There is a qualitative difference between ‘entrepreneurial capitalism’ and the ‘vulture capitalism’ of Mitt Romney

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

There was a line in the victory speech of Willard "Mittens" Romney on Tuesday night that has received quite a bit of commentary:

President Obama wants to put free enterprise on trial. In the last few days, we have seen some desperate Republicans join forces with him. This is such a mistake for our Party and for our nation. This country already has a leader who divides us with the bitter politics of envy. We must offer an alternative vision. I stand ready to lead us down a different path, where we are lifted up by our desire to succeed, not dragged down by a resentment of success. In these difficult times, we cannot abandon the core values that define us as unique — We are One Nation, Under God.

A reporter asked Newt Gingrich about this statement at a campaign event in South Carolina on Wednesday. This was his answer:

I think it’s funny that on the one hand he wants to run around touting his record, on other hand if anybody asks a question about his record, he hides behind an entire framework and to question the facts is to be anti-capitalist. That is nonsense — baloney is the term I think I was using the other morning. The fact is, we have a right to know. We have a right to know what happened at Goldman Sachs, we have a right to to know what happened with trillions of dollars in New York. We have a right to know what happens when companies go bankrupt. I think the country would like to know. And if we’re going to run a presidential campaign on a record, the record has to be open to review. Now this is not anti-capitalism. That is the smoke screen of those who are afraid to be accountable.

This line of attack has been a recurring theme for Mittens on the campaign trail. As Jed Lewison noted at Daily Kos: Mitt Romney campaign: Newt Gingrich is putting free enterprise on trial:

According to Mitt Romney's campaign, if you question Romney's record at Bain, you might as well be a communist—even if you're Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry[.]

* * *

And even worse, you're a coconspirator with President Obama!

Free enterprise is being put on trial by President Obama. And their first witness is Newt Gingrich.

* * *

Instead of actually responding to the criticism, Romney is saying the criticism itself is out of bounds.

The Ayn Rand acolytes of the right-wing noise machine have been foaming at the mouth over the attacks by Gingrich and Governor Goodhair on the excesses of the vulture capitalism of Bain Capital. These right-wing talking heads also believe criticism is out of bounds, and are trying to intimidate the candidates into backing off.

Which surprises me that conservative William Kristol of all people takes these Ayn Rand acolytes to task:

And the unqualified defense of the virtues of Bain Capital by some on the right is also silly. Criticism of any behavior by a private firm? Outrage! An Assault on Capitalism! Haven't they read Schumpeter? Don't they know the glories of Creative Destruction? And, of course, all such destruction must be assumed to be creative!

Yikes. If this is where some in the conservative movement and the Republican party are inclined to go—four cheers for finance capitalism!—good luck. Indeed, it’s useful to flush out this tendency now, and subject it to debate. Because it’s a recipe for political disaster—and intellectual sterility.

Newt Gingrich is correct when he says there is a qualitative difference between “entrepreneurial capitalism” and the "vulture capitalism" Romney did as head of Bain Capital. Newt Gingrich: I'm anti-capitalist? 'Baloney':

“People draw a distinction between investors who want a company to succeed and investors who basically take over a company for the purpose of draining out its cash and walk out without concern about the consequences,” said the former speaker.

Back in December, President Obama went to Osawatomie, Kansas to deliver a speech that echoed "trust buster" populist progressive President Theodore Roosevelt's "Square Deal" speech. Teddy Roosevelt would have none of "Mittens" Romney and his Ayn Rand acolytes arguing that the excesses of laissez-faire "free market" moral nihilists is out of bounds for public scrutiny and accountability. "Trust buster" Teddy Roosevelt based his political career on holding these "malefactors of great wealth" accountable for their destructive actions.

I will repost excerpts from Theodore Roosevelt's New Nationalism (Square Deal) speech below the fold. It's a shame that there are not any Republicans today like Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy would kick Mittens' ass!

Osawatomie, Kansas is where Theodore Roosevelt delivered his New Nationalism speech to a group of Civil War veterans in 1910. (Excerpts):

Practical equality of opportunity for all citizens, when we achieve it, will have two great results. First, every man will have a fair chance to make of himself all that in him lies; to reach the highest point to which his capacities, unassisted by special privilege of his own and unhampered by the special privilege of others, can carry him, and to get for himself and his family substantially what he has earned. Second, equality of opportunity means that the commonwealth will get from every citizen the highest service of which he is capable. No man who carries the burden of the special privileges of another can give to the commonwealth that service to which it is fairly entitled.

I stand for the square deal. But when I say that I am for the square deal, I mean not merely that I stand for fair play under the present rules of the game, but that I stand for having those rules changed so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and of reward for equally good service. One word of warning, which, I think, is hardly necessary in Kansas. When I say I want a square deal for the poor man, I do not mean that I want a square deal for the man who remains poor because he has not got the energy to work for himself. If a man who has had a chance will not make good, then he has got to quit. And you men of the Grand Army, you want justice for the brave man who fought, and punishment for the coward who shirked his work. Is that not so?

Now, this means that our government, National and State, must be freed from the sinister influence or control of special interests. Exactly as the special interests of cotton and slavery threatened our political integrity before the Civil War, so now the great special business interests too often control and corrupt the men and methods of government for their own profit. We must drive the special interests out of politics.

* * *

The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man’s making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have called into being.

There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor an easy task, but it can be done.

We must have complete and effective publicity of corporate affairs, so that the people may know beyond peradventure whether the corporations obey the law and whether their management entitles them to the confidence of the public. It is necessary that laws should be passed to prohibit the use of corporate funds directly or indirectly for political purposes; it is still more necessary that such laws should be thoroughly enforced. Corporate expenditures for political purposes, and especially such expenditures by public-service corporations, have supplied one of the principal sources of corruption in our political affairs.

* * *

We have come to recognize that franchises should never be granted except for a limited time, and never without proper provision for compensation to the public. It is my personal belief that the same kind and degree of control and supervision which should be exercised over public-service corporations should be extended also to combinations which control necessaries of life, such as meat, oil, or coal, or which deal in them on an important scale. I have no doubt that the ordinary man who has control of them is much like ourselves. I have no doubt he would like to do well, but I want to have enough supervision to help him realize that desire to do well.

I believe that the officers, and, especially, the directors, of corporations should be held personally responsible when any corporation breaks the law.

* * *

The absence of effective State, and, especially, national, restraint upon unfair money-getting has tended to create a small class of enormously wealthy and economically powerful men, whose chief object is to hold and increase their power. The prime need to is to change the conditions which enable these men to accumulate power which it is not for the general welfare that they should hold or exercise. We grudge no man a fortune which represents his own power and sagacity, when exercised with entire regard to the welfare of his fellows. . .

We grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used. It is not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community. This, I know, implies a policy of a far more active governmental interference with social and economic conditions in this country than we have yet had, but I think we have got to face the fact that such an increase in governmental control is now necessary.

No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar’s worth of service rendered-not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective-a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate.

The people of the United States suffer from periodical financial panics to a degree substantially unknown to the other nations, which approach us in financial strength. There is no reason why we should suffer what they escape. It is of profound importance that our financial system should be promptly investigated, and so thoroughly and effectively revised as to make it certain that hereafter our currency will no longer fail at critical times to meet our needs.

The entire speech is well worth the read.