Romney splits the difference and takes both sides-again!

Tuesday night in an Indiana Senator debate, GOP candidate Richard Mourdock stated that the only exemption that he would accept for an abortion was the life of the mother. So this would mean that rape or incest would not be an acceptable reason for an abortion any time after conception. This was quickly countered by Mitt Romney, who said that Mr. Mourdock's view wasn't his view and wasn't a plan for his his administration. But then the very next day, Wednesday, ads went up in Indiana with Romney saying that Richard Mourdock needed to be elected, and giving him Romney's full support. Now, I can think of dozens of policies that Romney has changed on, most in the last four weeks. But I can't think of any candidate that in one day he or she has tried to placate both sides of an issue. I find this to be completely unacceptable and it gives me another reason to not vote for Romney. But this also begs the question that I wanted Romney to answer on TV: What part of the 2012 GOP platform if you were President would you veto, if any. I believe that although Romney may not agree with all the far right ideas of the GOP now, it would show that he doesn't have strong enough beliefs to go against the GOP in any way. And that is completely unacceptable to me.