Old Frick already set the record straight on what it is Bain Capital does, but unfortunately, the Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson didn’t stop on over to check it out before writing his latest column.
In the 2012 Republican Primary, Mitt Romney’s opponents attacked Romney on Bain Capital for the same reason Obama is doing so: because other than smearing him on his dealings in a confusing industry, Romney is a frustratingly squeaky-clean candidate for an opponent to go after.
Yet in his assault on the role of private equity firms in the movement of capital in a free market economy, Robinson starts with:
Listen to what Newt Gingrich said in January: “The Bain model is to go in at a very low price, borrow an immense amount of money, pay Bain an immense amount of money and leave. I’ll let you decide if that’s really good capitalism. I think that’s exploitation.”
Apparently Robinson didn’t get the memo, but Gingrich is now campaigning for Romney after Romney agreed to politically reprise his role at Bain Capital and help Gingrich with his bankrupt campaign. This current situation calls into question the credibility of his initial, politically motivated attack.
His next champion? A candidate he soundly ridiculed back in the GOP primary, Rick Perry:
Or what Rick Perry said that same month: “There is something inherently wrong when getting rich off failure and sticking it to someone else is how you do your business. I happen to think that that is indefensible.”
In fact, according to Robinson, none of Romney’s primary opponents made any sense, as he himself proclaimed here. If none of these candidates made any sense then, why is Robinson using them as champions of game-changing questions on the value of companies like Bain? Because it’s convenient, and Robinson is unconcerned about intellectual consistency.
What is the “important question” Robinson believes should be asked? Continue reading