While I loved to hear the soundbites of Romney the liberal from his senate run against Ted, I think Silverstein has got it backwards. I don't think Romney's a fake conservative, I think he ran in MA as a fake moderate. Right now, he needs to appeal to the "social conservative" base of the Republican party, since he can't beat Guiliani with the social moderates (after all, the only job that's more liberal than gov of MA is mayor of NY, why do you think all us bay staters spend so much time on the Acela to Manhatten?).
If Romney gets the nomination, watch him move towards the middle with the 2008 version of "compassionate conservatism."

This kind of perspective is too much parsing of words. Look at what a governor signed and what he has vetoed vs. how a senator voted for the real direction a person will head once elected president.

And listen to the NPR comentary "Could Reagan Live Up to His Legacy?" at
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15160990

The main reason the R's should consider Romney is that he has beaten two women in the past. Once in the 2002 primary and then in the general election the same year. The Dems are set on choosing a female so this is only practical from their perspective.

Looking and sounding good on television pretty much trumps religious prejudice when you win against a Catholic in a majority Catholic state like Mass. It's not a stretch to accept that this can be replicated on a National scale when running against a Senate voting record that includes support for "live birth" abortion which is now illegal and unconstitutional.

These are just contrasting opinions and observations and should not be taken as an endorsement of any candidate.

He is good guy although not a true conservative (and I am) so I will leave the product on the shelf.