he says clear and realistic, and then says assuming 'robust growth, etc'. that's a laugh.
defense cuts-the ones that congress could have avoided? besides, if we cut defense in HALF, we would still spend 1/4 of the entire worlds defense monies-by ourself. so, what, instead of killing china ten times over, it would be six times over? i mean, people only have to die once....like we're going to war with china.
romney already said he wants to keep parts of obamacare, so that repeal is probably off.
been hearing about privatizing amtrak for years, not holding my breath.
nea-that's a gnat on an elephants ass when it comes to budget issues.
title x-that won't happen.
foreign aid-see nea, above.
let's be realistic about our issues that are facing us. much of that stuff you put up has nothing to do with the actual real, deep, growing issues that are centered on the federal budget.
the vast majority of federal spending goes to:
defense
medicare/medicaid/social security
interest on debt, and then
everything else combined, which doesn't equal any one of the above.
so, this guy wants to cut taxes (again, not mathematically possible to do what he said he wants to do) raise defense spending (WHY????), and give vouchers for medicare (will never happen).
and you mentioned above that he wants to repeal dodd/frank and have 'good regulations'. what does he mean by that? what would those regs be exactly? no one seems to know.
he deals in generalities. i'm going to fix this, this and this. how?
'empower states to innovate'. wtf is that supposed to mean???
presidential candidates have mentioned fraud and waste since i was born, during johsons term. yeah....we'll see how that one goes.
sorry, not seeing where romney is 'better'. it's all blather, smoke, and mirrors. which sounds par for the course actually!!! congrats mitt, you're a po-LIE-tician.