The Bain Wimps Are Hypocrites

January 9, 2012

I see a lot of squeamishness around regarding attacking Mitt Romney over Bain Capital. 

How viable a GOP nominee would Mitt be if he had decided to make a fortune off of running a national string of adult book stores that sold porn and provided peep shows? Or, God forbid, what about a chain of health clinics that provided abortions because, well, there is a good market for it?

The fact is, he would be DOA. There is a point to this, I support capitalism. As a capitalist, what Bain did in many cases was perfectly acceptable. To a certain degree, he stripped parts of America of its manufacturing base and shipped it off to China.

There are value decisions involved in every form of capitalism. Romney made some and as a capitalist, that's fine. But now he wants to run for POTUS. Sorry, a guy whose values said, hey, so what if some folks lose their jobs and pensions – and just about everything else – that's a problem I'm willing to create for them because the marketplace will give me big profits for doing it.

Sorry, I do not have to respect that person's values as a candidate for POTUS, no more than I might if he ran strip clubs, or peep shows, or abortion clinics, because maybe they would pay off big time, too. Just because I am able to respect Romney as a great capitalist does not mean I must accept his values in exercising his acumen as one, now that he seeks to be my president.

There are many activities of a capitalst nature, not all of them are equal once one considers the underlying values driving the various individuals engaged in them. I can remain a solid capitalist and still not care for Mitt Romney as a potential nominee because of the decisions he made in his personal wealth creation. And anyone who would say, oh no, you can't do that, but would reject him on values grounds if he sold porn, or hookers where it's legal, or provided abortions is simply fooling his, or her self.

So, get over it – or at least be honest. The judgements we make in selecting a president are not the same ones we might make in hiring a CEO. And a President of the United States is not that. Talk about your moral equivalence. Frankly, I have more problems with someone who would profit by putting another out of their life's work, than someone who opted to sell porn, or provide call girls, simply because the law somewhere allowed for it.

AdSense 300×250
NewsMax Trending Now
  1. astonerii says:

    You forgot an important one. Who amongst the capitalist Romney sycophants are big supporters of George Soros? Obviously, he must be a much better capitalist than Romney is.

  2. xiaoding says:

    Most people think, that if you prefer capitalism, that you must slavishly follow every capitalist decision. They are simply incapable, of the thought, that while capitalism may be the best economic system for a civilization, it does not follow, that EVERY decision must be capitalist. They cannot understand, that people come frst, society, the commonwealth, the community must come first. To that end, use capitalism, but do not be a slave to it.
    Romney is a slave to it. He would not understand, never understand, what I just wrote. He conceives as capitalism as an end in itself.
    Such a man is ill suited to be President. Imagine if Lincoln had been like that!

  3. Mark Turner says:

    Every political system operates on a certain backbone of utilitarianism, to one degree or another…in other words, a decision is deemed ‘good’ or the ‘least of all evils’ if it benefits the maximum number of people and causes harm to the least amount of people, or if the ‘good’ is somehow calculated to outweigh whatever ‘bad’ side effects occur. An extreme example of this would be Mao’s “Great Leap Forward”, which hardcore Communists would argue that although millions of people starved to death, billions ‘benefited’ from this policy.
    Now, neither Romney nor the US is anywhere near this extreme, but I think the main criticism I am hearing here is that some people feel that Romney’s decisions are too financially, bottom-line driven and not ‘compassionate’ enough for some conservatives. This may be a valid criticism. What other candidates are better in this regard?
    Off topic, I am also curious to see as the primaries progress whether there is any regional strength in Romney or other candidates…especially swing states and ‘must win’ states that will be important in November.

  4. Linda in Nevada says:

    What we don’t really know, or at least I don’t, are the whole stories about the companies that were bought and liquidated. Perhaps they were hemorrhaging cash for years due to very incompetent management. Perhaps a secured commercial lender called in Bain to see if the company could be rehabilitated with some capital injection. We just don’t know. If there were secured creditors (comm’l banks) with their loans already at great risk, maybe the only way to recover anything was via the liquidation of assets. Bain may have charged hefty fees, or perhaps they reached a settlement with the bank(s), then sold the assets to recover their investment. There usually are two sides to any story. I am NOT defending Mitt, as I don’t want him to get the nomination. I’m just saying we probably don’t have the complete picture.

  5. ltw says:

    I agree with what Professor Jacobsen at Legal Insurrection noted in one of his posts….at some point Gov. Mitt Romney is going to have to explain Bain in detail….just like he is going to have to release his tax returns some day. No way forward without transparency. In my opinion, Tax returns..yes…College records…yes…birth certificates yes…medical records…probably not. Rommney is going to have to give a transparent account of his record so people have enough information to judge. Enough of the manipulation from all candidates.

  6. USA American says:

    What’s really funny about the sudden wingnut objections to Mittens’ Bain career, is that none of you said peep about it until it began to occur to you that, yeah, he really IS gonna be your candidate in 2012.

  7. ltw says:

    What’s really funny…is that us “wingnuts” finally realized…that we want our candidates vetted before the general election. Why didn’t we think of that sooner. Oh well, we finally have. Good for us…we are lifetime learners.

  8. VaGal says:

    Excellent point. I have been following the outrage by some conservatives on Twitter (many of whom I admire) that are completely missing the bigger picture on this issue. They are painting this as being anti-capitalist and claiming Newt & Perry are acting like the Democrats. If Romney is going to point to his record as reason to vote for him, then that same record deserves the scrutiny and criticism for the types of decisions made, and not just their profitability or legality.

  9. David R. Graham says:

    Only a Christian can defeat the liar in November. That excludes Romney. Dems let that truth out of the bag over the weekend and today, but it is obvious for months. Romney is a hollow egg. Truth/ facts have to be thrown into the teeth of the liar, to shatter them.. A non-Christian cannot do that. Romney cannot do that.

  10. Terry Ott says:

    A aspect of Romney’s background at Bain and elsewhere is that he actually DID run something large and complex and with people who had to collaborate and accomplish something. “The buck stops here” chair is where a CEO operates. I was a partner/owner and executive but never a CEO, nor did I aspire to that. It takes a lot to be a good one.
    I have a lot of respect for the leader who is “requiring” and strong-minded about priorities and goals, and yet is supportive of those around him, with great relationship skills. This is what I would like to see in the next President. Whether these skills are demonstrated in a “for profit” environment or a public-sector gig, or somewhere else — matters little to me. Romney’s background in both the public and private sector, as well as his role in the Olympics are what we would be counting on in terms of preparing him for the top job. So, to say that he is not suited because the largest part of his leadership development and experience was in the private sector doesn’t make sense to me.

  11. Opinionator says:

    It is not that Romney is being questioned. He needs to be able to answer these charges when Obama brings them up. But, I do have an issue with so-called Conservatives using the rhetoric of OWS and the Left. As noted by Jay Nordlinger, “Over and over, Romney defends and explains capitalism. And he’s supposed to be the RINO and squish in the race?” We are acting like we would prefer candidates who have spent their entire professional lives in the public, not the private sector. I guess politics makes hypocrites of us all.

  12. gary gulrud says:

    Romney is a lying crud.
    He won’t release his tax return, not that I would, but he wants nothing but high regard for being rich.
    He attacks a moderate immigration position as if his is more restrictive when it is less so.
    Romneycare has accomplished none of its goals for MA.
    He has no intention whatever of using his business expertise, finding and eliminating redundancies, firing unproductive workers, selling or closing non-core endeavors, improving the balance sheet, outsourcing services as POTUS.

  13. Xiaoding says:

    “We are acting like we would prefer candidates who have spent their entire professional lives in the public, not the private sector. I guess politics makes hypocrites of us all. ”
    You are confusing making a capitalistic decision, with making a good decision. they are not the same thing.
    We have the right, and the obligation, to crtisize bad decisions, wheter they be the “capitalistic” one, or not. Capitalism, is not morality.