Republican Mitt Romney's 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.