your claim is ludicrous.

Writ Small said...

I heard that Ron Paul got paid whether the child he delivered in his private practice survived or not.

Ron Paul - profiting off the death of children! The whole system of medicine is sick, sick, sick - and Ron Paul earned his disgusting profits even while the devastated families were burying their loved ones.

I can't wait to see the documentary Newt produces on Paul. It really writes itself.

garage mahal said...

Bain is Obama's fault. Good one Pogo.

"look...over here....not over there.....look at these shiny keys..."

machine said...

No Pogo, we prefer people have an economy that puts everyone back to work.

It's the repubs in Congress who are actively working against bring the economy back, purely for political purposes...

Pogo said...

@DADvocate

Exactly. Corrupt states learn to use bullshit numbers to falsify their outcomes.

Over time, the false numbers are ignored as meaningless propaganda, but the State actually uses their bullshit data for decisionmaking, propelling the downward spiral.

Governments of the Big Lie:
USSR
Communist China
Cuba

Now the US? seems to be that way.

machine said...

Yea, President Obama ran the economy into the ground...its easy to win arguments when you make stuff up....

nice try....

Bob Ellison said...

cokaygne, your 3:14 comment is interesting. I agree with your analysis, but I'd stress that it will likely take more than one election to find the answer to your question.

I keep thinking about a few things:

1) An accountant told me in the 1990s that the most valuable corporations in America were the railroads, because of their vast real estate holdings. Do some people think there's so much value left in the ground (literally) that our $15t debt is relatively small? That concept has zero-sum logic to it, kinda like real estate people who say "they're not making any more beachfront property".

2) In the 1920s, after a devastating world war, Germany took its currency to zero value, and then declared war again on everyone and got smooshed...and then rose to become the economic powerhouse of Europe by the 1970s. Do some people think inflation and deletion of wealth is just a passing disease? If a voter has no significant wealth, does he think, "who cares about the dollar?"

3) People like Obama have people like Krugman counseling them on how the Keynes God told them from on high that it'll all be OK in the end if we just keep spending. Do those people like Obama shrug and think "ok, then I'm fine with it"?

I wonder: do leftist leaders have a concept as to how this will all play out? or are they just in it for themselves, and screw the descendants? Silly rabbit, I.

Pogo said...

@garage mahal said...
"Bain is Obama's fault."

I pity the Wisconsin students who learn to "read" by the same morons that taught you.

Do you read every other word?
Do you use the Lil' Orphan Annie Decoder Ring?
Backwards?
Right to left?

Pogo said...

@machine said...
"No Pogo, we prefer people have an economy that puts everyone back to work."

No, you prefer socialism, which does exactly the opposite.

Only one economy has ever raised people out of poverty: the free market.

Socialism impoverishes, and you prefer that. Why, I cannot fathom.

Evil or stupidity, or both.

Spread Eagle said...

I thought leftists hated corporations and wanted them to be broken up and parted out.

EMD said...

"A nation of Eddie Haskells."

Hey, even Eddie Haskell would do the right thing when the shit hit the fan.

Christopher in MA said...

"It's the repubs in Congress who are actively working against bringing the economy back, purely for political purposes. . ."

Even if your moronic comment were true - which it certainly is not - as someone said in another thread, you can consider it payback for the dems in Congress "actively working against" winning the Iraq war, "purely for political purposes."

harrogate said...

Nice catch on the phase. Heh, I'm trying not to let in phase me.

Pogo meanwhile does not understand what he calls my "claim." We still have a primary going on, after all. I am specifically talking about voters for whom Sarah Palin and Rick Perry have recently spoken. Romney claimed he created all these hundred thousands of jobs. But Bain was never a job creating entity. it was a wealth creating entity. While the two are often related, those are far from the same thing thing. Indeed the experience of Bain shows us that often the two can be fundamentally at odds.

Palin only spoke the obvious when she questioned Romney's "job creator" self-anointment to Hannity. So yeah, if Romney had not set himself up as a "job creator," the conversation about Newt's hit piece would be different.

EMD said...

It's easy to claim unemployment is going down when you control the definitions. Inflation works the same way, the figure the government uses doesn't include increases in food and fuel costs. Combined, these two areas are my greatest expense, but the government doesn't want to count it in the inflation figures becaue it will make them look bad.

That's why I always thought we should actually have an employment rate instead of an unemployment rate. Then, you don't have to count "people not working, but looking" and worry about "people not working, but not looking."

bagoh20 said...

This stuff has completely turned me against Newt, and it's from his own words and ads, not from what someone else says about him.

His attacks have made Mitt look better to me, and when I heard him talking yesterday suggesting he has superior character to Mitt, I just decided, he'll say anything to win now.

harrogate said...

I love that talking head in the media have picked up the following meme, over the last week: "Gingrich sees himself as a world historic figure."

Because he really, really does seem to see himself that way. It is satisfying, perhaps because so rare, when news media put it exactly right.

Pogo said...

"But Bain was never a job creating entity. it was a wealth creating entity."

But Goldman Sachs was never a job creating entity. It was a wealth creating entity.

But GM was never a job creating entity. It was a union wealth creating entity.

But GE was never a US job creating entity. It was a Democrat Party wealth creating entity.

But Solyndra was never a job creating entity. It was a wealth creating entity.

Yet Obama and all the leftists here support them fully.

I call bullshit, concern troll.

Cedarford said...

Harrowgate - "Had Romney not tried to frame his work in the private sector as "job creation" ......, then the Bain commercial would not be phasing him. He should have just said up front, that he got wealthy creating wealth for investors, and let it go at that.

Except a 70% record or so of successful startups and failing company turnarounds is not simply a return for VC's - it is wealth put into the whole US economy, taxes paid, far more jobs created than lost.
That is the thing about capitalism few liberals really understand. The profit motive creates new effeciencies and productivity gains that in turn generates wealth and new opportunities that goes past "the investors".

So you can't let it go at that.

In a sense, even Obama at some level "gets it". In a Fed government swimming in red ink, Obama is looking at cutbacks and efficiencies gained by ending redundancies, duplication of services, and military overcommitments.

As soon as Obama started talking about combining trade and commerce departments..Federal union reps "warned" that could "cost as much as 1,000 jobs".

The difference is the Feds can stay swimming in red ink and accumulating debt far longer than private companies can - as they get cut off when their debt load reaches a point where they are cut off from future loans and credit....so when a place like Bain goes in ...cutting costs like Obama is just starting to think about after 3 years in office, is done starting as soon as Bain or some other private equity firm comes in.

In other news, Hostess Foods, locked into 895 million in union obligations it can't afford, is going into bankruptcy and 20,000 jobs are likely to get killed, pensions destroyed - because unions wouldn't give ground and lost thought a "Federal bailout" was coming..

harrogate said...

Hear, hear on Goldman. And Solyndra was a failed enterprise. Wasn't the first, won't be the last.

But Wait. GM and GE were never job creating entities? Really? GE's tax evasion tactics are despicable and GM clearly was mortally struggling at the end of the last decade, but it is absurd to compare either of these companies to Goldman or Solyndra. Or Bain.

Bob Ellison said...

Harrogate, you should try to discern the definition of "proximate" and how it differs from "total" and "indirect". It's important in the study of economies.

Pogo said...

"n 2001, the year Immelt became CEO, GE had 158,000 US employees. In 2009, GE employed just 134,000 Americans. Under Obama’s guy Immelt, GE has shed 24,000 American workers, or 15% of its US workforce.

Abroad it’s a different story. In 2001, GE employed 152,000 workers abroad. In 2009, that number had edged up to 154,000. GE’s non-US workforce now exceeds its American workers.
"

harrogate said...

I think y'all ar not reading my comments on this point in good faith. I did n ot say or imply even, that "job creation" and "wealth creation" are fundamentally at odds. I claimed they often are. I also cheerfully acknowledged that they often are of a piece with one another.

But if you believe that Mitt Romney is going to be credible holding himself up as a "job creator" based on his experience with bain, you are simply wrong. I am not even sure that Palin meant to shred him so completely on this point, but she did, and that comment by her was so distilled, so direct, it will not be lost on American voters.

In my opinion Romney should be hammering at his credibility in terms of *competence*. His experiences at Bain and with the Utah Olympics are two examples that play right into this wheelhouse, among many. He can navigate these turbulent times, should be the message he tries to implant in voters' minds.

But he went for the "job creator" bait, and no matter how much you all want to make it so, he will never be taken seriously on that front by a plurality of Americans. it remains an open question whether he can even make it fly with a plurality of Republicans.

bagoh20 said...

rhhardin @ 7:20

Well described, but I would just add that the psychological and cultural effect it has on us as people who lose our fight and self respect is the real problem, for people like that may not have what it takes to tear it down and rebuild. In the end, it will be the quality of our people and culture that will decide it all. If we could teach young people what you just wrote, I would have no worries about our future. We are not teaching them that.

Bob Ellison said...

Harrogate, are you saying the electorate is too stupid to stand up for the free market? Could be.

Pogo said...

Yes, I feel your great concern about Romney, harrogate.

Would that you and other leftists had similar concerns about Obama's radical socialist past, which means he was for destroying capitalism.

Which means he was for destroying the only economic system ever known to lift people out of poverty.

Yet you wax on about Bain and wealth creation and blah blah blah ....until my eyes bleed.

Freeman Hunt said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Freeman Hunt said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
chrisnavin said...

I come here exclusively for Andy R's penetrating political analysis.

harrogate said...

Bob Ellison, not at all what I am saying. If you are going to bother to have a conversation with me about this, I appreciate it. But sometimes it works best not to caricature the person you are interacting with, even if you have significant disagreement with them.

Just as all wealth is not generated the same way or on the same terms, nor does all wealth generation involve "putting people to work." Romney cannot, he just cannot expect to be taken seriously going around talking about how he has a record of "putting people to work." This has less to do with the intelligence of voters or the hard elements of economics and economic theory, than it does with the relatively honesty of one Mitt Romney.

On another note, didn't the sublime spectacle of watching John McCain call Newt Gingrich a Communist make this whole fiasco worth it, regardless of where we may disagree?

harrogate said...

Pogo, I didn't pretend to have concern for Romney. I just pointed out what is becoming obvious, that he has been caught trying to play to "strengths" he does not have.

But yeah, however much I might detest Romney. However convinced I may be that he has about as much concern for the average American as does Kim Kardashian. I still will cede that he has a proven teack record of competent managment. I do not believe the Katrina fallout would have been nearly as horrific, had it taken place under Romney's watch, for example.

Freeman Hunt said...

People are unaware that if you are in the business of buying failing companies you will either have to (1) turn them around or (2) liquidate their assets? Whether (1) or (2) is more profitable depends upon the company and current circumstances.

22:34 More numbers. Romney’s net worth: $264 million. Bain Capital’s: $65 billion.

That was especially funny. Newt's people are under the impression that the corporation should hold a great deal of money? Why? If the company is one that requires a great deal of capital to function, that would make sense. If not, it doesn't.

But then, I don't think Newt's people are under that impression at all. I think Newt is showing that he is exactly what his critics have said he is: all about Newt. Truth makes no difference.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... It's so hard to keep track which of the Republicans we are still taking seriously and which have become nothing but a punchline..."

Actually what I find hysterical is that you and your liberal tovariches ever took Obama seriously and continue to do so.

Revenant said...

Gingrich needs to go away and never speak in public again.