Even some serious conservative thinkers say Bain Capital is a problem for Romney

In separate columns, Michael Walsh and Yuval Levin of the conservative National Review argue that their fellow conservatives should be careful about how they defend Mitt Romney from attacks on his actions at the helm of Bain Capital.

Levin says this about the Battle of Bain:

[I]t has revealed two problems that conservatives who have risen to Romney’s defense and the Romney team itself will need to address. The former have too easily treated finance as the entirety of capitalism, and so have needlessly made both the defense of finance and the defense of capitalism more difficult. And the latter have too easily treated Romney’s Bain experience as the entirety of the case for his election, and so have needlessly made both the case for Romney’s Wall Street work and the case for his candidacy harder.

Walsh, who consolidates Levin’s argument with his own HERE, adds this:

[T]he public…is rightfully suspicious of men who make millions off the lives and fortunes of others and then act as if they’ve accomplished something unique and original.

And that’s why Mitt’s vulnerable — and why a knee-jerk defense of “capitalism” as if it’s synonymous either with finance or “creative destruction” is so dangerously tone deaf heading into this crucial election…

The problem for Romney is, he has nowhere else to go. He can’t run on RomneyCare or his overall record in Massachusetts (other than to say he learned how to work with Democrats — the last thing a motivated and angry conservative base wants to hear). He can’t even run on “electability,” since he lost the 1994 Senate Race, chose not to run for re-election as governor in the face of certain defeat, and lost the 2008 nomination to John McCain, despite pouring $35 million of his own money into his campaign. He’s practically Harold Stassen already. 

So he has to run on his record as a “job creator.”