Apparently The Washington Post put together some investigative reporting re: the real result of Bain's effect on American jobs, and it wasn't pretty.
They invested in outsourcing companies.
They made huge profits from companies that were pretty quickly shut down & liquidated.
Perfectly legal-but-ugly vulture capitalism, or perhaps vampire-capitalism is a better descriptor.
And then the Obama campaign started using facts from the story in campaign commercials in the swing states, and it was having a significant effect on Independent Voters - the ones who will probably decide this thing.
I haven't seen the commercials - I live in Massachusetts which is firmly blue and thus is ignored every election cycle - they always agree the money is better spent elsewhere.
Anyway, the Romney's have been puttting a full court press to today to try to get the Washington Post story retracted. The newspaper has apparently told them to go stuff it. I.E. refused.
So just now the Romney campaign has put out a slideshow refuting the Washington Post's claims.
But as a person without my own staff of investigative reporters, I have no idea who is correct. I only assume the Post is correct because they're supposed to seek the truth - and the Romney's are partisan & I feel they'd absolutely obscure the truth to be elected (- that's nicer than sayng they're lying scoundrels..) .. but the independents in Ohio can no longer trust the source.
So there you have it - a supposedly non-partisan news source has been nullified. The facts have been made vague and unverifiable - American democracy in Action. Perhaps it was ever thus, but it doesn't feel good.
Thoughts?