Prior to the outcome of the Iowa caucus when it appeared that Ron Paul would be the victor, Republican media pundits were doing their best to marginalize this contest.\u00a0 Some commentators even went so far as to declare theIowacaucus as virtually worthless.\u00a0<\/p>\n
There is one respect\u2014the most crucial respect as far as substance, not perception, is concerned\u2014in which Ron Paul did as well as anyone else: he received the same number of delegates as did Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney. That is, theIowarace, from this perspective, was a three way tie.\u00a0 Of course, you wouldn\u2019t expect to hear that on Fox News or \u201cconservative\u201d talk radio.\u00a0 But it is true all of the same.<\/p>\n
There is, however, another respect in which the establishment Republican\u2019s worst nightmare did not <\/em>come to pass.\u00a0 Paul, though finishing with an exceptionally impressive showing, did not succeed in eliciting as many votes as either Santorum or Romney.\u00a0 He received 22% of the vote compared to the 25% that they each garnered.\u00a0<\/p>\n Now, <\/em>all of a sudden, the outcome of the Iowa caucus is a major game changer.\u00a0 Until this week, Santorum didn\u2019t come close to getting beyond single digits in any poll.\u00a0 <\/em>He hadn\u2019t been much more popular than Jon Huntsman, who, until recently, most people forgot is still in the race.\u00a0 Yet now, <\/em>establishment Republican commentators like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are bending over backwards to fuel Santorum\u2019s momentum.\u00a0 So far, it would appear that their efforts have been fruitful, for Santorum is already the new frontrunner.<\/p>\n Santorum, in truth, is the candidate for whom Limbaugh, Hannity, and many of their colleagues have been aching all along.\u00a0 The conventional wisdom within the establishment Republican class is that Santorum is a \u201ctrue conservative.\u201d\u00a0 Why?\u00a0 Santorum is a \u201ctrue conservative,\u201d a conservative\u2019s conservative, if you will, not just because of his positions on issues related to national security, but especially because of his positions on \u201cthe social issues\u201d\u2014i.e. \u201cthe moral issues.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n A few remarks are here in order.<\/p>\n First, there isn\u2019t a single piece of legislation, or even a single activity, that is devoid of moral import.\u00a0 Thus, to speak of \u201cthe social issues,\u201d meaning moral issues, as if they could be separated out from \u201ceconomic issues\u201d and \u201cforeign policy issues\u201d and whatever other issues that concern us is to speak confusedly.\u00a0\u00a0 The very association\u2014the civil <\/em>association\u2014that the United States of America itself was originally intended to be is <\/em>a moral<\/em> association.<\/p>\n Second, there is neither a single politician nor even a single American voter who isn\u2019t as concerned as is Santorum with \u201cthe social issues.\u201d \u00a0The latter, however, has been quite successful at recruiting the media in the service of reinforcing his self-conception as the lone \u201csocial conservative\u201d in this race.\u00a0 This, no doubt, has something to do with the frequency and loudness with which he speaks about \u201cthe social issues.\u201d\u00a0 But, more importantly, it is due, not so much to his desire<\/em> to use the federal government to advance his vision of morality\u2014with the exception of Ron Paul, every other politician lusts after federal power\u2014but the unabashed <\/em>expression that he gives to that desire.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n And this brings us to the third point.<\/p>\n In The Fatal Conceit, <\/em>F.A. Hayek notes the numerous ways in which socialist thought has infected our vocabulary.\u00a0 The most prominent and common method by which this transformation has occurred has been by way of the attachment of \u201csocial\u201d to all manner of things.\u00a0<\/p>\n In light of Hayek\u2019s perceptive account, it is eminently appropriate that Santorum should be crowned our \u201csocial <\/em>conservative.\u201d\u00a0 Santorum may not be a \u201csocialist\u201d according to the standard textbook definition of that term.\u00a0 Yet inasmuch as he favors an ever expansive government by which to coerce <\/em>citizens both here and <\/em>abroad into endorsing his <\/em>understanding of \u201cthe common good,\u201d <\/em>he indeed advocates a morality that is much more socialist than anything else.\u00a0 As Ron Paul correctly noted during the debate in New\u00a0Hampshire this past weekend, Santorum is as tireless an advocate of Big Government as anyone.<\/p>\n Leftist Democrats want to redistribute income from those who have earned it to those who have not.\u00a0 To this end, they exploit the voter\u2019s Christian sensibilities, specifically, his sympathy for the needy.\u00a0 Republicans rightly (even if hypocritically) observe that Christian charity, real charity, is voluntary<\/em>: there is no virtue where agents are compelled <\/em>to act.\u00a0<\/p>\n When it comes to the \u201csocial issues,\u201d Republicans like Rick Santorum would be well served to practice what they preach. \u00a0<\/p>\n Jack Kerwick, Ph.D.<\/p>\n also published in The Moral Liberal and\u00a0American Daily Herald\u00a0<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Prior to the outcome of the Iowa caucus when it appeared that Ron Paul would be the victor, Republican media pundits were doing their best to marginalize this contest.\u00a0 Some commentators even went so far as to declare theIowacaucus as virtually worthless.\u00a0 There is one respect\u2014the most crucial respect as far as substance, not perception,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":399,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-348","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n