Friday, January 13, 2012

Bain of Our Existence



Occupy Wall Street claimed a stunning victory this week when it was revealed that they have successfully established tent cities in the vacant spaces inside a number of Republican's heads.

Specifically, while Barack Obama is nonchalantly asking to borrow yet another $1.2 trillion, quite a few alleged conservatives are
ignoring the issue entirely while attacking Mitt Romney for heartlessly making money and creating jobs (but not saving every worker's job) when he was affiliated with Bain Capital.

In a nutshell, Bain Capital looked for companies which were struggling and bought them at bargain rates. They would then try to determine what was dragging a company down and eliminate those factors in order to make the company profitable (thereby saving and creating jobs). Sometimes, a company couldn't be saved and went out of business, or workforces needed to be downsized - meaning that people lost jobs. That's capitalism...and it
is heartless or it couldn't create the prosperity that eventually does create jobs.

But not to hear Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry tell it. Newt's SuperPac committee is running a video called "When Mitt Romney Came To Town" which accuses the photogenic Mormon businessman of every evil deed imaginable except pulling the gold fillings out of Jews' mouths at Auschwitz. Which has certainly helped
Hope n' Change narrow the field of GOP candidates we're supporting...though we don't think Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Perry would like our newly revised line-up.

Yes, Mr. Romney was operating out of a desire to make a profit (who isn't?) and he couldn't save every job in every company that Bain worked with. But if Gingrich, Perry, and others find that standard unacceptable, what will come next? Will doctors who work for profit (hint: all of them) be deemed unacceptable if they can't save
every patient? And if that did become the standard, what doctor would take on a high-risk case or bother to treat a terminal illness at all?

Clearly such a policy would be nonsense in medicine, it
is nonsense in the world of business, and it would be disastrous if it were the mindset of yet another American president.

Here at
Hope n' Change, we have our problems with Mitt Romney - but his willingness to cut programs that aren't working and his desire to keep an eye on the financial bottom line aren't among them. In fact, those are some of his better qualities.

Those candidates who are now attacking his record at Bain as "heartless" should take a deep breath and then look at what "governing from the heart" has done to our country: destroyed black families, created massive joblessness, ruined our schools, reduced our national security, and pushed our nation to the brink of extinction owing to unfunded (and unfundable) liabilities.

For any self-proclaimed "conservative" member of the GOP to ignore these truths while repositioning himself as a warmhearted populist is utterly unacceptable. And attempting to move ahead in the polls by damaging Romney's chances to win a general election is detestable.

The way to win this primary and the November election is to sincerely be more like Ronald Reagan. Not more like Barack
"Hey, I need another trillion from the Evil Rich" Obama.


Nancy and Newt enjoy watching his attack ads together.
-
READERS (Saturday Update): If you want to read the comments "old school" style (which is much easier on the eyes), just click on the hypertext title of each day's cartoon. Magically, you'll see the cartoon and comments exactly as they used to be. If you wish to leave a comment of your own, click on the tiny "Post a Comment" link after the last comment and a pop-up window will open where you can share YOUR opinion. Thanks to Chuck for bringing this to our attention!

I'll also continue trying to make this the "default" behavior for the site (if possible) to simplify things.
-

30 comments:

John Robert Mallernee said...

"Bloody mist"?

This should be a "JOHNNY OPTIMISM" comic strip!

Anonymous said...

Oh dear, America - you are doomed. Apart from Mittens the Republican candidates don't seem to realise what is at stake here.
This parallels the Blair years here in Britain. Blair was soon seen to be not what he told us he was but the opposition was so weak and divided that Blair was able to hang on for years to the detriment if Britain. We are still recovering from those years.

The Obungler must be laughing his socks off.

Barry in Britain

Emmentaler Limburger said...

I hear ya. I'm not a big Romney fan - but because he seems squishy; not because he's a capitalist. Perry and Gingrich have definitely dropped themselves in my estimation - but, alas! They're career politicians. They don't know any better...

(And I think, unless clever disguises are being employed, that's Newt on the couch with the Wicked Bitch of the West. Just sayin'...)

Colby said...

To this point I was happy to overlook Newt's shortcomings because I knew he would shred BO in a debate, and he has some great ideas on job creation and reducing Big Brother's influence. No more, Newt; you have crossed the line.

I realize desperate people do desperate things, and that is where Newt and Rick Perry are, but let's dismiss both of these guys now. I don't think Perry had a chance anyway because he has two strikes against him from the start. A) HE would get shredded by BO in a debate, and B) the libs will look at him like a clone of W. Not that I have a problem with that, but it is too soon after W's term.

Let us also remember that four years ago, we were considering Mitt to be the conservative alternate to McCain. Yes, he might be a bit squishy, but his tenure at Bain proves that he is willing to make painful cuts to accomplish a higher goal. Sometimes a surgeon has to amputate a leg to save a life. This is what has to happen to save our country.

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

So far Slobama (Mitt) has what...17 delegates? Can't we wait a while before we succumb to the inevitability of Romney? If he does get the nomination I still don't know if I can vote for him. I know with absolute certainty that I don't want him in the White House any more than Obama. I still believe the media and Republican establishment want Mitt as the nominee because he will either lose to Obama but satisfy the "moderates" to help carry the Senate for the Republicans or...he will win and be the big-government progressive he's always been. America is in such a weakened state after 3+ years of turdboy, I don't know that we can survive anything but a hard right turn to conservative principles and policy.
Just barely better than Obama is not nearly good enough.

John the Econ said...

In economics, it's called "creative destruction" and all conservatives should be familiar with the concept. Alas, once one enters the world of government, it's an idea that quickly evaporates from one's consciousness. Nothing in government, no matter how unnecessary, outdated, disproven or outright silly is ever allowed to go away. For example, in 100 years when we're all driving fusion-powered hovercraft fueled by our own natural gasses, the federal government will still be subsidizing ethanol and mandating that we buy it. Fortunately, it will still be useful in burning to prevent the upcoming ice age, right Newt?

This now blog format has left me dizzy and disoriented. Is this what it's like to have "Occupiers" in your head?

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John Robert Mallernee- It wouldn't be as funny in Johnny Optimism, because in his world there's already bloody mist on everything.

@Barry in Britain- I must admit, it's the vision of Obama laughing and high-fiving while watching this GOP debacle that I find particularly upsetting.

@Emmentaler- Neither have I been a big Romney fan, but as Charles Krauthammer (hallowed be his name) pointed out, these attacks are basically reshaping the narrative of the November election into which party will do the best job of protecting "the little guy" from big, bad capitalists. For the GOP, that's political suicide.

@Colby- Even though I focused on Newt and Rick Perry, let's not forget that Jon Huntsman is also part of this ugly bunch-hunch on Mitt. I'd still vote for any of them over Obama...but that being said, it would be a vote against Obama and not for any of them.

@Angry Hoosier Dad- I hear you, fellow Hoosier (I'm a naturalized Texan, but my roots are in Indiana). I definitely want that hard right turn you're talking about, and feel that it's urgently needed. But...job one is getting Obama out of office. A Republican House and Senate could at least conceivably start some important incremental changes, but if Obama retains veto power - and the power to appoint to the Supreme Court - then we're well and truly screwed. If the vote comes down to America having a small chance or no chance, I'll go with the small chance...and I hope you and other voters will too.

@John the Econ- As you well know, people lose jobs all the time. Would it be heartless to fire a blacksmith in a town with no horses? He's a great guy, has a wife and kids, and only cleans the dirt out from his fingernails to go to church. So maybe the taxpayers should just keep paying his salary. And that of the ice man, who used to bring blocks of ice to put in people's ice boxes. And all of the people who work in the town's failing slide rule factory. And so on and so on and so on.

Businesses don't exist to keep their workers employed...workers are employed by successful businesses, because ONLY successful businesses can afford employees. And Newt, Rick, and Jon all know this and should be ashamed of themselves.

Regarding the new comment format, I freaking hate it and will restore things to the way they were if it ever becomes possible.

Pete(Detroit) said...

John the Econ -
This is the 'Mitt Romney' version. We all hate it, but less than the alternative (the multi-threaded italicized version we saw yesterday).

I don't think Perry ever really had a chance either. Not only does he stink of W (who never met a spending bill he didn't like) he always 'felt' like a 'typical Texas d-bag politician' to me. Nothing I could quite put my finger one, but he just seems a bit 'slimy.' To me. Others are welcome to their own opinions.

Newt certainly put his foot in it this time, and his apparent utter inability to own up, "yep, my bad, sorry about that" has him walking around on stage dragging a mop bucket on one leg - not a good look.

Interesting to me is the attention this is bringing to Santorum, who is running as a 'true conservative' even tho he voted right down the pipe w/ all the squishy R's in the Bush years...
And of course the double edged sword of being a gay bashing bible thumper...

txGreg said...

I've not been overly fond of Romney, but being from Texas I'd already ruled out Perry before he even finally got honest enough to announce.

I tried to force myself to like Newt due to his debate performances in spite of the fact that I knew better.

If I had any lingering sympathy for him, he blew it with this fiasco.

In regards to voting for Romney. If you feel forced to do it, you might also consider putting some real effort into surrounding him with real conservatives in Congress. If he's hemmed in by the Tea Party crowd while he's in office, I think he might be effective. Maybe.

elcedar said...

Interesting... Newt and Perry as virtual suicide bombers at the Bain Capital picnic!

Newt is a loose cannon kind of politician. Beware...as the ship of state takes a few rolls, that loose cannon can wreak havoc on all and sundry!

Perry, ummm? Three things about Perry. First, he's a former Democrat. Second ... ummm? Well there's two other things. Let me ask Ron Paul what they were!

Everyone seems to ignore the job Mittens did with the Olympics. I think we all have to admit he turned a disaster into a profitable success. We may not like him, but he has taken over disasters changed the course of events.

I'm torn about Romney mostly because he seems so utterly milquetoast! He apparently never met an Obama policy he didn't like, or maybe he just doesn't have anything in his heart but Jesus' love. I don't know, but now that the Republican Taliban have placed Bain in the spotlight, he will have to defend against all kinds of charges.

This morning I heard claims that Bain got government bail out money. The Dumbo Krats are also going to try to put Bain in the spotlight by talking about some of the Bain takeovers that resulted in the taxpayers having to pick up the pension funds of companies they liquidated.

Of course there's always Ron Paul...but I already lived through the Goldwater debacle, and I don't think Conservatives or Constitutionalists would like to see another landslide loss to an incompetent Statist.

Mike Porter said...

The day Newt sat on that sofa with queen expelosive bolts and vomited climate tripe upon my shoes was the day he landed on my permanent shitlist. Herman Cain was my first choice, though his plan for taxation had one too many nines - I'd go for ten-ten without the sales tax... giving bureauocrats a bottomless VAT from which to feed is a very bad idea. And really, what ever happened to that Clintonian attitude the media once had as concerns sexual predation? And if Perry isn't an idiot, he's doing a damn fine job of hiding it. Huntsman just plain gives me the willies, and Santorum smiles like he's about to confess to crapping on your car seat. Then there's Ron Paul, the crazy uncle who seems quite sane until he gets to his third sentence. Oh well, a true conservative who is truly electable was too much to wish for after all. So Romney, buddy, all we ask of you is that you prove to be a budgetary slash and burn kind of guy who is in the mood for czarocide. Beyond that, just stay the hell out of the way of the (hopefully) conservative Congress and Senate.

CenTexTim said...

@txGreg, @elcedar, and @Mike Porter - One of the (few) things I like about Romney is that he's a flip-flopping milquetoast. He'll bow whichever way the political winds are blowing, which could be a good thing if enough true conservatives are elected to congress.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Pete(Detroit)- I've never been able to think of a Perry vs Obama debate as being anything other than a nightmare for our side. There's a lot to like about Santorum, but I wish he'd shut the heck up about gay marriage even if he feels strongly about it. Whatever side of the argument you're on (and I'm not on his side), as an issue it's not as urgent as rectifying the things that are clearly destroying the country.

txGreg- It's HUGELY important that everyone pay attention to their local races and elect conservatives. The presidential contest will be (nearly) irrelevant if we can't also solidly capture big majorities in the House and Senate.

@elcedar- Very nice breakdown of the various candidates (in fact, I may have a breakdown just reading it).

@Mike Porter- Your analysis is on-target too, and I agree with your assessment of what we'll want from Romney if he gets the nod.

@CenTexTim- Exactly. I can't see Mitt fighting real conservatives if the House and Senate send him the right legislation.

Colby said...

txGreg.... You have said several mouthfuls, my friend! I heard Jim DeMint on the radio the other day talking about how very important the Senate races are. He is concentrating his efforts on having a conservative Senate, and perhaps we should do the same.

I really do belive no matter what Republican candidate was elected, we would be on the right track if the Senate and House were both filled with people who love the USA like Jim Demint or Marco Rubio.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Mike Porter - in re the "Clintonian attitude"...
Anyone notice that there has not been Word One since he put his candidacy 'on hold'?

Yes, a 'which ever way the wind blows' candidate would be fine, w/ a strong conservative wind...

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Colby- Imagining the pleasure of seeing Harry Reid evicted from power is all the incentive I need to work towards getting conservatives into the Senate.

@Pete(Detroit)- Once Cain stepped down, the media was able to put up their "Mission Accomplished" banner long enough for a round of drinks, after which they lost all interest in him.

Meanwhile, PBS (of all outlets) is planning to do a 4-hour series about Bill Clinton, giving a full hour to his infidelities (though I doubt they'll get into his rape of Juanita Broaddrick). But why would PBS do such a thing? Mrs. Jarlsberg and I opine that it will be to give Hillary cover (via public sympathy) for a quick, amicable divorce... freeing her up to run for president without Bill's baggage. And quite possibly being the surprise Democrat candidate in 2012.

My crystal ball may be cloudy, but if not - you read it here first.

Coon Tasty said...

"The way to win this primary and the November election is to sincerely be more like Ronald Reagan."

Hmmm...I disagree. I think the only way to truly ensure that the Democraps get booted out is to be MORE conservative than Reagan. If a candidate came forward and said, "I will repeal DADT, repeal Roe vs. Wade (on the basis that it is a matter for the individual States to legislate about, NOT a Federal matter), repeal Obamacare, build a fence along the entire Mexican border and have it heavily patrolled, actively pursue and deport illegal aliens, pass a law requiring ALL voters to show ID, summary execution for Muslim terrorists, etc, etc"...THAT guy would win in a landslide.

JustaJeepGuy said...

@Coon Tasty,
THAT guy would have my vote now and forever! Barring that, I'll take the "blowin' in the wind" Romney with a conservative Congress.

John the Econ said...

Yesterday during lunch, I suddenly became concerned that I had been teleported to an alternate universe. My channel-surfing had landed me on CNN, where there was a discussion of the Newt-Romney situation. The tone of the conversation went as follows:

Are you all aware that Mitt Romney ran an investment firm where the goal was to make money for Romney and his stockholders?

After that post-capitalist/American nonsense, the next topic was Tim Tebow. That narrative came across as:

Are you all aware that Tim Tebow is a Christian? What is that all about?

Is he not aware that sports figures, and NFL stars in particular are supposed to be secular atheist/agnostic narcissists totally focused on this weekend's game and whatever felonies they're going to commit for the fun if it afterwards? What's with this freak?

That was enough. TV off. I feel like I've been taking crazy pills.

John the Econ said...

Oh, and I concur with most of you on this above; I think Newt has finally sunk himself here. As much as the establishment GOP doesn't get it, Newt clearly gets it even less. By cynically and desperately applying Obama's class-warfare rhetoric he just flushed the Tea Party vote. This bonehead move was a gift to Romney, both by eliminating Newt as a serious contender, but by putting this Bain nonsense out front now, so it will be tired news by the time Obama tries to exploit it come summer.

Thanks Newt. Now go home.

Chuck said...

I like to read the comments as part of the whole comic/commentary layout, so in stead of clicking to view comments, I click on the title of the comic and read them as I am used to reading them. To make a comment, I wind up opening this stupid mini-window ... but it works okay.

As for the topic at hand, we knew it was going to get dirty and ugly ... and I really don't care who gets the GOP nomination: I am ABØ! Heck, I have never voted "for" anyone. My vote has always been "against" what I perceive as the greater evil. Today, that is Øbama, Reid and Pelosi. What I really would like to see is a super-majority in the House AND Senate!

Stan da Man said...

Hey, Chuck thanks for the tip - I much prefer to read the comments 'old school' too! Didn't know you could DO that!

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Coon Tasty- If the candidate you describe can get on the ballot, I will crawl over broken glass to vote for him/her.

@JustaJeepGuy- Doesn't it feel good saying "Conservative Congress?" Let's all say it again right now: "Conservative Congress." I think I just got a tingle in my leg.

@John the Econ- We now have televisions that are supersized, high definition, and 3D - but sadly, no television yet exists that allows us to reach into the screens and choke idiots who desperately need it. As you correctly point out, businesses and stockholders wishing to make money isn't exactly "news," and we don't need a breaking bulletin to announce that a football player is insanely professing his allegiance to the same crazy religious dogma as - oh yeah - Barack Obama.

Meanwhile, Newt is dead to me as a candidate (though I'd be happy to keep him locked up in an attic and well fed as long as he produces useful ideas). Newt's 28-minute attack video has now been shown to not only denigrate capitalism, but the content of the video is filled with outright lies about Romney and Bain. Gingrich should get the hell out of the race now, so his supporters can vote more meaningfully in the primaries for a candidate who might actually win.

@Chuck- HOLY CRAP! Your suggestion works! Readers, if you just click the hypertext title over each day's cartoon, you'll see the cartoon and comments EXACTLY as they used to appear! The only difference is that there's no comment box at the bottom - but there IS a barely-visible link that says "Post a Comment" which will open the pop-up window where you can add you own two cents' worth! (And the reading experience is MUCH easier on the eyes).

Per the political meat of your post, I'm feeling the same way. In November, I'm voting AGAINST Obama, Pelosi, Reid and their ilk whatever name is on the GOP ballot. And I will be voting FOR the most conservative state and local candidates possible.

alan markus said...

Just getting caught up here (and other places too) & saw your 1/6/12 cartoon over at The Macho Response

I'm a big fan of his site (The Crack Emcee) - probably a little too bizarre for the usual conservative crowd, but his perspectives as a conservative angry black are spot on.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Alan- Bizarre and conservative? I'm all over it - and am adding The Macho Response to my list of recommended blogs in the sidebar. Thanks for calling it to our attention!

John the Econ said...

The problem with Tebow is that he's not a safe, harmless "secular Christian", but a genuine one. That's why the left hates him so. On the other hand, absolutely nobody takes Obama's supposed Christianity seriously. Everyone knows better.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John the Econ- As usual, you're right. The media "respects" Obama's Christianity because they assume it's just a game he plays to fool the rubes, but they're frightened by anyone who has genuine faith. Except Muslims, of course.

Emmentaler Limburger said...

OK, let's say that I want to run. Clearly, as y'all know me, I would repeal DADT, repeal Roe vs. Wade (yes, on the basis that it is a matter for the individual States to legislate about, NOT a Federal matter - but I'd have to admit to also being morally opposed to it as well), ensure that the courts interpret the law of the land rather than make the law of the land, repeal Øbamacare as my first act in office, build an ELECTRIC fence along the entire Mexican border and have it heavily patrolled allowing our agents to return deadly force in kind and actually act like law enforcement agent rather than guest concierges; actively pursue and deport illegal aliens, pass a law requiring ALL voters to show state or local ID (absolutely NO federal ID), treatment of foreign Muslim terrorists as enemy combatants, treatment of citizen terrorists or those lending aid to terrorists under the US laws regarding treason, return of the administration of all things charitable to private concerns, proper application of the 10th amendment rather than the very liberal interpretation being used to control your lives...

But there's a problem with my candidacy: the election process has been turned FROM the system the founding fathers envisioned - one where Joe Everyman can get the support of his community, then run and, perhaps, be elected - to a multi-hundreds-of-millions dollar media event DEMANDING that the individual either be a multimillionaire or someone that the political machinery of one of the established parties will rally behind. And, if you have either of those, you still need to make the humongous hurdle of the media, and the devastation they will lay on your life, your friends, and your family.

Any takers?

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Emmentaler- First and foremost, I'd vote for you in a heartbeat.

But you're right about the obstacles which now exist which keep the right kind of people from running for office.

You've got to be highly photogenic and "look" the part, you've got to have access to boatloads of money (either your own, or that obtained by making promises to big donors), you've got to be willing to see your family attacked and/or destroyed, and if you're a conservative you have to accept that there's a whole other Hell reserved for you by the media. All of this being the case, nobody entirely sane would want the job - which is why we see such (ahem) flamboyant personalities in the races these days.

Emmentaler Limburger said...

@Stilton: Vote for me? Shoot - you'd be my running mate. What a cheesy campaign we would run!