Mourdock's comments represent a growing problem for my party

First there was Craig, then there was Vitter. Who was followed by Akin, now supported by Mourdock.

Craig and Vitter broke the law. Senate candidates Akin and Mourdock have an apparent sympathy for rape.

Taken together, these scandals speak to a serious and growing problem for the Republican Party.

While our party has many impressive, honorable national leaders - Romney-Ryan, Boehner, McCain, Portman etc, we also have a minority of officials who fall below the standards deserving of the American people. The problem here isn't just Craig/Vitter style ethics violations- the Democrats have their own affinity for electing representatives of flexible integrity - Jefferson, Rangel, Jackson Jnr, Calvert providing a few examples. Instead for the GOP, the deeper problem is the manner in which a small but substantial number of Republican candidates/officials are left un-restrained to purvey our party as a perceived bastion of hypocrisy and fundamentalism.

            First, where does the GOP's perception failure come from? To start, let's consider the examples above. Senators Craig and Vitter subscribed to aggressive government measures to restrict law abiding homosexuals from greater rights. These same officials then engaged in criminal personal conduct. The perceptive implication stemming from these highly publicized scandals was all too clear; that Republicans believe in utterly hypocritical intrusions into the private lives of law abiding Americans. Sadly, Craig and Vitter are far from lone examples. If this was simply an issue of hypocrisy, it could be written off as the result of a raw pursuit for votes. But then, we also have candidates Rick Santorum. In contrast to some, I believe that Rick Santorum is a decent, honorable man who means well for his country - I believe he is misguided but not without integrity. However, what is unquestionable is that Santorum subscribes to an extreme and highly aggressive understanding of state-individual interactions. Thus, where Craig and Vitter are simple hypocrites, Santorum is a committed fundamentalist. All found (and find) places at the highest levels of the Republican Party.

The central problem for the Republican Party is therefore clear-

In this apparent mixing of stunning hypocrisy and un-repentant fundamentalism, the GOP appears to many Americans as a faux moral police. A party more interested in restricting gay rights than increasing individual freedoms. More interested in lecturing and litigating against certain Americans than responding to their concerns. More interested in winning elections than serving Lincoln's enduring cause of social justice. As I have noted, I believe this perception is ultimately unfair. I know that the vast majority of Republican officials care far more about the economy than they do about gay sex. However in politics, perception is as important as reality. And it is evident that for many Americans, perceptions of the GOP are not good.

At the moment, this perception-dynamic has some political insulation. The social conservative movement offers political candidates a well organized and highly reliable voting block. However in the longer term, the impact of our fundamentalist flirtation will be far less positive. In appearing to stand for both the protection of individual freedom and the simultaneous restriction of individual freedom, too many Americans are coming to believe that Republicans are their enemy. Too many Americans, whether hispanics, women, homosexuals or others, believe that the Republican Party regards them as second class citizens. Again, while I do not believe that this perception accurately reflects reality, the fact that it exists at all should be of great concern to Republicans concerned about future electoral success. When it's personal, voters tend to remember.

As the social conservative movement increasingly cedes supporters to growing currents of libertarian social tolerance, the Republican Party will face a challenge in persuading voters to alter their perceptions of our party. In this regard, statements by Mourdock and co. will have a lasting, negative impact for the future of the GOP. 

For the sake of our identity and our political future, Republicans must more actively condemn those who celebrate the fringe of American politics.

Rick Santorum's base

Rick Santorum's base. And.. why I would never, ever vote for him (and... why he was crushed in Illinois last night). I'm a Christian, but this kind of rhetoric is neither Christian nor Republican. It is arrogance, authoritarianism and prejudice.

Illinois Primary

Romney needs to have a good night in Illinois if he wants to put the Republican race to bed soon. If Santorum wins, Santorum will be emboldened to continue towards his ultimate objective - a brokered convention. The Republican party leadership are desperate to avoid this outcome and while it is unlikely, it is not beyond the range of possibility. Romney knows more about economics than Obama but when he criticises the President for 'high' gas prices - he is being unfair and disingenuous. America's national security and future economic security require higher gas taxes.

Santorum's latest comments show why I could never vote for him.

For those who are newcomers to the blog I am a Republican.

Rick Santorum's latest comments on pornography show why Obama would destroy him in the general election. The key concerns for Americans are - the economy, jobs and rising health care costs. Very few people really care if the guy next door wants to watch porn. In a free society the boundary between the private choices of an adult and the encroaching reach of the government must be strictly defined and from a Republican point of view - strictly limited. As a Republican, I cannot support a candidate who believes that two consenting gay men should not be left in privacy in their own home, or that contraception should be banned, or that (all stage) abortion doctors should face criminal charges. These policy proposals are the product of a mindset that begins and ends with the strict contours of a personal religious interpretation and is rendered absurd by its natural hypocrisy... Santorum opposes the catholic contraception mandate (freedom of religious beliefs*) but supports banning contraception all together (no freedom of individual beliefs). 

In the end, the critical point is that Santorum believes that his views must actively and absolutely trump the perspective of all others, even when the debate concerns the most intimate of issues (sexual conduct) and the most private of areas (the home). Waging this kind of a war on individual freedom is fundamentally incompatible with conservative values of freedom.

* - I oppose Obama's mandatory contraception coverage requirement. My reasoning - Contraception is a personal choice and is cheap to acquire. If made mandatory in health care plans, the mandate would serve to retrench private health care into an increasingly rigid system. An industry with a focus that goes far beyond that of critical health care coverage. It's evidently incompatible with the Catholic faith that their institutions be forced to provide contraception as part of their health care plans. Nothing prevents their employees from private purchases.

Santorum Southern Wins

Rick Santorum's victories in Mississippi and Alabama are not unexpected. Part of the Republican base is still uncomfortable with Mitt Romney and this won't change until the inevitability of Romney's candidacy becomes clear. But Romney's nomination is inevitable. Only Romney can challenge the President effectively on the economy. At the same time, Santorum's social views are way outside of the mainstream - from my perspective his beliefs in this area are incompatible with the traditional libertarian foundation of the Republican Party. There are enough Republicans who may not be fully satisfied with Romney that know that if Santorum were to be the nominee, Obama would landslide the election. Romney will still win this nomination fight.

Super Tuesday

Romney needs to lock this up. Santorum is an intelligent, passionate man who cares deeply about 'value' issues. But.... Santorum fails to connect with voters who have core concerns that go beyond gay marriage, abortion and condoms. We NEED to nominate a candidate who can challenge the President on the economy, on foreign policy and on the debt. Santorum's views alienate far too many people where as Romney's views (especially with his willingness to think outside the Republican box - his MA health care program for example, offer a real chance to bring people together. Romney is the only option we have. An imperfect candidate for sure, but a candidate who can beat Obama and carry out sensible, intellectual (non-palin), bi-partisan reforms.


For UK readers - I will be going on BBC News at around 2.30-2.45PM to talk about STuesday. Watch! For US readers - you (might) be able to find this online via BBC World Service or something. It would be at 0930 EST.


Also - great piece on the Red Sox. (Kev- the Yankees are going down)

Santorum and the Tea Party?

Little note re- Santorum. I struggle with the idea of Santorum as the tea party candidate. The central premise of the tea party is that government should get out of people's lives.. yet, Santorum thinks that the state should be able to intrude into the private residence of two consenting adults. That is incompatible with any notion of personal freedom vs the state. If we believe in personal freedom then that belief must be honest and genuine. Content based evaluations of when freedom is warranted and when government has overreached, serve to seriously diminish the power of the Republican pro-freedom narrative.

Santorum

Santorum did very well last night. However, this result will not change the outcome of the primary race. For all his passion, Santorum has a central problem. His policies are simply out of the mainstream. In arguing so vociferously against gay rights- including Lawrence v Texas, Santorum undercuts a simple premise of the mainstream Republican movement. This premise being that the government should not engage in excessive interference with the affairs of the individual. Santorum would be crushed by Obama. Republican primary voters will ultimately coalesce around Romney. He is the only candidate who has the economic-policy credibility to challenge the President in the general election.


Americans simply don't care about what gay people do in their own homes. And those that do, tend to care more about how much money they have in their pocket!

Romney

Romney's win in Iowa is an important step that allows him to move closer towards securing the republican nomination. Santorum will not be able to appeal to the more moderate republicans that define the party's presence in states like New Hampshire. Gingrich lacks the  organisation to be able to contest  Romney across the country. While Ron Paul plays a useful role as an outside radical to the party elite, his policy positions will ultimately preclude him from making continued headway in the race. Ultimately, Mitt Romney will be very happy with how tuesday night played out and.. Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry are (thankfully) done.