[AFA-Michigan]

Mitt's current position on protecting marriage is a flip-flop itself.

In seeking the homosexual Log Cabin Republican endorsment (which he got twice), he said: “The authorization of marriage on a same-sex basis falls under state jurisdiction.”

In other words, it's up to each state to decide, identical to McCain's argument against a federal marriage amendment.

Running for governor in 2002, Romney publicly OPPOSED a state Marriage Protection Amendment proposed before his state Supremes legalized so-called homosexual "marriage," calling it "too extreme" -- even though his wife and son signed the petition to put it on the ballot.

But hey, Mitt's no dummy. After getting elected governor, he put that presidential campaign finger up in the air and correctly calculated that he could get some national mileage by making himself out to be the crusading champion of marriage amendments.

[MassachusettsGOP]

All of these statements and positions occured before the Courts ruled in Massachusetts for Gay Marriage. At that time, Mitt wrongly believed that statue would be good enough. Once the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled against all of human history, Mitt flipped and since has done just about everything he could to get rid of Gay Marriage. (Some people think he could have rejected Gay Marriage through executive powers, but at the time it was hazy Constitutionally, as the ruling is)

I don't know if thats a flip-flop, its more of a flip. But I understand your point. He has definetly flip-flopped on Abortion. I don't know if he has flipped on Guns yet, though I doubt it. And he has always been hazy on Gay Rights. Though he is strongly Conservative on Fiscal issues. Not my first choice, but I'd still vote for him under "Favorite Son" conditions if Newt doesn't run.