If you want change in the right direction, you must realize that you are not going to get everying you want on every issue. Mitt seems to have the right balance for me–and I think most of American will love him the more they get to know him.

Again, here’s the problem. Our politics (and federal budget) is so screwed up today because far, far too many people pay zero income taxes, yet are voting for politicians who promise them benefits financed by a true MINORITY of Americans (i.e. taxpayers). Unless and until each and EVERY voting American pays SOMETHING in taxes, then there will be no incentive to require our politicians to be parsimonious. A flat tax as the answer? Hmm, it’s got the same problems if you look at the arugments of it’s adherents. I believe in a truly fair national sales tax where all pay their share.

Concerning gay rights. Romney, of course, is earnestly explaining his earlier comments about his gay rights position. He explained that he continued to be interested in protecting their rights to employment. As far as governmental hiring, so be it (they are taxpayers too, in theory, and thus should be treated equally). But as for private hiring, I do not want the government mandating that I hire someone with whom I have a strong moral disagreement. Indeed, using Romney’s logic, I guess the government could require the Mormon church to hire a Baptist minister to oversee their congregations (or, on the other hand, requiring the Baptists to hire a mormon as a pastor at their church). I know, I know, religions are protected from such mandates–but how about protecting the “religious” too? A small business owner with deep religious views should not be mandated any more than a large denomination church.

My .02