Except it's not a strawman
Except, it is.
As d_r reworded, the premise is that to stop greedy businessmen from getting too much power, you sick other greedy businessmen to them
Wow. You really think that damn_registrars, of all people in the world, claiming A means B, is actual evidence that A means B?
I was attacking the notion, as the OP quoted, "If you want to catch a thief, set a thief to catch him"
Yes, within a certain context, where government is not siding with the thiefs. You attacked that notion within the context where government is siding with the thiefs (or, at least, you were ignoring whether government was siding with the thiefs).
As I noted in another comment, crony capitalism is not capitalism. Your claim "The existence of crony capitalism is counterexample to the notion that capitalism will protect us" is idiotic, because either it is saying that crony capitalism is capitalism, or it is saying that smitty claimed capitalism will solve all our problems regardless of what government does. Obviously, neither of those is true.
I disagree with your disagreement. Using one's natural faculties to create wealth to further one's own interests is something even animals do.
False. You do not know what "wealth" is. Try harder.
Capitalism is simply a means to an end.
It's the only reasonable means to the end. In what other system would I be free to use my natural faculties to create wealth to further my own interests? Every other system we have works to prevent me from using my natural faculties, or at least significant restricts it, or else it takes my wealth after I've created it, or else it restricts what I can do with my wealth. Capitalism is the only means we've yet seen in humanity for doing this, except for, perhaps, anarchy, which is destructive in other ways.
Adam Smith: it is not from the kindness of bakers in which we get our bread.
You offer this quote as though it disagrees with me in some way. Why?
It's called throwing in additional points to stir discussion.
But, as I said, it was not merely a non sequitur, it was also meaningless. It said nothing. It made no point, and had no meaning.
I was addressing the notion virtue touched upon by the OP.
Yes, by dishonestly and meaninglessly claiming that virtue is only for churches, and not all other aspects of our lives.