Um do I?? here's the definition http://nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.htmlPerhaps you need to look up the definition of ad hominem and also the medical definition of repetitive behavior........
Hmmmm.............?
GWAH-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH-HAH!!!!!!!!!!!!
You never fail to amuse me with your opinionated convolutions deeply mired in fallacy and obfuscation.
I'm betting you must be Tartuffe's shadow.
Are you familiar with Bain and ToysRUs and Kaybee? How about AmPad?Please get your head out of your butt and do some serious reading on what Bain [and Mitt] did and did not do.
Are you familiar with Staples?
And "we" elected a prez, not a CO, and "we" expect him to act like a prez, not a CO.
Hmm more ad hominem... no actual evidence of any fallacies or obfuscation just hollow accusations... kinda like the ones you level at other posters.
Repetitive behavior is a symptom of Altzheimers.
Got anything NEW?
:-D
Do you know how to use Google?Make up your mind. Did they buy AmPad in 1992 or 1994? And how do you charge your own company advisory fees?
So how is Staples doing after their one floundering store rec'd a $25M loan from Bain? Did Staples, thanks to Bain, employ a few people here and there?
And I suppose you are prepared to say Obama is a great leader?
Really?
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Clearly you don't. Is ampad still in business? Did Bain profit while running ampad into massive debt? Did a lot of people lose their jobs?You bet I do. And I know the answers to the questions I asked. Obviously, you don't know the answers, don't know how to google, or both.
How does the opening of a Staples store "produce jobs"? I suppose if a Staples store opened in some locale that had zero access to office supplies prior, some jobs might be produced. But...that would require ZERO access prior. Otherwise, the new Staples store wouldn't be producing jobs, it would just be taking them from somewhere else. Of course though...there IS a way a Staples store could "produce jobs", even as it took them from someplace else. But that would require them to take that "someplace else's" market AND operate LESS efficiently than that other place did, thereby causing Staples to hire more people to do the work previously done elsewhere. But....nobody - at least right now - is promoting Mitt's skills and talents around helping companies operate less efficiently.Apparently you're avoiding my point with Staples while you desperately attempt to hang on to what you consider a negative against Romney.
Why do you insist on hanging on to one negative while refusing to acknowledge very clear positives. In fact, a positive that far exceeds any negative you can claim about AmPad.
In business as in life, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. Too bad you're incapable of looking at both sides of the ledger sheet..................
In short, the number of jobs/$$ lost with AmPad cannot begin to compare to the jobs/$$ produced with the opening of every new Staples store.
What you CAN say, is how Staples "creates" jobs, rather than snivel-diverting to Solyndra. Even as it may've harshed your buzz a tad, my question is perfectly valid.Ah, geeze, fair..........my bad!
I guess I must have thought all those new Staples stores might have created new jobs just the same way Solyndra was going to create all those green jobs.
Geeze, what can I say??