Stop complaining that there aren't any other Republicans in the race!
No, I mean it. Even if Mitch Daniels suddenly decides to throw his hat in the ring, he's going to be at a major organizational disadvantage.
But beyond that, you've got Rick Santorum, who, earmarks aside, is pretty much exactly what you diehard conservatives want. I mean, he has no organization whatsoever (but look at what he's done without it), and nominating him will mean ceding pretty much every voter under the age of 30 to Obama, but hey, you want him, there he is. If only that bumbling megalomaniac Gingrich would get out of his way...
By the way, congratulations to Santorum on his three-state win. I'm actually sincere there. I'm concerned about his lack of organization and his ability to appeal to younger voters, but if he ever nudges Gingrich out, he just might force Romney to move to the right.
(Side note: right before the three-state sweep, I started reading Romney's book, No Apology. Why is his ghostwriter not writing his campaign speeches? The first chapter is better than anything Romney's ever said on the stump.)
Now, the purpose of these next few paragraphs is not to discredit Santorum's accomplishments. After all, this is a guy who started with no money, no organization, and no name recognition, and he's tearing up the campaign trail. So massive props on that.
A few days ago I claimed - stupidly, in hindsight - that social conservatism wasn't the issue to run on in this economy. Then Obama comes out and obliges Santorum by making a big social brouhaha and demanding that religious institutions start covering abortions. (Man, it must be nice to be a liberal; that pesky Constitution only matters when it helps you or hurts your opponent.) Stir that in a pot full of anti-Romney sentiment and let simmer. Result: a massive boost for Mister Evangelical at the polls. (No, that was not the only reason Santorum did so well. But it helped.)
...and then Santorum turns around and does this.
Watching Ron Paul yammer about an insane "soft-power" foreign policy helps remind me why I stopped calling myself a "right-leaning libertarian" and went to plain old "conservative." Listening to Santorum reminds me of one of the reasons I went with the "right-leaning libertarian" label in the first place; because "conservative" has a number of connotations I disagree with, and this is certainly one of the largest.
If a woman wants to put her life on the line for my freedom (or, as the case has been recently, some foreigner's freedom), I'm not going to tell her to get back in the kitchen.
I have a tremendous amount of respect for our military and the men and women who choose to wear the uniform. Two of my friends from high school are in the armed forces. Yes, both of them happen to be male, but it wouldn't make any difference if they weren't.
Who should stay home to take care of the kids? Whichever parent's making less money. (Who takes care of the kids on nights and weekends? Both.)
Now, I'm not about to defend "radical feminism." That is just one aspect of a non-stop culture war that has been waged for the last 40+ years. The liberal social agenda says that you can do whatever (and whoever) you want (and the liberal economic agenda says someone else will pick up the tab for it).
That's not the American Ideal. The American Ideal is personal freedom, but also personal responsibility. The Left wants to do away with all notions of personal responsibility (except of course our responsibility to pay our neighbor's mortgage). Consequence-free screwing. Tear down the old religious institutions. They're outdated, they're unhip. Let's amend the Constitution to get rid of all those pesky "God-given" rights and replace them with stuff like free healthcare. Result: endlessly-deferred adulthood, followed by Greece.
Santorum has the strongest standing of all the Republican candidates to fight this agenda.* But saying things like women shouldn't serve on the front lines doesn't do him any favors.
*This does not constitute any sort of endorsement.
No comments:
Post a Comment