The article quotes Fortune magazine as stating, "The prospectus lists 'certain investment professionals responsible for the DAY-TO-DAY affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.'" Wait - the same SANKATY that Mitt transferred into his wifey's name the day before he became governor so that he would not have to disclose that as part of his financial assets??? Also, yeah, "day-to-day" work usually involves full-time involvement. It does not in any way though preclude Mitt's part-time involvement, whether that be for "key personnel decisions" or other board stuff.

At least we have Staples right? That place it like manna from heaven.. Until Staple came along we all had to scrap for our paper and ink, I don't know how we ever survived without the Walmart of the business world bringing us inexpensive Chinese Ink Jet printers and color copies for 20 cents a piece..

I don't get it. The guy can do a superior job as President compared to Obama. Obama was a glass ceiling President and during this time of crisis we needed someone truly qualified to lead us. Obama's constant drum beat over redistribution of wealth is repulsive to many people who have worked hard and saved all their lives. It's divisive and unhealthy to this nation.

Is this really how the Globe will help defeat Mitt Romney? Pathetic. It does not matter one bit when he left, or to what extent he left Bain Capital. The Globe is in desperation mode here, seeing that Romney is on a path to victory.

Willard is despicable. he was obviously hiring and firing at Bain from his own words. His money has always bought his way out of trouble before and its not working this time.

Victory? LOL!

How many different names is Eric Lapdog using here?

Governor Romney appears to have intentionally misled people for political reasons. It matters a lot.

So, maybe he didn't know when he left that he wouldn't be coming back. Why is that not reasonable. Do you always know what the future will hold?

Governor Romney will say anything and do anything to become President. It is not possible to believe anything he says.

Thats right. Lets not forget that Willard and Bain were responible for putting stationery stores selling American products out of business. Chinese is cheaper and better for the bottom line. Right?

Evolved = Willard is lying again.

At question is not what Willard thought at the time he left. It is with all of his lies -sorry-evolving statements about it since that day.

Gee, Mr. System. $100k or so a year for either showing up or not (depending on whether you feel like it) seems like really nice work if you can get it. Why hasn't the Republican House just mandated that for everyone and solved the economy already?

Is Mitt Romney responsible for high unemployment, trillion dollar budget deficits, growing welfare dependency, EPA efforts to halt domestic energy production, repeated leaks of national security secrets, divisive racial and class rhetoric from the Oval Office, etc.? I don't think so.

Once again, this "jobless economy" is the result of actions taken by Republicans before Obama became President. It takes years to have a true recovery and we don't even have a cooperative Congress because of the Republicans, thank you very much! Obama is trying to clean up the mess. caused by both Republicans and Democrats, but especially Republicans and GW Bush, who is never even mentioned by you Republicans because you are too scared to admit what he wrought. Never forget that fact.

You'd have to be truly crazy to deny that the problems you list were not caused by yes, some Dems, but largely by a previous Republican administration. Talk about amnesia!!! Where have you been?

Gosh, Martha. I guess that Obama is off the hook for everything and that George W caused WWII and the fall of the Roman Empire.

The question as to when Mitt left or didn't leave is only important in that it gives Mitt cover for the things that Bain did. If one is paying attention Mitt holds he is not responsible for the jobs lost due to Bains actions because he wasn't there. Yet we know that Mitt whether he was there or not supports any actions that Bain took and that is the only thing that really matters. The whole I was there when I wasn't is just political mish-mash. (NP) Now if his supporters want to accept this argument that's fine but then they have to accept the fact that Bush was responsible for the unemployment that took place up through 09 as although he wasn't there the implications of his policies were still in effect as 09 was a result of that Fiscal Years budget which was Bush's. Naturally they won't accept that and I don't blame them this whole argument is rather specious. Mitt was Bain and Bain is Mitt simply take responsibility for what your company did and live with it.

Yes, Eric, Willard Mittster Romney is responsible.k

Obviously Mitt wasn't a job creator - he would create or destroy jobs, whatever it took to make a profit for himself, sometimes even at the expense of taxpayers (who had to pick up the pension costs of companies that he bankrupted). He was an "entity" creator. And obviously Mitt isn't a truth-teller - he will say what he needs to to prove his residency in 2002, and then say the opposite to say he "knew nothing, knew nothing" when he is running for governor and president.

Martha1 hit the nail on the head. Besides, what does this have to do with Mitt lying?

The "funny" thing is Mitt is going around saying he "helped start Staples." He did no such thing. Bain's initial investment was something like half a million (as part of a joint venture with Bessemer), but Staples already existed. What Bain did was help them go from a single location to a chain.