Republicans ought to know better - Romney's profitable past

Amelia

Rookie
Feb 14, 2011
21,830
5,453
0
Packerland!
Wall Street has its share of miscreants, and they should be recognized as such when appropriate. But to abominate Mitt Romney for having been a success at the business of investing in struggling American companies, connecting entrepreneurs with capital and producers with markets, is foolish and destructive. Republicans ought to know better, and the fact that Gingrich et al. apparently do not is the most disturbing commentary on the state of the primary field so far.

Romney’s Profitable Past


Great article.

".... private-sector expertise and experience is an invaluable thing in a chief executive, and Romney has nothing to regret on that front."

Yes!

We NEED someone who understands business. For Gingrich, Huntsman and Perry to go all Zuccotti Park on Romney and take his statements out of context about key elements of capitalism is not only intellectually dishonest -- it's just plain stupid. It makes THEM look ignorant of business. The "not-Romney" position which primary voters are looking to fill is that of a strong conservative yet these guys are running to the left of Romney. They're acting like people who would punish success and who fail to understand the need for business owners to have freedom to make new choices when they see something isn't working.

Gingrich et al are pounding Romney for having the experience Obama doesn't have - the experience a president needs to be able to understand job creation in America.

Desperation has shaved several points off their IQ's.
 
Cool, someone agrees with what I said months ago about Romney. He's not my 'choice' but when it comes to business and economics, he knows his shit. He's smart and very capable - now, if we could just get him to be honest. LOL.
 
Wall Street has its share of miscreants, and they should be recognized as such when appropriate. But to abominate Mitt Romney for having been a success at the business of investing in struggling American companies, connecting entrepreneurs with capital and producers with markets, is foolish and destructive. Republicans ought to know better, and the fact that Gingrich et al. apparently do not is the most disturbing commentary on the state of the primary field so far.

Romney’s Profitable Past


Great article.

".... private-sector expertise and experience is an invaluable thing in a chief executive, and Romney has nothing to regret on that front."

Yes!

We NEED someone who understands business. For Gingrich, Huntsman and Perry to go all Zuccotti Park on Romney and take his statements out of context about key elements of capitalism is not only intellectually dishonest -- it's just plain stupid. It makes THEM look ignorant of business. The "not-Romney" position which primary voters are looking to fill is that of a strong conservative yet these guys are running to the left of Romney. They're acting like people who would punish success and who fail to understand the need for business owners to have freedom to make new choices when they see something isn't working.

Gingrich et al are pounding Romney for having the experience Obama doesn't have - the experience a president needs to be able to understand job creation in America.

Desperation has shaved several points off their IQ's.

The republicans like to put great stock in morality, there is no moral argument that will make the type of business Romney was in seem honorable, they will certainly try, but in the end Romney created nothing of value, sold nothing tangible, and left these businesses worse off then when he found them. They cannot spin their way out of that.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #4
Wall Street has its share of miscreants, and they should be recognized as such when appropriate. But to abominate Mitt Romney for having been a success at the business of investing in struggling American companies, connecting entrepreneurs with capital and producers with markets, is foolish and destructive. Republicans ought to know better, and the fact that Gingrich et al. apparently do not is the most disturbing commentary on the state of the primary field so far.

Romney’s Profitable Past


Great article.

".... private-sector expertise and experience is an invaluable thing in a chief executive, and Romney has nothing to regret on that front."

Yes!

We NEED someone who understands business. For Gingrich, Huntsman and Perry to go all Zuccotti Park on Romney and take his statements out of context about key elements of capitalism is not only intellectually dishonest -- it's just plain stupid. It makes THEM look ignorant of business. The "not-Romney" position which primary voters are looking to fill is that of a strong conservative yet these guys are running to the left of Romney. They're acting like people who would punish success and who fail to understand the need for business owners to have freedom to make new choices when they see something isn't working.

Gingrich et al are pounding Romney for having the experience Obama doesn't have - the experience a president needs to be able to understand job creation in America.

Desperation has shaved several points off their IQ's.

The republicans like to put great stock in morality, there is no moral argument that will make the type of business Romney was in seem honorable, they will certainly try, but in the end Romney created nothing of value, sold nothing tangible, and left these businesses worse off then when he found them. They cannot spin their way out of that.


^^^^

Thank you for demonstrating the kind of talk Democrats engage in, which Republicans should know better than. Especially Republicans with private sector experience. But apparently Gingrich, Perry and Huntsman don't have as much practical experience as they would have us think.
 
Jobs, jobs, jobs ain't accomplished by layoffs or preditory capitalism. Trickle down economic theory is time tested and an abject failure for all but the top 1% (I would have used "wage earners" but that implys somenone who labors for their money - I might have used the word "earnings" but that also implies someone who labors for their wealth).
 
Jobs, jobs, jobs ain't accomplished by layoffs or preditory capitalism. Trickle down economic theory is time tested and an abject failure for all but the top 1% (I would have used "wage earners" but that implys somenone who labors for their money - I might have used the word "earnings" but that also implies someone who labors for their wealth).

Why is it so many people think Romney's ability to make money for himself by buying up and then tearing down companies, causing middle class worker layoffs somehow gives him experience in job creation????
 
Jobs, jobs, jobs ain't accomplished by layoffs or preditory capitalism. Trickle down economic theory is time tested and an abject failure for all but the top 1% (I would have used "wage earners" but that implys somenone who labors for their money - I might have used the word "earnings" but that also implies someone who labors for their wealth).

Why is it so many people think Romney's ability to make money for himself by buying up and then tearing down companies, causing middle class worker layoffs somehow gives him experience in job creation????

Good question. I suppose concrete thinking, magical thinking or there is no thinking involved.

Romney's a classic demagogue.
 
It's called creative destruction. Hedge funds like Bain Capital will buy a company that is failing, strip off the buggy whip manufacturing and sell the profitable parts. The buggy whip makers have to find a more relevant job where they aren't losing money for the company.

That's why education is the most important element of our society. The days of growing up and working in your dad's buggy whip factory are over. We need to be training our workforce for the jobs of tomorrow, not the jobs of yesterday.

Too bad certain elements in the Republican Party are so unprincipled in their yearning for power they have decided to align themselves with the marxists on the left and call Romney a greedy capitalist pig. This is a great litmus test to determine who is actually principled and who is actually just out for power at any cost.

Gingrich is spending every breath attacking creative destruction right now.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
Jobs, jobs, jobs ain't accomplished by layoffs or preditory capitalism. Trickle down economic theory is time tested and an abject failure for all but the top 1% (I would have used "wage earners" but that implys somenone who labors for their money - I might have used the word "earnings" but that also implies someone who labors for their wealth).

Why is it so many people think Romney's ability to make money for himself by buying up and then tearing down companies, causing middle class worker layoffs somehow gives him experience in job creation????


^^^^

Again, thank you for demonstrating the Democrat spin of what Bain & Romney did. This is what you guys are there for.

Republicans are supposed to be more interested in the whole story. Not in going to the left of Romney and using that non-winner vantage point to take cheap shots in the hope of bringing Romney down.

Does Gingrich think he can win the nomination by assuming a position to the left of Romney and engaging in intellectually dishonest trash talk?

Somehow, on some level, I think Gingrich knows that is not a winning strategy. If he injures Romney, he sends votes to Santorum. Gingrich is toast no matter what. But he is so bitter about Romney that he doesn't care.
 
Jobs, jobs, jobs ain't accomplished by layoffs or preditory capitalism. Trickle down economic theory is time tested and an abject failure for all but the top 1% (I would have used "wage earners" but that implys somenone who labors for their money - I might have used the word "earnings" but that also implies someone who labors for their wealth).

Why is it so many people think Romney's ability to make money for himself by buying up and then tearing down companies, causing middle class worker layoffs somehow gives him experience in job creation????

Million times more experience than Obama had.:eusa_boohoo:
 
Cool, someone agrees with what I said months ago about Romney. He's not my 'choice' but when it comes to business and economics, he knows his shit. He's smart and very capable - now, if we could just get him to be honest. LOL.

You wouldn't like him if he was honest.

For example: he really does support Romneycare, and Romney care really is Obamacare.

He's lying to you to get your vote.
 
All those Americans who got outsourced and downsized and restructured and laid off and any other term people like Romney are fond using to seem less like a predator did not just disappear, they are still there trying to make a living while people like Romney call them lazy and a drag on society. They also still vote and they will vote against this representative of the golden parachute class.
 
Cool, someone agrees with what I said months ago about Romney. He's not my 'choice' but when it comes to business and economics, he knows his shit. He's smart and very capable - now, if we could just get him to be honest. LOL.

You wouldn't like him if he was honest.

For example: he really does support Romneycare, and Romney care really is Obamacare.

He's lying to you to get your vote.


Whip out standard reply #423:

What is so difficult to understand about the difference between federal rights and states' rights?
 
Cool, someone agrees with what I said months ago about Romney. He's not my 'choice' but when it comes to business and economics, he knows his shit. He's smart and very capable - now, if we could just get him to be honest. LOL.

You wouldn't like him if he was honest.

For example: he really does support Romneycare, and Romney care really is Obamacare.

He's lying to you to get your vote.


Whip out standard reply #423:

What is so difficult to understand about the difference between federal rights and states' rights?

What is so difficult to understand that states have no more right to force you to buy a commercial product than the federal government does?
 
Cool, someone agrees with what I said months ago about Romney. He's not my 'choice' but when it comes to business and economics, he knows his shit. He's smart and very capable - now, if we could just get him to be honest. LOL.

You wouldn't like him if he was honest.

For example: he really does support Romneycare, and Romney care really is Obamacare.

He's lying to you to get your vote.


Whip out standard reply #423:

What is so difficult to understand about the difference between federal rights and states' rights?

Right, the consitution gives the states the power to do things that are not within the federal governments powers. It was the federal government that was restricted.
 
Jobs, jobs, jobs ain't accomplished by layoffs or preditory capitalism. Trickle down economic theory is time tested and an abject failure for all but the top 1% (I would have used "wage earners" but that implys somenone who labors for their money - I might have used the word "earnings" but that also implies someone who labors for their wealth).

Why is it so many people think Romney's ability to make money for himself by buying up and then tearing down companies, causing middle class worker layoffs somehow gives him experience in job creation????


^^^^

Again, thank you for demonstrating the Democrat spin of what Bain & Romney did. This is what you guys are there for.

Republicans are supposed to be more interested in the whole story. Not in going to the left of Romney and using that non-winner vantage point to take cheap shots in the hope of bringing Romney down.

Does Gingrich think he can win the nomination by assuming a position to the left of Romney and engaging in intellectually dishonest trash talk?

Somehow, on some level, I think Gingrich knows that is not a winning strategy. If he injures Romney, he sends votes to Santorum. Gingrich is toast no matter what. But he is so bitter about Romney that he doesn't care.

Romney is a classic demagogue, Gingrich is too. Tell us oh wise one, how will Romney create jobs? Cutting taxes? Well now, the Bush tax cuts haven't done so. Oh, I know, the spin is business and job creators are scared of tax increases. Too bad they're not risk takers and have the guts to believe in America and Americans.
 
Why is it so many people think Romney's ability to make money for himself by buying up and then tearing down companies, causing middle class worker layoffs somehow gives him experience in job creation????


^^^^

Again, thank you for demonstrating the Democrat spin of what Bain & Romney did. This is what you guys are there for.

Republicans are supposed to be more interested in the whole story. Not in going to the left of Romney and using that non-winner vantage point to take cheap shots in the hope of bringing Romney down.

Does Gingrich think he can win the nomination by assuming a position to the left of Romney and engaging in intellectually dishonest trash talk?

Somehow, on some level, I think Gingrich knows that is not a winning strategy. If he injures Romney, he sends votes to Santorum. Gingrich is toast no matter what. But he is so bitter about Romney that he doesn't care.

Romney is a classic demagogue, Gingrich is too. Tell us oh wise one, how will Romney create jobs? Cutting taxes? Well now, the Bush tax cuts haven't done so. Oh, I know, the spin is business and job creators are scared of tax increases. Too bad they're not risk takers and have the guts to believe in America and Americans.

Government does not 'create' jobs. It's role is to create a sustainable, solid economic foundation in which the private sector can thrive.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top