http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/15/mitt-romney-vague-speculatron-sept-14_n_1885620.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
One of the essential charges that's been levied at Mitt Romney by Team Obama Re-Elect is that he has, thus far, refused to offer any specifics in terms of the policies he would, as president, engender and support.
Not that they'd be thrilled to learn what those are -- the simple fact of the matter is that Obama and his affiliated allies among the ranks of campaign surrogates and super PACs have enjoyed a prolonged period of filling in that vacuum. But the new wrinkle, as we enter the period of time between the pageantry of the political conventions and the presumed-to-be-somewhat-substantive debates, is that now Romney's nominal GOP allies are starting to get tweaky over Romney's vagueness
starting to, were they not complaining that they had to hold their nose's in order to vote for him in the primary?
As Salon's Steve Kornacki documents, Romney took multiple hits on this at the beginning of the week. Here's George Will, for example, seeking clarity on Romney's tax-cut math. Here's Trent Lottinsisting that Romney "does need to be clearer about what his vision is and what he would do." And the Wall Street Journal's editors this week opined:Mr. Romney’s pre-existing political calculation seems to be that he can win the election without having to explain the economic moment or even his own policies. As this flap shows, such vagueness carries its own political risks.By "this flap," the Journal editors are referring to Romney's recent appearance on "Meet the Press," where he insisted that he was going to "replace Obamacare" with his "own plan." That plan, of course, is completely ethereal -- he's never actually specified what it entails, probably because he's already come up with a health care reform plan, and it's the one he now opposes.So, on "Meet the Press," he went a little weak in the knees: "I'm not getting rid of all of health care reform. ... Of course, there are a number of things that I like in health care reform that I'm going to put in place. One is to make sure that those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage."
Romney said out of his own mouth "if i'm elected nothing will change", the state rest.
The ensuing reaction was, essentially, "Oh, really?" and that propelled the Romney campaign into a bewildering 12-hour period in which they walked back, walked around, and eventually came up with just a promise to maybe keep insurance companies from dumping "individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage." Which, while swell, doesn't fully address the full problem.
But Romney's health care specifics -- or the lack thereof -- are just a hot flash amid the dull throb of discontent over his vague economic prescriptives. These are the specifics for which the establishment GOP commentariat yearns.
Let's recall that the highest esteem in which conservatives held Romney came when he chose Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan as his running mate. (You should also recall that the Ryan pick immediately turned conservatives around on Romney. Prior to the Ryan announcement, the Romney campaign was getting pilloried for spokeswoman Andrea Saul's complimentary statement on Romney's Massachusetts health care reform.)
There was a clear reason for this -- unlike Romney, Ryan does have a set of well-codified policies to tout, and in selecting Ryan as his 2012 partner, Romney was initially seen as having executed a skillful merger and acquisition of everything Ryan represented. The problem is, it didn't last. Rather than bringing specificity to Romney, the partnership has only really brought Romney's fog to Ryan.
and a well deserved fog, just waiting for the sun to come out over the republicans, melt so we can see Ryan more clearly, is he singing the Temptation song "i wish it would rain"? he has to figure someway to deal with all the lies he's told just this month.
