Your New York Observer Piece

Steve,

 

You did not tell the truth when you said, "In less ideologically charged policy areas, Mr. Romney has systematically sacrificed his reformer credentials to national political expediency."

 

Romney has never changed his position, and you only have to read his wikipedia article to know that.

When he ran for governor in 2002, Romney declared his opposition to both same-sex marriage and civil unions. [34] "Call me old fashioned, but I don't support gay marriage nor do I support civil union," said Romney in an October 2002 gubernatorial debate. He also voiced support for basic domestic partnership benefits for gay couples. Romney told the Log Cabin Club of Massachusetts (a Republican gay-rights group) that he did not support same-sex marriage or civil unions, but would fight discrimination against gays and lesbians. [35] He also opposed an amendment, then before the General Court, that would have banned same-sex marriage and outlawed all domestic partnership benefits for gay couples. As a result, the Log Cabin Club endorsed Romney in the gubernatorial election. [36]. When campaigning in 2002, Romney's stated position was that "all citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of sexual orientation" and that "homosexuals should have the right to a domestic partnership status that affords them the potential for health benefits and rights of survivorship." [37]

I am discipointed that you would misscharacterize Romney's record.

Your conclusion is not only stupid, it is not honest: "But that's Willard Romney: He could have been an exceptional, ideologically independent governor, just as he could have been the real-deal conservative he now appears to be. It's just a pity that he didn't pick one face and stick with it. "

You prove that you are not ideologically independent writer, but choose to call someone a flip flop, even when their positions have never changed.