To Bain… Or not to Bain.
Don’t get me wrong: I think it’s good that Mitt Romney’s career at Bain is being brought up…. I just don’t think it’s being done in the right way.
As an employer, Mitt Romney had every right to fire whomever he chooses. In fact, sometimes firing employees is the responsible thing for employers to do. No one has the right to a job, everyone should work hard and when someone isn’t up to the task of their job they deserve to be fired. Similarly, when the government imposes policies on people, they have no choice but to lay people off. Most employers don’t want to do this, but sometimes they have to.
The way Newt, Huntsman, and Perry, all principled fiscal conservatives, are going about attacking Romney on this is reprehensible. I am firmly in camp Newt, but I have to say I am sorely disappointed by his decision to take a line from the New York Times and run, I’m angered that a Pro-Newt SuperPAC is buying an anti-Romney documentary pushing left wing talking points.
There is a much smarter way to attack Romney using Bain without resorting to childish left-wing ideas about “fairness”. What is the one single strength, the one reason Romney is at the top of the polls? His electability. Period. End of story. The way the conservatives should have handled this is to say, “Look, I know Mitt Romney seems electable, but having a successful business career means making decisions that leave people on the chopping block, in an election year where the public is anti-Washington and anti-Wall Street, do we really need the personification of Wall Street with a trail of people left in the wake of his career ready to tell their stories be our nominee?
In the case of Newt, he could have found supporters who were once on welfare and are now successful because of welfare reform.
In the case of Perry , he could have stated the has millions of people ready to cut commercials for him regarding his job creation record.
They did not need to resort to this. I’m still firmly a Newt supporter, but count me bummed out.