Read a few, clicked the hyperlinks for the supposed proof, left disappointed...
Disappointed at the site for connecting dot's that are very distant, comparing apples to oranges, and general playing with/bending the rules of logic to suite whatever. Example: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2012_01/setting_the_standards_for_the034544.php
I hope people understand utterly pathetic it is to compare how many jobs that Romney may have created to those that Obama may have. Seriously. The site is quick to point out that not all of Bain's projects saved jobs, and that some were lost, but then they seem to forget that the exact same thing happen's with 'Obama's' economy. I, for one, do not think that the pres has the amount of influence on the economy to be made responsible for every single job creation/destroyed, but the site shouldn't just cherry pick whatever statistics will bolster their opinion the most. It's all or nothing. They assume that whatever job's are created are all 'Obamas' jobs. Not so.
(also, it just occurred to me that jobs are being counted twice in this, as 'Romney's' jobs are his but they also count towards the 'job growth' that Obama claims is his. Did they both create those jobs in this instance? Another example of faulty logic.)
After reading a few more, I get the feeling that one could make similar arguments about pretty much all of them. It's all a matter of perspective, really. Or "Lies, damned lies, and statistics"