Is this really the best we can come up with?

Being the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney has been a game of musical chairs for more than a year now, and finally, mercifully, the music has stopped and there is one person left sitting down: Rick Santorum.

But if Santorum is considered a conservative simply because he is not Mitt Romney, than the Goldwater-Reagan tradition of the party is truly dead.

In an interview with Reason Magazine in 1975, Ronald Reagan said, “I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.” To him, being a conservative was about a belief in limited government and individual freedom to pursue success.

The primary goal of conservatism should be to limit the government’s involvement in our lives, because people and local communities are better able to manage their own affairs than bureaucrats in Washington.

Republicans abandoned this tradition during the Bush administration. Under the guise of a supposedly “compassionate” version of the movement, Republicans destroyed budgets by undertaking a binge of spending as they engineered the federal takeover of education, expanded entitlements, created entirely new federal departments, spent lavishly on pork and threw money at their pet causes.

When debt, spending and jobs became the primary concern of every American, the long-dormant limited government crowd reasserted itself, and proved that there was still an appetite for that old, decidedly more individualist brand of conservatism.

This band of rabble-rousers was revolting not only against the Democratic hegemony in Washington, but also the egregiously nonconservative activities of the Republican Party in the 2000s. The resurgent right seemed to have come to a consensus that their more libertarian-oriented instincts were the ones to follow.

This new consensus wants to vote for a presidential candidate, and all of the most acceptable candidates have taken a pass on the race; hence the seemingly endless parade of conservative alternatives.

Now that Iowa has finally come, there is one man left standing as the supposed conservative standard bearer. The problem is that man — Santorum — is a different and more offensive breed of anti-conservative than Romney.

Name one thing from the Bush era that is anathema to conservatives, and Rick Santorum not only voted for it, he was part of the leadership team that ensured its passage. No Child Left Behind? Check. Medicare part D? Check. Bridge to nowhere? Check. K Street Project? Check. Serial abuser of earmarks? Check.

But it is perhaps his obsessive focus on social issues and the twisted logic he uses to push his social agenda that are most disturbing.

Decrying what he calls the “libertarianish right” and “this whole idea of personal autonomy,” Santorum believes that liberty is not found in the right of individuals to decide what is best for ourselves, but “the freedom to attend to your duties” to God and family. Whatever that means.

In a 2006 interview Santorum said, “I do not believe that people should be empowered to do what pleases them the most. We have a responsibility beyond ourselves.” He then sneered at the concept that Americans have a right to do what they personally wish to do, so long as it doesn’t harm others. The government, he argued, can not allow such amoral behavior simply as a matter of individual freedom.

“One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before,” he said in October, “is I think the dangers of contraception in this country.” He went on. “It’s not OK. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

These are the musings of a person who very much likes government power and wants to use it.

Santorum doesn’t want the government small, he wants it to do what he perceives as social good. Like his leftist kin across the aisle, he knows that a toothless government can’t do that, and that is why he has been such a strong advocate of big government in his career.

The credo of the Reagan Revolution was that government was the problem, not the solution. Santorum believes that the government is indeed the solution, it is simply the solution to different problems. The problems he cares about.

That should make every conservative deeply uncomfortable.

Matthew Gagnon, a Hampden native, is a Republican political strategist. He previously worked for Sen. Susan Collins and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. You can reach him at matthew.o.gagnon@gmail.com and read his blog at www.pinetreepolitics.com.

Matthew Gagnon of Yarmouth is the chief executive officer of the Maine Policy Institute, a free market policy think tank based in Portland. A Hampden native, he previously served as a senior strategist...

Join the Conversation

13 Comments

  1. I agree. Reagan was right. Libertarianism is the key to conservatism. Those of us who think
    likewise should no longer label ourselves as conservatives due to candidates like Santorum, Gingrich, Perry and Bachmann. These people don’t qualify to clean out Reagan’s horse stalls in Southern California.

    Not that Romney is any better. Endorsed by McCain? Good luck GOP. You’ll be sitting there on
    November 7, 2012 with your chin on your chest, asking yourselves, “what happened? They said it wouldn’t be McCain all over again…what happened, what happened?”

    But back to Santorum. Is the GOP rank and file serious or just utterly ignorant? More drumbeats for wars from chicken hawks who never served themselves? Santorum compared his service in government to serving in the military during a town hall meeting on Thursday. A disgrace to all of us who served. This man is not fit to be our Commander in Chief.

    Santorum’s record will catch up with him and then what? Endorsing Arlen Specter? It doesn’t get much worse than that. “Oh my God, I didn’t know his record was that bad?” Good luck, GOP.

    Answer: Ron Paul was only one of 4 congressmen who supported Ronald Reagan in 1976. A true libertarian who understands what needs to be done in 2012.

    It is shameful that “Reagan Conservatives” such as Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin (chicken hawks who never served – all 3 of them) go out of their way to slam and misconstrue Ron Paul. They, like the GOP who are now for Santorum, wouldn’t know a real conservative if they saw one.

    Ronald Reagan: RIP – Please forgive the mainstream GOP for they do not know what they vote for….

    1. Santorum isn’t going to end up going anywhere… so we don’t have much to worry about with him.

      I think the worst part about the current crop of candidates is their constant insistence to try to make themselves out to be more conservative than they are by evoking Reagan’s name… Gingrich especially saying he is the “Reagan Conservative” in the race makes my head spin…

  2. The main- stream Republican establishment (money) is backing a candidate who is unacceptable to the narrow minded and bigoted wing of the party, the group that has been fed and nurtured by every Republican candidate since Eisenhower with a “Southern Strategy”. 
    Many in the GOP see Romney, a Morman, as a nonChristian, a heritic, an infidel.  My prediction:  his own party will burn him at the political stake.
     
    Let me be one of the first to ask the question on many minds from Virginia to Louisiana….

    How many secret bigamous wives has he had exactly?  How many does he now have, for that matter? 

    Whom do his kids look like? Mrs. Romney? I don’t think so. I don’t care about his birth certificate.  I want to see all of his marriage licenses, pronto!

    1. For somebody who is going to be burned by his own party… he just won Iowa after basically writing the state off for the entire campaign… he is going to win New Hampshire by double digits… CNN just came out with a poll today showing him up 18 points in South Carolina… and he’s likely to win Florida as well…

      That has never been done in the modern system of presidential nominating contests, and would make him more successful than Ford, Reagan, Bush, Dole, Bush or McCain.  

      That Mormonism would somehow keep him from the nomination has always been catnip for the politically ignorant.

      1. Thanks for responding Matt.  I appreciate and truly respect you for it.
         
        That said, I didn’t say Romney was going to be denied the nomination.  I think he will be the GOP nominee. 
         
        And I hope you are right and I’m wrong about the depth of bigotry in the southern Republican parties. 
         
        But after George W, Bush’s southern primary campaign made headway against John McCain with a rumor that McCain had fathered a black child and after Donald Trump came to GOP prominence by claiming the President’s birth certificate is forged, I gotta think Governor Romney is in for some rough sledding in Dixie.

  3. The term being used to describe the ever changing preferences of the republican horserace/primary process is “almond joy syndrome”  

    Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don’t.   

  4. Santorum’s big government “compassionate conservatism” is indicative of the growing influence of the papacy in the Republican Party and the United States in general.  Those aren’t values that historically defined the Republican Party, and they’re not the values that the GOP should be espousing today.  The Republican Party is changing, and unfortunately, those changes mimic the changes in our larger society.  You’re not in America anymore. 

  5. First let me say that I was hoping to see the republicans nominate a candidate that I could support. I feel the current resident of the White House is a great campaigner but a terrible leader and a weak President. I watched most, if not all, of the republican televised debates and came away with the opinion that with the exception of Huntsman all of the candidates were running for President of the Tea Party and not President of the United States. I agree totally with your premise Matthew that Santorum would grow government , primarily to further his views on morality. The other thing I came away from the last debate thinking was, “my god most of these people with the exception of Ron Paul sound as if they are chomping at the bit to get us into another war”, this time with Iran. Santorum was the most vocal of the group on that subject. While everyone is free to their own opinion I believe that there are two things that our Nation does not need , larger government and another war. 

  6. I like libertarianism…mostly. But here’s the truth. The only way the Republicans can beat Obama is by nominating someone with some passion. People thought Reagan was unelectable because of his past positions and the fact that he lost previous races…but the man put on his charisma and nobody cared much about the specifics of what he wanted to do.

    People say Romney can appeal to the independents—but Romney lacks appeal all around and that is becoming clearer every day. Why on earth would he allow McCain to endorse him in NH of all places?

    If Santorum is willing to “visit all 99 counties”, metaphorically speaking, throughout the entire country, maybe he is the man who will connect with people and inspire them. I can’t decide yet if he can do it…but I am watching him.

    1. Passion and motivation in presidential re-election races comes from basically one thing:  the public’s feelings about the incumbent.  The opposition tends to fail when the president is though of kindly by the people, and tends to succeed when the president is disliked.

      The nominee matters, to be sure, but ultimately they need somebody competent who won’t cough up the ball with major scandals or things that will scare the heck out of voters.  Inciting passion is not required to win, and indeed win rather comfortably.

  7. Holier then thou, perpetual war for perpetual peace, big government Santorum won’t beat Obama if he is the GOP nominee.

    Ron Paul is the only candidate that can beat Obama. 

    As poll after poll shows Paul can get more democrat and independent voter support than any other candidate. And that is what it takes to win an election.

    Paul has a good, solid foreign policy that is based on an understanding of human nature and common sense. Paul is for us having a strong military and national defense and unlike Bush and Obama, won’t pussyfoot around if any one messes with us.

    Paul is the only candidate that has put forth a bold, sound economic plan.

    Paul knows more about monetary and economic matters than all the other candidates put together. And when the impending financial and economic collapse happens, Paul is the best equipped candidate to handle it. 

    Paul will protect are freedoms and liberties by following the constitution and has a rock solid record in that area. And that’s one of the main reasons the establishment really fears him.

    Paul has not sold his soul to the devil and will not sell this country out. In other words he is not another bought and paid for status quo sock puppet. That’s another reason the establishment (military industrial complex, financial terrorists on wall street, crony capitalists, globalists, neocons and the bought and paid for press that prop them up) doesn’t like Paul.

    On the major issues, Obama can’t beat Paul in any debate, no matter what the subject is.

  8. I seldom agree with Mr. Gagnon, but this time, in the words of the immortal Mrs. Slocomb, “I am unanimous” with him.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *