The San Francisco Chronicle AT THIS LINK (as would be expected) has a major article considering Rick Santorum's position of same sex marriage.The article also considers the other candidates positions on this matter but, rightly, concludes that Santorum's is the most conservative "to the right of the other contenders".
Whether "to the right" is interpreted as "more correct" or more conservative, or whether more conservative means traditional and time honored is a matter for the reader to decide.
I must give the newspaper, and the writer
Bob Egelko, full credit for a reasoned and balanced article which simply sets out the candidates positions, the history of the matter and the current and future aspects.
Frankly, given the city where the newspaper is published and its readership and the strongly democratic supporting state it is a tribute to Egelko to have taken the professional stance he has.
This matter relates to the Republican campaign, and possibly the post convention campaign in a significant manner I believe. If we consider that no party or candidate will be able to effect their economic policies to the degree they might wish, then their social agenda is the only thing that matters when one is considering who to vote for, especially as regards the Republican nomination.
If there is an economic collapse, then whether Obama, or any of the GOP candidates is at the helm it will make little difference. At that point the rescue operation, in one manner or the other, will have to be effected and basically the president is just along for the ride-e.g. Bush in 2008. If there is no crisis and President Obama is re-elected with the GOP controlling the house or senate, which seems likely, or both, then he will have little power in respect of any leftist agenda he might wish to impose.
Similarly, if the GOP wins then, unless they have a filibuster proof senate majority, there will be little that a Republican president can do apart from keeping tax cuts on the agenda. Basically market forces will determine how things go, how popular or unpopular the president is, whichever party is in power. This is how things are, always have been and always will be barring war or a state takeover.
Thus perhaps the only way a president can make significant changes, under the preceding scenario, is in the social arena. A President Santorum, if he could have all existing same sex marriages annulled, whilst allowing for civil unions to give the same benefits as are given to heterosexual married couples, would certainly bring about social change. Or rather a return to traditional social values. Santorum would also bring about a massive social sea change as regards abortion.
A Santorum presidency would bring a massive challenge to the liberal establishment, the media and Hollywood. They would either engage in a full-on social war or, if Santorum was popular enough, have to tack their left sailing ship to the wind blowing strongly from another direction. It would be a fascinating prospect.
For conservatives there is another challenge. Do they vote for the supposedly "more electable" Romney in order to get rid of Obama? Do they vote with their heart and their social conscience a plump for Santorum?
If, as I posit, there is no real difference between a traditional leftist president or a centrist Republican president in a self, or establishment, regulating economy, then perhaps it is time for the heart to lead before the head-or in considering voting for Santorum, perhaps they are one and the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment