Two must-read pieces today together make clear the ridiculousness and absurdity of Barack Obama's attacks on Bain Capital and his claims that Romney's private sector experience has not prepared him for the presidency.

First, Peter Kirsanow has two key questions for the president:

Over the last few days you have derided the value of Mr. Romney's private-sector experience in preparing him for the presidency.

tor Marco Rubio said this about you: "We have not seen such a divisive figure in modern American history as we have over the last three and a half years." Governor Chris Christie added, "He is the most ill-prepared person to assume the presidency in my lifetime." (Governor Christie was born in 1962.)

Which of the above two quotes do you disagree with more? If it's Governor Christie's statement, who among the following was more ill-prepared than you to assume the presidency: John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, or George W. Bush?

Which of your previous positions best prepared you to be president? How did it do so?Secondly, Conn Carroll explains why Bain matters, but not in the way Barack Obama wants voters to think it does.

After referencing (with excerpts of Romney's responses) Time Magazine's transcript of Mark Halperin's interview with Mitt Romney about his tenure at Bain in which Halpern pressed Romney on his claim that his business experience gave him "a perspective on how jobs are created -- that someone who's never spent a day in the private sector, like President Obama, simply doesn't understand," Carroll put the issue into a clear perspective using energy as an example:

If you are an entrepreneur deciding where to locate your new manufacturing business, an eight-fold increase in energy costs is going to drive you away from creating jobs in the United States. That is what Mitt Romney, business man gets, and what President Obama, community organizer, still doesn't understand.

Meanwhile, the most ill-prepared person to assume the presidency, and the most divisive in history, continues to claim that a man that is likely one of the best prepared men to assume the presidency in the last half century, a man that strongly supports capitalism and the free market -- and certainly no fan of class-warfare (ergo in no way divisive), is somehow ill-prepared to replace him as president.

Go figure!

... more