I just read an article at Human Events that was kind of pimping John Huntsman. Personally, I've never considered him a contender. We don't need a rino right now, which counts him and Romney out in my opinion. Then again, I'm not even sure Huntsman is a rino. He might be a full on democrat calling himself a Republican, look at McCain.
If you need proof of that, refer back to the debate earlier this week where Huntsman said the government should "right size" banks that are too big to fail.
You know, the free market can sure do that without government intervention. If the government would stop giving banks and other businesses a no-fail guarantee in the form of bailouts, maybe the people in charge of these organizations would make better decisions.
There are two reasons businesses, or banks, fail. Either the consumers decide the product or service isn't viable or they are poorly managed. Either of the two are reason enough to allow the free market to weed out the weaker members of the herd. It works great in nature, and so it should in the business world.
So, anyway, Huntsman assertion that government should manage the size of banks is more of the same crap we have been dealing with for years. It doesn't help a bad situation to invest billions of dollars of tax payer money in to it. Why should we, the tax paying citizens, be on the hook for poor decisions or lousy products?
Huntsman should have someone in his organization take the pulse of the American public, we are bailout weary. We are just plain old government intervention weary...
