Does It Matter When Mitt Romney Left Bain?

The best evidence right now suggests that GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney took a leave of absence from Bain Capital in February of 1999 to help run the Salt Lake City Olympics in Utah. During his leave of absence, Romney continued to sign documents submitted by Bain to the Securities and Exchange Commission, listed himself as the Chief Executive Officer of the company in some of those SEC filings, and reportedly took a $100,000 annual salary. There’s no evidence that Romney was involved in Bain’s day-to-day operations, but he attended board meetings for companies affiliated with Bain, and a Boston Herald report from the time he started his absence — a report touted by the Romney campaign — indicated that Romney planned to “stay on as a part-timer with Bain, providing input on investment and key personnel decisions.” But the bulk of Romney’s time after he left was spent on the Olympics, where he worked “12 hours a day, six days a week,” according to a  Massachusetts state investigation. The Bain team, meanwhile, worked on transitioning Romney out of the top job and putting a new management team in place.

Romney’s campaign insists that Romney left Bain in 1999, saying that although Romney initially took a leave of absence, he later “retired retroactively.” President Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, on the other hand, seems to think that questions about just exactly when Romney left Bain and what he did there are a winning issue, at least in the sense of winning the day: A morning email sent out by the Obama team proposed a slew of detailed questions about Romney’s time at Bain — and when, precisely, it ended.

There are two issues here, and neither of them matter very much. The first is whether Romney’s campaign is being truthful in insisting that he actually left in February of 1999. On the evidence, it looks like he phased full-time into Olympic work, but continued to advise his old company and take a stipend while new leadership was being selected and installed. Given Romney’s longtime prominence in the company — he split off from Bain’s consulting arm to help found the company in the mid 1980s — it does not seem unusual that he should continue to take a moderate salary (for a founding CEO who built a corporate megafortune, $100,000 is a relatively modest stipend) or provide some input on operations in the years immediately following his departure.

So Romney’s campaign is probably overstating its case when declaring that he had zero involvement with the company following his 1999 leave. That’s not a particularly attractive quality in a political candidate, but it’s hardly unprecedented. If rewriting one’s own history is a sin for a presidential candidate, then it’s one that both candidates have committed.

The reason the date fudging supposedly matters in this case is that the Obama campaign has tried to link Romney to Bain investments made after 1999 that involved offshoring. Romney’s campaign has responded by saying that the former Massachusetts cannot be held responsible for investments made after he left.

Er...so what? If Romney is linked to Bain’s offshoring, then we find out, what? That Romney was the head of a successful private equity firm that attempted to wring economic value out of failing or struggling firms — and sometimes that involved laying off workers? That the laid off workers don't like Romney or Bain? And that Democrats don't either? Anyone who dislikes Romney on these grounds already has plenty of reason to dislike him.

I don't think the Obama campaign's attacks are entirely unfair, and in general I think candidates for high office should be exposed to maximum public scrutiny, whether or not it's comfortable. Mitt Romney knew what he was signing up for when he ran for president (again), and given his own intentionally dishonest campaign attack ads, he has little room to complain about negative messaging. But this is much more of a gimmicky PR squabble than a clash of visions. 

Which brings us to the second issue. In theory, the Obama campaign’s attack is tied to a larger debate about job creation: If Romney was responsible for offshoring, the argument goes, then can he really say he created jobs in the private sector? Actually, it shouldn’t make any difference: “Offshoring has no effect on native employment in the aggregate,” according to a recent paper published by the London School of Economics Center for Economic Performance. “While offshore workers compete directly with natives, their employment generates productivity gains that ‘increase the size of the pie,’ leading to an overall neutral impact on native employment.” Democrats, who helped pass the North American Free Trade Agreement in the 1990s, should know this: Manufacturing sector job losses attributed to that agreement were offset elsewhere in the economy

But this isn't really about jobs or the economy. It's not even really about whether Romney's campaign is telling the truth about when the candidate left Bain. It's about defining Romney as an evil capitalist villain and creating a news cycle sideshow. But it tells us almost nothing new about how either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama would govern if given the keys to the White House. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Hugh Akston||

    I demand to see a long form résumé!

  • Caleb Turberville||

    I'm sure the fanboys are gonna nitpick The Dark Knight Rises to death this weekend, especially since The Avengers is now the hottest thing in town.

    ...But I like Tom Hardy's portrayal of Bane. Three words: No shoulder hair.

  • BakedPenguin||

    I wonder why Romney doesn't just say "no one died because of anything I did at Bain. Why doesn't Obama release all information about Fast and Furious?"

  • WWNGD?||

    Because Fast and Furious was an isolated incident that the republicans are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill. Now Romney worked and made money while working, and then said he didn't work there. See how serious that can be?

  • Pip||

    A stipend isn't a salary. My company pays its board members a stipend. Why? Because they aren't employees, they're directors. Every time Obama opens his mouth he's essentially saying, "One born every minute."

  • The Hammer||

    Sarcasm, Pip.

  • Randian||

    Because Romney is a really terrible candidate, that is why.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Romney is laying low and letting the economy do the talking. One may not agree with that strategy but it's not a terrible one.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Romney has one single claim - he can "create jobs" and that is pure bullshit for two reasons:

    1- He didn't and Bain proves it
    2- Government doesn't create jobs

    Therefore Romney has no case to be POTUS.

  • Tulpa the White||

    He has another claim, that he's not Obama. Which is a pretty compelling one.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Right, because Romney wants to kill the Obama spending cuts of the 2011 budget deal (sequestering).

  • ||

    2- Government doesn't create jobs

    Sure but it can destroy jobs and under Obama it is.

    Economist from around the world agree debt at 100% GDP hurts the economy.

    All Romney has to to say is he will cut spending and that will create jobs. Relative to what Obama is doing it will create jobs.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Too late. Romney has said he will increase spending.

    He will restore Medicare cuts and the defense cuts of 2011.

  • ||

    So you agree with standard proven economics; cutting spending helps the economy.

    Glad you finally gave up the bullshit Keynesian thinking of yours.

  • ||

    I have no idea what Romney's strategy is.

    But sitting back and letting the economy shit all over Obama is a winning strategy.

    In fact that same strategy gets some credit for giving Obama his 2008 win.

    Anyway I have been predicting Obama's defeat since at least 2010. And in 2008 I said the democrats would overreach and therefor fuck itself out of office. My prediction has not changed.

  • Bill||

    As soon as he said that, they would find a few people who had gotten sick or died or someone in their family had died within a year or so of a layoff and then say that he did so make people die. They just haven't thought to look for that yet but once the statement was made, 75% of the media would all of a sudden remember what investigative journalism is.

  • Tulpa the White||

    So what if Romney was chief executive of Bain Capital 1999-2002 when it caused America to lose jobs?

    We don't need to do much digging for documents to discover that Obama was chief executive of the federal govt 2009-12 when it caused America to lose jobs.

  • Raven Nation||

    "Obama was chief executive of the federal govt 2009-12 when it caused America to lose jobs":

    Nope, that was still Bush.

  • Mumu Bobby||

    Yes. I remember Bush giving Obama an 8 year warranty. There's still 4 years to go!

  • Tulpa the White||

    Not sure what level that's supposed to be at, which makes it excellent sarcasm.

  • Aresen||

    Well, duh!

    Bain was an evil profit making company and is therefore bad, unlike the Green Jobs companies that make big campaign donations to Team Blue works with to help get America growing.

  • Joe R.||

    Let me explain to you how this works: you see, the corporations finance Team America, and then Team America goes out, and the corporations sit there in their corporation buildings, and see, they're all corporationy, and they make money.

  • Zeb||

    My first thought when I hear "OMG outsourcing jerbs" is to think, "don't they need jobs in China (or wherever) too?". And my second thought is that those weren't American jobs, they were Bain capital's jobs to do with what they saw fit.

    The Democrats really make things difficult for themselves in trying to be both the party of labor unions and the fancy, worldly, cosmopolitan party that wants to be friends with the rest of the world.

  • ||

    Don't forget the fact that those jobs were lost anyway since the previous owners had pretty much run the companies into the ground when Bain stepped in.

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, there's that too. Basically everyone could lose their jobs and their money, or some people could lose their jobs, some people could gain jobs (albeit no in the US) and some people would lose less money than otherwise. Not a tough choice.

  • Lyle||

    Is it okay to call Obama and the Democratic Party socialist now?

    The State creates business is their economic plank now.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I'd go more with fascist than socialist.

  • Suki||

    If there is a difference between party flags, what is it?

  • Suki||

    I mean if there is a difference *beyond* party flags, what is it?

  • Tulpa the White||

    Fascists don't insist on the government formally owning the means of production, so you wind up with nominally private industry subject to heavy government control, rather than government owned industry.

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, that sounds about right as a description of Democrats.

  • Suki||

    So, a distinction without much difference.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Fascist women also make better lovers.

  • Suki||

    Fashion makes the fascist.

  • ||

    Fascists don't insist on the government formally owning the means of production, so you wind up with nominally private industry subject to heavy government control, rather than government owned industry.

    That's actually to the Fascists' benefit. (Almost) all the control and none of the blame when something goes to shit. Like being #2 on the Enterprise. Obama is Riker.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Riker controlled jack. He was the worst officer ever.

  • Tulpa the White||

    The whole command structure of that ship was a disaster.

    Chief O'Brien bounced from Lt to NCO randomly, and by the finale Counselor Troi outranked Data!

  • T o n y||

    Ambition is an emotion.

  • ||

    Kirk's first officer NEVER tells him to stay on the bridge.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Kirk's first officer had some serious dominatrix issues. No wonder the Fed sent them to patrol the outer rim where the most high-profile job was fixing space amoeba.

  • db||

    I've been to The Rim

  • Hugh Akston||

    He was also racist against Ferengis.

  • ||

    Yeah, but that's completely understandable, Hugh. Unlike crashing the saucer section into a planet. What a dumbass.

  • Killazontherun||

    Dirty money grubbing space joos, not like honorable officers enforcing the righteous law of the Federation.

  • Killazontherun||

    'Fascist' has been ran into the ground. 'Socialist' is new and hip and according to the polls the youngsters love it!

  • Lyle||

    I'm not too uncomfortable with that either. Progressives have been trending towards fascism for some time now.

  • T o n y||

    If that were the case you'd think they'd have rid us of the filibuster... at least.

  • Lyle||

    Haha.

  • Lyle||

    They tried... fascist.

  • Mumu Bobby||

    I'm pretty near sure that the filibuster is fascist. And likely racist.

  • Mickey Rat||

    I thought the Progressives loved the filibuster, that it was a vital aspect to the institution of the Senate?

    Oh, right, sorry, Iforgot. That was when the Dems did not have a majority in the Senate,

  • Suki||

    I thought Jonah Goldberg showed they are the same thing?

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    Fascism is a right wing disease.

    Liberal Fascism is like Jumbo Shrimp.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Quite right, just like Liberal Leftism. But seeing as how the statists adopted the word liberal, the shrimp have become lobsters.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    I agree with you here.

  • Suki||

    How is fascism right wing again?

  • ant1sthenes||

    "Fascism is a right wing disease."

    Relative to Communism, sure. But it's really more of a centrist evil, combining the worst aspects of left and right ideology.

  • ||

    Obama: you can have the keys to the White House when I drop a non-functioning copy into your cold dead hands.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    The first is whether Romney’s campaign is being truthful in insisting that he actually left in February of 1999.

    What's the second issue? Try as I might, I can't suss it out.

  • wareagle||

    I'm still trying to figure out why "the first" matters. The most amazing feat is that this narrative has held for as long as it has. Then again, when you have a record - for the first time in your life - but it is a sorry one, you will look for anything else.

  • Mumu Bobby||

    It matters because it puts Romney on the defense. It will continue to matter until something better comes along.

    Probably related to Mormonism, which is way worse than anything Rev. Wright did or said, or will ever do or say.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Which brings us to the second issue.

    Was that there before? I am made to look the fool.

  • Mike M.||

    I think I have a pretty darn good idea about how Obama intends to govern if he gets the keys to the White House for four more years.

    Here's a clue: think the last three and a half years, only about five times worse.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    Well, I will say this: If Mitt Romney were secretly running Bain Capital while managing a turnaround of the Olympics then, politics aside, he really is a badass, at least on a personal level. What was he doing in his spare time, writing symphonies and personally decoding the human genome?

  • Lyle||

    Chuckle.

  • Pip||

    "What was he doing in his spare time, writing symphonies and personally decoding the human genome?"

    He outsourced that to Dunphy.

  • General Butt Naked||

    +Faye Dunaway

  • ||

    But it tells us almost nothing new about how either Mitt Romney or Barack Obama would govern if given the keys to the White House.

    And that's entirely the point.

  • mustard||

    So his defense is that he was running the Olympics? They employ even more foreign workers than Bain did! Plus they give medals away to foreigners that Americans could use.

  • ||

    Those things could be melted down and made into lawn darts for sending immigrants scurrying for cover!

  • tom.darga||

    Whether or not a candidate is telling the truth is always relevant.

    I don't think the outsourcing thing is a big deal, but I do think that the fact that Romney is absolutely steeped in the current culture of corporate corruption is relevant. He's just another CEO who collects big checks and denies knowing anything about anything when the shit hits the fan.

    Corzine, Dimon, Romney - they're all just Rats.

  • wareagle||

    try bringing something rational to the party, something other than "I hate all those corporate types."
    --Romney ran a venture capital shop; a lot of companies managed to survive and grow.
    --Dimon runs a bank that lost money from an investment fund and still turned a big quarterly profit.
    --Corzine "lost" a billion dollars of other people's money.

    One of these is not like the others.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    MFG's funds have been located and Corzine didn't have any of it.

    Another wingneck lie from you.

  • tom.darga||

    Um .. if you steal someones money and then use it to pay back someone you own money too, you are still a thief even if later none of the stolen money is in your own pockets any longer.

    This is not hard people.

  • tom.darga||

    Um .. if you steal someones money and then use it to pay back someone you own money too, you are still a thief even if later none of the stolen money is in your own pockets any longer.

    This is not hard people.

  • tom.darga||

    "Dimon runs a bank that lost money from an investment fund and still turned a big quarterly profit."

    Not, it didn't. He dipped into loss reserves and engaged in other "earnings management" (ie. shifting money around to make the appearance of a profit on paper). Not the same thing.

  • Mumu Bobby||

    So they planned ahead for such a disaster.

    That pretty much proves that they're bastards. The bastards.

  • Alan Vanneman||

    "The best evidence right now suggests that GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney took a leave of absence ..."

    If you're the President, CEO, and sole shareholder of a company, it doesn't matter if you take a "leave of absence" or not. It's still your fucking company. Mr. Suderman spends about a thousand words trying to cover up the fact that Obama has found himself a nice stick with which to beat poor Mitt, and that's what's going to happen. And the fact that poor Mitt will only release two years' tax returns, after giving up 23 years' worth to be vetted as McCain's VP in 2008 only makes things worse.

  • tom.darga||

    Apparently, according to some of the ass-kissing sycophants in the press, being "President, CEO, and sole shareholder of a company" is just "boilerplate" and doesn't mean anything and could as easily apply to the guy who mops the floor as much as they guy who runs the show.

  • Suki||

    According to the Maobama klan, there are no people in corporations.

  • ||

    If you're the President of the United States, it doesn't matter if you complain about "broken Washington politics" or not, it's still your fucking administration running (ruining) the country.

  • Tulpa the White||

    You're on my shit list with Steigerwald and Bono now. How dare you preempt me!

  • Tulpa the White||

    However, you can be President of the United States and bear no responsibility for the federal govt's performance, according to Mr Obama.

  • T o n y||

    The president has the unfortunate role of being highly visible yet legislatively impotent. The American people gave us a GOP House in 2010. They're the ones acting like retards and not doing anything. The president can't sign bills that don't come, all he can really do is talk. Why people assume he can do more domestically than his office allows continues to perplex me, especially when those same people bitch about every executive order.

  • Tulpa the White||

    So since he's totally incapable of getting anything done....we should give him four more years?

  • T o n y||

    Along with a Democratic majority in Congress, yes.

  • ||

    So as a voter i know that would not happen.

    Tony, did you just endorse Romney?

    Idiot.

  • Tulpa the White||

    "We" tried that already, too.

  • T o n y||

    I was reasonably satisfied with the results, would have been happier without the filibuster.

  • wareagle||

    legislatively impotent? Really? Hasn't stopped him re: immigration, from deciding it's okay to kill American citizens, from deciding he won't enforce laws that give him political heartburn, etc.

    The whole reason "the American people gave us the GOP House" is because a lot of those same American people had given Obama Dem majorities in both houses, and they decided that was a bad idea.

    For the first time in his life, Obama has a record. And he is running away from it quite fast.

  • T o n y||

    Look I choke down the words and actions of the other side so I'm informed, the least you can do is the same about Obama. You don't know what you're talking about because you're just repeating slogans you read at Redstate or something. What do you mean he's running away from his record? What standard are you using? Obviously not the words coming out of his mouth. He's even defending healthcare reform!

  • Tulpa the White||

    What amazes me is that leftists apparently think that the presidency is powerful enough for Bush to have destroyed the country with it -- while never having a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, as BO did -- yet it's so weak that Obama can't be held responsible for anything.

  • ||

    Why does absolutely retarded partisan dipshittery amaze you? It's not like you don't see this cognitive dissonance shit every fucking day from the TEAM idiots.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I'm like Prometheus and my liver is my expectation of honesty.

  • T o n y||

    Obama never had a filibuster-proof majority, especially if you define that as carte blanche.

    And Democrats are pussies. That's partly why Bush got away with so much, in addition to Republicans being vicious and power hungry. It's definitely they who have flipflopped more on presidential authority.

  • ||

    And Democrats are pussies. That's partly why Bush got away with so much

    yeah cuz blaming the Blue Dog democrats of 2009 for running up deficits, increasing regulations more then any other president before, passing no child left behind and donut hole prescription drug benefits makes a whole hell of a lot of sense.

    You are an idiot.

  • Not an Economist||

    I noticed you started with 2010? I thought Obama was president before then?

  • T o n y||

    It became clear that more stimulative measures needed to be taken after the first one buttressed the economy but did not restore it to acceptable growth. That became impossible after 2010. I don't see why you should think Congress blameless.

  • T o n y||

    It became clear that more stimulative measures needed to be taken after the first one buttressed the economy but did not restore it to acceptable growth. That became impossible after 2010. I don't see why you should think Congress blameless.

  • Not an Economist||

    I don't. I don't see why you think Obama is blameless. If we adopted his policies his administration said unemployment would never get above 8%. It hasn't dipped below that in a while. And in reality it is even worse than that because the percentage working is worse. And don't give me that BS about them not knowing how bad it was. It was there JOB to know how bad it was.

  • Mumu Bobby||

    The American people are retards because they didn't toss out the President in 2010 too? Maybe so. Though to be fair there was a shortage of pitchforks and wooden torches at the time.

  • ||

    legislatively impotent.

    2009 and 2010 disagree with you.

  • ant1sthenes||

    "The president has the unfortunate role of being highly visible yet legislatively impotent."

    According to the Constitution, sure. But in practice, he has shown he is willing and able to usurp the legislative power when it suits him.

  • Killazontherun||

    What was he doing with those other 84 hours in the week while with the Olympics, right AV?

  • Pro Libertate||

    This is such a nonissue. The guy had no reason to be deceptive about this and almost certainly was taking a less active role. $100K is chump change at his level.

    Honestly, trying to make hay out of this nonsense just shows how desperate Obama has become.

    There's plenty wrong with Romney, but Obama can't go for the more stinging attacks, because he's incredible vulnerable on anything substantive.

  • T o n y||

    The core of Obama's stump has been contrasting Republican and Democratic economic policy priorities. And even though his description of the plan Romney endorsed sounds cartoonish, thanks to Paul Ryan etc., it's perfectly honest.

  • wareagle||

    no, the core of Obama's stump has been blaming things on other people, other countries, even bad weather in other continents. He owns the economy and has nothing to show for it. Can't run on his record so he runs against his opponent's non-political record.

  • T o n y||

    So what you're saying is you haven't listened to his stump speech, but you've nearly memorized the Crossroads GPS ad.

  • wareagle||

    Interesting that you are more familiar with Rove's group and its ads than anyone here. Obama's stump speech has been relatively unchanged for four years now - someone or something is to blame for anything not going his way. It's like he still doesn't get that he won the 2008 election, that he is actually POTUS, not just a candidate for it.

    Since this is Obama, words are more irrelevant than usual. He's had 3 and a half years to develop a record, and he cannot run away from it fast enough:
    -unemployment is higher than when he took office
    -the actual labor pool is smaller, so the jobless number is even worse
    -gas prices have close to doubled (didn't Nancy think this was Bush's fault back in '06?)
    -his administration has led to the Muslim Brotherhood winning election in one Arab country and poised to do so in a second
    -he whines about the tone of Washington as if no one will notice that he LEADS Washington.

    All the speechifying in the world does not change that.

  • T o n y||

    Interesting that you are more familiar with Rove's group and its ads than anyone here.

    Not interesting at all. I pay close attention to my enemies. Why do you think I'm here?

    Obama's stump speech has been relatively unchanged for four years now - someone or something is to blame for anything not going his way.

    Just admit you've never had the stomach to sit through an Obama speech.

    Obama didn't create the economic crisis and has been hamstrung by Republicans for two years to do anything about it, and they're doing it on purpose and everybody knows it. Your other grievances are too ridiculous to address.

  • Mumu Bobby||

    Finally somebody figured out Team Red:

    1) Wreck the economy,
    2) Get Romney elected,
    3) ?????,
    4) Profit

  • ||

    I pay close attention to my enemies. Why do you think I'm here?

    average reason commenter is Pro legalization of pot, pro gay marriage, anti-republican, anti-war, anti-cronyism...

    Yes I can see why you are here.

    It is because you are an idiot.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    This is such a nonissue. The guy had no reason to be deceptive about this and almost certainly was taking a less active role. $100K is chump change at his level.

    Actually, Romney had a very good reason to be deceptive about it, but in the opposite direction of what Obama is claiming now.

    Had Romney Sold Bain, or even resigned as CEO when he went to 'fix' the Olympics, it would have been harder for him to claim that he was a MA resident, as required for his run as governor.

    His ballot access was challenged on the grounds that he was not a resident, a challenge he defeated in part by showing that he was only on a leave of absence from Bain.

  • R C Dean||

    Sure, sure, Mr. V.

    But this is character assassination, here. The point is to make Romney look like a bad person. For that to stick, he has to be personally, directly, responsible for the outsourcing. If he was on leave of absence from his company, then you can't really tag him for being personally, directly responsible.

    If you think about the narrative, it looks like Bain didn't countenance any outsourcing while Romney was there in person. Then, as soon as he leaves the building, his little minions start outsourcing like crazy.

    Its almost like they wanted to do it all along, but he was holding them back.

    Now, I'm no Romney fan (as regulars will know). But this is cheap class warfare, personal attack, character assassination politics, and its practitioners should be spit on, period.

    The fact that they are so stupid that they have set up a counternarrative that Romney the hero is just, well, par for the course for these idiots.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    IOW, Romney is no job creator - his sole claim to the throne.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    As stated above, his sole claim to the throne is that he isn't Obama. And it will be enough.

  • Killazontherun||

    Also, any research into the president's past beyond two thirds of his whole name is racist. Don't forget that, people,.

  • Pip||

    Christ are you ever stupid, Anal.

    "And the fact that poor Mitt will only release two years' tax returns, after giving up 23 years' worth to be vetted as McCain's VP in 2008 only makes things worse."

    So we're only missing returns from 2008 and 2009 then?

    Look, Obama is a lying jerk and he knows it. It's all he's got. He blew his wad on the Whitehouse lawn with Obamacare. End of story.

  • wareagle||

    what does Alan think more tax returns will reveal beyond confirmation that Romney is wealthy. Just a guess, but I think most folks know that already.

  • tom.darga||

    Do they matter,
    those dreams from the pits?
    You can drink
    and forget
    and be glad
    and people won't say that you're mad
    because they'll know that you fought
    for your country
    and no one
    will worry
    a bit

  • T o n y||

    It's a perfectly relevant question to ask how Romney's business experience will inform his presidency. I personally don't give a shit, as the more interesting question to me is how Mitt Romney was chosen as the 'safe' candidate by the Republican primary electorate. The guy is a child in a politician's costume. He needs to take the advice of some of his desperate Republican friends and get new management at campaign HQ. A good businessman would know when his enterprise was flailing about like a brain-damaged monkey. Maybe he should sing 'America the Beautiful' some more. Jesus Christ.

  • Mrs. Kravitz||

    You know who else sang?

  • T o n y||

    Hyacinth Bucket?

    "You can't all expect to have voices like myself and Joan Sutherland."

  • Tulpa the White||

    The guy is a child in a politician's costume.

    Those are the same costume.

  • Lyle||

    ... and so convenient when President Obama has NO business experience. Apparently not competent enough to even take on such a challenge.

  • T o n y||

    What is the virtue of business experience in a president? The two biggest businessman presidents of the 20th century were Hoover and G.W. Bush, both considered disasters. Governing is different from running a business in very important ways.

  • Lyle||

    I don't know... knowing how business works, which is kind of key to the economy and jobs and such.

    What's the biggest problem in America right now? The economy. And we have a President who knows jack all.

  • T o n y||

    Whatever their respective backgrounds, it's the case that Obama's prescriptions for the economy come from mainstream economists. Romney's come from spittle flinging radio personalities.

  • Mike M.||

    Right, we should pick nothing but "community organizers", whatever the fuck they are, because everyone can see how great that's working out.

  • ||

    The guy is a child in a politician's costume.

    A Mormon Republican who got elected as Governor of Massachusetts...

    You are an idiot Tony.

  • T o n y||

    Would that be the only election he's ever won?

  • ||

    How many elections did Obama win before running for president?

    You are an idiot.

  • R C Dean||

    The guy is a child in a politician's costume.

    As perfect a description of Obama as I have read in quite some time.

  • R C Dean||

    I mean, the opportunities to tu quoque every Obama attack into oblivion just fall out of the skies, and the idiot Repubs won't take them.

    "I know you've heard the President accuse me of outsourcing while I was at Bain. As far as I can tell, he is accusing Bain of outsourcing while I was on leave to run the Olympics. Let's not get bogged down in details of what I was actually doing at Bain while I was on leave; I'll just take full responsibility for every job outsourced by Bain.

    By my reckoning, that comes to _________ jobs. Compare that to the jobs outsourced with your tax money by the Obama administration: _____________ jobs.

    There. We've both outsourced jobs. The only difference is, he outsourced more jobs, and did it with your money. I hope we can put this issue to rest and, to coin a phrase, move on."

  • T o n y||

    He's tried that very strategy many times. Basically taken Obama's line and just filled in Obama's name. "He's the real outsourcer in chief!" But it's so obvious and poorly delivered that it fails to stick. The Karl Rove strategy as interpreted, apparently, by morons. Which is just bizarre since Rove was able to turn George W. Bush into a strong leader.

  • Drake||

    Who outsourced our space program to the Russians?

  • Ken Shultz||

    Romney's people seem to think that if he can just avoid making any major mistakes, that Obama is unpopular enough in the right states that Romney should be able to cruise to victory.

    I'm not sure he's wrong about that. Because Obama seems to be on the offensive all the time--which would suggest that Obama's people think that if he doesn't score some cheap points, he won't be reelected.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Unlike Romney, BO can't hide. So his only option is to attack.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    That, and it's too early to go on full offensive. Most people are barely paying attention, and Romney has a warchest to fill. He didn't come in flush like Obama.

    Obama, on the other hand, seems hell bent on spending away his cash advantage in order to raise Romney's negatives before the convention. I think they're worried Romney will get his convention bump and ride it to November.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Presidents Dukakis and Kerrey followed that strategy.

    Didn't work out too well for them.

  • ||

    The ample opportunities the Romney campaign has had to skull fuck the Obama campaign with stuff like that proves how fucking arcane the GOP machine is.

  • ||

    He doesn't really need to attack Obama yet. Obama is doing a great job by himself. It's like he swapped faces with Joe Biden.

  • Tulpa the White||

    This. BO's getting his ass kicked at shadow boxing.

  • Drake||

    Is there a large company in the U.S. that hasn't "outsourced" some of its functions? The loaded cost of American workers is just too high in comparison to other parts of the world to resist.

    With Obamacare and more regulations in the pipeline, Obama is doing more to encourage sending jobs offshore than any Bain money man ever did.

  • Gladstone||

    I don't think the Obama campaign's attacks are entirely unfair

    Is Sudermann playing to do a follow up on this?

  • Gladstone||

  • Ken Shultz||

    I think Obama is a toe-licking democratic socialist, and I don't think Obama's attacks on this are entirely unfair.

    I think they're wrong. I think Obama is wrong for criticizing outsourcing. I think it shows how little Obama knows about free trade or how the economy works.

    Doesn't mean Obama's being unfair. It just means he doesn't know what he's talking about.

    I think Obama pontificates and pounds the desk on things he knows nothing about--sort of like Tulpa. But that doesn't mean Obama's being unfair. Tulpa will turn around and add something unfair, too, but I don't think Obama's doing that, here.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I loom large.

  • Killazontherun||

    The talk of the town, the infamous fermentor of rouse.

  • Killazontherun||

    formentor!

    At the moment I'm adding brandied peaches I scathed in fire to my mix bucket, hence fermentation on my mind.

  • ||

    You took more satisfaction (pedantic condemnation is satisfying isn't it?) over Giffards death then anyone else.

    I will give you that.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Giffords isn't dead yet.

  • Killazontherun||

    Yeah, I agree with Pete. It's not entirely unfair. I like seeing the tit for tat of opposition research in action for the game value, and his-shit-don't-stink McCain robbed of us of the entertainment value of venality with his high and mighty attitude about staying focused on the issues. A fat lot of good that it did him to denounce every ally he ever stood on stage with whose comments on Obama went beyond two thirds of his whole name.

    More venality! With Obama going negative, Romney has little excuse not too. We're finally going to get the cage match this country deserves, and deserves hard.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Lying and misrepresenting is unfair.

    If all BO were doing was saying Mitt is rich and his company laid people off, that would be red-herringish but "fair". They're not; they're calling him a "pioneer of outsourcing" and saying he committed felonies. Very different thing.

  • Killazontherun||

    Romney was hesitant to unleash the hounds until Gingrich took South Carolina. Obama campaign overkill is a good thing for your team because Romney should take from this that his opponent has no honor and deserves no quarter.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    The Libertarian Case for Obama
    Seven potential upsides to a hope-monger presidency

    It's amazing how completely wrong they were on every fucking point.

  • Ken Shultz||

    If Mitt Romney laid people off and replaced them with outsourcing, that makes me more likely to vote for him.

    This would be a great time for Romney to talk about the South Korean and Colombian Free Trade agreements--and how Barack Obama continues to hold the U.S. economy hostage for the benefit of unions.

    And as the recent failed recall in quasi-Canadian Wisconsin just demonstrated, Obama is vulnerable on his support for Unions.

    Obama should be ashamed of himself.

  • Drake||

    I'm looking for a President to lay off a couple hundred thousand federal employees - and not replace them.

  • Ken Shultz||

    That's what I'm talkin' about!

  • ZundoRann||

    Sounds like s plan dude.

    www.Get-Private.tk

  • 0x90||

    I think outsourcing is great. Without it, there would be a deal of money still in Europe, instead of in my pocket, here in the US. And even for those who do business domestically, how many do so only with people in their own state, county, city, neighborhood, or family? All trade does, or does not, involve outsourcing, depending on the resolution you use. It's only the rah-rah jingoist who sees the question purely in terms of national borders.

  • Adam330||

    I don't really like either of these guys, but the fact that Obama thinks this attack has any merit whatsoever ensures that I will certainly not vote for him.

  • ||

    you cannot claim Clinton created jobs while simultaneously claiming Romney cannot create jobs.

    Romney has claimed he will cut spending (clinton balanced the budget) and the record of Bain capital is exactly what Clinton meant when he said creative destruction.

    And yes economists agree with me:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07.....wanted=all

    note i have no faith in Romney cutting spending...he might be better then Obama on free trade but who the fuck really knows.

    Anyway the point is the left have gone bat shit insane.

  • db||

    No one else will make the Bane/Bain connection this week, I promise.

    You know what? Fuck you, Suderman.

  • Randian||

    That posted was practically riddled with errors.

  • ||

    In all honesty Romney fits the Bruce Wayne narrative more then the Bane Dorrance narrative.

    But who knows maybe his opponents are saying they think Romney was born and raised in a Mexican prison.

  • Killazontherun||

    George Lopez had an actual funny joke (I know out of know where he says something deserving a belly laugh) about Romney not acknowledging he Latino.

  • ||

    Does Romney speak Spanish?

  • ||

    Well he can read it from a card saying he approves of this message at least.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6PYDh6Wgts

  • Killazontherun||

    All of my Mormon friends were sent to Spanish speaking countries for their year of service. One to Argentina during the Falklands War when we were not exactly popular for our fake neutrality.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    This issue also serves as another example of how the Mainstream media carries water for the Obama.

    The Obama campaign wanted to create an issue about Romney's history at Bain that the lapdog press went right along with it.

    The media that could never (and still can't) be bothered to ever investigate anything about Obama's history can be counted on to try to dig up anyting it can on Romney or amplify anything the Democrats want to initiate.

    Obama joined a radical leftist party called the "New party" back in Chicago when he started getting into politics there. He lied about it and claimed he was never a member. He has lied about his assocation with Bill Ayers and the Rev Wright. Obama's team tried to pay Rev Wright $150 K to keep his mouth shut.

    The same media that is eagerly digging for anyting it can find on Romney ins't the least bit interested into digging further into any of that about Obama.

  • Killazontherun||

    Obama joined a radical leftist party called the "New party" back in Chicago when he started getting into politics there.

    A fact of which Nick G. had a brainfart over the last time he ventured into the whether Obama is a socialist or not territory. At this point, of course he is a socialist. Denial of that fact is absurd.

  • T o n y||

    Bill Ayers? Rev Wright? Never heard of them. Must have been that total media blackout. Nope, not a single word in the press about those figures. It can't be the case that you're just pissed they never found anything that damaging to Obama.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I've never heard anything about Ayers in the MSM. Also it was Hillary Clinton who beat up on him with the Rev Wright issue, not the GOP at first.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Normal people would refuse to associate with thugs like Ayers and Wright.

  • T o n y||

    If they're thugs, what's Dick Cheney?

  • XM||

    Former vice president of the United States.

    Ayers and Wright are either thugs or loons. Normal people will find them as such and won't rush to find their GOP equivalents for the sake of diversity.

  • ajain31||

    "Given the precedent set by past seven Presidents and Presidential candidates of releasing multi-year tax returns why is Romney making an exception?" Because he has a lot to hide, apparently.

    He's the only one that knows what's in there, and apparently he's made the judgement that he's better off having us suspect the worst, rather than us knowing whats in there, which apparently in his mind is worse than anything we're likely to imagine.

    Possibilities include:

    (1) He ended up with 120 million in his 401K by the trick of agreeing with Bain to grossly undervalue the market value of his stock, then a few years later have the stock get unvalued to the stratosphere.

    (2) He participated in the tax avoidance amnesty program of a few years back, avoiding major tax penalties or prosecution.

    (3) Any one or more of the other borderline legal but very bad smelling tax dodges-- "in-kind" trades, "no-risk" trades, no-risk write-offs, the list is almost endless.

    And BTW he HASNT even released all of his 2010 return, he very conveniently left off the foreign investments and deposits form. Very convenient.

    And his argument that it would be "bothersome" to collect the tax data is a crock too-- he supposedly collected 23 years of the stuff to show to McCain in 2008.

  • ajain31||

    Two-Faced Willard

    "I was not responsible for what happened at Bain Capital" - Mitt Romney
    "I was the Sole shareholder, Sole director, Chief executive officer and President of Bain" - Mitt Romney

    "The Arizona immigration policy is a good model" – Mitt Romney
    "I didn't really support the Arizona immigration policy" – Mitt Romney

    “The Massachusetts healthcare plan should be a model for the nation” – Mitt Romney
    “Healthcare reform should be left to the states” – Mitt Romney

    "Let Detroit go bankrupt" -Mitt Romney
    "I'll take a lot of credit for saving the auto industry" -Mitt Romney

    “I believe Roe v Wade has gone too far.” – Mitt Romney
    “Roe v Wade has been the law for 20 years we should sustain and support it.” – Mitt Romney

    “I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose.” – Mitt Romney
    “I never really called myself pro-choice.” – Mitt Romney

    “It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam.” – Mitt Romney
    “I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and represent our country there.” – Mitt Romney

    “I’m not trying to return to Reagan-Bush.” – Mitt Romney
    “Ronald Reagan is… my hero.” – Mitt Romney

  • ajain31||

    “I think the minimum wage ought to keep pace with inflation.” – Mitt Romney
    "There’s no question raising the minimum wage excessively causes a loss of jobs.” – Mitt Romney

    “I saw my father march with Martin Luther King.” – Mitt Romney
    “I did not see it with my own eyes.” – Mitt Romney

    “I would like to have campaign spending limits.” – Mitt Romney
    “The American people should be free to advocate for their candidates without burdensome limitations.” – Mitt Romney

    “I supported the assault weapon ban.” – Mitt Romney
    "I don’t support any gun control legislation.” – Mitt Romney

  • ajain31||

    On Friday the 13th (7/13/2012) the very illusive Mitt Romney gave very defensive interviews to all FIVE networks on a single day at once!! Just a few days ago Mitt Romney said to FOX News that explaining means that you are WEAK. So his five interviews "explaining" his time at Bain were signs of his weakness!!

    Presidential Candidate Mr. Mitt Romney maybe feeling the heat on his role in BAIN Capital, his business experience which was supposed to be his sole criteria for creating jobs and his greatest qualification for running for the American Presidency in the current economy in 2012!

    However SEC documents show Mitt Romney as sole owner of all shares of Bain Capital. Romney is shown as CEO, President and Chairman of Board of Bain Capital in 2001 and 2002 then LEGALLY speaking Mitt Romney has been responsible to all that goes on under the banner of Bain Capital.

    Mitt Romney can not just share the good like job creation from 1999 to 2002 and leave the ugly like Bankruptcies and layoffs behind as if he had nothing to do about them from 1999 to 2002.

  • ajain31||

    If he really wanted to disassociate himself from Bain Capital he could have resigned and sold all his shares in Bain Capital in February 1999 then it would have been a different matter but to share in the glory of Bain's job creation accept a salary of $100,000 or MORE (where are the Tax Returns?) for three years and only to refuse to take the responsibility of Bankruptcies and layoffs on his WATCH (1999-2002) is trying to have it both ways and then complaining of playing politics having been caught with his hand in the proverbial Cookie Jar that is the very essence of an ACTIVE LEGAL ROLE in Bain Capital till 2002!! Was Romney getting $100,000.00 or more to do NOTHING for BAIN Capital???

    Mitt Romney will have to face the consequences of this leaving Bain "lie" that Mitt Romney has brought on upon himself. If we keep reminding the Romney campaign of the Bain exit lie and Romney's ill effects on workers robbing them of their hard earned salaries and life long benefits all the way to November then 7/13/2012 (FRIDAY the 13th) will go down as the turning point of the 2012 Presidential election!

  • ajain31||

    " ... Mitt Romney senior adviser Ed Gillespie said Sunday on CNN’s "State of the Union" the GOP candidate “retroactively” retired from Bain Capital after the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics began. ... "

    No body who has been drawing at LEAST $100,000.00 per year from 1999 to 2002 from Bain Capital “retroactively” retires from Bain Capital AFTER the 2002!!! Then why draw the salary of at LEAST $100,000.00 per year from 1999 to 2002 from Bain Capital if Romney retired from Bain “retroactively” !!!

    " ... Gillespie continued, "He took a leave of absence and, in fact, Candy, he ended up not going back at all and retired retroactively to February of 1999 as a result." ... "

    However SEC documents show Mitt Romney as sole owner of all shares of Bain Capital. Romney is also shown as CEO, President and Chairman of Board of Bain Capital in 2001 and 2002 then LEGALLY speaking Mitt Romney has been responsible to all that goes on under the banner of Bain Capital. Then to run for Governor of MA Romney sought residency of MA by lieu of his Bain positions. Now either Romney was at the Olympics OR he was at BAIN.

    Only one can be true not BOTH at the same time simultaneously!!! Will the true Willard Mitt Romney stand up and accept ONE thing? Does Romney want to accept untrue SEC filings and be called a Felon or agree that he represented Bain from 1999 to 2002?

  • ajain31||

    Republicans betrayed their own conscience when they went against established Republican principles like the MANDATE over healthcare which was a Heritage foundation issue popularized by Gingrich.

    Obama did more than his share to UNITE but the Republicans were out to oppose for opposing sake and not following any policy or principles. In the famous words of Minority Senate Leader Mitch McConnell the Republicans were out to defeat the Obama agenda even if it went against established Republican policies set by past precedent.

    Mitch McConnell was out to make sure that President Obama remains a one term President and see where it has brought the Congress and its public esteem.

    Gingrich out of his own admission was out to defeat Obama from the day he was sworn in as President.

    You can not justify the Republicans as the "loyal" opposition as is the case in most mature democracies. They have been out to get President Obama by hook or by crook. A leader can meet the opposition half way but can not fold completely to their whims and fantasies like that of the current Tea Party affiliates.

    Republicans will loose in 2012 just like they did in 2008 but with a smaller margin because of the dark money of Billionaires due to Citizens United verdict of the right wing Supreme Court.

  • ajain31||

    "Given the precedent set by past seven Presidents and Presidential candidates of releasing multi-year tax returns why is Romney making an exception?" Because he has a lot to hide, apparently.

    He's the only one that knows what's in there, and apparently he's made the judgement that he's better off having us suspect the worst, rather than us knowing whats in there, which apparently in his mind is worse than anything we're likely to imagine.

    Possibilities include:

    (1) He ended up with 120 million in his 401K by the trick of agreeing with Bain to grossly undervalue the market value of his stock, then a few years later have the stock get unvalued to the stratosphere.

    (2) He participated in the tax avoidance amnesty program of a few years back, avoiding major tax penalties or prosecution.

    (3) Any one or more of the other borderline legal but very bad smelling tax dodges-- "in-kind" trades, "no-risk" trades, no-risk write-offs, the list is almost endless.

    And BTW he HASNT even released all of his 2010 return, he very conveniently left off the foreign investments and deposits form. Very convenient.

    And his argument that it would be "bothersome" to collect the tax data is a crock too-- he supposedly collected 23 years of the stuff to show to McCain in 2008.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement