No big deal.
Mitt ain't going anywhere anyway.
The Christians will never vote for him.I'm Christian and a lot of us will support the winner and true American heart and spirit in Mitt Romney.He is for our rights and values as Americans and he will not betray this country by offering our citizenship and our drivers licences to aliens.Mitt Romney is the only candidate with a lot of guts and intelligent as well he will not sell us to illegals from around the world like the rest are sounding it off already.You try to please the world but the American people will not be please with those candidates.We are Christian American we love Romney and we want justice.

I thought you had to born in the United Stats to be President. McCain was born in Panama and Romney was born in Mexico! What's up with this?

Rebuttal to post by KENNY: Just what internet do you get your information from? Mitt Romney was born in Detroit Michigan and even though McCain was born in Panama, at the time of his birth it was a U.S. territory, therefore he is a U.S. Citizen.

I would love to see Mitt Romney if he becomes President to strighten up the media mess.

Let's see if I got this right. The telephone calls said that Romney got Vietnam deferrements, which he in fact did. It said the Mormons prize the Book of Mormon over the Bible, which is accurate. It said that Romney's sons are working on their dad's campaign instead of serving in Iraq, which Romeny said was equally valid national service, which is true. Hmmmm. How is the truth dirty mud and "un-American"? Sorry Mitt but the truth hurts.

Romney's father was born in Mexico but ran for President. However Romney Sr's father was seving as an ambassador and Romney sr may even have born in the Embassy.

McCain was born I think in the Panama Canal Territory, which was under US control at the time as hos Dad was serving in the US Navy at the time. I think in both circumstances these people count as US Citizens.

Not that I would vote for either, or any Republican come to that.

But these push polls and attack calls have no real place in democratic politics, whatever is being said.Seems the Repugs are still reading Karl Rove's playbook, and are happy tp follow it, until the fire is turned on them.

un-American? Is it American to pretend that you are a mainline Christian when you are not? Is Mitt deceiving Americans into beleiving he is a true Christian? He certainly is and that is a crime! Is he a god in embryo? Ask him.Is his god a man? Ask him. Let him tell the truth.

Oh Boo Hoo MR. EX-Massachusetts totally rotten Governor Romney. (would have used much more explicit adjectives but it is prohibited)
I would love to honestly tell you what I think but I wouldn't want to hurt your feelings. I will however, point out one little fact to you MR. Romney. To say You are very disappointed in the political process that someone is pursuing to use this kind of underhanded, un-American technique. Now wasn't that Shame issue-ad in campaigning recently approved as a legal political technique by the Supreme Court. A Court at this time that has a majority of judges appointed by the ever so christen, looking for Saint hood President Bush? And isn't he a Republican???? What you disagree with your own parties doctrines??? STRANGE INDEED! Well it all sounds par for the course. This political campaign is as usual. All the Candidates are far more wishy washy then Charley Brown!!! Oh and ask any supported of President Bush, He is by far the Greatest American constitutional/Human rights supporter!!!
Then you might want to talk to an American voter that has their head in a proper anatomical positions.

To Bud,

I really keep trying to believe, contrary to what the press continually says, that this country isn't as full of religious bigotry as the press claims. But to read your post, I get really depressed.

Why are you attacking Romney on the basis of his beliefs? A man can believe anything he wants to? Why do you and other Christians feel so threatened? What's the problem? Whatever Romney's theology, it can't possibly be any stranger to a non-believer than yours. So why the one-sided bigotry? I just don't get it.

And by the way, I'd really like to know what a "true Christian" is? Is it someone like you who attacks the faith of others?

Surely the antagonists that are claiming to be Christians on this blog can't possibly be Christian. Their venomous dialog is contrary to Christian doctrine. My reading of the Bible’s New Testament says that Christians should love all and let God be the judge. I have never known ridicule or shame to have ever converted anyone to Christianity. To hear such vitriol would make me question why I would ever want to fellowship with them. As far as people hearing voices and claiming revelation perhaps Adam, Moses, Jesus, and even Mohammad should have been declared insane. When Jesus was baptized a voice from heaven declared Jesus was his son and was well pleased in him. Do you remember the mission of the Holly Spirit? And if Jesus was a man then doesn’t that imply that God became a man and was resurrected into perfection? And those that follow Christ will be resurrected and be perfected in him. So why would a Christian deny their own doctrine to defame Mitt just because he is a Mormon that seeks to know Jesus. Even between Christian sects their doctrine of Jesus is different. So I can’t imagine a true Christians being the antagonist on this blog.

We need campaign finance reform that eliminates soft-money ads. No more Swift-boat veterans for truth (and their current incarnation - all of them a bunch of rich conservatives bent on dominating government through lavish funding) ganging up on one candidate in a smear tactic of innuendo and lies. But while the NEW Golden Rule - he who has the gold gets to rule - applies, this kind of thing will be all too common. I'd love to see campaign finance reform place strict limits on the number of soft ads that can be placed, limit the budget of a campaign based on office and limit the amount of time a campaign OR THE SOFT ADS can run to no more than 60 days before an election date. News organizations, if reporting on one candidate, must report on ALL of them with equal time - a campaign round-up - in the same newscast and rotate the first and last candidates covered. Seems pretty simple to me and I think it would stand the constitutional free speech litmus test. Like getting a permit to have a parade or a gathering (Both expressions of free speech), it has to be done at the appropriate times and place. The budget thing is to see which candidates are actually good with budgets. It may not translate well to their time in office, but at least we know the candidate's track record for handling a budget going in. And limiting the time that ads can run reduces the cost of the political battle and the wear and tear on the American public (the election's a fricking YEAR off and this is what we have ALREADY???). And limiting the number of soft money ads that can be aired doesn't limit someone's right to say something - only the number of times they're allowed to say it. Were it up to me, I'd throw in some accountability - every ad that airs benefiting a candidate must be acknowledged by that candidate before it can air with the candidate approving or disapproving of the ad - but given the utter lack of accountability on the part of most politicians (starting with the top and working down), I'd say I have a better chance of PROVING the existence of God than getting THAT to happen. It's too bad we can't get politicians who are sincere, trustworthy, accountable, thrifty and responsible. We get what the powers that be (the DNC and RNC) decide we should get and that's all. Oh, and as a final note while I'm fantasizing, I'd add a "none of the above" option to all elections and if a candidate can't garner at least half of the votes, the office goes unfilled for that term.

Boys just wanna have fun.

Romney is just like Bush, anything that he does not like, in this case more of the truth about him, he whines is unAmerican. By the way, it IS my right to vote against a guy that follows a cult. Why is it that all these Republicans who avoided military service want to start wars all over the place? What family value is it that approves of his sons` refusal to serve in the military if terrorism is the scourge of the 21st century as Mitt proclaims?

McCain is right, this guy is the biggest hypocrit in the race.

Luke,
I'm curious, when did the draft become reinstated? Your comment about the Romney family having no family values because the sons "refuse" to serve in the military makes no sense. The last time I check, military service in this country was voluntary. So all of us that are not serving right now are devoid of family values? Also, the article says and I quote "his five sons did not serve in the military" There is nothing in the article that says they refused to serve, just that they are not serving. I too belive that terrorism is the scourge of the 21st century and I bet that if you were to poll people, the majority would agree. So those of us who agree and yet did not serve in the military have no family values?

Those who claim to be christian or born again christian or whatever are jokers and clowns.I am apalled at how people claim to be true Christian don't talk and act like they are representing Christ real life examples when he was among men.Jesus Christ loves all human beign despite the differences in their belief and ways of worship but he was preaching the true path to salvation and everlasting happiness.So when I read and hear other Christian or so profess to be Christian talking down to other people and their religion I know right away the devil is involved in the planning and discussion.In a way he(Satan)is powerful than the masses of mortal weak Christian.There are many of them around standing in corners and streets and other places of gathering screaming their lungs out and shouted condemnation of other people and their religion.I wrote these views with the help of the Spirit of God.