Skip to comments.Giuliani To Gingrich: "What The Hell Are You Doing, Newt?"
Posted on 01/12/2012 2:35:21 PM PST by joe212
click here to read article
I agree, and with the rest of your post. The only one I was excited about was Michelle Bachman. Some people just have the right instincts and Bachman is one of them.
I was fully aware of her lack of experience and thin resume, and it eventually caught up with her. Other than Bachman, I liked Cain's 9-9-9...
With the lemons we have left, we just need to make a lemonade, get Obama out of there...
Well he has to defend the vulture capitalist that funded his campaigns like Carl Icahn etc.
yes. It is exactly what Newt,s point is.
Newt in the real reagan conservative.
Was Giuliani wearing a dress, heels and a wig when he made this demand?
Interestingly enough, Rudy failed to attack his buddy Perry for saying the same thing about Romney.
Agree with you Rush has been boring and wrong this time around...taking a sabbical from listening to him....its better than sitting and calling him a jackass on Lets not fight Romney any way except the way I think it should be done..
Stop spreading misinformation.
Giuliani said in this very video that he prefers Newt to Romney. And, as for Rush, here he is last October flat-out stating that Romney is not a conservative:
Romney is not a conservative. He's not, folks. You can argue with me all day long on that, but he isn't. What he has going for him is that he's not Obama and that he is doing incredibly well in the debates because he's done it a long time. He's very seasoned. He never makes a mistake, and he's going to keep winning these things if he never makes a mistake. It's that simple. But I'm not personally ready to settle on anybody yet -- and I know that neither are most of you, and I also know that most of you do not want this over now, before we've even had a single primary!
My apologies. Seems he did go after everyone, including Perry.
Giuliani ran an awful campaign, though. If he lost, it wasn't anybody else's fault.
I don't know if you were here back then, but there was a lot of hostility to Giuliani. People who say they'd never vote for Mitt today were saying the same thing about Rudy four years ago.
The thing is, Romney is running as a businessman and touting what he did at Bain. There are some suspicious things there. But the elites and press are going bonkers because there are questions. The thing is, Romney invited the scrutiny by his claims. I don't get the hysteria about the questions. Everyone but Romney gets vetted?
Yeah, I noticed that. While Gingrich backed off a bit, Perry has not. It may have to do with the fact that Perry and Rudy are apparently close friends (which I was not aware of).
Yeah. Everybody is after Newt “the Plumber” Gingrich.
notice how the gop will not let Mitt defend himself. They are so afraid if him providing the DNC with soundbites that sending out the minions to defend.
some of it there is no reasonable defense.
That is why they are so pist at Newt. He boxed them into a corner.
I hurled for days after zero was elected, and last night was my first political hurl since then.
Sure it won’t be the last.
Okay. So he went after Perry too. But look at this headline. They’re after Gingrich.
Interestingly enough, not long ago, many speculated Perry would choose Rudy as his VP.
Maybe Rudy is hoping for a VP slot? Don't alienate anyone, just in case, the call comes in at 3am!
It is getting clearer and clearer that this election is NOT about the American Citizens needs or aspirations. From the beginning this has been about getting one of THEIR OWN in the
WH. they thought Zero was their guy. Figured he was bought and paid for. OOPS, he was being led around by the radical ideologues.
Romney apparently convinced his buddies he was the guy.
Notice how ALL of the other candidates from Cain on have been destroyed by the media. etc. ONLY Romney has sat it out while everyone gets torn to shreds.
Will the voters get a clue? I am beginning to seriously doubt it.
We’re all going to be blowing chunks and taking aspirin for migraines by November!
What I find in this twilight zone time is..you know if he and the other so called friends to Newt, would stop this pounding (and blowing this issue way out of proportion), Newt could do better with the undecided republican voter. They know Newt is not a Marxist. I suspect Rudy is only using this so he can get behind a moderate Romney.
That would be suicide!
notice how the gop will not let Mitt defend himself.
Unfortunately I agree. Wish that I didn't.
The pressies want Romney to run against Obama because they can destroy him.
BTW, in 2008, I supported Rudy. I live in NYC, he was my mayor, and he did a great job - governing as a conservative in a totally liberal city. Not just that. He has talent (like Reagan, Christie) to be able to persuade people who starts out completely hostile to anything conservative to actually supporting conservative positions.
This is what we need in a political leader, someone who can persuade people, who can win an argument. Not just someone who can win the presidency on basis of the minimum number of conservative states.
Paradoxically, I think Gingrich may have that talent as well...
Me too, there is something definately wrong with what is going on. Me thinks they are all CORP. whores who do not want their playhouse disturbed and NEWT is doing just that.
THEY ALL have some skin in the Romney shuffle of businesses, if the truth ever gets exposed as to what their extent in everything is, there will be a REVOLUTION.
The chickens have come home to roost, and Romney is their rooster.
GO NEWT and keep telling it like it is, you have nothing to lose now. You know where all the skeletons are and who put them there, let it all out, you can't play Nice any longer. We are in some serious trouble in America and you are the only one who can HELP us.
See post 67 re VP slot.
I cannot support Mitt Romney. He has changed positions on very important issues too many times. I do not trust that he will do what he says. He is surely a crony capitalist & lying RINO. His goal is to enrich & empower himself, his family, friends, & cronies, at the expense of this country & its people.
But, what Bain Capital does is a normal, if unhappy, process that occurs all the time in the business world. The truth is, businesses fail, & management has no idea how to deal with it. That failure can be complete bankruptcy, where workers, suppliers, debtors, & investors all lose nearly everything. Companies like Bain can mitigate such a disaster, saving what is salvageable & discarding what is not. It is a risky business that often loses in the attempted salvage.
The loss of jobs in these situations is inevitable. Bankruptcy will surely end all jobs. Mergers & acquisitions often mean the loss of jobs. Are mergers & acquisitions more demonic aspects of free enterprise? Should we restrict a business's ability to relocate, as in the NRLB?Boeing dispute, because of the impact on workers? The very nature of capitalism is the fluidity of businesses to open or close, grow or fail, merge or split. The more you regulate a business, the weaker it becomes.
Gingrich & Obama would have us accept their notion that the jobs are more important than the business. That we should support failing businesses - GM & Chrysler are examples - for the worker's sake. Pure socialism! That, barring gov’t support, it is better to let a business completely collapse, than to bring in someone who can salvage something, including some of the jobs.
Folks, this is pure pandering to all the workers out there who fear they might lose their jobs. What in Hades do you think Newt & Obama can do to help you keep your job, as if they really even cared?
Conservative Pubs will regret this line of attack on Romney, as it will be used by Rats to continue to vilify business & free enterprise, no matter who wins the Pub nomination.
""""Reagan said this didnt bother him at all. Let him have the Fortune 500, he said. I want our campaign to stand for Main Street, not Wall Street. I want us to stand for the worker, the shopkeeper, the entrepreneur, and the small businessman. Reagans instincts were right on the mark."""""
Newt needs to borrow that.
I am not disagreeing with you. All I am saying that I was not aware of this (that Perry and Rudy are friends).
This is NOT about capitalism. ROMNEY uses his "job" in the private sector and invited the scrutiny. When you run for office using a life experience, people WILL look at it. He REFUSES to address anything about it. It's off limits. But he USES it.
Are you really saying that everyone gets vetted but Romney?!
Oh and, there's this.
Do you really think the Dems don't have ALL the dirt on Romney?
There is a big difference between a communist Michael More making an argument against free market and Gingrich / Perry making that argument. Liberals in media are masters in using fools from our side to make their arguments....
Today Giuliani appeared with John McCain and they were bashing Newt for his stance on Bain Captial, jus as Rush Limbaugh and others have been doing.
These guys (Rush, McCain, Guiliani and others) can’t defend Bain Captial and Mitt Romney unless they move to the left and that’s what they have done. They have sold thier soul and the conservatives out to the CRONY CAPTIALIST.
Rush Limbaugh is talking out boths sides of his mouth on this issue, he has moved to the left...! Why? Is it bacause Bain Captial owns many of the stations Rush is on...? Just asking....!
This is NOT about capitalism. It is about Romney being dishonest and slimy. Are you stating that he's a dishonest politician but squeeky clean businessman?!
There is one question that I have about this whole dustup. Why was there no condemnation of Romney when he was spending millions in Iowa lying about Newt?
The Republican elites protect Romney. He’s been chosen as McCain was. The Dems and the media want him as the nominee. They’ll eat him alive.
Ping to post #4
There is a difference in vetting a candidate for his political positions, & criticizing a standard business practice because someone you happen to hate worked in that area.
I suppose if Romney had been an undertaker, we would be vetting his creepy job, & speculating if he had spent more time with female cadavers vs. male.
This kind of “vetting” indirectly vilifies an entire industry, which plays right into the hands of ignorant socialists. Obama must be gleeful to see so-called conservatives attacking free enterprise practices.
What Romney & Bain Capital did with failing companies was not illegal, nor ethically wrong, & has been a standard business practice for longer than I know. Only socialists consider these practices as wrong. I'm not siding with socialists against ANYBODY.
In Romney's case, attacking him on guns, abortion, taxes, gay marriage, big gov’t, & Obamacare makes it easy to avoid attacking him on free enterprise. Only a guy like Gingrich, who is just as squishy as Romney on the above list, needs to raise the issue of mean ol’ Romney & his capitalist company.
What a crock of BS.
You talk a lot but don't listen.
I’m totally with Rudy on this.
There are so many really good political reasons to reject Romney, I just don't know why folks choose a complicated subject that so many people misunderstand.
To me, it is like scrutinizing a surgeon that had to do some amputations to save the patients. I suppose the surgeon takes some grim satisfaction in an amputation done well, even though he knows he has left the patient a cripple. And he is paid well for his services, & often thanked afterward.
But who goes back to the doctor & says, "I've talked to some friends & your competition, & though they weren't there & didn't know the circumstances, they think maybe the amputation was wrong".
Sarah P was my only hope for a candidate who had not yet sold her soul to Satan in exchange for power & wealth. I liked Cain until he couldn't/wouldn't explain the money given to the women. The rest are already bought & sold. So, I am w/o a candidate to support.
Feel free to side with socialists & nannies as often as you like.
Where was Rudy when Willard was smearing Newt in Iowa?
The less clever among us are just happy to be attacking Romney, & care nothing about collateral damage. It's almost a mob mentality, & it distracts us from the real issues.
Nobody is pinning Romney down on abortion, gay marriage, gun control, jobs, the debt, ..... Nobody is stepping up with good solutions to our many bad problems. Nobody is attacking Obama. It is becoming another Donner Pass Pub Primary, & the Left is loving it.
By Pat Garofalo on Jan 9, 2012 at 9:25 am
2012 GOP presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney, who has a large lead in the polls heading into the New Hampshire primary tomorrow, has been taking heat from both Democrats and his Republican challengers for his time at Bain Capital, the private equity firm that he headed. Bains modus operandi was to invest in companies, leverage them up with debt, and then sell them off for scrap, allowing Bains investors to walk away with huge profits while the companies in which Bain invested wound up in bankruptcy, laying off workers and reneging on benefits.
Last week, Reuters profiled one company, Worldwide Grinding Systems, that went belly up after Bain invested in it. The company not only lost 750 jobs, but the federal government had to come in to bail out its pension fund, while Bain walked away with millions in profits.
And according to an analysis by the Wall Street Journal, this was far from an isolated incident. In fact, 22 percent of the companies in which Bain invested wound up either in bankruptcy or shutting their doors entirely, while Bain itself has made billions of dollars for its investors:
The Wall Street Journal, aiming for a comprehensive assessment, examined 77 businesses Bain invested in while Mr. Romney led the firm from its 1984 start until early 1999, to see how they fared during Bains involvement and shortly afterward.
Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost. [...]
The Journal analysis shows that in total, Bain produced about $2.5 billion in gains for its investors in the 77 deals, on about $1.1 billion invested. Overall, Bain recorded roughly 50% to 80% annual gains in this period, which experts said was among the best track records for buyout firms in that era.
Adding insult to injury, Bain would hide its profits in tax havens, not even paying the rate it was supposed to on the profits it made laying off workers.
The US Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp, which insures company retirement plans, determined in 2002 that GS (Steel) had underfunded its pension by $US44 million. The federal agency, funded by corporate levies, stepped in to cover the basic pension payments, but not the supplement the union had negotiated as a hedge against the plant's closure.
For Joe Soptic, who worked at the plant for 28 years, that meant a loss of $US283 per month, about 22 per cent of his pension. Others lost up to $US400 per month, according to documents supplied by the union.
Comparatively, the GS bailout was one of the pension guarantor's smaller hits. The federal fund swung from a $US7.7 billion surplus to a $US3.6 billion deficit that year as it struggled to cover bankruptcies in the steel and transportation industries. The failure of LTV Steel, for example, cost the agency $US1.9 billion.
The agency's woes prompted Congress in 2006 to require companies to contribute more toward their pensions. Press accounts said this change accelerated the shift away from pension plans toward 401(k)s and other defined-contribution retirement plans that offer less security for workers.
First, is just one tale of a Bain deal under Romney. Bain invested just $30 million to take over a company. It then arranged for this company to pay Bain and its investors a special dividend of $180 million or six times the amount of equity capital Bain invested to take control. This technique of forcing your prey to pay back your original investment or more, as in this case, is to ensure that the Private Equity Firm is assured of a profit. It is an exploitative way to strip the company of its spare cash and is indefensible corporate rape. It is one selfish and destructive way to play the Private Equity game. For the average holding period by a PE firm is somewhere between 3 and 5 years in and out with little thought as to the long term performance of the company or the protection of its employees.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.