After a day of conversations, some lasting up to an hour and a half, some with Mormons, some with Catholics, and some with Evangelicals I have decided that I am all the more eager for the primaries to be done...

Many months ago the trek for the nomination began in the individual minds, hearts, homes, and offices of the candidates...

As an observer and fan of many aspects of each candidate and finding myself in opposition to some policies of each as well - I continue to be flummoxed at even this late date as to the certainty of which candidate I myself will be voting in favor of.

My transparency in the reflection and discussion of my own thoughts - on my own blog - has been an irritation to both supporters and opponents of Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Ron Paul, and to a lesser degree Rudy Giuliani.

With Rudy I simply can not support - nor will I - a candidate who seems to believe that the act of murdering an unborn child is "wrong" but not something he could ever advise someone else against...

With McCain his recklessness on a host of issues over the past seven years had burned me out on him truly before the campaign had even had a real chance to begin.

Ron Paul is simply a man living in denial.

Fred Thompson was who I was most excited about early on - especially prior to his announcement. Something went kaput on the Leno soundstage and almost immediately Fred's energy level dropped. Simultaneously so did his poll numbers.

Mitt was my official candidate prior to Fred getting in, and became my favorite candidate again as soon as Fred began to fade.

I have written at length about the strength I believe a Romney/Duncan ticket would have in forcing Democrats to spend money in California, and the liberal Northeast - and thusly possibly provide some opportunities for Dems to not defend other territories as strongly and possibly allow some (one to four) blue states to be flipped red.

I have interviewed Romney more than any other candidate in the race. At CPAC in person last spring, multiple times by phone since, and each time he has presented a STRONG case for the coalition he seeks to build using fiscal, defense, and social conservatives. His game plan was well thought out, and it seemed putting his millions into the early states was wise.

Mike Huckabee is someone I've also had some face time with. Introducing him at CPAC last spring. Talking to him as well on my show and hearing from him directly his passion for the issues I hold most important.

At Values Voters by FRC and Focus on the Family this last fall Mike and Mitt stood head and shoulders above the crowd in terms of receptivity. Huck won the straw poll of people in attendance. Due to some very savvy internet marketing Mitt won the online straw poll. Mitt gave the best speech of the week - and it was likely his best speech to date. (For my two cents it made the "Faith in America" speech look like chopped liver.)

And then came the deranged attacks on Huckabee - simultaneous to his rise in the polls. The attacks from Drudge, Hugh Hewitt, and to a lesser degree on National Review Online were in large part the creation of the Romney camp. I don't hold this against the candidate - it is his staff's job to win. But unfair things began to be said.

For example a simple comparison of the issue of taxes under the two Governor's administrations easily showed that Huck kept taxes lower over his tenure as Governor of a needy state (where more safety nets were needed) than Mitt did in Massachusetts. The degree of difference was slight - but on the technical examination of the facts Huck did a better job in real dollars of reigning taxes in. For the Club for Growth to imply otherwise has been less than sincere. Grover Norquist has encouraged voters to look at the facts and has more or less said, "trust Huck" on his conversion.

None of that is to say that Mitt didn't do a fine job on taxes as well. After looking at both of their records I would give them solid A-'s for their grade on the tax issue.

I wrote only a day or so ago that Mitt's biggest weaknesses at present were his most rabid supporters - at least those who have a microphone. I have heard from hundreds who share that same opinion.

Mitt also has some hidden weaknesses that believe it or not no one sees right now. (And it's not the insane clown posse of Camenker, Rios, and Jackson riding the Mass Resistance horse to the rodeo.) It is actually much simpler than that...

Romney's camp leaked the "press release ratio" to Drudge to attempt to portray how the DNC will bite into Huck. But Mitt's strategy has a gaping whole in its potential exploitation as well.

When strategists looked back at Rove's gameplan for 2004 - the entire election came down to one state and one statistic in that state.

In 2004 - George W. Bush won the White House because six more African American evangelicals voted with the President on the issue of marriage out of every 100 African Americans in that state. Six out of one hundred... in Ohio... on marriage.

Mitt Romney is no racist. The LDS religion no longer embraces the racist history that it did up until my parent's generation. Mitt's father personally walked and marched with Martin Luther King Jr.

But I speak with the African American church in our nation every single day. The deep distrust of a Mormon - not on faith - but on civil rights - is already being whispered all too unfairly in these very circles. I have yet to see "African Americans for Mitt" - though by this time in the two Bush election cycles that strategy was already well conceived and being executed.

Huckabee on the other hand governed the equivalency of a welfare state with safety net programs but cut his state's deficit, left the state with a surplus, and reached out to the African American population simultaneously. And though techinically taxes increased 37% the state remained towards the bottom of the fifty states in the nation in terms of overall tax burden. But aside from all of this...

Huckabee attracted 49% of the African American vote in his state.

Looking at the 2004 map - should it again come down to Ohio, and should it again be depedent upon African American Evangelical Christians - what candidate will get what percent of them?

I am not making an endorsement in the primary race - after much examination and defense of both Mitt and Huck and to a lesser extent Fred.

I am an evangelical. My belief system theologically is nearly identical to Huck. My policy positions are closest to Mitt. Both men can be engaging, both are highly intelligent and would make for interesting debate opposites vs. Obama or Hillary.

I will support the GOP candidate coming out of the primaries as long as that candidate is not named Rudy Giuliani...opposite Hillary there is little difference in many issues - both perceived hawkish, pro-abortion, pro-redefining marriage, and pro-Sanctuary cities. They've both even donned formal wear in public - and I will not weigh in on who was more womanly in their full regalia.

I like Mitt and Huck very much. I believe the wrestling with substance and truth and issues that matter has actually been a beneficial process for the GOP. Hugh Hewitt is still someone I admire much - but happen to have a bit of difference on when it comes to the objectivity from which we both operate. (I'm not in line to become anyone's Press Secretary...)

Because my motives have been, and continue to be honest about both of these fine men, I do not feel it necessary to apologize for posts I've made regarding either of these candidates. And if either get the nomination - it will be my priority to pray for either of them as the leader of this nation.

I'm sure there will be more to say in the days to come - but after spending a few hours on the phone today with a sweet Mormon couple, and later some mightly motivated Evangelicals, and one very smart Catholic I felt it was time to again demonstrate my transparency in my own thoughts as they relate to the race ahead.

My blog, my show, and my mind are not bought and sold. No one has claim to my vote - and each of them will need to earn it...

And that ain't all bad!