Big-Government Conservative

Here’s why it’s hard to work up much enthusiasm for Rick Santorum. He’d be another George Bush.

From a small-government perspective, we’re doomed to have a dud in the White House regardless of the outcome (barring a brokered convention). So it’s important to try to get as many true classical liberals into the Congress as possible to check the nanny compulsions emanating from the White House.

[Update a while later]

More from David Boaz.

[Late morning update]

Santorum doesn’t think much of the Second Amendment, either.

20 thoughts on “Big-Government Conservative”

  1. There is always Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate if you don’t like any of the Tea Party selections 🙂

  2. I skimmed Santorum’s book, and he came across as almost a big a State-shtupper as Chris Gerrib or Thomas Matula. (Oh, that’s right. Matula’s an “independent.” Funny how easy that is to forget after enough of his posts.)
    His rhetoric was pretty much that Old Tory* gobbledygook, no-syllogisms-allowed-here State-cultism. Based on his book, Santorum only differs in the kinds of things he wants to force people to do or not do.

    *As opposed to people like Gerrib and Matural, the New Tories.

  3. Bilwick,

    For the record I am not for forcing folks to do things and want a smaller government with fewer foreign entanglements. As such Ron Paul would be someone I would support. The biggest problems with the Tea Party is the social baggage their candidates carry, their fantasy views of how the economy worked in the 19th Century and their aggressive foreign agenda.

  4. “For the record I am not for forcing folks to do things and want a smaller government with fewer foreign entanglements which is why I was so happy to vote for my excellent Senator: Harry Reid.”

    1. Yes, imagine Sharon Angle in the Senate, introducing bills to force creationism to be taught in schools and to fund Scientology programs in the prisons… You really need to look at the Tea Party candidates record before you buy their snake oil. Why do you think she earned her nickname of 42 to Angle? Because of the crazy bills she used to sponsor in Nevada, one of the most libertarian states. Why is there any reason to believe she would be any different in the Senate? Sarah Palin really picked a bunch a clowns with her Senate endorsement.

      1. And you imagine that such bills introduced by Sharon Angle in the Senate would go anywhere?

        Jeez, are all Nevada voters as moronic as you, that you imagine that this was a reason to leave Harry Reid in charge?

        1. The Troll Matula strikes again. Carping about the teaching (or not teaching) of creationism in public schools has nothing to do with “smaller government.” A true advocate of smaller government say the government shouldn’t be running schools, not try to micromanage the curriculum.

          It’s also funny that someone calling for the government to create an “International Lunar Development Corporation” says he wants “fewer foreign entanglements.” Perhaps “international” means something different in Matula.

          1. Edward,

            [[[A true advocate of smaller government say the government shouldn’t be running schools, not try to micromanage the curriculum. ]]]

            Which Sharon Angle was not if you look at her record. And speaking of government involvement in education are you and the SFF still trying to get NASA to bankroll your “teachers in space” scheme?

            [[[It’s also funny that someone calling for the government to create an “International Lunar Development Corporation” says he wants “fewer foreign entanglements.” Perhaps “international” means something different in Matula.]]]

            Yes, just look at all the wars Intelsat got the U.S involved in 🙂

          2. Which Sharon Angle was not if you look at her record.

            Unlike Harry Reid, has a long record of reducing government. Riiiiggghhhtttt…!

            are you and the SFF still trying to get NASA to bankroll your “teachers in space” scheme?

            Teachers in Space is a project of the United States Rocket Academy. We are no longer associated with the Space Frontier Foundation. Nor was I ever “trying to get NASA” to bankroll Teachers in Space (apart from a brief two-year Cooperative Agreement to develop some curriculum of common interest).

            I see you still subscribe the philosophy of repeating the same lie over and over again, in hopes that people will get tired of correcting you.

            Yes, just look at all the wars Intelsat got the U.S involved in

            You think there was no foreign involvement in Intelsat because it didn’t get the US involved in wars???

            I was right, the word does mean something different in Matula.

        2. Rand,

          I thought you were a Libertarian? Why should Nevadans sacrifice their self-interest for the good of the Tea Party and Sarah Palin’s ego? Susan Lowden was on track to easily beat Senator Reid and she would have done a great job representing the state. But I guess she was too sensible for Tea Party types like you 🙂

          And yes, I am popping the popcorn watching the Tea Party lead the Republicans off the cliff in the presidential primaries just as they did in Nevada. The good thing is after this election the Republicans will be free to rebuild as they were after 1964.

          1. Susan Lowden was on track to easily beat Senator Reid and she would have done a great job representing the state.

            Meanwhile, on planet Earth, Politico said, “if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wins reellection in Nevada, it will likely be thanks to those 14 words spoken by Republican challenger Sue Lowden.”

            Lowden was the candidate who suggested people should reduce their health care costs by paying doctors with live poultry instead of cash. She might have done a great job of representing Tom’s economic policies, but for some reason the Nevada voters were less enthusiastic.

          2. And yes, I am popping the popcorn watching the Tea Party lead the Republicans off the cliff in the presidential primaries just as they did in Nevada.

            Yep, something a blue blood Democrat would write.

  5. I’ve long disliked Santorum, because to me he seems to be the worst of both worlds: Social conservative, big-government fiscal liberal.

    I will say, in his defense, that he was smeared recently on immigration, regarding a vote against eVerify. That was part of the McCain Kennedy amnesty bill, and he was very much right to vote against it, otherwise he’d have voted for that abomination. He’s got a decent rating from numbers USA, as well.

    I’m a libertarian on social issues (I don’t consider illegal immigration to be a social issue, but a national security and fiscal issue). So, Santorum is an anathema to me on social issues, the same way Ron Paul and Gary Johnson are on foreign policy. (I’d prefer Santorum to either, and I hate Santorum, but at least he seems rational on border and foreign policy issues).

    I’m also a Tea Partier (including being a member of the local committee) and I can say this much for the local Tea Party members; their #1 goal is fiscal sanity via cutting spending. On other issues, they seem a diverse bunch (some social cons, some right-libertarian, etc). I think that’s why, (assuming the same is true nationally, which I don’t know) that “Tea Party” support is hard to define in the race so far.

    Who do I like in the race? Nobody. I’m currently trying to decide whom I dislike the least. I have until the end of February to make up my mind, because that’s when I’ll be voting in the Arizona primary. I really need to make up my mind by Feb 1st though, because that’s when I’ll be leading a local get-out-the-vote drive, and if last time is any indication, my position will sway a lot of undecideds. (I’d prefer it didn’t, but last time it did.) With Iowa currently sitting at 91% of the vote counted, and all of 12 votes separating the first and second spot, a few votes can make a difference.

    I just wish I could settle on one of these guys to support, but so far, it’s a battle for least-disliked with me.

    I wish I shared Rand Simberg’s belief in a brokered convention that piks someone other than the current slate. I’d like that to happen, but I don’t see it happening. My best guess is that if the convention occurs without a clear winner, we’ll see two of the top three form the ticket. I hope I’m wrong.

  6. Correction to my above post: I was wrong regarding Santorum’s grade from numbers USA. He gets a D, same as Perry, from them. Also, he did actually vote against e-verify as a voluntary program back in 1996. Sorry for my error.

  7. How would a brokered convention pick a candidate other than the establishment favorite, aka Romney. A brokered convention strikes me as slightly less dangerous than a convention to amend the constitution.

  8. I see plenty of reasons to be wary of Santorum, but a few of the items on Rauch’s list leave me scratching my head and wondering how they qualify as examples of “big government.”

    “Promotion of prison ministries”??? I don’t know the specifics of what Santorum called for, but that doesn’t sound like it ought to be very expensive.

    “Covenant marriage”??? I had to look that one up; never heard of it before. Based on the description I found, it doesn’t look like “government intervention” but a voluntary option that individuals could choose.

  9. So Matula is pro-Second Amendment and pro-free-market? Amazing. Or at least that’s his pose this week.

  10. Bilwick,

    [[[So Matula is pro-Second Amendment and pro-free-market?]]]

    When have I ever said I wasn’t?

  11. You just seem to parrot the Hive’s party line on so many things. So you ARE pro-Second Amendment and pro-free-market? Just answer the question.

Comments are closed.