Why is Carney Still White House spokesperson?

Rush shared a soundbite today:

"Look, Romney got an 80% success rate. Bain Capital, they went in, they took over failing companies and bailed 'em out, and 80% of 'em ended up being saved, growing, jobs are created. What's the difference in Romney doing that, Mr. Carney, and Obama investing taxpayer dollars in failed green energy companies like Solyndra?" So the reporter said, "If that's the argument, that not every company will succeed and therefore it's too risky because private equity can't save 'em all, if that's the argument, how is that different from Romney's argument on Bain Capital which is that many succeeded and a few failed?"

CARNEY: Look, there -- there -- there is the difference in that your overall view of what your responsibilities are as president and what your view of the economic future is. The president believes as he's made clear that a president's responsibility is not just to those who win but those who in -- for an example in a company where there have been layoffs or a company that's gone bankrupt, that, you know, we have to make sure that those folks have the means to find other employment, that they have the ability to train for other kinds of work, and that's part of the overall responsibility the president has.

Really... why does the government need to provide for folks to be able to "train for other employment"? Why can't they do that themselves?

Rush went on:

In fact Romney and Bain Capital, they are using their own money. They chose companies to bail out, they succeeded. What's the difference in that and Obama using taxpayer dollars to try to bail out... of course the difference is that every one of Obama's companies fails. There hasn't been a success story in green energy. There isn't a business there. It's an absolute joke. It's nothing more than a money laundering scheme using green energy as the emotional connection to people, have them support it, while money just travels a circuitous route from donor to Obama, back to donor and finally back to Obama. Pure and simple. Which is the point we tried to make in our little parody commercial I just played for you.

So Carney, well, what's the difference? In fact, the difference is, Romney is using his own money. But the government ought want be picking winners and lose. I'll tell you the next thing -- and again, this is a statement from Realville. It doesn't take long to drive through Realville. You know, people drive through Realville every day. Not very many people stop, and most people that travel through Realville don't know they've been there. That's how tiny it is. But here you have Carney, (imitating Carney) "Well, you got a company that goes bankrupt, those folks have to find other employment, train for other kinds of work, that's part of the overall responsibility." No, it's not. The president's not supposed to pick winners and losers. Somebody loses a job, it's their responsibility to get a new one.