During Romney's administration in MA, there was a net increase of jobs, 61,000. During the Obama administration so far, the country has lost 1.8 million jobs.

As for Bain Capital, Staples has 89,000 employees. Bain was an investor.

Some of Bain Capital ventures' companies:
http://www.baincapitalventures.com/portfolio/

And Bain capital's portfolio:
http://www.baincapitalprivateequity.com/Investments/Default.aspx

Note that Skillsoft, a NH company, is on the list.

Meanwhile Obama has invested the public's money in ventures such as Solyndra.

So Seamus --- Romney would make jobs appear by hiring them... for government work? or take over private companies?

and about his MA record of jobs... ahem...
"The answer to the first is easy: Massachusetts’ economy performed poorly during his tenure and his defense is misleading. Massachusetts’ unemployment generally follows that of the nation as a whole, but it went from slightly better than the national unemployment rate (5.6 percent in the state versus 5.8 percent in the country) when he took office to slightly worse when he left (4.7 percent in Massachusetts versus 4.4 percent nationally). And his record is even arguably worse than that: Massachusetts lost population for two years in a row during Romney’s term. That means the unemployment number went down because the denominator shrank, but that’s hardly a sign of a growing economy. Total jobs in Massachusetts were the same when he left office as when he started and many key industries actually lost jobs."

"Vampire Capitalist"... "Vulture Capitalist". How childish. No company ever took venture capital money at gunpoint. It is an agreement between the founders and the financiers.
As for people, yes, corporations are people. The groups include the employees, the corporation's customers, and the stockholders. The same goes for non-profits organizations and academic institutions.

vanpires and vultures use guns? how strange...

and no, each person is a person - you are not 2 because you belong to a corporation are you?

You mentioned people giving money to candidates in groups. So the ACLU (not a person by your definition) is OK but a corporation is not? Same for the Sierra Club, a teacher's union, etc.

Seamus -
You seem to have a problem thinking deeply through this issue.
Corporations - in the business of amassing profit to increase the income of their shareholders and their executives.

ACLU? Unions? Protecting the Constitution, protecting people's rights, worker safety, fair treatment, enviormental issues... see the difference?

sorry Jan, if Romney made "billions" then that makes him a hero in my book. That would mean he paid half a billion or so in taxes to feed freeloaders and whiners so they don't have to work :)

Corporate personhood has been killing our democracy by making it nearly impossible to regulate what corporations do and how they do it. Monsanto is the perfect example of why corporations should not be considered people, because when they are, they can feed us cancer and there isn't anything anyone can do about it (think "feed us cancer" is an exaggeration? Go research Monsanto). And Jan, I have to agree with Seamus, in the same sense that corporations should not be allowed to make unlimited and anonymous donations to any candidate of their choosing, nor should unions. These entities have near unlimited funds and allowing money to act as speech puts you and I at a huge disadvantage. Until the average American can afford a lobbyist and until big business stops buying out our government, our media, and our country, corporations cannot be trusted with personhood, and nor should unions.

Every day the Federal Government spends $10 billion and takes in $6 billion. It is time for fiscal responsibility.
And the unemployment rate has been higher during every month of the Obama administration than any month of the Bush administration. It's been 3 years and Obama's policies have failed. There is certainly a lot at stake in this election.

its past time - in fact we're well past the time where cuts can fix anything. return tax levels to when we were solvent and watch that balance return.

"Groups such as the ACLU and Unions are fine. Groups such as corporations are not. "

Got that right, Seamus. All anyone need do is visit Opensecrets.org to see who the heavy hitters are and who they donate the most $ to, for instance

Act Blue is the #1 bundler/PAC donating 99% to Democrats
AFL-CIO 92% Dem
Teamsters Union 89% Dem
UAW 98% Dem
Laborers Union 88% Dem

Apparently Jan would be happy if corporations were non-profit and didn't allow their employees to donate to a candidate of their choice.......like the unions do.

Obama's second largest contributor in 2008: Goldman Sachs. In the 2012 election, his second largest bundler group is Financial Services (lawyers is #1).
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/bundlers.php?id=N00009638

"The entire Republican party is open and honest about wanting to unleash corporate power; don't they have it already? Why isn't it working if it's so awesome?"

For starters, NAFTA and the US-China trade agreements were signed by Clinton which began the exodus of jobs overseas.

The Republicans only have a majority in the House of Representatives. No matter what they pass to try to prevent job loss or create new ones, it usually gets blocked in the Senate, including the attempt to get the Keystone Pipeline passed.

Yep. Just be nice to them, give them big tax breaks, and then they'll return the favor by "trickling down" jobs as a way of saying "thank you". Hasn't been working well for the last decade. Maybe if we just give them a bit more, and wait a bit longer? I'm willing to pay more in taxes so GE can get an even bigger rebate. THEN I'm sure we'll get our promised windfall. It's a sound investment. Trust them.

One thing I don't understand. Everytime the liberals tax the rich why do they get even richer?

@ Tonto "One thing I don't understand. Everytime the liberals tax the rich why do they get even richer?"

Your question isn't clear. Who do you mean by "they"?

Don't worry, President Robin hood is gonna take real good care of you man. Please don't hold your breath though :)

@Tonto
I'd settle for "President Stopstherichfromscrewingeveryoneelse". I'm not holding my breath for that, rest assured. Still, even a small step in that direction would be welcome. I'm fairly confident Obama will be reelected. He still has many passionate supporters, and the GOP lineup couldn't be more foolish.

David, thats why I said don't worry. You will be on easy street soon. Just be a good communist and the regime will make certain your fresh crumbs arrive on time :)

@Tonto
"You will be on easy street soon. Just be a good communist and the regime will make certain your fresh crumbs arrive on time."

Is that what Limbaugh is saying? The only ones on "easy street" are people like Mitt.

David, how much do you think Obama should rob from Mitt and give to you?

@Tonto
"David, how much do you think Obama should rob from Mitt and give to you?"

That's cute. Taxes on the wealthiest Americans have been cut, and cut, and cut, while the middle class gets squeezed ever tighter People like Mitt, who was born a millionaire, pay lower taxes now than they ever have. Taxes MUST be paid. When the richest pay less - you pay more. Why would you be ok with that?

Ed, how much should Robin Hood rob from Mitt and give to you?

But Edward, without these big tax breaks, they might not hire us. Let's cut the tax rates on the top bracket to 0%. Then with all that extra cash, they'll "trickle it down" to us! It makes perfect sense.

Tonto:
"For those in the top 0.01 percent of the income distribution, the effective tax rate was 71.4 percent in 1960, 74.6 percent in 1970, 59.3 percent in 1980, 35.4 percent in 1990, 40.8 percent in 2000 and 34.7 percent in 2004." --Politifact

@ Tonto
"how much should Obama rob from the rich and give to you guys."

I answered you a couple times already. Review the thread.

Here's one for you, though: How much more in taxes are you willing to pay so Mitt can get a bigger tax cut?

I would pay Mitt extra under your fantasy theory rather then one whinning gimpy liberal get a cent :)

@ Tonto.

Weak. You dodged the question.

Your dodging Oblamers game of President Robin Hood :)

@ Tonto
"Your(sic) dodging Oblamers game of President Robin Hood"

Tell us how much more you'd be willing to pay so Mitt can pay even less on his capital gains tax. He needs your money more than you, right?