Please, pretty please show me where Newt is advocating that?
Or, is he saying perhaps the character of Romney is what's under the microscope here - character being how you act when no one is forcing you to take either position? Romney's Bain Capital bought companies, issued debt (some would argue while covering up major business risks), used the debt to buy it and its investors out of the acquired company and pay itself lots of fees, then moved on. Too often, the acquired company then folded like a house of cards under the debt load.
Legal? Unless fraud was involved, sure. Moral? If you advocate a beggar-thy-neighbor approach to life, or fall into the atheist Ayn Rand camp, or like to parrot the "it's capitalism, trust us" message of the folks who made their bank this way, sure.
But if you expect the people adversely impacted by this to nod sagely and say, "no worries, Bro, this sort of thing happens in capitalism, and we hope Romney enjoys his nine-figure fortune", well, you're a bloody idiot.
Let me put it another way. Obama was a community organizer - a legal advocation - involved with assembling a constituency to petition for a redress of grievances - Constitutional even! How he did it, why he thought those folks deserved it, and the outcomes he achieved are all highly questionable. Obama got serious power as a result, and I didn't want that type of guy in White House. I don't want the type of guy Romney is in the White House, either.