Globe is desperate to keep this story out there, and its silliness is something to behold. If a person looked at the resume of Barack Obama in 2008, and compared it to the resume of Mitt Romney (now, 2008 it does not matter), you see a very successful businessman, executive and governor, vs a community organizer, and part time law instructor. Who is more qualified? It is a no brainer. Of course, Obama can put on his resume that he is a rock star, and that makes him more qualified than even George Washington to be president. NEW PARAGRAPH: Today, on that resume, he must add that unemployment has remained over 8% for the totality of his tenure as president; that he has added 4 Trillion to the national debt; that he has added a government takeover of healthcare that is going to ratchet up taxes; and that he has a tendency to rule by fiat, because he lacks the political skills to persuade congress to pass his agenda, now that Republicans have a voice. NEW PARAGRAPH: Are the American really so stupid as to believe that Romney's rare failure at Bain makes him less qualified than Obama? The Obama camp is banking on it.

Get serious. The man is a perpetual loser. Willard Romney has never been able to win an election. The Olympics carried the 2002 election.

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

There are serious questions to ask of all the "wizards of the global economy" aren't there? The business model pioneered by Michael Milken was fantastic at producing wealth for the investors, and antithetical to almost all other forms of life on the planet. Using junk bonds to finance a leveraged buyout, then stripping the assets, loading up the company with debt, and then kicking them out the door, that's the basic definition in a nutshell. The example that still sticks in my craw, years later, is of Pacific Lumber in Scotia, CA. The company logged redwood forests on a 180-year return cycle, with plenty of profit for the local mill that kept the town going. That sort of entry meant that the forests would regenerate in perpetuity, with abundant wildlife habitat, an intact watershed, and jobs for everyone. They were, of course, ripe for the picking. The standing value of those trees made it trivial to plunder the 'asset', and screw the workers. just leverage the value of those redwoods with the clear understanding that you'd cut them down once the company was bought up to repay those debts and make a tidy profit. That's just a short synopsis of what happened. You can get all the ugly details here: http://www.times-standard.com/opinion/ci_9560701 http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/10/redwoods/bourne-text http://www.iiipublishing.com/hurwitzm.htm There are lots of other links, just search for Pacific Lumber and Maxxam. This is a thoroughly disgusting business model that has nothing at all to recommend it outside of short-term profit. It is life-denying and wealth destroying, if by wealth we mean the incalculable value of a rich gene pool transmitted down through time from ages past. The Redwoods, bathed as they are in near perpetual fog, are the standing reminder of that past and, thanks to an ever-changing climate, one that echoes a future that will surely come again. I'll let you all figure out what sort of crime that amounts to, and what any religion worth it's sacred scriptures, would have to say about it. If I were Mitt Romney, I'd be a little circumspect about touting that sort of business model in my resume. It's poison of the most potent kind.

It is my feeling that, despite the contentious situation regarding Mr.Romney's reasons for or against releasing more income tax records and when he did or did not leave Bain Capitol, the reason for his reluctance to comply with the requests and demands seems to me to be a simple, direct one: he is caught on the horns of a dilemma of his own making having to do with the residency qualifications he faced during his run for Governor in Massachusetts. In order to seek that position he had to establish that he was a legal resident of Massachusetts, and what better way to do it than by having legal documents available showing that he was the owner and CEO of a corporation actively doing business in the state. Now, when it is advantageous to him to claim the opposite, that he was not the owner and CEO of that corporation at the time in question. The bottom line: either he lied to the State of Massachusetts in 2001, or he is lying to the country now.

I would argue that Obama's whole life story should be a target. He said in his own autobiographies how much he disdains business, and that he smoked pot and snorted cocaine, while Mitt Romney was saving businesses and creating jobs. He then followed the trail blazed by William Ayers and Tony Rezko in Chicago. He was sermonized by Jeremiah Wriight's hateful rhetoric for two decades. But, of course, since Bain Capital invested in some businesses that lost jobs or hired people overseas, Mitt is clearly the less qualified.