Mitt Romney and Meet the Press

Mitt Romney was on Meet the Press, and once again gave vague non-answers to specific questions. But one of the questions that he gave a vague answer to actually told people quite a lot. After saying he would ensure that rich people's taxes wouldn't go down as loopholes in the tax code would be closed, he was asked which loopholes he would close, and couldn't answer the question. When asked, he said that closing the loopholes would ensure that the tax cuts would be revenue neutral. If we are running a deficit and we get no new revenue, how would he reduce the deficit? Well, he did say that no cuts in defense spending would occur under his administration, so this mean all the cuts would have to come from domestic spending. He was asked what would be cut, and wouldn't answer. When asked  if the budget would balance in his first term, he said that the domestic cuts would be too draconian to be done in one term, and that it would balance in his second term, taking 8 to 10 years to balance the budget. Now not to quibble too much, but is a president's second term 4 to 6 years? Does it balance in the second term or not? And if it's too draconian for one term, than what cuts are they that can be made incrementally that wouldn't hurt people in 8 to 10 years but would in four? And there were other answers that I'd like to debate, such as which monetary policy is now hurting the European economy, but the question that wasn't asked is the one I'd like answered. He was asked if he would work with Democrats if elected, and he said that he would, citing his time as governor as his history of working with the other side. But if Mitt is elected, he won't have a House controlled by Democrats, and he may not have a Senate that is controlled by Democrats. So, he'll have at least one part of the legislature controlled by the GOP, maybe both parts. So my question would be, if a GOP controlled legislature sent you a bill that reflected part the GOP party plank that you disagree with, would you veto it? Now, he may say he wouldn't answer a hypothetical, but the American people deserve to know if you, Mitt, would be would just rubber stamp anything that came out of a GOP-controlled legislature or not. This is one answer that you can't be vague with, Mitt, and you need to answer it, and answer it truthfully. You may not want to, but the American people shouldn't vote for you if you refuse to answer the question. Those on the right may not vote for you in you say you'd veto, and those on the left won't vote for you if you wouldn't veto. But the answer will matter to those in the middle, the undecided voters, which is why you won't answer it if you are ever asked. That's something you have a history of too, Mitt.