Yuvall: you and everyone else here are missing something. Every single Republican in this debacle has shouted how they “will control the size and growth of government.” Would someone tell me how you are going to do that WITHOUT “firing people”??? It Cannot Be Done!
So why are these idiotic arguments against Romney being made? Well, for one thing Romney has used the underhanded and dishonest trick of having “outside” PAC’s smear, tear down and generally do a character assassination job on Newt. All the while Mitt stands there and like Bart Simpson, smugly says “well---it isn’t I, not me, no way man, I didn’t do it—it was those guys in the PAC’s who support me but I can’t control them. Then we have Ron Paul doing the same thing to Newt and justifying it in Lord only knows what logical machinations in that nutso mind of his. So Newt pushes back, Perry and Santorum and Huntsman and Bachman jump in and we now have the promised bloodbath brought on by “politicians, being politicians” though they all deny they are politicians and what happens is once again the public and national interest is placed below the aspirations of the “politicians” who are either outsiders who will clean up the government or “insiders” who are best qualified to clean up the government. Confusing—you bet. So what do we do?
How about the Republican’s start acting like grownups. We certainly don’t have any on the Democrat side. Acknowledge that in a free, capitalistic society we have winners and losers. If the current crop can’t do that; then it is time for the RNC to get together and figure out how to draft an adult at the convention. Rubio, Ryan, Christie—I DON’T CARE—just get an adult in this debate and election.

"If you think about it, and especially if you think about what it is supposed to tell us about Romney, it’s really a profoundly preposterous attack."

Hardly. It is an extremely potent attack. This is why you are seeing Romney's rivals using it: they have focus-grouped these attacks, and they DO resonate with voters.

As I said yesterday, the Vulture does play a vital role in the ecosystem. It liberates calories from sick and dying animals and recycles them. But let's not pretend a Vulture is an Eagle. Or even a Penguin...

Look for a lot more of it to come in the months to follow, and it's very difficult for Mitt to defend against these charges while still maintaining the idea he is a 'job creator.' He is nothing of the sort, and never has been.

I would specifically challenge you to discuss the actual topic, but you seem strangely loathe to do that, preferring instead to waste time with ad hominem attacks, and comments that provide no greater understanding of any topic to any reader. I honestly don't understand the motivation behind such actions.

Boring. Try actually discussing the topic and you'll get a response from me; I'm not interested in your (inaccurate) opinion of me in the slightest.

Hostess (bakers) folds today. Too bad Bain wasn't there for them. One more company gone.

For my money, thefish is a bit of a twit, but he's cleaning your clock in your debates with him.

"You've used this yesterday. "

That's why I wrote 'as I said yesterday.' Did you somehow miss that part?

"Who would confuse the two?"

Romney would, apparently. He seems to view himself as the latter - or would have voters view him that way. But the reality of his experience belies that idea.

Just to be clear, I have no problem with Bain or the business that it's in. I seek no laws nor regulations to stop them from doing what they are currently doing. I have never indicated that I wish to change anything about their business whatsoever.

The sticking point lies in Romney's repeated claims that he is a 'job creator' or in the 'job creation' business. He clearly wasn't either of those things.

Did Bain help some companies survive? Yes, they did. Did they make a ton of money for their investors? Of course. Did they also run some companies into the ground, and send American jobs overseas? Of course they did. To pretend otherwise is a joke. But, that's exactly what he and his campaign would have you believe.

The fact that he continues to profit off of Bain's activities, and refuses to release his tax returns to document just how little he pays in taxes on those profits, opens him up to continued and meaningful criticism on the subject. It was Romney's choice to make his business experience the center of his campaign; he now gets to own that decision.

The entire premise of Romney's campaign and pitch is that he IS a private-sector 'job creator' and someone who knows how to fix the economy that he has claimed Obama 'destroyed with Socialist policies.' The question of his experience cuts directly against this central claim, so I think it is relevant.

You can see where Obama and his crew are going to be headed with this thing. Romney is absolutely the avatar of the 'rich kid,' who spends his entire career playing with other people's money for profit. It doesn't matter if the companies Bain invested in fold or not, as long as the investors made money, because the point wasn't to 'save' jobs or the companies, but to make money. There's a valid place in our economy for this, but it seems heartless and it's really tough for the common guy to relate to.

Comments about enjoying firing people really don't help the narrative, either...