Newt goes for the soundbite at the expense of the facts, again (National Journal, emphasis added):
“I think you have to live in worlds of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and automatic $20-million-a-year income with no work to have some fantasy this far from reality,” Gingrich said, jabbing at some of the details of Romney’s self-released income taxes this week.
It’s just abundantly clear that Newt doesn’t get it.
Mitt Romney’s income is far from automatic. There is risk involved in every investment. Sure, risk can be mitigated or minimized in various ways, but it never goes away. Even the “risk-free” T-Bill was downgraded last year.
I mention this because a certain fellow blogger has focused on Newt’s economic policies as friendlier to the supply-side school of economics. From a policy perspective, this is true. However, statements like this make it clear that Gingrich has none of the underlying respect for investments and upper-income earners that are at the heart of supply-side economics. For Gingrich, the private sector exists to fuel his various government schemes; it has no value of its own.
In short, when it comes to economics, Gingrich may know the words, but not the music.
Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal
P.S. and Non-Seq: Read the whole piece (here it is again); Gingrich’s “guest-worker permit” plan reads a lot like full-blown amnesty to me.
Like this:
Filed under: 2012 Elections, National Politics, Newt Gingrich, Republicans, Supply-side Economics
Newt gets it, he just doesn’t care enough to be honest. He’s trying to win. If class warfare works for Obama, why not use it against Romney?
Who’s idea was it for republicans to have 87 zillion debates to beat each other up for months on end? Why are we doing this?! Before this we had some chance to beat Obama, on his record. Now we have almost no chance because of our own destruction of our candidates.
Romney’s tax returns reinforce the growing perception that “he’s not like me.” It is in fact hard to imagine most folks in today’s economy identifying with him and that is the real target of Gingrich’s remarks you quote above.
But how else does the right-wing liberal suggest we use to address the immigration matter???????????