Top Obama Donor Tied to Bain Layoffs

More hypocrisy....

The Obama campaign’s latest attack tells the story of workers at an Indiana office supply company who lost their jobs after a Bain-owned company named American Pad & Paper (Ampad) took over their company and drove it out of business.

Here’s what the Obama Web video doesn’t mention: A top Obama donor and fundraiser had a much more direct tie to the controversy and actually served on the board of directors at Richardson, Texas-based Ampad, which makes office paper products.

Jonathan Lavine is a long-time Bain Capital executive and co-owner of the Boston Celtics. He is also one of President Obama’s most prolific fundraisers. He has already raised more than $200,000 for the Obama campaign this election, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Lavine started working for Bain in 1993. He was one of three Bain executives who served on the board of directors of Ampad for several years, a post he held until 1999. Here’s a news release announcing his departure from the company in April 1999.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... n-layoffs/

This Bain attack by the Obama campaign on Romney is slowly making Obama look like a fool. Perhaps the Obama campaign can start focusing on... oh... I don't know... maybe the economy?

Clearly Axelrod needs to fire Lavine and re-pay the money he bundled. It is blood money. Next thing you know, Barack will start taking money from the 1%'r venture captialists. (too late.)

This is silly....before you know it the conservatives will have dug out a $25 donor to Obama who was in jail for 3 days. I'm sure if the liberals were so inclined we could dig up dirt on those who donated big bucks to Romney.....but as far as having any relevance to the race between the 2 men, Obama and Romney, I'm not sure it does.

I don't think the issue is whether or not equity firms or venture capitalists are good or bad, only does being a part of that effort make a good background for a president. Will Romney, as president, focus on jobs for all Americans or continue his focus on making money for the wealthy? I think it will be the latter because that is what he knows how to do really well. Any jobs created by that activity seem to be incidental to his wanting to make lots and lots of money for his investors at any cost. That does not bode well for the middle class in this country.

Creating jobs is not the object of the exercise. It's creating wealth for the investors, and if jobs get created or lost, that's incidental. And we know how well that wealth trickled-down....

archer wrote: I don't think the issue is whether or not equity firms or venture capitalists are good or bad, only does being a part of that effort make a good background for a president. Will Romney, as president, focus on jobs for all Americans or continue his focus on making money for the wealthy? I think it will be the latter because that is what he knows how to do really well. Any jobs created by that activity seem to be incidental to his wanting to make lots and lots of money for his investors at any cost. That does not bode well for the middle class in this country.

No.. equity firms make a lots of money for investors, unions, employees of private companies and Presidents. Romney is not going to be working for an equity firm if he is elected president, he will be working for the Federal Government. If he manages the US government as well as equity firms make money... good.. Someone who knows what is working in the government and what to cut that is not working in the government is someone I want in the White House.

LadyJazzer wrote: Creating jobs is not the object of the exercise. It's creating wealth for the investors, and if jobs get created or lost, that's incidental. And we know how well that wealth trickled-down....

And those investors are public unions (SEIU comes to mind), private unions, employee benefit plans and private individuals... who are making a good profit for their benefit plans from those equity companies that you ostracize. You're a true socialist... you don't want anyone profiting more than someone else.

archer wrote: I don't think the issue is whether or not equity firms or venture capitalists are good or bad, only does being a part of that effort make a good background for a president. Will Romney, as president, focus on jobs for all Americans or continue his focus on making money for the wealthy? I think it will be the latter because that is what he knows how to do really well. Any jobs created by that activity seem to be incidental to his wanting to make lots and lots of money for his investors at any cost. That does not bode well for the middle class in this country.

Ok... let's turn the tables a bit on this. Can you or anyone else on 285 Bound tell me what the employment credentials are for Obama in regards to his knowledge or running a business? His credentials for managing money, payrolls, budgets, hiring, firing, managing employees?

LadyJazzer wrote: Creating jobs is not the object of the exercise. It's creating wealth for the investors, and if jobs get created or lost, that's incidental. And we know how well that wealth trickled-down....

Better than high tax countries like France?

And what would you prefer as a job, one where you are just opening a door, or one where you are creating value for the customer, the firm, and advancing yourself.