Originally posted on 6/5/11. Updated 9/23/11 to reflect the Fox-Google debate.

Last night, Rick Perry attempted (rather poorly) to highlight Mitt Romney's flip-flopping ways.  We had a flip-flopper running for President in 2004 .  His name is John Kerry, who represents Massachusetts in the US Senate. We don't need a GOP flip-flopper on the ballot in 2012.  Might be something in the water in Massachusetts that makes people change their minds depending on whether it's an election year or not.  I tweeted last night that Mitt Romney is running as a conservative, as a former moderate, as a former liberal.  Keep that in mind when you see him schmoozing for the cameras at the next debate.

Do not forget that Romney is the party's choice.  He seems to be quickly becoming the media's choice as well.  As reflected below, we went down that road in 2008 with John McCain. 

For those of you that didn't learn your lesson in 2008, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is nothing more than a repackaged John McCain.  The moderate (and would be liberal) wing of the party loves Romney.  The GOP leadership loves Romney.  The mainstream media loves Romney.  See a pattern?  It's the same junk we went through with John McCain.

So what's the problem with Romney?  He just announced his candidacy, and you're already going after him?  My answer is damn right!  We have to nip this Romney candidacy in the bud before we are left with John McCain Version 2012. 

Here's the problem with Romney.  He stands for nothing.  He flip-flopped on a number of issues in 2008 to appear more conservative than he actually is.  Numbered points are from the Washington Post in February 2008:

1. Abortion. In October 2002, campaigning for governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney said he would "preserve and protect" a woman's right to choose. He now describes himself as an abortion opponent.

The right to life of the unborn is sacred.  Massachusetts is a lefty state to begin with, so I understand his position then, but it begs the question: was he lying to the people of Massachusetts when he said these things or is he lying to us now.  Personally, I don't want to find out should he actually win the GOP nomination.

2. Gay rights. In a 1994 letter to the Log Cabin Republicans, who advocate gay rights, he said he was in favor of "gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly" in the military. He now says it would be a mistake to interfere with the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

This issue has been somewhat settled now that gays can openly serve in the military.  However, I wonder if he would be very supporting of DOMA if he won the presidency. 

3. Gun control. Campaigning for the Senate in 1994, he said he favored strong gun laws and did not "line up with the NRA." He joined the National Rifle Association in 2006 while pondering a presidential run, and he praised the group for "doing good things" and "supporting the right to bear arms."

There are some of us that don't line up with the NRA either, especially when the NRA was tossing around the idea of endorsing Harry Reid last election.  So does Romney support strong gun laws or does is he pandering to the base of the party again?

4. Campaign finance. In 1994, he advocated a spending limit on congressional elections and the abolition of political action committees. In 2002, he supported public financing of campaigns from a 10 percent tax on private fundraising. This year, he said the McCain-Feingold law limiting campaign contributions is an attack on free speech.

I support the decision in Citizen United, but it's funny how you can see Romney's opinion on the situation going into 2008.  Things change when you need bunches of money to run for President.  Again, I'm not faulting the Supreme Court's decision, I'm faulting Romney for once again leading GOP voters around by the nose.

5. Immigration. In a November 2005 interview with the Boston Globe, he described an immigration overhaul advanced by John McCain as "reasonable." He now denounces it as an "amnesty plan." In December 2006, he signed an agreement authorizing state troopers to round up illegal immigrants.

Pandering again.  Finger in the wind.  Nuff said here.

With Romney, it gets a bit worse.  Mitt Romney has come out in favor of continuing ethanol subsidies.  Ethanol was nice at one time, but has not lived up to its promises.  I'm no tree-hugger, but the amount of water needed to make just one gallon of ethanol is enormous.  We yell at Obama for subsidizing the car industry, but yet many say nothing (to get elected) about subsidizing ethanol?  And other industries?

Last, but not least, is Romneycare - Massachusetts' version of Obamacare before Obamacare was even around.  How can Mitt Romney bash Obamacare and the massive costs it will have on the taxpayers in 2 years and the intrusion of government into our lives when he did the same thing only on a small scale?  It is the ultimate Romney flip-flop!

Once again, beware the candidate - Mitt Romney - that is supported by the GOP leadership, mainstream media, and the left.  All these people supported John McCain in 2008. What's one more flip-flop for a McCain Version 2012?  Romney likes to talk about what is in his book or Perry's book, but the only book Romney should be reading is a history book.  Especially the chapter on his past candidacies/past platforms.