-
Obama’s Drone War
May 23, 2013 | 16 comments
-
How Long Is This War?
May 20, 2013 | 15 comments
-
Next: The Benghazi Select Committee
May 13, 2013 | 94 comments
-
Nobody Died in Watergate
May 9, 2013 | 148 comments
-
Benghazi Bullchips
May 6, 2013 | 184 comments
Loose Canons
Bane Capital and the GOP’s Dark Night
Newt’s bad narrative has made a mockery of this presidential race.
(Page 2 of 2)
Both Romney and Gingrich have ideas to help our economy. Obama has just told Congress he wants to use the last $1 trillion in borrowing authority given him in the August debt ceiling deal. Our debt now exceeds the annual value of our entire economy, and nothing is being done to get us out of the no-growth “jobless recovery” we’re still suffering through.
House and Senate Republicans are in desperate need of presidential-level leadership. That’s hard to do before we have a Republican president, but not impossible. The Dems hold the Senate, but Republicans hold the House and can, if they want to, actually pass bills quickly despite the Dems’ objections.
Gingrich and Romney should each take their two or three top economic ideas to Speaker Boehner, Republican Conference Chairman Tom Price, and Republican Steering Committee Chairman Jim Jordan. Ask them to put the ideas in legislation and bring them up for a vote.
At that point, the debate can be shifted to opposing Obama and seeing who — between Romney and Gingrich — can best help lead Congress to actually accomplish something.
The Republican Party is in desperate need of a national leader. Neither Romney nor Gingrich can achieve that stature unless they can demonstrate — beyond the primaries — the leadership talent that person must have. How else are you going to do it, gents?
About the Author
Jed Babbin served as a Deputy Undersecretary of Defense under George H.W. Bush. He is the author of several bestselling books including Inside the Asylum and In the Words of Our Enemies. You can follow him on Twitter @jedbabbin.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (97) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jed Babbin
More Articles From Loose Canons
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/01/16/bane-capital-and-the-gops-dark
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Clint| 1.16.12 @ 6:21AM
Where's Mittens' Tax Returns ?
The Dog Ate Mittens' Tax Returns.
The Tea Party Rebellion Is In South Carolina.
Jack in Wi.| 1.16.12 @ 7:14AM
Mitt Needs to retire to his 30,000 sq. ft house on the Californa coast. This bankster, chicken hawk warmonger, enemy of civil liberties, and flipp flopper is unelectable and unacceptable. He would just be another Bush and destroy right wing opposition to the Leviathon, even if he did win.
Paul Kotik| 1.16.12 @ 8:52AM
Plus, he supports Israel. Can't have that, right?
KennesawJack| 1.16.12 @ 11:39AM
Not unless your Jack from Wi or Clint...
Crassus| 1.16.12 @ 10:23AM
Yada, yada, yada.
Lyneuss Fields | 1.16.12 @ 1:49PM
Is there some Wall Street, Bane, Israel thing going on here?
TrueBlue | 1.17.12 @ 2:24PM
So someone who is successful isn't allowed to spend that money however they want?
Not saying I agree with how he may have gotten that money, there ARE quite a few questions about his time at Bain he really needs to explain so your average person understands what actually happened, but why should he retire his big house? 30,000 sq. ft is unrealistically large by the way. The California home you are referencing is current 3,009 sq ft with plans to enlarge it significantly to 11,000 or so.
Dr. Paul has a couple of decent sized homes too by the way, one is about 5,500 sq ft with a nice pool (and they've lived there for ~42 yrs). Both facts easily found after a few minutes of actually bothering to check.
Tom| 1.16.12 @ 11:21AM
Clinty
Do you know what a tax return is? Do you have a job, you are here 24 hours a day posting the same nonsense.
Clint| 1.16.12 @ 7:09PM
Yeah, And I Got A Great Boss Too.
Me.
Apparently, You're An Unpaid Intern For The Israel Firster Smear Bund.
The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Smear Bund Ass Clown, Tomasina.
Vern Crisler | 1.16.12 @ 2:25PM
Hmmm, all this criticism of Newt. I don't remember Babbin ever criticising Romney or Paul for their vicious attacks on Newt.
obadiah| 1.16.12 @ 6:43AM
Jed Babbin and American Spectator get a few pinocchio's themselves. I always enjoy an article that first denounces the "left-wing media conspiracy" in one sentence and then quotes and cites said media in another. Bain Capital had no interest in job creation, it existed for profit and only for profit. Media exist for profit and only for profit and they are selling what they hope viewers will buy. Fantasies like the "left-wing media conspiracy" don't make for winning elections.
Timothy L. Pennell| 1.16.12 @ 10:03AM
I don't understand the problem. Baine Capital? Are you serious? You think that's gonna be a problem?
One of the 1st things that Hamas' Deliverer did, when he got in to office, was to rip the Private School Vouchers, out of the hands of little POOR Minority Children, even as their Moms (No Dads) were pleading for those Vouchers, and their Children's futures.
He P*ssed Away $800 Trillion on a LIE. A Lie of "Shovel Ready Infrastructure Jobs". He's Killed Jobs in the Energy Sector. Killed Jobs in the Gulf. Killed Jobs along the Coasts, in the Heartland, and from Sea to Shining Sea.
He's been Running Guns to Mexican Drug Cartels, without the knowledge of the Government of Mexico, with the hope of using the DEAD MEXICANS, as a Prop, for his Marxists Dream of an Unarmed Citizenry.
He REFUSES to Deport illegals. REFUSES to enforce the Laws of the land. REFUSES to Stop Spending us in to oblivion, on everything BUT, our National Defence.
He wants to Run our Health Care, like Castro. He wants to Run our Banks and Car Companies. He wants to decide what we can EARN. What we can DRIVE. And, what we can EAT.
Until this latest Supreme Court Ruling, AGAINST him, he sought to COMMAND the Church, as to whom they must have as Priests and Pastors.
Maybe it's just me? To me, Baine is nothing. It is a Tool used in Re-assessing Companies that are in trouble. Some survive. Some Fail. Some Hire more, when it's over. Some are forced to close the doors.
Compared to what OBAMA is doing?
Bain is like a Pimple, on the Vast *ss of the Her Highness, the Wookie.
It's nothing.
obadiah| 1.16.12 @ 11:10AM
do you think obama is more like hitler or more like mao? is obama satan or is he the antichrist?
i agree that "baine is nothing." except that you mis-spelled it, it's spelled "bane," as in "the bane of obama." the reign of bane is mainly done for gain.
Grzmlyk| 1.16.12 @ 2:57PM
No, it's spelled BAIN. Lord, what an idiot you are.
rhoetus| 1.16.12 @ 1:02PM
Timothy- you should be running the campaign after the primaries are finished!
Grzmlyk| 1.16.12 @ 2:56PM
Hey moron: It's called CAPITALISM. The nature of technology and the marketplace mean that some jobs are going to go away. And if companies can't efficiently adapt, guess what? The market EVOLVES - new jobs, like, say, Website designers - jobs that didn't exist 40 years ago - come into existence while old jobs - like door-to-door salesmen - go away.
It is not the purpose of any capitalist to create or save jobs. Hard to believe, I know, but it's true. It is the job of a capitalist to invest his capital in businesses he thinks are going create something people want to buy. Then, if people want to buy the product that the venture capitalist made possible by his investment, lo and behold jobs are created! It's a miracle! The capitalist's RISK turns into PROFIT and, in between, jobs are created, goods and services are produced, and the market remains healthy by purging itself of unhealthy companies.
Businesses have to run efficiently. If they don't, they will either overprice themselves out of the market (the American auto industry comes to mind) or else adapt to the new landscape and thrive (phone companies transforming themselves into bandwidth providers, for instance).
I suppose if you were king of the world, we'd still have blacksmiths and buggy whip manufacturers plying their trades by government fiat - after all, the advent of the automobile - gasp - eliminated those occupations.
Of course, the advent of the buggy put chariot makers out of work, so perhaps we should still have chariot makers around, too.
So what if nobody is buying the products these people make anymore, right? Government ought to pay them anyway! And if there's a company making anvils for the blacksmiths, the government should just buy up all the anvils lest the anvil maker go out of business and - gasp - lay off its workers. While, the entire ecosystem of dead and moribune businesses ought to be preserved in amber in perpetuity!
I am so tired of absolute idiots like you, who apparently don't have the brains to tie your own shoes, utterly twisting logic into an unrecognizeable mass.
You should not be allowed to vote. You're too damned stupid.
TrueBlue | 1.17.12 @ 2:33PM
It's a matter of morality to me. If the purpose of purchasing the company was to prop it up before liquidating it for the most profit possible that gets into the morally shady area. However if the purpose was to purchase the company in hopes of turning a profit and allowing it to continue, only to find out it's not financially possible to meet a certain profit level that is another matter entirely.
A 20% failure rate wouldn't be acceptable at most private companies I know of, however if it was an acceptable level of loss to Bain's investors (after all that's still an 80% profitability level) then good for him for doing his job well. I know plenty of people that play the stock market that have no issues with an 80% success rate; if you lost $2mil for every $10 mil you made would you really be disappointed?
Regardless Romney needs to come out and explain it in plain english somethat that is clearly obvious to him since that was his job. Your average citizen won't understand how that works, and if it's not explained it will only hurt him in the long run. It's something so easy, yet he hasn't done it, and THAT is what makes me suspicious about the entire thing. Even doing something like saying, "During my time at Bain the companies we bought out resulted in a net loss of X number of jobs, but at the same time because we bought out those companies we saved Y, and even created Z."
We cannot claim to be the moral authority and then participate in morally bankrupt actions, so his reasoning for doing something IS subject to review.
Mark in LA| 1.18.12 @ 8:41PM
Well TrueBlue the problem is he knows that what he did was morally repugnant to most people. His group was not Berkshire Hathaway. It was a bunch of young guys thinking they were the smatest guys in the room trying to make money as fast as they can by shimmying as close as they could to the law. Nothing wrong with that but the tactics of people like this were right out of the movie Wall Street and the LBO binge of the 80s and nobody on Main Street really likes it - or will give their vote to it.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.16.12 @ 7:19AM
In the past seven years, starting with George W. Bush, there has been little if any, leadership.
What leadership has arisen, is quickly shoved off the Titanic as it heads ever closer to the iceberg and certain doom.
The article glosses over the main point. Romney's attacks on Gingrich were factual. Gingrich is an opportunist who latches onto any movement, including global warming and illegal immigration, if it keeps Newt in the spotlight.
Only one item in the Romney ads may have been misleading when they claimed Gingrich was "forced" out of his leadership role. Other than that most of the ads were pretty factual. Isn't that leadership, pointing out the facts?
Gingrich is an example of modern day Republicanism. No solidarity and it's your way or the highway. That's not a product the public wants and that's the Republican problem.
As far as making suggestions to Congress, the U.S. Congress has shown a stubborn resistance to ideas the last several years, even ignoring committees they established by law.
Providing Congress with any ideas right now as part of a campaign would be a bad idea since Congress is reviled by about 84% of the public.
In the meantime, if people love Obama they should follow Gingrich. He's leading his followers over the edge and taking the party down with him.
Flame out in progress.
Dai Alanye | 1.16.12 @ 10:53AM
I'm no partisan of Gingrich, but let's get one thing clear -- Romney has no-one to blame but himself for these attacks.
He was a disruptive influence in 2008, grinning in the faces of the other candidates while attacking them covertly, a practice that made him the most disliked man running. After the Obama win the Romney camp initiated an attack -- behind the scenes, of course -- on Sarah Palin, trying to weaken her chances in 2012.
Now we see that he's up to his old tricks again. He had no need to attack Newt in Iowa, since Gingrich had already shot himself down. In addition, the attack on Newt indirectly served to boost Santorum into a tie.
There is some sort of moral disconnect in Romney that allows a fine upstanding family man to engage in underhanded scurrilous attacks on his opponents. Is he under the illusion this tactic will work against Obama? The Dems invented this approach, and they'll hand him his head.
W| 1.16.12 @ 11:31AM
What is the evidence that Romney attacked Palin. Never heard that. Palin took herself out by quitting as governor. No matter her reasons, quitting does not look good.
Newt did some good things as Speaker, but he did resign under pressure because of the $300,ooo fine paid to the ethics comittee.
Attack ads or negative ads are ok as long as truthful and honest. To say Newt paid a fine is both truthful and negative towards Newt. To say Dukakis gave a weekend furlough to Willie Horton is truthful and negative to Dukakis. To say Bush 41 broke his "No tax,read my lips" pledge is truthful and negative to Bush. To say John Kerry accused American soldiers of war crimes, like Genghis Khan, is truthful and negative to Kerry. To say Obama increased the debt by 5 billion is truthful and negative to Obama, and so on.
Nunya| 1.16.12 @ 2:32PM
5 billion? I wish it was only 5 billion. More like 5,000 billion (5 trillion).
Anybody but Obozo. Anybody.
W| 1.16.12 @ 4:17PM
Meant 5 trillion, wish it were 5 billion. Maybe Obama made same typo error
Zak Klemmer | 1.16.12 @ 2:38PM
"Congressional Ethics" Now that's rich! It rhymes with situational ethics.
Anthony| 1.16.12 @ 3:28PM
The ultimate oxymoron.
Mimi| 1.16.12 @ 7:25AM
Every action has a REACTION ! Newt gets "Carpet Bombed"....Voila ! A movie about BAIN! Where is it written the Man cannot defend himself ???
Soon all this won't matter...the PEOPLE of So. Carolina....Hopefully will weed this all out and the Top Conservative vote getter will be known , and bring us to a TWO man RACE! The Country NEEDS a Conservative leader and hopfully we will get her one!!!!!
Timothy L. Pennell| 1.16.12 @ 10:12AM
You're absolutely right. He brought this on, all bye himself. He blew off Reagan's 11th Commandment, and now, he's paying the price.
I'm sure there must be SOMETHING in Latin, that covers this.
Or, he coulda just gone with: "Do unto others, as you would have THEM, do unto you".
See? Life really is a lot easier, when you do the right things.
I think it goes like this: "Everything I need to get through life, I learned in Kindergarten."
Indeed.
KennesawJack| 1.16.12 @ 11:05AM
Hey, Tim. Try these: Non habemus hic circularis incendere manipulus, eius de me, habeo vere f***ked is surnum, and, most appropriately, et tu, Brute? In order: We have here a circular firing squad., It's all about me., I have really f***cked this up., and we all know the last one. Kind of loose Latin, but it will suffice. I've have always been a big Newt fan but, given the 11th Commandment, I think he hurts us rather than helps us with this attack strategy and I think even he understands that now and is backing off. On the plus side, by the time the general election campaign roles around the Baine thing will have worn out its welcome with the public and, believe it or not, maybe even Obamarx's propagand organ (also known as the main stream press) and, ironically, Newt may have ended up doing the party a favor. Viam ad victoriam!
Timothy L. Pennell| 1.16.12 @ 12:55PM
No. That's not what I'm saying. I'm not blaming Gingrich. I'm blaming MONEY BAGS.
There's another axiom that says: "Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean that you SHOULD.
Reagan's 11th Amendment was SPECIFICALLY intended to prevent what we have, today. Circularis Incendere Manipulus.
Romney got it started. If Newt lets it slide? Then he's seen as WEAK. As a PUNK.
Everybody knows that he took out Herman Cain. his Super Pac has been used like Greek Fire. I agree with you that, this may turn out to be a good thing, in the end. Then again, do the ENDS justify the MEANS, now?
What happened to: "What does it profit a man, to gain the whole world, and lose his immortal soul?" JESUS CHRIST.
KennesawJack| 1.16.12 @ 1:07PM
Tim, Jesus also told us to "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's." and in this sewer that we call the campaign system, the ends will justify the means. I understand what you're saying but, if you believe as I do that the path to victory next November is in making the election about Obamarx's record and not the baggage of the Republican nominee, then we have to look the other way at Romney's violation of the 11th Commandment. Yes, he got it started but, as much as I would love to see President Gingrich, the Axelrod guillotine will destroy a Gingrich candidacy before it ever gets started. Romney is the least vulnerable to the kinds of smear campaign that the Dems have no choice but to run. They cannot, and they know they cannot, run on Obamarx's record. Like I said months ago, I would pay good money to see Gingrich debate this Muslim lightweight. It would be a massacre to make the Little Big Horn look like child's play but all I care about right now is the country and that means getting this America hating, Jew hating, Constitution hating bastard out of there.
Nunya| 1.16.12 @ 2:35PM
Agreed, Jack.
Nice post.
Timothy L. Pennell| 1.16.12 @ 3:40PM
Our Candidates are NOT Vulnerable to Axelrod, and his Marxist Master.
You said it, yourself: "He can't run on his record."
But, we can.
He has accomplished much, in his 3 years. He holds the Record, for every Bad Economic Indicator there is. Unemployment. (The REAL NUMBERS. Not the made up ones that, that LIAR - Solas - pulls out of her Ass) Foreclosures. Bank Failures. Bankruptcies. Homelessness. Suicides.
He holds the Record for the Most Americans on Food Stamps. The Most Americans living AT, or BELOW, the Poverty Line. He holds the Record for the Worst Housing Market since they started keeping Records.
We have the Lowest Consumer Confidence in 30 Years. A Misery Index at a 28 Year High.
He's got the Record for Consecutive Deficits over a TRILLION. He's got the Record for more DEBT, than all of his predecessors, COMBINED. He holds the Record for the most Credit Rating DOWNGRADES, in our History.
He owns the Wost JOBS Record of any modern President. And, he's the 1st President to show a Net Gain in Jobs, of ZERO. In fact, we've LOST JOBS, under President Vacation.
He P*ssed Away $800 Trillion on a LIE. A Lie of "Shovel Ready Infrastructure Jobs". He's Killed Jobs in the Energy Sector. Killed Jobs in the Gulf. Killed Jobs along the Coasts, in the Heartland, and from Sea to Shining Sea.
He's been Running Guns to Mexican Drug Cartels, without the knowledge of the Government of Mexico, with the hope of using the DEAD MEXICANS, as a Prop, for his Marxists Dream of an Unarmed Citizenry.
He REFUSES to Deport illegals. REFUSES to enforce the Laws of the land. REFUSES to Stop Spending us in to oblivion, on everything BUT, our National Defence.
He wants to Run our Health Care, like Castro. He wants to Run our Banks and Car Companies. He wants to decide what we can EARN. What we can DRIVE. And, what we can EAT.
Until this latest Supreme Court Ruling, AGAINST him, he sought to COMMAND the Church, as to whom they must have as Priests and Pastors.
Where I'm sitting, it's gonna take all the LIPSTICK in the World, to dress up that PIG.
How do you "Smear" your opponent, when your opponent has THIS for an arsenal?
Have Faith, my friend.
KennesawJack| 1.16.12 @ 4:59PM
Trust me, Timothy. I try to keep the faith but came to the sad realization, finally, three years ago that the American voting public is, by and large, an uniformed, easily swayed herd of sheep. If my first choice (Newt) were nominated, he would annihilate Obamarx in the debates and show him to be the fool he is. Problem is, though, between the Democrat smear machine and the complicit, compliant puppets in the press (how's that for alliteration!) Newt would be pilloried for his personal past. It's OK to sexually harass an intern in the Oval Office if you're a Democrat but, Heaven forbid if a Republican is anything but lily-white in his personal behavior. And that, my friend, is why I say our candidates are, for the most part, vulnerable to Axelrod and his "to hell with the country, we want the power!" crowd.
W| 1.16.12 @ 7:40PM
Agree with you KJack.
Wasnt there a baseball commissioner named Kennesaw?
KennesawJack| 1.16.12 @ 11:06PM
Kennesaw Mountain Landis.Good on 'ya.
W| 1.16.12 @ 11:25PM
Are you related? Wasn't he the one that suspended the White Sox players in the 1919 World Series scandal?
KennesawJack| 1.17.12 @ 9:13PM
No, just live near the mountain he was named after.
Grzmlyk| 1.16.12 @ 3:18PM
Since when is lying about someone who's attacking you with the truth a valid defense?
Newt is no conservative - he's attacking Romney from the left, and in such a sleazy, cynical, and dishonest manner that it will go down in the annals of campaign politics as perhaps the most egregious example of craven, self-serving pandering to feckless independents ever.
Anybody who thinks Newt Ginrgrich isn't an utterly ridiculous, immature and impulsivie narcissist by now - I don't know what you guys are seeing. Set aside for the moment the mounting evidence that he is utterly delusional about his own abilities. The man believes in global warming and cap-and-trade. Does anything else need to be said?
Don't get me wrong - I'm no fan of Romney, either, but not because of what he did at Bain.
I'm no fan of Romney because, like Gingrich, he's no conservative. He, too, believes in global warming. Both men are statists and, as such, neither is fit to lead the GOP.
And neither is capable of getting America out of this mess.
In short, we are screwed.
Bonnie Sciarretto| 1.16.12 @ 7:33AM
Jed, I am thoroughly disgusted and disappointed in Newt. What is he thinking!!! I hadn't realized up until now that he was this selfish and this self absorbed. I still love the guy for his brilliance but he lost my vote with all the crap. We need and should be better than the Dems - always. Your Pal, Bonnie
Old Soldier| 1.16.12 @ 8:30AM
And Perry was dumb enough to tag along on this kamikaze run. What a couple of morons.
Kade| 1.16.12 @ 7:50AM
Mr. Babbin, I thought you were a straight shooter. The Bain criticism is against one man Romney, not capitalism -- this is getting ridiculous. Mitt made his Bain experience the centerpiece of his campaign and now it is off limits.
You are parroting the rest of the GOP establishment, including Rove, Rudy, Fox News, Rush and Hannity who are apparently in the tank for liberal Romney. Even CNN is joining the pro-Romney chorus in this charade.
I guess from now on any GOP businessman cannot be criticized lest he labeled an OWS supporter. The GOP punditry has taken a tactic from the left and initiated a PC code of speech regarding their boy Romney – it is quite stunning.
WJ| 1.16.12 @ 8:46AM
And how has Gingrich made his millions? The never worked in a real job in his entire life.
Kade| 1.16.12 @ 9:05AM
I am not a big fan of Newt, especially on his picking of Dede and his weak immigration policy, but still would pick him over empty suit Romney. There are no real good choices.
This weak field also shows the GOP is bankrupt on ideas and going the way of the Whigs. I fear we may not regain the Senate and lose seats in the House because Romney will hurt the down ticket.
If Romney wins Obama and the Dems will nationalize the elections and paint the entire GOP as Gordon Gekko because of the punditry’s inexcusable defense of Mitt’s unsavory tactics-- and it will be effective.
Vern Crisler | 1.16.12 @ 2:28PM
Kade, I think you are probably correct. If Romney wins the nomination, the Republicans have had it as a conservative party.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.16.12 @ 3:08PM
When have the Republicans ever been conservative? It's a myth.
Grzmlyk| 1.16.12 @ 4:29PM
The Republican Party is to the Democrat party what the Washington Generals are to the Harlem Globetrotters.
With the exception of Reagan - who succeeded in pushing the dialogue in this country, if not the Federal government itself, to the right - every GOP president in the modern era - since Nixon - has been moderate-to-liberal: Nixon, Ford, Bush Sr., Bush Jr.
It is a myth that America is a center-right country. If we're a center-right country, how come our government and our culture are far left?
rhortus| 1.17.12 @ 12:06AM
Bob Taft, Barry Goldwater. . .
KennesawJack| 1.16.12 @ 5:02PM
I take that to mean that authoring a number of best-selling, hugely profitable books is not a real job. Are you as curious as to how the man from Hope became so fabulously wealthy? Probably not.
RJ| 1.16.12 @ 8:00AM
In December, I thought we found our candidate, an eloquent communicator with broad experience and accomplishments. He reassured us that he was going to be "relentlessly positive." His baggage looked like it was in the past. Unfortunately, his decisions on how to respond to Romney's attacks have killed his campaign. His campaign is no longer conservative, but sounds like something out of the emotional, liberal playbook.
We could have had a very strong candidate in Newt. Now it seems that he does not have the temperament for the job. I need to look for the best alternative.
VonMisesJr| 1.16.12 @ 8:20AM
Romney twisted the truth about immigration and tax cuts attacking Huckabee and McCain in 2008, and he began these Freddie Mac attacks on Gingrich leading up to Iowa. While not defending Newt, he allegedly received consulting fees from the GSE from 1999-2006, I believe. So he may have used his position to further business for his firm, but this is before the sub-prime collapse. Ben "the Bank" Bernanke and the Wall Street "smart guys" say they did not see the sub-prime collapse coming; and Clinton, Schumer, Frank, Dodd, Waters and others engineered it from Glass-Steagall, the CRA, CDO/CMO's, CDS to IndyMac.
So Romney looks like the bully in the schoolyard who just got punched in the nose. Too bad, so sad.
Moreover, Romney is like a vicious dog attacking Republicans, especially conservatives; while he is a lapdog for the Marxist Obama, the Democrat Socialist Party and the Lame Stream Media. What are we to think of a guy who sounds like the Democrats and MSM each and every day?
Lastly, if Romney is the nominee, this is like a flu vaccination. If the shot does not kill Romney now, we know that the disease will not in the summer and fall. Let the people decide now: Do you want a country like Greece or Canada? Not one to admire the French in Quebec, but even they are reining in their universal health care by offering free market mechanisms. The country as a whole has instituted smaller government and 15-16% corporate tax rates and they are doing peachy. So we know Obama, Reid and the MSM will be guns ablazing for "social justice," so let's find out now the mood of the country. If the electorate wants to re-enact the Nazi purge against the Jews substituting conservatives in their place, perhaps it is time to get a cottage in Nova Scotia? Otherwise, we might as well fight the fight now, as opposed to when we have a nominee who won't join us.
Pete| 1.16.12 @ 12:05PM
Good points as usual. Newt should be commended for bringing this up at this time. Conservatives like the author instead of explaining why rebuilding businesses is a good thing are more concerned with attacking Newt. Why? Newt is a gadfly stimulating a needed discussion.
Romney needs to explain why firing workers is actually a good thing. One a company hires an employee, they are not obligated to that employee for life. They hire him for as long as it makes business sense. When business contracts it is time to fire him (or euphemistically lay him off). The next president better be prepared to fire government workers. We can not afford this big government and it must be downsized.
These conservatives who get so upset about Newts tactics need to come to grips about what the free market actually means. It is not a blind belief system. It is a working model of value and reward.
Vern Crisler | 1.16.12 @ 2:42PM
Newt's attack on Romney for his role at Bain was not an attack on capitalism (as Newt has repeated several times now), but an attack on Romney.
Given that capitalism is a process of "creative destruction" (unfortunate phrase from Schumpeter), any capitalist who runs for office and boasts about his creation of jobs will also have to admit to his destruction of jobs.
Romney did not make this admission. Capitalism is not utopianism but Romney made it sound as though he were CUO, Chief Utopian Officer. Newt called him on it. Given that Romney's Massachusetts's record was something like 47th in the country in job creation, it's understandable he would not want to run on his job creation, or lack thereof, as governor.
So he tried it as capitalist. Bad move. By stressing his capitalist resume, he invited a riled up Newt to go after him, and has also given Obama a strategic advantage in the general election.
Romney's best course would be to stop bragging about all the jobs he supposedly created. Focus on other issues instead, to the extent Romney has any other issues.
VonMisesJr| 1.16.12 @ 3:22PM
There was a good article yesterday at American Thinker by Jim Yardley. It spoke to the Republican nominee starting to flesh out some of his top Cabinet members. I like the idea of perhaps floating John Taylor for Fed, Boone Pickens for Energy, Steve Forbes or Herman Cain to work on tax reform.
But we don't hear anything but platitudes from Romney. He doesn't seem to be decisive and this would actually be helpful if the leading candidates started to talk specific policies and name leaders to head those projects. We are waiting Mitt, Newt and the rest for something more than obscure statements and reminders that they are not Obama.
Deborah D | 1.16.12 @ 8:21AM
I don't even know how to respond to all of this. All I can say is that I was in the Gingrich camp and am no longer. Hey, Republicans, let's focus on saving the country -- not your egos!
Al Adab| 1.16.12 @ 11:01AM
DD:
That is just about the smartest comment anyone has ever posted here. I second the motion. Lets get over our egos, stop helping the DEMs kill our candidates off and get on with saving this country. We may not get another chance.
KennesawJack| 1.16.12 @ 11:37AM
Amen, and Amen.
Kade| 1.16.12 @ 8:26AM
Alas, the fix is in for another McCain nomination and Jed is helping. Three early state open primaries; Huntsman suddenly dropping out to aid Mitt; Perry staying in probably to help Mitt; and Rush, Fox News and the conservative print media insulating Mitt from any of his Bain business practices.
jothepro| 1.16.12 @ 8:35AM
Hey Kade, Why do you even post here. You and your buddies Jackwi and Clint should go to Media Matters and fit right in..
Kade| 1.16.12 @ 9:10AM
Jo
I would never vote for Ron Paul as CIC although I agree with some of his domestic positions especially on the out of control Fed.
Mike W| 1.16.12 @ 8:44AM
It's amazing to me that any so called conservative could ever support Gingrich after this vile bit of propaganda. These "conservatives" obviously don't understand free market capitalism and should just go ahead and watch MSNBC.
Your boy Gingritch never had a chance for the nomination. He has shown himself to be a vile, fat egomaniac who cares far more about his position than he does about the American people. Thanks a lot Newt.
Vern Crisler | 1.16.12 @ 2:44PM
And true conservatives can support Romney?
Marco2| 1.16.12 @ 8:59AM
Gingrich is a disgrace, to himself and the party. Perhaps he will be purged along with the mad Doctor. Only Santorum can possibly make a run at Romney, but where's the organization and the money? In any case, Paulinista's, back under your rocks!
Vern Crisler | 1.16.12 @ 2:45PM
Santorum has had no leadership experience.
florin| 1.16.12 @ 9:41AM
Yes, Romney put out some negative ads about Gingrich but they were true whereas Gingrich's ads were, for the most part, not true...Charles Krauthammer was right when he said gingrich was like Ahab going after the whale - vengeance was his motive and he didn't care who got destroyed along the way...gingrich has shown in the past that he will destroy ... if he can't win then he will destroy his opponents and his party...he needs not to go away but to be sent away...no more of his face and his glib words on Fox...he needs to be banished before he does any more damage to others...
Vern Crisler | 1.16.12 @ 2:46PM
What is false about what Gingrich said? Romney bragged about his job creation record, and Newt pointed out that it should be balanced by his job destruction record.
Grzmlyk| 1.16.12 @ 3:31PM
Come on - some jobs need to be destroyed - it's a function of a healthy market and a healthy economy. The simplicity of this thinking - jobs creation good, job destruction bad - is just amazing. DO you propose that it was a bad thing that blacksmiths were put out of work?
Also, if you think Gingrich is conservative, you simply arent' looking - remember his sitting on that couch with Pelosi decrying globabl warming? He STILL defends cap and trade!!! That is NOTHING but redistributionist one-worldism.
Wake up - Gingrich is a statist. As is Romney.
Grzmlyk| 1.16.12 @ 3:33PM
BTW, if all job creation is good, then why don't we do what Paul Krugman suggests and just hire a million men to dig holes and then refill them? Hey, it's a job, right?
Bob K.| 1.16.12 @ 10:34AM
Mr. Babbin,
Where in the hell does it say that Republicans who are seeking office are free to criticize each other except for what they did while employed in a business venture? The other party is not going to be bound by that restriction.
Reagan's dictum about never speaking ill about another Republican is great but that train left the station when the GOP party leadership decided to determine who their nominee was going to be when they bought into the Primary System.
Admit your mistake and admit that you are part of the problem.
Resist We Much! | 1.16.12 @ 11:17AM
"If you truly believe in representative self-government, you can never study Franklin Delano Roosevelt too much. HE DID BRING US OUT OF THE DEPRESSION. (No he didn't, as Christina Romer as shown). He did lead the Allied movement in World War II. (He did, but, unfortunately, we are dealing with the fallout of his paternalism in the ME). HE WAS CLEARLY, I THINK, AS A POLITICAL LEADER, THE GREATEST FIGURE OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY. (A Georgia Reagan Republican?) And I think his concept that we have nothing to fear but fear itself, THAT WE'LL TAKE AN EXPERIMENT, AND IF IT FAILS, WE'LL DO ANOTHER ONE -- AND IF YOU GO BACK AND READ THE NEW DEAL, THEY TRIED AGAIN AND AGAIN. (How is this self-government? Further, if Newt had bothered to read the private writings of FDR's own cabinet members and advisers, he would know that the spaghetti theory of government was a disaster in practise). They didn't always get it right, and we would have voted against much of it, BUT THE TRUTH IS WE WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR MUCH OF IT. (Considering the fact that FDR Brain Trust member, Rexford Tugwell, credited Herbert Hoover as the real father of the New Deal, I guess we can say that Newt is a lot like Hoover, too)."
- Speaker Newt Gingrich, 4 January 1995
“It’s not a point of view libertarians would embrace, but I am more in the Alexander Hamilton-Teddy Roosevelt tradition of conservatism. I recognize that there are times when you need government to help spur private enterprise and economic development.”
- Newt Gingrich, Window of Opportunity, 1984
Resist We Much! | 1.16.12 @ 11:29AM
“So, we’re gonna help the poor? Truth is, we don’t know how to help the poor. We’re gonna experiment and experiment and experiment until we break through. It makes me, in some ways, like the two Roosevelts.”
- Newt Gingrich, Newsweek, December 2011
"Conservatives cannot cheer unions overseas and then be blindly anti-union here at home. There are legitimate historic reasons for workers to organize together, and there is a strong need for a healthy, competitive, union, movement that helps improve the lives of its members and the competitiveness of our country.
Andy Stern, the head of the Service Employees International Union, is the union leader who probably best understands the challenge of the world market and the need to make American union members productive in the face of world competition. Sadly, he is a distinct minority among union leaders."
- So sayeth Big Government Newt
Vern Crisler | 1.16.12 @ 2:48PM
Newt is 90 percent conservative, with a 10 percent Progressive streak. What is Romney?
W| 1.16.12 @ 5:54PM
Resist,
McCain said his political hero is Teddy Roosevelt, who believed in a big government to push his agenda. Teddy believed in big govenrment just like a liberal but differed only on the agenda.
The worst part is Teddy was a pompous egotist who ran as a third party candidate in 1912, thus splitting the Republican/conservative vote, and we got Woodrow Wilson. WW gave us WW1 and the income tax. Thanks Teddy.
David| 1.16.12 @ 11:46AM
Hey folks, this is information on Santorum from RedState. It was published on January 6, 2012.
I keep telling everyone to get behind Santorum now - support him with five bucks. Forget Perry and Huntsman and Gingrich and Paul. Santorum can win - and win as a conservative.
The following is From RedState.
Here are his ratings from when he was in Congress:
American Conservative Union — 88%
National Right to Life Committee — 100%
Americans for Tax Reform — 95%
National Tax Limitation Committee — 92%
U.S. Chamber of Commerce — 88%
League of Private Property Voters — 94%
Now remember, this is Santorum’s House ratings, in a DEMOCRAT district. How many Republicans in Democrat areas vote this conservative? Kirk? Snowe? That’s conviction! Santorum is NOT a ‘big government conservative’ but an across-the-board mainstream conservative with a solidly conservative voting record, albeit marred with the support for earmarks and some spending bills that many Republicans in Bush eara fell prey to.
Yet another source that looks at Santorum’s record is Jen Rubin, who likewise absolves Santorum of the phony claim that he is a big-government conservative:
“While in Iowa, Texas Gov. Rick Perry tried to begin a line of attack on Rick Santorum claiming that the former Pennsylvania senator is a big-government conservative. That attack seems poorly thought through (shocking, I know from such a meticulous campaign) for several reasons.
First, Santorum is to the right of Perry in some important ways. Santorum opposed the Troubled Assets Relief Program; Perry wrote a letter on the day of the Senate vote urging Congress to pass legislation to avert a meltdown. Santorum, as we saw in the debates, is likewise to the right of Perry (and Newt Gingrich, for that matter) on immigration.
Indeed, Santorum’s supposed deviations from conservative orthodoxy are similar those of his rivals. He voted for earmarks and highway funds. Gov. Perry took the money. Santorum voted for Medicare Part D; Gingrich lobbied for it, and Perry said in a debate that he wouldn’t repeal it.”
“And finally, Santorum has put together an aggressive spending reduction plan. He’s for the balanced-budget amendment. He’s embraced Rep. Paul Ryan’s Medicare reform plan. He’s in favor of Social Security reform, against energy subsidies, for privatizing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and in favor of repealing Obamacare. The guy is no liberal when it comes to spending taxpayer money. Is he to the right of Gingrich? Yes. To the left of Ron Paul? Yes. But so are most GOP voters.”
Where Santorum deviated from the conservative line, like his vote on NAFTA and his support for earmarks, he was doing the exceptional thing, and those deviations were in most cases catering to his constituents. But UNLIKE most Northeast Republicans, that ‘catering’ did not extend to abandoning conservative principles again and again. They’ve been the exception to the rule that Congressman and Senator Rick Santorum held. With his support for lower taxes, prolife and profamily policies, conservative Judges, for balanced budgets and entitlement reform, against McCain-Feingold, for school choice, against TARP and Frank-Dodd. Rick Santorum has had a solid and mostly consistent conservative voting record.
Santorum further has a solid and conservative agenda for President. Romney timidly talks of getting spending maybe down to 20% of GDP. Rick Santorum fully supports the Republican balanced budget amendment that caps spending at 18% of GDP. He wants lower tax rates for all, going to a 10%/28% two tier tax rate and lowering corporate tax rates.
While Gingrich criticized the Ryan roadmap, Santorum embraced it. Newt supported Medicare Part D, supported at one time healthcare mandates, and supported all the Bush programs that conservatives object to in Santorum’s voting record. Romney has gone further of course, embracing not just TARP, but healthcare mandates and failing to even fully criticize the Obama stimulus spending. Only Gingrich or Santorum will wage a campaign that fully challenges Obama’s whole agenda and actually works to repeal it. Newt has pegged Mitt Romney rightly as a Massachusetts moderate, but Newt is not without flys in his ointment either, from global warming to embracing Hillary, Pelosi and Al Sharpton (!) at various times in attempts to ‘reach across’ bipartisanly.
The bottom line is that between Newt, Santorum, and Romney .. Santorum is the one who is most fiscally conservative and who will have the most fiscally conservative administration as President.
Both Newt and Santorum are conservative. Just not perfect conservatives. For those who say that Santorum is not a ‘true conservative’, I would argue simply that if an 85% ACU rating and leadership on conservative issues in Congress for almost 2 decades is not enough, you will NEVER find a ‘true conservative’ in the Presidential field.
For the rest of us without that fine a filter, yes, Rick Santorum is a ‘true conservative’. Conservatives will be happy with his SCOTUS picks, his support of our military, his support for life, his tax reform and entitlement reforms, his pro-energy policies, his economic growth agenda, his fiscally responsible budgets, and his appeal to get America working again.
Resist We Much! | 1.16.12 @ 12:41PM
"And again, I'm going to be a little controversial. I would divide the FBI into two agencies. I would have an anti-domestic crime FBI, which was very cautious, very respectful of civil liberties. You are innocent until proven guilty. And I would have a small, but VERY aggressive anti-terrorism agency. And I would, frankly, give them extraordinary ability to eavesdrop and my first advice to civil libertarians is simple: don't plot with terrorists."
- Newt Gingrich, 29 April 2008
Vern Crisler | 1.16.12 @ 2:49PM
Good idea, though I think the CIA already listens in on terrorists.
Zak Klemmer | 1.16.12 @ 1:04PM
STOP!!!!!
In MHO the real issues are:
1. Federalism- LBJ and Nixon started the government in Washington DC on the path of destroying the sovereignty of the states, the 10th Amendment.
2. Government Debt: Since 1981 the national debt grew from One-trillion to over 15 Trillion dollars.
3. Welfare programs have been created to buy votes; Medicare in 1965 under LBJ and prescription drugs under George W. Bush. Worse are the programs that reward destructive behavior such as benefits for children born out of wedlock. All these programs are unsustainable and alone they will bankrupt the country.
4. Regulations that destroy the private sector’s ability to initiate voluntary economic exchanges. Private sector employment is dependent on economic growth. Even government is dependent on growth to balance their budgets.
5. When government power exceeds the limits proscribed in our constitution we all lose. Not just our freedom but our nation’s ability to survive- ultimately this will destroy society.
6. Honesty in the media. If voters are only going to listen to sound bites, talking points and clichés this not only destroys the credibility of the media but hampers and destroys the ability of most voters and our youth to understand facts underpinning objective reality.
7. Wars on everything under the sun: cancer, crime, poverty, drugs, guns, fat, sugar, and every other fear in the public’s mind. Self-government requires individual responsibility. Politicians know this but they cynically feed on the weakness of human nature.
8. Government agencies out of control working against individual freedom: FBI, BATF, EPA, etc.
9. The tax code. Confiscates private initiative and wealth creation for the detriment of society transferring power to government against individuals and the private sector. The tax code punishes risk-taking and rewards those who live off of government subsidies and programs.
10. Entangling alliances, has our society become so corrupt due to government that these issues cannot be fixed without a revolution? Czechoslovakia had a non-violent “Velvet” revolution when the communist government lost all authority to use force against the people.
Anthony| 1.16.12 @ 3:43PM
"The media (and the left) always have an established theme". Quite correct Jed. It's called "heads we win, tails you lose".
While I am no fan of Romney, I find it so typical of the left to caterwaul about Romney giving some poor woman $60 and calling it buying votes. Had he said no, they would be calling him a callous, cold blooded conservative.
We need to stop playing the game of the left. It's time to just crush them.
So whomever our nominee is, save for Ron Paul, I will support him.
creeper| 1.16.12 @ 3:55PM
I'm in Iowa. After what Romney's PAC did to Gingrich here there is nothing worse Gingrich could do in return. Some days our mailbox was stuffed with five full-page, full-color, heavy-stock mailings--all trashing Gingrich. Romney's not getting anything he didn't ask for. And I'm not even a Gingrich supporter.
Nick099| 1.16.12 @ 4:04PM
Mitt is a liar. He has constantly bent like a weed in the wind,"on anything including his ideological core and political belief system. He was a rogressive"in 2003 and not a regular Republican. He distanced himself from Reagan ( Just like Ron Paul). He is all things to all people depending on what time of the day you catch him and where he happens to be standing. He has one constant however.....he steadfastly refuses to admit Romneycare was a mistake. That is his Achilles heel. The same advisors that put together Romneycare put together Obozocare including the twisted John Holdren. Wait till that hits the general election. Mittzy will go down just like McCain.
Paul from SA| 1.16.12 @ 7:32PM
He was on the left side on nearly all issues until he began running for president about 7 years ago, then one by one, he's flilpped. I think he'll lose worse than McCain.
Do you think he'll chose Nikki Haley as his VP?
old progrmr| 1.16.12 @ 4:32PM
When the Tea Party people take their bat and go home, refusing to vote on "pirniciple" because their guy didn't win the primary; I hope they will apologize to me sometime during the second Obama term. Of course, I did notice how brave and principled those Tea Partiers were during the battle of WI when those far left school teachers and Union thugs nearly trashed your state capital. I noticed how the Tea Party was so much in evidence defending the Governor and Legislature they helped elect, and then abandoned. A very sad sight indeed.
Margie| 1.16.12 @ 4:53PM
"When the Tea Party people take their bat and go home, refusing to vote on "pirniciple" because their guy didn't win the primary; I hope they will apologize to me sometime during the second Obama term."
Not necessarily TEA partiers, but Paul-bots and other holier-than-thou types.
And you will get NO apology. EVER. Because these dimwits cannot understand that it is more important to kick the unrepentant Marxist out of office.
They HATE Republicans more than they want Obama out of office.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Paul from SA| 1.16.12 @ 7:25PM
The condescending tone of both comments toward Tea Partiers bothers me. Replace a few words and it would sound like something from Nancy Pelosi's mouth. Or Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Apologize, personally, to you, on their knees? Dimwits? Stupid?
I think Tea Party people just want smaller gov't and more individual freedom - less spending, lower taxes, less regulation, etc., and I believe they are the most politically informed demographic group in the country and they have 99% gun ownership.
Nominating Mitt Romney, instead of a conservative candidate, ensures Obama will be re-elected.
Kingofthenet| 1.16.12 @ 5:18PM
Mitt will ALWAYS be 'King of Bane'...
Loadmaster| 1.16.12 @ 5:26PM
As Rambo told the Col.."they drew first blood". Mitten screwed it up in Iowa and their blaming it on Newt. From where I'm sitting I don't see the problem. Only inside the beltway does the GOP Elite see Newt's attack on Mitten an attack on the Capitalist way of life (true believer of Capitalism) . If we were only playing checkers then I could see your point but this is for all the marvel's so this is no time to back down from any challenge. I'm all in and so is Newt. You guys there in the beltway need to get over it and let the voters pick the candidates. The Chicago machine was going to gut any GOP candidate that made it through the primary gauntlet...Bain or no Bain. These guys eat nails for breakfast so...go Newt2012.
Loadmaster| 1.16.12 @ 5:35PM
And another thing...with Newt bringing out Bain..do you think he's scared to bring out Ayers, Rev Wright and Resko and all the cronyism that has been taken place in the WH? No me. Mitten wouldn't even want his team go down those rat holes. These are the folks we are fighting against and Obama needs to be exposed. The wuzzies in the GOP are so afraid of the "race" card that they'll drive 10 miles out of the way to avoid it. Not Newt because he knows that NO matter what we say and do..Obama going to use it. So let's put it out there and let's do some real vetting. It's past time the American voters know who's been hiding in the WH. The election is going to be down and dirty and if you don't want your hands dirty...get the hell out of the way. Too much is at stake and gentlemen...Chicago wouldn't be playing checkers.
Kingofthenet| 1.16.12 @ 6:08PM
President Obama: Are you the real Republican nominee?
Brian: No.
President Obama: No? Then why do you dress like him?
Brian: He's a symbol... that we don't have to be afraid of scum like you.
President Obama: Yeah, you do, Brian. You *really* do!
Job CREMATOR of Bane Capital| 1.16.12 @ 7:33PM
No matter how the GOP spins it, Bane is an issue for the DRAFT DODGING FLIP FLOPPER. All polls show the LIBERAL Romney has lost support among working class and middle class Republicans (of all backgrounds and races).
Here is the movie: http://www.kingofbain.com/
johnd2| 1.16.12 @ 8:21PM
Bain Capital targeted companies that were already weak and badly run ( at least that is what they tried to do ). They would have failed in the fullness of time anyway. Romney made money by
speeding up the process. This is hardly the same level of meanness claimed by Gingrich in this day and probably by the Dems later.
POST American| 1.16.12 @ 8:33PM
-------------------BOTTOM LINE-----------------------
---Chicken feed and sideshows.
Meanwhile, we're still waiting for that
first piece on the overturn of the U.S.
Constitution by NDAA 1031
(the authorized secret arrest,
'disappearance', torture, stripping
of citizenship and execution of
Americans ---anywhere)
---------------------OR-----------------------
the rave 'fave' of the century,
that 4 decades on Bush--Clinton--Bush--Obama
----ROCKEFELLER Globalist RED China set
up, sellout and world TREASON OP.
Again, that's world TREASON
---and EUGENICS.
-----Whenever you're ready.
Marc Jeric| 1.16.12 @ 11:52PM
In Europe to fly on an airplane is a sign of a rich man; here in US it is totally accessible to everybody - well, except if you are living on food stamps and unemployment benefits.
Why this difference ? It is thanks to our capitalist system of constructive destruction, where the unefficient companies with too many unionized workers, inferior products that nobody wants to buy, inefficient salesmanship and distribution, too many debts covering up the management's failure; and now comes a venture capitalist who buys that copmanies' undervalued shares, installs a new management with new ideas, fires the useless too-expensive bloated union "workers", introduces new and/or products, reorganizes their finances - and when all that works, the venture capitalist cashes his shares at a profit. So the question is not how many union feather-bedders have been fired, but how many new productive jobs were created from zero.
Mark in LA| 1.18.12 @ 8:55PM
More foolishness from people who can't see past their noses or never leave the country.
Germany has a heavily unionized private workforce and I don't read about Germans being too poor to travel.
video converter ultimate | 1.17.12 @ 1:20AM
Video Converter Ultimate,
MOD to MPG Mac,
Harold Carstensen| 1.17.12 @ 7:43AM
Mr Babbin: If you are going to write about a subject, the least you could do is get the spelling right! It is B A I N . . not BANE.
Mark in LA| 1.18.12 @ 8:53PM
You missed the play on words:
bane
[beyn] Show IPA
noun
1.
a person or thing that ruins or spoils: Gambling was the bane of his existence.
2.
a deadly poison (often used in combination, as in the names of poisonous plants): wolfsbane; henbane.
3.
death; destruction; ruin.
4.
Obsolete . that which causes death or destroys life: entrapped and drowned beneath the watery bane.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bane
Jhon | 1.17.12 @ 5:30PM
And if there's a company making anvils for the blacksmiths, the government should just buy up all the anvils lest the anvil maker go out of business and - gasp - lay off its workers. While, the entire ecosystem of dead and moribune businesses ought to be preserved in amber in perpetuity!
Bane | 5.23.12 @ 6:17PM
Found this hilarious site on this very topic. And yes this seems to be an unexpectedly comical topic for the upcoming election and could become the Romney's bane of existence