BAIN & ROMNEY.

An article in Politico.com tends to exonerate Romney, the Republican Party front runner in the party's nomination race from blame, in regard to the Bain issue.

Yet, it seems to be a one sided story by a narrow minded individual, who wants people to forget about Bain Capital, the company in question, that pulled the rug from under some workers in South Carolina, and of whether Romney, who headed that venture capital company, is the type of a "job creator" as he wants the public to believe.

However sweet the article wanted Romney to smell, it has already been proven that the Bain management was cumbersome, demanding and therefore inefficient.

Decisions were made on the spur of the moment, with managers meeting supply deliveries at the loading dock with petty cash; as well as the constant demands that production should be raised or labor costs have to be reduced. Such actions made the situation there rather intolerable.

That led finally to the outsourcing of most of Bain's business to the Far East, particularly, to China. WHAT?

He, Romney, has been taunting President Barack Obama of a lousy economic management, and giving the impression that he could do better to boost the economy by using his many experiences in the private sector as his database.

Bain's involvement in Holston, the picture frame company, which went down abruptly and caused some people in Gafney to suddenly become unemployed was a shame; however, it was Bain that was safe in the deal to close the plant.

"Bain invested about $10 million in Holson and made almost $23 million profit over six years, according to a financial document obtained by the Associated Press." the article has claimed.

There was another company, a steel mill in Georgetown, "about 200 miles southeast of Gafney. About 750 steelworkers lost their jobs there when the company, GS Industries went bankrupt in 2001 following a buyout led by Bain." the article has continued.

Perry, who was also running in the Republican Party's nomination race, has called Romney a "vulture" capitalist, and "has accused Bain of making $65 million off the firm, mostly in management fees, before it went belly up." the article has finally said. (Politico.com, 01/14/12).

So, if Romney, who was portraying himself as the savior of the American economy, has so many skeletons in his closet, shouldn't people know about them, especially in the week before the South Carolina's primary?

Romney's background mattered most there, just as it would be very important in the 2012 general election, if he should win the Republican nomination.

He was always talking out of the two sides of his mouth, that "governments do not create jobs; private individuals do," and almost in the same breadth avowing that he "created many jobs in his career." Goodness gracious me!

Did it bother the people in Gafney to lose their jobs; and if the answer happened to be "yes", then voters must feel hesitant to take a person just at his word and to get or ask him to run the American economy. Wasn't that taking a big risk by Americans?

Many thought that they should be skeptical of Romney for hiding his business failures until now. Even then, he did not volunteer them himself; it was the media that found him out.

If the European downturn did not affect the present economy, Obama would have a great chance of winning a second term, since his plans seemed to be steadily working at this very moment.

The economy was speeding up, and the unemployment rate has begun to go down. Those were what would urge the voters to decide as to whether they wanted him to carry on; despite the Politico.com camouflage and stupid things like that.