Republican Mitt Romney has repeatedly
flip flopped on some key issues. In doing so, he has only proved how easily he
can let go of his principles in his bid for power. Or does it indicate that he
simply does not have any principles to speak of?
For instance, in 1994, during his
earlier, unsuccessful run for Massachusetts
governor against Democrat Ted Kennedy, Romney projected himself as being
committed to a pro-choice policy. Subsequently, in 2002, while running again
for Massachusetts
governor, Romney remained an ardent supporter of women's right to choose. But
later Romney changed his position. He now calls for doing away with the Roe v.
Wade ruling that would allow individual states to define their own abortion
policies.
Romney similarly reversed his reformist
views with regard to gay rights. After declaring himself staunchly in support
of equal rights for gays in 1994—a position he retained even in 2002—he
suddenly changed his stance and declared marriage out of bounds for gay
couples.
Another issue is federal funding for
stem cell research. In 2005, Romney held a position that favored state
sponsored embryonic stem cell research, saying, "I believe stem cell
research is important for our state and for our nation." However, he
subsequently shifted to a more conservative stance, and opposed funding for
research involving embryonic stem cells.
The ideal candidate for the post of
president will be a leader who can take tough decisions. For this, he would
need to have a strong internal value system. More importantly, he would need to
have the mettle required to stand his ground. Such strong leadership is even
more important today, when one considers the threats facing America. Romney
may be a capable executive with the ability to get work done quickly. However,
his compulsive flip flopping has proven that he lacks the moral fiber required
to steer the nation during these difficult times.
