Mitt Romney

The Pain of Bain Falls Mainly on Romney's Campaign? Not Quite

Newt Gingrich's attacks on Romney are good news for Mitt, but bad news for the rest of us.


Believe it or not, Newt Gingrich is doing Mitt Romney a favor. Gingrich has spent the past week attacking Romney's tenure as the head of Bain Capital, the private equity firm Romney helped found in the 1980s. Through his own words and a propagandistic documentary produced by Winning Our Future, a well funded pro-Newt Super PAC run by a former campaign aid, Gingrich has attempted to paint Romney as a heartless, out of touch, capitalist monster—the King of Bain—whose firm made millions through mass firings and layoffs. The campaign, however, has mostly backfired. Gingrich has united the conservative chattering class against him enough that Winning Our Future's major financial backer, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, has distanced himself from the documentary, and Gingrich has called for its producers to either edit the film or "pull it off the air and off the internet entirely." In the process, Gingrich has managed to generate the one thing that the Romney campaign has failed to win or buy for itself: sympathy.

But what's good for Romney may be bad for the rest of us. Gingrich's attacks aren't just helping to unite conservatives in defense of Romney, they're distracting from the very real flaws in Romney's record. 

Gingrich's criticisms of Romney's time at Bain Capital have backfired in part because they're straight out of the liberal playbook. Indeed, they amount to attacks on the essence of capitalism: creative destruction. That's especially true of Romney's Bain Capital, which was spun out of Bain and Co., an early player in the world of high-end management consulting, in the mid 1980s. Most private equity firms at the time relied primarily on financial engineering to increase the value of the companies they worked with.

But according to Stephen Kaplan, a professor at the University of Chicago's Graduate School of Business, Bain Capital's innovation was marshalling the tools of management consulting in hopes of transforming companies into entities that weren't just better financed, but better run. Private equity firms, Kaplan wrote in a 2008 paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research, "applied performance-based managerial compensation, highly leveraged capital structures, and active governance to the companies in which it invested." Overall, the strategy seems to have been a success: The "evidence suggests that private equity activity creates economic value on average." For all practical purposes, Gingrich is attacking Romney for having run a business that helped create value.

The attacks on Romney aren't just misguided; they're also inaccurate, relying on factual errors and quotes taken out of context. Here's just one example: The half hour documentary funded by the Gingrich-supporting Super PAC Winning the Future tells the story of UniMac, a Florida company that made laundry equipment. The documentary leads viewers to think that UniMac was bought and shut down by Bain through another firm, Raytheon, that was Bain under a different name. But as CNN Money's Dan Primack noted earlier this week, Bain and Raytheon weren't the same thing. Raytheon bought UniMac in 1994, then merged it with other companies. Bain didn't buy that unit until four years later.

Even the timing and delivery of Gingrich's attacks will likely help Romney in the long run. If Romney wins the nomination, the Obama campaign will have a harder time using Bain's record against him. Not only will they be old news, they'll be associated with a disreputable, discredited Republican candidate.

Meanwhile, Gingrich's attacks have distracted people from the true problems with Romney's record—his long history of flip-flops, his enthusiasm for technocratic fiddling, his unimpressive Medicare reform proposal, his significant role in passing the Massachusetts health care overhaul that served as the model for ObamaCare, and the weakness of his plan to undo ObamaCare through federally granted waivers to the states.

Gingrich's suicide run ultimately tells us more about his own desperate political narcissism than it does about Mitt Romney, whose business career is the best part of his record. There are plenty of reasons to complain about Romney, but his time at Bain isn't one of them.

Peter Suderman is an associate editor at Reason magazine.

NEXT: Peaceniks Should Love Murder Drones, Say Drone Enthusiasts

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Is it possible that Gingrich and Romney colluded in these attacks? Could they have been that smart?

    This article is exactly right. The Obama people were dying to use Bain against Romney. Now it will be old news and something Newt Gingrich said.

    1. Could they have been that smart?
      No. Gingrich is just trying desperately to damage Romney because Newcular wants to be the President. He wasn’t expecting to have it backfire.

      1. Probably so. But it is working just like they colluded to do it. Also, it is making crony capitalist Romney look like a real free market advocate. The only time this entire election Romney has looked any good have been during his straight forward defenses of capitalism and Bain.

        I guess Gingrich really is that fucking stupid.

        1. He really is that grasping and venal, too. It just happened to be a serendipitous result for Romney.

    2. nope – mittens is NOT innoculated unless he can prove his [JOBZ] creation numbers…including the mass firings.

      1. “Proletarians of the world, Unite!” doesn’t fly here.

        1. Dyslexics of the world, Untie!

          1. So not only are libertardian tea-baggers racist, sexist, and homophobic, they also hate DYSLEXIC PEOPLE? Ugh! HOW DISGUSTING!

            /NYT fuckhead

        2. just wait, you’ll see…like the tribe. just wait

    3. ” Could they have been that smart?”
      No, Gingrich is the dumbest fuck in the room.

  2. The attacks, however, have mostly backfired. In fact, they’ve managed to generate the one thing that the Romney campaign has failed to win or buy for itself: sympathy

    I don’t see your commiseration point but I do feel the in-fighting is making Paul look like the mainstream guy

  3. *tosses yellow flag*

    Excessive use of puns!

  4. It’s truly remarkable that Mitt Romney has been vetted more in the last two weeks than Barack Obama has in four years.

    But this is indeed how real elections are supposed to work. When they don’t work this way, you end up with the kind of nightmare we’re stuck in now.

    1. That’s racist

      1. How is that..oh, night, black..RACIST!!!11!!!

        1. The sun microaggresses against us all at the end of each day.

    2. translation = Other people didn’t care about Rev Wright, Bill Ayers, and the other bullshit redneck AM radio spewed 24/7.

      1. Well, we certainly did our best to ignore it.

        1. obviously since the MSM are journalists, not radio entertainers

      2. Translation

        I am shrike. I normally hate Christfags. But when he is on my team I will love a guy who went to a fundamentalist evangelical church every Sunday for 20 years and called the minister a father figure.

        Seriously Shrike, if you were anything but a deranged hack, you would have been pissed off about Wright. But since you are a mindless drone, you were not fazed.

        1. The ignorant bigotry that spews from the Republican candidates’ own mouths puts cherry picked snippets of Wright’s sermons (over 20 years as you remind us) to shame.

          1. Why don’t you go ask reverend Wright what he thinks about homosexuality there Tony. It is a United Church of Christ church. They hate you as a homosexual. And Obama was a dues paying important member who came every Sunday for 20 years. And you still love him.

            1. I honestly don’t give a single fuck about Rev. Wright and never have. That Obama pretended to go to his church is not disqualifying enough for me to accept the alternative.

              1. He pretended? LOL. He raved about how fabulous Wright was for years. Wright played a big part in his book. But Obama just pretended to go? It is sad Tony. I really think you live in that kind of denial.

              2. So here is what we have from a statist

                1: Comes up with a fantasy that somehow the things the republicans have said somehow are as bad as Wrights rantings, news flash, they weren’t

                2: When confronted with evidence that they cannot dispute, that Obama did attend a church lead by a racist for 20 some years they then qualify it by saying that Obama really didn’t go to that church, he ‘pretended’. You know Elliot Spitzer ‘pretended’ to have sex with prostitutes.

                1. saying that Obama really didn’t go to that church, he ‘pretended’.

                  You know, sometimes the explanation is worse than the accusation.

            2. wright’s about as (ir)relevant as romney’s 4 wives

            3. I have no use for Wright. But he is less despicable than Pat Robertson, Louis Farrakan, or Franklin Graham.

              Or the Vatican.

              Unless a president is a Unitarian they pretty much all follow some asshole.

              1. If you have no use for Wright, why do you have so much use for his ideological creation Barrack Obama? Obama spent 20 years looking up to Wright as a father figure.

                Admit is Shrike, you love Christfags as long as they are black and on your team.

                1. You’re so ignorant. “Ideological creation”?

                  If Wright were consistent he would preach a sermon titled “God Damn Barack Obama!” for his drone attacks in the Middle East.

                  Some “creation”.

              2. Yes because a raving racist is somehow better than an organization that despite its flaws is one of the largest charitable organizations in the world. From catholics world wide, fuck you shrike.

            4. John, John, John.
              You’re actually expecting a person on the left to hold themselves or one of their guys to the same standards they apply to the other team?
              You should know better than that.

            5. United Church of Christ ran a series of TV ads a few years ago about how open and tolerant they are of gays. I don’t know about Wright’s church, but the national organization is quite OK with homosexuality.

              1. The national organization is very liberal. The individual churches vary.

          2. Gawd Obama is hot. I think I’ll masturbate now.

          3. What ignorant bigotry is that?

            1. Anything Rick Santorum ever says, for one.

              1. Even when he told his kids that he loves them when they left for school in the morning?

                1. No, the next bit when he says “if you see any gays, stone them.”

      3. I’m not even just referring to the Wright and Ayers stuff, I’m also talking about all the stuff this douche has done for the last three years, the majority of which the vermin in the media ignore and gloss over.

        Obama routinely gets away with things that the media would have a kitten over if a republican did them. He is easily the least scrutinized and least criticized by the so-called mainstream media president we’ve had in history.

  5. Who cares… Mitt has huge liabilities for the general, he only looks electable compared to the other guys.

    He is incapable of seeming authentic, though he’s very good at acting like he’s trying to seem authentic. Comedy talk shows are being and will be merciless. Authenticity is so much more important than his time as a vulture capitalist.

    My only question is when Obama beats him in a landslide, will the talk radio sheep finally shut the fuck up with their hysterical screeching for a while?

    1. Tony Obama couldn’t beat David Duke for the Whitehouse. All Romney has to do is show up in a suit. No one but the idiot deadenders like you are going to vote for him.

      Look on the bright side. Once you are back in the wilderness you can start caring about GUITMO and killing of American citizens again.

      1. Romney is John Kerry all over again. Look at the last umpteen elections–whoever was the most (seemingly) authentically charismatic won every single time. At best Romney polls even with Obama, and the only time Romney’s support has ever grown is when he started looking inevitable and people finally started saying uncle.

        And I don’t need supporters of the torturing warmongering Bush regime lecturing me on national security concerns. Obama didn’t close Gitmo because the Republicans wouldn’t let him. He could rip someone’s eye from its socket on national TV and he’d still be a superior alternative to the next Republican fuckface whose mission in life is to loot the country and sell it off to multinationals.

        1. The only good commie, Tony, is a dead commie. That applies to fucktarded pinkos like you, too, by the way.

        2. Didn’t Team Blue run Congress and the White House for a while in 2008? How did Peabo not get everything he wanted, Tony?

          So, wait, Team Red is selling out and looting the country, but Team Blue is not?

          1. With a filibuster proof senate for one year, I might add. It was his own “team” in congress that stopped him from closing Gitmo.

            The way recall it he wanted to transfer the “detainees” to the supermax in Illinois. Not exactly a “team Red” state, yet even his own side refused to go along with it.

        3. Aren’t you a little concerned about Obama’s willingness to gather up ever more executive power? Not that Romney wouldn’t do the same, but still.

          1. Your second sentence is all-important. Of course I’m concerned–unlike John I don’t change my mind about these things depending on the party in power. I just realize that every election is a choice between two candidates, and more important two parties, so one must take the best one can get.

            Until people start voting in large numbers on executive power issues, it’s not going to get better. The best I think can be done for the time being is to keep people out of power who think torture should be official policy and who think bombing Iran would be a great idea.

            1. “Change you can believe” in is now “better than the alternative.” Talk about damning with faint praise.

              1. I never even supported Obama until he was the nominee. I don’t buy into political hype, I see every election as a choice between two imperfect human beings, and your choice is always “who is better?” not “who is Jesus?”

        4. “And I don’t need supporters of the torturing warmongering Bush regime lecturing me on national security concerns.”

          Yeah, because Ron Paul and libertarians totally supported GITMO and the erosion of rule of law. You’re full of shit as usual Tony. Those things don’t mean anything to you so long as His Majesty, King Barack gets to do it.

          “Obama didn’t close Gitmo because the Republicans wouldn’t let him.”

          He’s the goddamned President of the United States! He can do whatever the fuck he wants regarding national security via executive order. I bet you think Mitch McConnel and John McCain made him sign NDAA at gunpoint.

          1. I was talking to Bush supporter John, who has apparently had a heartfelt conversion to terrorist loving hippie–I suspect the miraculous change happened somewhere around Jan. 20, 2009.

            Here’s a link explaining why Obama can’t close Gitmo.

            1. Still not good enough. If Obama had any integrity he would find a way to work around Congress because it’s the right thing to do. Funny how he is perfectly willing to subvert Congres on the Consumer Protection Bureau appointment but not on this issue.

              1. If you know of a legal pathway I’m all ears. Even if there were one, there is still politics to consider. Obama’s wife literally can’t eat a hamburger without it becoming a scandal on talk radio, so I can imagine what would happen if he went all in for transferring terrorist suspects to American cities.

                Again, life isn’t perfect–the problem here is jingoistic fascists who opened Gitmo in the first place, not the people charged with cleaning up their mess.

                1. Again, life isn’t perfect–the problem here is jingoistic fascists who opened Gitmo in the first place, not the people charged with cleaning up their mess.
                  reply to this

                  Tony you really are beyond parody sometimes. New flash Obama is the President. Maybe you missed it. It was in all of the papers.

                  1. What’s your point? Did you read the article I linked?

          2. Just because Obama should have grown a pair and shut the place down doesn’t mean the Republican alternative wouldn’t have been worse.

        5. Ton it must be taken some serious mental effort to keep your mental walls from coming down, but the fact is Obama is done. He has been no better than Bush in terms of civil liberties, worse in terms of fiscal prudence, and comes off as completely ineffectual.

          That sad thing is that he makes a shitty president even when compared to the metrics of progressives. You guys let your vagina juices started flowing and elected him at least four years, if not 8-12 years too early.

          But in the end it is a boon for libertarians. Neo-conservative ideology was uprooted by the bush years, and instead of electing a president that could have continued the implementation of the stealth progressive agenda, you picked a newbie, essentially a kid who just got out of the minors into the major league. His fuck ups have shown the system for what it is, and now we have the best chance we have had for the cause of freedom in a long time.

          Ron Paul has assembled the armies of middle earth and your leader hasn’t even finished making his one ring, much less bind the other rings to his will, or assemble his orkish horde.

          1. The best chance for liberty is Mitt Romney? I still got 10 grand on anyone who wants to bet that the next potus won’t be named Obama or Romney.

            Anyway Ron Paul’s foreign and domestic policy would kill more people than in Dick Cheney’s most satisfying wet dreams.

            1. Ron Paul taking troops home from overseas and using them only if the country is directly threatened would kill people?
              His pulling home troops that are killing people would kill people?

              Your idiocy never ceases to amaze, Tony.

              Not killing people will kill more people than killing people.


              If stupidity could kill your mother would have miscarried.

              1. That’s assuming you have a mother.
                Sometimes I wonder if you came about as a result of fission, like other bacteria.

              2. He is also for ending foreign aid–the resulting body count would be in the millions.

                1. LMAO!
                  The vast majority of foreign aid goes to those who administer it and the corrupt government officials who receive it. Very little if any actually helps people.
                  You want to do something humanitarian? Give to a church.
                  That’s coming from an atheist.

                    1. Try google you disingenuous piece of refuse.

                    2. That’s what I thought, shitbag.
                      You only wanted a cite so you could trash the source while ignoring what they said, ad hominem fallacy style, because fallacies is all you got.

        6. ….and he’d still be a superior alternative to the next Republican fuckface whose mission in life is to loot the country and sell it off to multinationals.

          Good point! I for one was heartened to see that Obama had stopped this practice.

      2. Tony’s a fucking moron. Ideological consistency is something his dumb ass couldn’t achieve if it tried.

        1. I get some of the Tony-think. I can see some examples of evil league of evil CEOs and the need for minarchist government with some basic regulation. I just can’t put any faith in Team Blue and all-powerful central planners (for the common good!) like he does.

          1. I don’t have faith–Democrats have disappointed me more than anything. I simple have the certainty that Republicans will destroy this country if they ever get their hands on it again. Sounds like hyperbole but look at how close the Bushies got us–and those were the “compassionate” ones.

            1. derp de derpity derp

              1. herp derp nice crunchy bacon derp

            2. What do you mean by “destroy this country”?

            3. Shorter Tony.

              I don’t care how much the Democrats beat me. I like it.

              1. No, I don’t like it, I would just not prefer the only possible alternative, being waterboarded by Republicans.

                1. You will vote for them no matter what Tony. You like it or you wouldn’t do it. You could always just not vote and refuse to be a member of either party. Ever think of that?

                  1. Deeply. I concluded that doing so would be an exercise in narcissism and nothing else. If ever an election came down to my vote, I want to be sure whatever action I take is not in support of the (far) worse of two evils. Not voting is the same as voting for them. Voting for a Nader-esque candidate is the same as voting for a Bush-esque candidate. No one’s ever satisfactorily explained to me the utility of doing anything other than backing one of the two parties and influencing it from within. If you abandon your party, they stop listening to you.

                    1. Not voting is the same as voting for them.

                      That’s to the electoral college system, that is the stupidest statement anyone can make about presidential voting.

                2. No, I don’t like it, I would just not prefer the only possible alternative, being waterboarded by Republicans.

                  Bullshit! We hear Oklahoma boy likes it kinky.

    2. “Obama pretends to go to church”, “when Obama wins by a landslide”. The crazy little bastard actually believes this shit!

    3. “Obama pretends to go to church”, “when Obama wins by a landslide”. The crazy little bastard actually believes this shit!

  6. One thing that seems very absent from Reason critical talking points on Romney is the fact that he signed the Massachusetts permanent assault weapons ban. For liberty minded voters shouldn’t that be a big fucking deal?

    1. I don’t know any liberty minded folks who like Romney.

    2. No liberty minded voter gives Willard much thought, so there’s no need to go over every detail of why he’s a statist tool.

    3. No no no, NO no no, you’re getting it all wrong. When Romney did stuff like pass Romneycare and sign the assault weapon ban and collectivize the farms, he only was doing it on the state level. He’s against doing any of that on the federal level because he’s a conservative.

      1. “collectivize the farms”

        +100. I actually laughed out loud on that one.

        1. Email to a friend Print Comment Reprints Add to myDJC [+] [-] Adjust font size

          January 13, 2012

          Bridge firm owner jailed for construction delays
          By ED WHITE
          Associated Press
          DETROIT ? A judge ordered the 84-year-old owner of Detroit’s Ambassador Bridge to jail Thursday for failing to meet court orders on a construction project linking the span to adjacent interstates.

          Wayne County Judge Prentis Edwards said Manuel “Matty” Moroun and top lieutenant Dan Stamper will stay in jail until they comply with a 2010 order to get the work going. It’s unclear how long they’ll be behind bars after an appeals court hours later refused to suspend the decision and release them.

          “It is clear that the Detroit International Bridge Co. does not intend to comply with the court orders unless meaningful sanctions are imposed,” Edwards said.

          Lawyers for Moroun and Stamper asked Edwards to freeze his decision while they appeal, but the judge declined.

          Ken Mogill, lawyer for Stamper, said the judge was “absolutely wrong” since it is the company, not the men, that was earlier found in contempt.

          “Neither Mr. Moroun nor Mr. Stamper had received a notice that they individually could be facing consequences,” Mogill said. “It’s not enough that a company has been found in contempt. The law is so clear.”

          The bridge company also must pay $7,500, the maximum under state law for civil contempt, and the state’s legal fees.

          Moroun, listed by Forbes magazine as a billionaire, and Stamper were escorted out of the courtroom by deputies. After getting an emergency request, the Michigan Court of Appeals declined to release them while the broader case is appealed.

          The three-judge panel said attorneys cited the wrong law in their filings, although one of the judges was in favor of granting a stay and freeing the men.

          Moroun’s son, Matthew Moroun, accused Edwards of having a “personal vendetta” against the bridge executives.

          “A judge viciously lashed out at Matty Moroun and Dan Stamper and ordered a penalty outside the bounds of a civil case that was excessive, unwarranted and outrageous,” the younger Moroun said in a statement.

          Detroit International Bridge Co. was declared in contempt of court in November for failing to finish work on the project linking the U.S.-Canada span with two Detroit interstates.

          The state of Michigan sued the company after it failed to meet a 2008 deadline to finish its part of a $230 million project to improve traffic at the bridge connecting Detroit to Windsor, Ontario. The company claims the Department of Transportation repeatedly has changed construction plans and been obstructive, allegations the state denies.

          Gregory Johnson, MDOT chief of operations, said it could take a year to get the work done.

          “We take no joy or satisfaction in seeing these gentlemen incarcerated,” Johnson said. “Our only goal is to see this contract, this project, completed.”

          The hearing began with lawyers for Moroun insisting he is not the real owner. They say a Moroun trust has a minority stake in a holding company that owns the bridge. But state officials say Moroun clearly is in charge, and the judge agreed.

          “Mr. Moroun has the power, the authority to make sure there is compliance” with court orders, Edwards said.

          After a November hearing, state engineer Tony Kratofil said the bridge company has done only “superficial” work to follow the judge’s previous orders. Without the improvements, he said, trucks are stuck using neighborhood roads.

          Kratofil said Thursday there’s still a lack of progress on the project. The judge said he considered appointing a receiver or contractor to oversee the project but determined it would only lead to more delays and litigation.

          An activist in the residential neighborhood near the bridge complimented Edwards.

          “This is a win for the people,” Scott Brines said. “This is not about people going to jail. It’s about bringing a solution to get trucks off of our neighborhood streets, as the Gateway development was intended to do.”

          1. Long story short goverment fucks you over cause it can.

          2. This is not about people going to jail.

            Funny, I could have sworn people went to jail.

            I guess what she means is “I don’t care if somebody is illegally jailed as long as I get what I want.”

          3. I don’t get what is going on here. Did the guy just take the money and then refuse to build the bridge? If he was contracted to do it and now refuses to, something seems amiss.

            1. “The company claims the Department of Transportation repeatedly has changed construction plans and been obstructive, allegations the state denies.”

              I have a feeling there’s something more than meets the eye going on here. I’ve worked on government aerospace programs before where NASA kept changing their plans and being “obstructive”. When the program inevitably fell behind and went over budget, the CEO of Lockheed Martin wasn’t thrown in jail.

              1. I have worked on projects before too. And usually contractors love it when the government is incompetent and changes plans. They just “you got it” and do a bunch of work they wouldn’t have normally done and bill the government for it. Contractors love these long drawn out fucked up projects. They are cash cows.

                1. Too true, unfortunately. It’s that kind of shit that makes me want to get out of the aerospace industry. I would go work for Spacex (one of the few truly commercial space companies around), but that would require me to move to CA. I’d rather eat my own man-berries.

                  That, and as commercial manned space ramps up they’ll get absorbed by the borg collective and end up just like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, et al.

                  1. SpaceX does testing in TX and launches in FL and someplace in the south Pacific, couldn’t you fit in to those locations’ jobs? Also, Bigelow Aerospace isn’t in CA either.

      2. it really is a good thing for freedom that romney and obama are so terribly, horribly, abominable.
        they make it clear to all but the most die hard team cheerleaders that their parties are a joke.

        1. +1

        2. It is good that politicians are so terrible, or we would grow too fond of listening to their ideas.

  7. Anyway Ron Paul’s foreign and domestic policy would kill more people than in Dick Cheney’s most satisfying wet dreams.


  8. a superior alternative to the next Republican fuckface whose mission in life is to loot the country and sell it off to multinationals.

    We need Democrats in power.

    Militarizing the police, and encouraging them to carry out home invasion raids for drug enforcement, is merely the price we pay for living in a civilized society.

    1. And preventing global warming.

    2. Because Republicans would be better?

      1. They wouldn’t be any worse. That’s the point.

        1. On drug war policy, you’re probably right.

        2. Medicare Part D

          The difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Democrats don’t pretend to be for big government.

          1. big small


    3. a superior alternative to the next Republican fuckface whose mission in life is to loot the country and sell it off to multinationals.

      I agree. The Dems are showing a startling degree of facility when it comes to transferring taxpayer cash to multinationals.

      GM? Multinational.

      Fisker? So multinational they even built their taxpayer-funded plant overseas.

      GE? They don’t get much more multinational than GE.

      1. You’re holding Democrats to the same standard that liberals hold everyone else!



      2. STOP IT YOU BASTARD…’re hurting me.

  9. Newt Gingrich’s attacks on Romney are good news for Mitt?

    Well then I think a round of applause is warranted. Good job Newt Gingrich! Well done old chap.

    And if they (Newt and Mitt) were actually smart enough to “Steal the Meat” off of Obama’s propaganda table before B-Rock was able to dish up a plate full of lies then I’m impressed!

    Of course this doesn’t help Ron Paul at all which is also good 😉

  10. Life is short,We always need passions!
    SeekCasual*COM, a place for people who wanna start a short-term relationship.And also for finding soul mates.Over 160000 honest members with real photos and detailed profiles.Sign up free and have a try!Nothing to lose!

  11. If someone wants to go after Mitt Romney there is plenty of material. Gingrich singling out Romney’s strongest area for ridicule tells me only that Gingrich is even more of an idiot than I believed. How can they be ignoring such a wealth of flaws and focusing on this?

  12. If the companies that Bain Capital took over were what they are claimed to be, they were already on a downhill slide. Romney merely made money speeding up the inevitable. That is hardly the same scale of mean move that Gingrich and the liberals want to make it out to be.

  13. Economist Fred Foldvary has a good take on the whole demand-to-see-a-candidate’s-personal-income-tax-returns farce as we know it: Releasing Income Taxes. Gingrich should be ashamed of himself, but so too should the other candidates for even playing along with this stupid game.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.