Barack Obama and his campaign have been making Mitt Romney’s time at Bain Capital one of their premiere mantras that have over and over backfired in their faces. They decided to attack the fact that Bain outsourced jobs during the restructuring of the companies they acquired. So what does Obama have to do with it? During the time he points to, 1999-2002, the executives of Bain donated to Obama for his campaign. No doubt at that time Barack Obama was not at all upset about jobs being outsourced as he got some big, fat checks from the executives.
Ben Shapiro points out,
The same SEC form from February 2001 that lists Mitt Romney as “sole shareholder, sole director, Chief Executive Officer and President of Bain Capital … the controlling person of Bain Capital” also lists over a dozen other managing directors of Bain Capital, Inc. — all of whom were undoubtedly more active than Romney was during this period. And President Obama took money from many of them.
Or how about Stephen Pagliuca? Last year, he cut a $35,800 check to Barack Obama’s Victory Fund. Then he cut another $30,800 check to the DNC. And another $30,800 check to the DCCC. Jonathan Lavine and Mark Nunnelly have both maxed out to Obama already, as well as to the DNC. Lavin was a bundler for Obama, and raised over $100,000 for him. Michael Krupka gave Obama $4,600 in 2008.
Now there is nothing wrong with outsourcing jobs. There is nothing wrong with taking campaign contributions from businesses. The problem comes when one wants to bash his opponent over being in a company that did something you claim is bad and then took money from the very same people. In this case Barack Obama was fine with outsourcing while getting a check, but not fine when it becomes a political advantage.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at RepublicanLegion.com.