Which campaign are they following? The WSJ thinks Romney should just fire everyone

As Eddie mentioned earlier on the blog, the Wall Street Journal thinks Mitt Romney's campaign has really screwed up the whole “Obamacare” tax/mandate thing.

"Mr. Romney promised Republicans he was the best man to make the case against President Obama, whom they desperately want to defeat. So far Mr. Romney is letting them down," the op-ed laments.

The article faults his campaign for not taking advantage of Chief Justice Roberts’ ruling, for being too scared of the whole "flip-flopper" thing, and, darn it, why is Mitt jet skiing?

Granted, we agree with the article when it says Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom really screwed things when he told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd that “Obamacare” is a “penalty” and not a tax. But aside from this specific criticism, the op-ed seems a bit too critical of the Romney staff.

It accuses them of not responding to attack ads, of failing to address Romney’s “out of touch” persona, and of "garbling" its campaign message.

Which campaign are they following?

As we’ve said before on The Blaze, we’ve been fairly impressed with the Romney campaign’s turnaround time with ads, it’s financial strategy, and its willingness to go on the offensive. Again, Fehrnstrom's MSNBC appearance didn't help anything and the campaign needs to offer more specific solutions -- but to say the entire thing is being poorly run?

We're going to have to disagree with that.

We wonder how much influence Rupert Murdoch's personal position had on the op-ed. After all, he does own the Wall Street Journal. Just saying ...