News-Record.com

The man should be judged by his stated political stance and his record. I say that for all politicians. A man's religion may give some insight into his personality, but I don't believe it is as much a determinant as many people seem to think.

Morman, Mooney, Shiite, Sunni, Baptist, Baha'i, Quaker, Shaker, or whatever other brand of silliness Romney chooses makes no difference - I simply cannot vote for anybody from the land of Barney Frank & Ted Kennedy, aka Massachusetts.

I wonder why Southerners are so parochial in their presidential choices? As if being from the South automatically qualifies you more than someone with similar attributes and ideas as someone from New England. Are regional differences over certain ways of pronunciation so important?

Being from the South didn't qualify the Breck Boy - last time he ran he didn't carry his own precinct, nor his own county, nor his own state and if he chanced to live next door to me out here in Caswell county I still wouldn't vote for him.

Since political choices nowadays, with our two-party system, are more about the "lesser of two weevils" (M&C), I would vote for Romney, as opposed to ANY liberal – black, white, male, female or Martian – even though I believe Mormonism to be a rank heresy. Again, a conservative heretic is better than a crypto-Marxist, baby-killing, perversion-pushing, liberal poster-child of the DMC. Too bad they don’t make ‘em like the famous, dyed-in-the-wool Democrat president of the 30’s & 40’s who said: “No greater thing could come to our land today than a revival of the spirit of religion . . . I doubt if there is any problem – social, political, or economic – that would not melt away before the fire of such a spiritual awakening . . . We guard ourselves against all evils – spiritual as well as material – which may attack us from without, and the forces of ignorance and fear which may corrupt us from within.” If the alternative were REALLY bad, I would consider voting for a Democrat who spoke like that. Today, it’s pull-the-wool-over-your-eyes lip service – even by most Republicans.

What barrage of epithets do you reserve for those who are only moderates: liberal on some things and conservative on others, Nikos? Those names sure leave little for rational discussion, let alone reasoned choice.

What epithet would I use? "moderate"!

Yeah, you're right. It was a little over the top - hyperbole, I guess. However .............What we are seeing in our own country, and around the world, is a polarization of worldviews and spiritual identities. In my opinion, the Democratic Party is now highly influenced by left-wing, anti-Christian advocates, intent on advancing any unbiblical and immoral practice their most vocal constituency delights in at the moment – sort of “in your face, God” types.

The Republican Party had moved sor t of to the right; but now, after the mid-term wake-up call, is in regrouping mode, running desperately for cover at the center. Unfortunately, the “right” they moved to was not a Christian right, but a socio-political, neocon right that was only superficially “Christian,” and engineered for the purpose of garnering Christian votes. There was SOME policy enactment, but not very much.

I’m inclined to see both parties as just one humanist mega-party, that does a mild pendulum swing every four to eight years in order to placate its rather influential fringe elements. I would love to see a manifestly Christian party that was NOT about changing the Constitution, but about enacting biblical policies and laws through the Constitutional process. That’s what conservative Christians had some hope for with the Bush administration. It DID NOT happen. There were too many compromises and blunders along the path. I wasn’t at all surprised by the mid-terms.

And furthermore, I think my wording for the Democratic political movement is quite rational and accurate. My words are not meant to be “epithets” but are reasoned assessments. Take “baby killing;” the Dems are almost all for abortion, even the partial birth kind. Babies are killed!! What’s to debate? That these fetuses are just blobs of unformed tissue? Hardly!! And “perversion-pushing;” it’s obvious who’s behind the gay initiatives. As far as being crypto-Marxists is concerned; their big-govt. socialism and thinly-veiled anti-American sympathy with leftist elements is almost beyond crypto.

So discuss! Deny, defend with all the rationality you can muster. But if “rational” means that it must agree with YOUR presuppositions, we certainly cannot have a reasonable discussion. If it means setting forth each or our views and debating them, I’m game. But little ad hominem blurbs are so so cop-out.

I am registered independent, so I am not buying anyone's baggage on face value for whatever party they sign up for.

Good.