Answer: 'I Like Being Able To Fire People' Who Don't Provide Adequate Services

[240 is Back]

Question: "What is, shit you don't say the day before the New Hampshire primary."

[pedro01]

What is wrong with firing people that don't provide adequate services?

Should employers just keep them on 

I am sure this will only bother the extreme left.

[howardroark]

This makes me like Mitt more.

[240 is Back]

I am sure this will only bother the extreme left.

Mitt said it today.

And the people who are bothered are actually other republicans, and a lot of republican voters.

[pedro01]

Mitt said it today.

And the people who are bothered are actually other republicans, and a lot of republican voters.

According to who?

[Fury]

According to who?

According to "Douchebag is back" who likely pulled this "fact" out of his ass, much like he did with the rest of them.

Good for Romney. No one cares. He'll still win NH tomorrow. 

[howardroark]

I watched the video here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/romney-sees-need-to-be-able-to-fire-service-providers/2012/01/09/gIQAF18alP_blog.html

This is only a "gaffe" because the left-wing media takes something out of context and turns it into a gaffe.

[240 is Back]

I watched the video here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/romney-sees-need-to-be-able-to-fire-service-providers/2012/01/09/gIQAF18alP_blog.html

This is only a "gaffe" because the left-wing media takes something out of context and turns it into a gaffe.

So any republicans that bitch about this - they are left wing media? 

[howardroark]

So any republicans that bitch about this - they are left wing media? 

Or idiots and economic ignoramuses. Watch that video and tell me what is wrong with what Mitt says there. Do you dislike being able to fire people who take your money but don't serve you adequately?

[240 is Back]

Or idiots and economic ignoramuses. Watch that video and tell me what is wrong with what Mitt says there. Do you dislike being able to fire people who take your money but don't serve you adequately?

NASHUA, N.H. — Mitt Romney's Republican rivals accused him Monday of exaggerating his successes and coldly laying off thousands of workers while heading a profitable venture capital firm, an effort to turn the presidential front-runner's biggest asset into a liability.

The heightened focus on the firm Bain Capital threatens to slow Romney's cruise-control campaign because it goes to the heart of his No. 1 appeal to voters: the claim that he knows far more than President Barack Obama about creating jobs.

Romney's takeover-and-restructuring firm "apparently looted the companies, left people unemployed and walked off with millions of dollars," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said on NBC's "Today" show. A group friendly to Gingrich is preparing to air TV ads of laid-off workers denouncing Romney.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry joined in. He cited South Carolina companies that Bain bought and downsized, and he practically dared Romney to ask for voters' support there in the name of easing economic pain. "He caused it," Perry said in Anderson, S.C.

Romney points to thousands of jobs created at companies that Bain bought, invested in or restructured. But he struck a discordant note Monday, just as attention to the Bain jobs history was spiking.

Speaking of insurance options before a New Hampshire audience, Romney said, "I like being able to fire people who provide services to me."

He remained favored to win Tuesday's New Hampshire primary. But his rivals might improve their hopes of halting his momentum in South Carolina's Jan. 21 primary if they can persuade voters that his jobs legacy is not what he claims.

Thanks to millions of dollars from a Las Vegas casino owner who supports Gingrich, TV ads in South Carolina will try to do just that. Like many attack ads they are emotional, one-sided and not subtle. They show angry victims of layoffs from Bain-controlled companies, according to excerpts shown to reporters.

"We had to load up the U-Haul because we done lost our home," a woman says.

[howardroark]

So some dipshits think it's a bad idea to reallocate scare resources from failing firms to successful ones. I guess that lets you know who not to vote for.

Regardless, this is political profiteering at its worst - by the left-wing media and some of Mitt's competitors. Happy? 

[howardroark]

IMO, Mitt needs to present a forceful defense of his actions at Bain Capital - explain how they helped the economy and then explain how he'll translate his experience of gutting weak projects while at Bain to the federal government.

[pedro01]

I watched the video.

Anyone that disagrees with firing people that provide a shitty service is a damn communist.

Hell, I'm from England, a socialist country and I see nothing wrong with it.

This will backfire on the people attacking him over this.

What is more American than being able to choose who provides you with a service? No more freedom of choice?

This is retarded.

[Coach is Back!]

Question: "What is, shit you don't say the day before the New Hampshire primary."

I fail to see a problem with this. Rob, have you gone so far left you can't think straight like most libs?

[Soul Crusher]

I fail to see a problem with this. Rob, have you gone so far left you can't think straight like most libs?

He is in full kneepad mode. 

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

I watched the video here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/romney-sees-need-to-be-able-to-fire-service-providers/2012/01/09/gIQAF18alP_blog.html

This is only a "gaffe" because the left-wing media takes something out of context and turns it into a gaffe.

Well Jon Huntsman and Newt Gingrich are the ones that are taking it out of context because they are using it in attack ads now

[Fury]

IMO, Mitt needs to present a forceful defense of his actions at Bain Capital - explain how they helped the economy and then explain how he'll translate his experience of gutting weak projects while at Bain to the federal government.

I get a kick out of people who, on one hand, claim to be pro-capitalism and then on the other claim to have a problem with PE, arguably one of the purest examples of capitalism.

[Soul Crusher]

I get a kick out of people who, on one hand, claim to be pro-capitalism and then on the other claim to have a problem with PE, arguably one of the purest examples of capitalism.

240 is like a parrot of MSNBC

[Fury]

240 is like a parrot of MSNBC

I'm pretty sure he secretly wishes for Rachel Maddow to bottom him out with a strap-on.

[Soul Crusher]

I'm pretty sure he secretly wishes for Rachel Maddow to bottom him out with a strap-on.

Its down right embrassing at this point. 

He claims to be a libertarian yet disagrees with RP on 90% of issues. 

He claims he will vote A B O but have never once started a thread attacking Obama on anything and parrots every MSNBC talking point about every single repub running for office.   

[240 is Back]

newt went on morning joe today and criticized mitt for it.

said it's just another example of mitt being loose with his words, and how obama will expolit that in the debates.

[Soul Crusher]

newt went on morning joe today and criticized mitt for it.

said it's just another example of mitt being loose with his words, and how obama will expolit that in the debates.

Who gives a fuck what newt said?   He is trying to get back on top, of course he is going to try to jump on this. 

[240 is Back]

I fail to see a problem with this. Rob, have you gone so far left you can't think straight like most libs?

I think any frontrunner, in a bad economy, would NEVER use the phrase "FIRE PEOPLE" under any circunstances.  Dumb move.

And it's not "the far left" that has a problem with it.  Newt and Huntsmann have problems with him saying it.

I know it's more fun to say "rachel maddow sucks", but these GOPers are pissed about him saying it, and they're interviewing GOP primary voters in NH who were fired, who don't like it.

It's funny - When Mitt had illegals doing his landscaping, he was powerless to stop the company from doing that.  He had no control oevr it.  Now he's the guy with all the power who LIKES FIRING ***PEOPLE***.

It was just a stupid thing to say.  Like newt said, when Mitt says things like this, obama is going to wreck him for it.

[240 is Back]

Who gives a fuck what newt said?   He is trying to get back on top, of course he is going to try to jump on this. 

Well, we can no longer just say "Only the left cares about this!"

That has changed now, 33.

now it is
1) the left
2) the media
3) Obama & white house
4) Some of the other GOP candidates
5) Some NH voters

At some point, it will tip to the MAJORITY of people disagreeing with Mitt's statement. 


Bottom line - it was a dumb thing to say. 

[Soul Crusher]

I think any frontrunner, in a bad economy, would NEVER use the phrase "FIRE PEOPLE" under any circunstances.  Dumb move.

And it's not "the far left" that has a problem with it.  Newt and Huntsmann have problems with him saying it.

I know it's more fun to say "rachel maddow sucks", but these GOPers are pissed about him saying it, and they're interviewing GOP primary voters in NH who were fired, who don't like it.

It's funny - When Mitt had illegals doing his landscaping, he was powerless to stop the company from doing that.  He had no control oevr it.  Now he's the guy with all the power who LIKES FIRING ***PEOPLE***.

It was just a stupid thing to say.  Like newt said, when Mitt says things like this, obama is going to wreck him for it.

Oh please.  Stop being such a "concern troll"     Jesus dude - you are so far gone.