Professing Christ Means You're Better?

I'm not a big sucker for politics. I try to keep my boots as clean as possible while gathering enough information to vote. I don't usually comment on political issues, but this isn't really a political issue so much as a religious one. In watching the debates about whether or not good LDS members will break the Republican mold, a comment was made that voting for Huckabee is better than voting for Obama because "any person who professes Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior . . . will be a better person for it." I don't think so. I think it depends on what image the so-called "professor of faith" has created for Jesus Christ.

Evidence: The Crusaders professed Christ as Lord and Savior.
The Inquisition professed Christ as Lord and Savior.
The Salem witch hunters professed Christ as Lord and Savior.

I generally feel pity for atheists and agnostics, but there is one thing on which I wholeheartedly agree with them: unaccountable evil has been done in the name of Christ. Christ himself warned that many would come falsely in His name. That it is necessary to take upon oneself the name of Christ in order to be saved is inarguable. However, if someone confesses the name of Jesus Christ, but does so by redefining that name, he is creating a false Christ and is, essentially, taking the name of God in vain. The name of Christ is its own, it cannot be used to justify a person's own agenda. True belief in Christ is not a political tool.

Whether or not Huckabee falls into that category, I'm not intending to comment on, but simply saying "I believe in Jesus" is not enough to truly take His name upon oneself. Nor does it automatically make one a better person. In some cases, it has shown to make one infinitely worse. For me, I'd rather* have a sincere and humble follower of Islam in office than a two-faced, manipulative Mormon.

*Disclaimer: this is not a comment on either Obama or Romney, so don't get your knickers in a twist.