re: #44 kirkspencer

I read the article. What I noticed was that in all three cases Romney would revoke and repeal the regulations as passed and instead pass something else. In all three cases the “something else” was vague and undefined. Or as the article said it, “replac[e] it with a mostly unspecified but “streamlined regulatory framework.”

So my distorted view is that Mitt has no plan, just vaporware. How is this wrong?

Willard’s keeping to the GOP script: Declare efforts supported by Democrats “failures,” accuse Democrats of not accepting “failure,” promise to revoke those “failures,” and mumble at the end that the revoked laws will be “replaced” with something better.

Or, as FDR so eloquently put it decades ago:

Youtube Video