John, it is true that abortion is not a make or break issue for me. I could support either a pro-lifer or a pro-choicer depending on who I thought would be the best leader to confront the terrorist threat. The reason why I have a problem with Romney’s changing positions on abortion is that they are part of a larger pattern, which extends to gun control, immigration, campaign finance reform, and gay rights, just to name a few. On issue after issue, the one constant in Romney’s public career is that he will say and do whatever is most politically expedient at the time. That’s a problem for me because it impacts my judgment of what type of commander in chief he would be. One of the most important qualities I look for in a wartime leader is the ability to have the courage to make decisions that may not be popular at the time. Romney does not meet that test. Furthermore, as a governor, he has no record on national security issues to speak of, so the only thing I have to rely on regarding his foreign policy views is what he’s saying now. Given his history of saying the most politically expedient thing at the time, he has not given me much confidence that his statements are anything more than carefully designed to appeal to conservative primary voters. Moving on to other issues, he instituted a universal healthcare plan in Massachusetts that included mandates –something that in my view is a fundamental violation of conservative principles regarding the coercive power of government. So far, he has said he wouldn’t support such a proposal at the national level. But again, given his history of reversing himself, I have no faith that he would stick by that if his advisers told him national universal healthcare with mandates would be a smart move politically. In summary, abortion may not be a top issue for me, but by continuing to say whatever is politically convenient, and by splitting hairs in a Clinton/Kerry-esque way, Romney has lost all credibility with me, and I cannot take him seriously on any issue.