For anyone considering supporting Rick Santorum’s White House run, I would recommend reading his 2005 book, It Takes a Family. Rick Santorum mixes no words in defining his world view. In November 2005, he wrote an op-ed for Townhall.com outlining his vision for "Compassionate Conservatism."
Compassionate Conservatism relies on healthy families, freedom of faith, a vibrant civil society, a proper understanding of the individual, and a focused government to achieve noble purposes through definable objectives which offers hope to all.
You will find no argument among Pennsylvanians, Rick Santorum is a life-long social conservative fiercely committed to protecting religious and constitutional rights.
In 2001, Santorum tried unsuccessfully to insert language which came to be known as the "Santorum Amendment" into the No Child Left Behind bill that sought to promote the teaching of intelligent design. In a 2002 Washington Times op-ed article Santorum wrote that intelligent design "is a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes.” By 2005, Santorum had adopted the Discovery Institute's Teach the Controversy approach.
Santorum and U.S. Senator John Kerry, (D-MA), were the lead sponsors of the Workplace Religious Freedom Act (WRFA), which would require employers to accommodate the religious observances of their employees.
During 20 years of service in the House and Senate, Rick Santorum never altered his view concerning our nation’s role in military engagement. He was a leading proponent for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Santorum’s view on the role of diplomacy caused him to be one of two votes in the Senate against the confirmation of Robert Gates as Defense Secretary.
In 2006, Santorum opposed President George W. Bush’s bi-partisan immigration reform proposal. He has not waived during the GOP presidential campaign in his opposition to amnesty for illegal immigrants.
Many might wonder how Santorum lost his Senate seat representing voters in Pennsylvania who President Barack Obama once noted “cling to guns or religion.” There are at least three theories:
One camp contends Santorum’s personal decisions caused major erosion in his support. Santorum moved his family into a Virginian home an hour outside of Washington back in 2001. This decision surprised few as the Santorum’s family values system had deemed Pennsylvania an unacceptable option for his children. The Senator’s children never attended public or private school in Pennsylvania, but were cyber-schooled. Santorum’s departure from Pennsylvania echoed his voting record, which showed him having filed an absentee ballot since 1995.
A second camp concentrates on Santorum’s record as out of touch with voter’s core concerns in 2006. Polling in 2006 showed the state had grown weary of dual Middle East conflicts requiring repeated deployment of far too many military reserve units. The majority of voters opposed Santorum’s support for privatizing Social Security investment. Additionally, a sluggish economy had led to rapidly rising budget and national deficits worries.
Santorum offers a third spin. He contends none of the above contributed to his defeat. He believes his loss was largely reflective of an anti-Bush wave sweeping the country during the 2006 election cycle which returned power to the Democratic party in both Houses of Congress and across the nation.
Can Santorum win the GOP nomination? That is a question only caucus members and delegates to the national convention will be able to answer. The question Republicans must answer is: Is this election about social conservatism, fiscal conservatism, or a most perfect mix?
If it is about the former, Rick Santorum could become the GOP nominee. If it is about the later, Republicans might be left staging a brokered convention come August.
Photo Credit: marcn
The Discussion
As I look at the Republican primary season I don't see any reasonable challenger to President Obama. In Mr. Romney I see a dressed up "politician" who has changed positions on every issue a few times. In Mr Santorum I see a passionate candidate who has failed to prove he can win.
All at the white house are praying for a Santorum victory.
My blood boils every time I hear someone say we should teach ID in science classes. ID is creationism 2.0 and is NOT valid scientific theory. The fact that Santorum tried to make it federal law that all schools have to teach ID in science classes shows that he is more interested in pushing his religious beliefs onto everyone than he is in letting people be free to make their own choices.
In my viewpoint, Santorum redefines how G.W. Bush defined compassionate conservatism. Where Bush would nudge, which I supported, Santorum wants to push people down the path he sees best. Huge difference!
3 Replies
2 Replies
1 Replies
Please Santa, please please please let Santorum get the nomination. I wanna do a happy dance in November when Obama wins by a record margin.
1 Replies
Everybody on Policymic knows I'm no Santorum fan...and for all the reasons Sal, John and George have presented below.
My analysis is this: most of the American electorate doesn't really "get" that Rick Santorum has such a radical theocratic bent to his politics. They still see him as another alternative to Mitt Romney - so the message that he's not a GOOD alternative isn't getting through.
Neither is Richard's thesis that there's a distinct dichotomy now between fiscal and social conservatives. I believe that this, in the end, will destroy the Republican Party as it is currently constituted.
Mitt Romney represents the fiscal conservatives, more or less. He is more fiscally radical than the old fashioned Eastern Establishment Rockefellar Republicans, but perhaps that's neither here nor there. When Ronald Reagan made his unholy bargain with the Christian Conservative movement - and politicized issues and people that ought never to have been brought into the political arena - he also made a falling-out inevitable.
The Tea Party factions who haven't joined the Ron Paul movement have continued to advance the social issues and they are the ones who are passing these radical anti-birth control and anti-abortion bills in State Legislatures all over the country.
The Republican Party is at war with itself. I don't see them patching this up any time soon - and certainly not before the Convention.
9 Replies
7 Replies
6 Replies
Santorum has certainly presented himself as the loud & proud social conservative throughout the 2012 race, and that's the image he's hoping to ride into the GOP nomination.
But this is the wrong year for those issues. While they've temporarily crept back into the national spotlight as of late, make no mistake: jobs, the economy, federal spending, the debt & deficit, and taxes will be front and center in 2012, not abortion or gay marriage.
I believe Mitt Romney will find a way more recptive audience this election than Santorum will. The independents & swing voters of America are definitely up for grabs, and I don't think Santorum will win em over with statements like, "A kid is better off with a father in jail than with 2 lesbian mothers."
2 Replies
1 Replies
Social Conservatism, and its base of fundamentalism (i.e. the term "conservative" in this context is both misleading and inaccurate), does not belong in politics. And the GOP needs to wake up.
If Santorum wins the nomination, voters in November won't see an alternative to Obama, they'll see instead a fundamentalist. And the election will be little more than a formality presaging Obama's second term in the White House.
4 Replies
3 Replies
2 Replies
Mr. Matthews- This is an outstanding essay that gives Republicans something to think about before we pull a handle in the primaries.
I'm particularly concerned with the passion of Santorum regarding social values. He is pushing the envelope too far for many Americans, essentially trying to impose religious beliefs into government policy. This violates one of the most important principles of our nation- the separation of Church and State. I don't begrudge others from practicing their religion in any way they want so long as they don't ram it down my throat. Social conservatism is code for intrusive government, in our bedrooms, in our minds and in our schools.
My understanding is that Santorum had his clocked cleaned in his last senatorial race. He lost by a huge margin. To say he was out of touch with voters, is therefore an understatement, if not a lie. It would be okay to blame Bush for a few percentage points, but ten or more? He was just a lousy candidate. Republicans should learn from this, and stay away from Santorum- I think he is a sure fire loser. I see a rerun of the Johnson/Goldwater occurring in November.
What credentials does Santorum have from a financial perspective? He was a short term senator. Moreover, his foreign policy experience is nil. What does the man bring to the table? He's not an orator, in fact he's boring. All he is is the latest alternative to Mitt Romney; we are just about finished looking at all the options.
1 Replies
"Is this election about social conservatism, fiscal conservatism, or a most perfect mix?"
- Neither. It's about who can get the most money, and commit the most cases of election fraud. See: Maine.
4 Replies
3 Replies
2 Replies