In today's New York Times, Dean Barnett gives an honest assessment of the Mitt Romney has has known, worked for, and admired for years. After laying this out, he turns to why so many people (including me) don't like Romney:

The Mitt Romney I got to know was warm and likable. He had an electric intelligence. He was unfailingly decent. He was totally committed to his family. He treated everyone with respect and kindness.

If you're like most politically attuned Americans, you probably don't agree with my description of Mr. Romney. You may consider him to be the personification of political ambition. You possibly believe he will say anything to get elected president. You might even consider him one of the least honorable politicians in the country.

Barnett blames Romney's campaign for the current negative perception:

Early in the presidential race, Mr. Romney perceived a tactical advantage in becoming the campaign's social conservative. Religious conservatives and other Republicans with socially conservative views found the two early front-runners, John McCain and Rudy Giuliani, unacceptable. As someone who shares the beliefs of social conservatives, Mr. Romney saw an opportunity that he could exploit. He made social issues the heart of his candidacy.

This tack rang false with the public because it was false. The problem wasn't so much the perception of widespread "flip-flopping" on issues like abortion. The public allows its politicians a measure of flexibility. But the public correctly sensed something disingenuous about Mr. Romney's campaign.

Voters perceived the cynicism of a campaign that tried to exploit wedge issues rather than focus on the issues that in truth most interested the candidate. They sensed phoniness. As a consequence, many have grown to feel that Mitt Romney can't be trusted. This lack of trust is now the dominant and perhaps insurmountable obstacle that the Romney campaign faces.

What bothers me the most about Romney was the gleeful way he said he'd be "delighted" to sign a congressional bill outlawing abortion, despite the fact that Congress lacks the constitutional power to enact such legislation. The right way to do this would be a constitutional amendment. Fred Thompson knows this, but Romney either doesn't know (unlikely, as he's a bright enough guy) or else he doesn't care. I could be wrong, but Romney just struck me as completely unprincipled at the time. And in the worst possible way; I can forgive a lot of unprincipled behavior, but a president being unprincipled about the Constitution? That goes to the heart of his entire purpose. (Hmm... Maybe he doesn't really mean it.)

Barnett has a lot more, and it was obviously painful for him as a former Romney guy to write, because it's so damning to Romney:

The real value of a Romney presidency would lie in the talents, honed in the business world, that he would bring to the White House.

Because Mr. Romney chose to make this argument a secondary matter compared to his stands on social issues, he mounted a campaign that was, at its most basic level, insincere. Now, parts of the voting public have come to view everything Mr. Romney says through jaundiced eyes. This past weekend, Romney-distrusting portions of the conservative blogosphere kicked up a fuss over seven words Mr. Romney said to volunteers who were dialing for dollars at a fund-raising event last week: "Make all the promises you have to."

Without knowing the context, it's impossible to know precisely what Mr. Romney meant. But given the public setting, it was almost certainly something benign. Most likely, he was reminding his volunteers to reassure potential contributors that in spite of his recent setbacks in Iowa and New Hampshire, he is committed to staying in the presidential race. But for voters who have learned to distrust Mr. Romney, the comment probably sounded a lot like, "Tell whatever lies are necessary."

Mr. Romney's 1994 campaign, errors included, reflected the candidate's character. His 2008 campaign has not.

I hope Mr. Romney does well enough in Michigan today that he gets the opportunity to introduce the public to the real Mitt Romney. He is a wonderful and gifted guy. It would be nice if he and his campaign allowed the voters in on that secret.

Maybe someone should ask Romney whether Barnett's allegations are true.

People need to know.

Until Romney comes clean about his inner decency, I still think the best thing to do is to donate to Fred Thompson's campaign. (As I explained here, you don't even have to be a Thompson supporter.)