With less than a week until the Iowa caucuses, Liberty’s Leviathan wants to remind everyone not to take Iowa too seriously, when it comes to the outcome. How can I say that? Because I’m an Iowan, born & raised…And I still live here. I can assure you, when I say not to take us to seriously, I REALLY mean it.

See, Iowans can be split into a couple different categories:

* Those who are politically ‘aware’ almost all the time, but don’t like to be stuck with party affiliation.

* Those who, like Pavlov’s dogs, come a runnin’ to vote for whomever is ‘on their side’ of any given hot-button said.

* Those who believe it is the federal government’s right to set every aspect of social order for our private lives.

Those in that last category are Iowa’s social conservatives.
They voted for Mike Huckabee in 2008. Remmeber how that turned out?

Yeah — like I said — don’t take us seriously, because right now, that same group is doing the same thing, and, as Erick Erickson notes (over at RedState), they are about to shoot us in the foot, one more time:
(snips)

No Surprise, Iowa Social Conservatives Are About To Shoot Us All in the Foot Again
Posted by Erick Erickson
Wednesday, December 28th at 4:02PM EST

(…)
Santorum has no money or organization outside of Iowa and cannot win the nomination, but Iowans love a guy who sucks up to them and makes sure they know he loves the babies.

As a pro-lifer myself, I have to throw up a bit in my mouth that Iowa conservatives are seriously considering Rick Santorum, which will only help Mitt Romney, a guy who even after his supposedly heartfelt conversion to life put some seriously pro-abortion judges on the Massachusetts bench hiding behind the “Well it was Massachusetts for Pete’s sake” defense.

Let’s remember Rick Santorum could not even win re-election in his home state of Pennsylvania.

Rick Santorum also supported Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey in the U.S. Senate back in 2004.
(…)
He supported steel tariffs in Pennsylvania, which did him little good in his own re-election effort.

He supported No Child Left Behind.

He supported the prescription drug benefit.

He supported the Bridge to Nowhere. In fact, according to Club for Growth, “Santorum had the audacity to vote to continue funding the Bridge to Nowhere rather than send the money to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.”

Santorum decided, after leaving Congress, to oppose earmarks, but he sure did love them while he was there. He voted against the Farm Bill in 2002, but he voted to extend milk subsidies to save the poor Pennsylvania farmer.
(…)
Rick Santorum will not be the nominee. That’s the reality. But his rise hurts Bachmann, Gingrich, and Perry in Iowa — all of whom have better organizations and better shots beyond Iowa.

Erick’s last line in that piece says it all, and should also have you wondering…Which candidate benefits the most from Santorum staying in the race while the game is still up in the air in Iowa?

Santorum is merely the latest “non-Romney flavor of the month” here in Iowa. Social cons love him, because he’s socially conservative, and they cannot and will not…literally WILL NOT…see past social issues, when it comes to politics. Everything is secondary to them. And because of that, Santorum is pulling away votes from Gingrich, Bachmann and Perry. He’s doing what he’s been told to do, and perhaps what he’s agreed to do. Nothing more. He knows he doesn’t have a real shot at the White House. He’s just pushing the same button Mike Huckabee pushed with his “floating cross” campaign commercials in Iowa. Pavlov’s dogs…Yep, you betcha’.

* * *
In semi-related news, Romney was out yesterday in Iowa, touting…Defending…Promoting…Individual healthcare mandates…In Iowa. Click the link to view the video (courtesy of RedState), and listen to Romney’s own words…Right out of his mouth.

Folks — if you were all ‘up in arms’ about obamacare to begin with…Think about what Romney’s statement here might mean for you, if he becomes President.

* * *
And once again from RedState, here’s part #4,018,663 of why Ron Paul is nuttier than a fruit cake. At the link, there are three video clips which you should feel free to share with friends and family. Really folks, I understand why Ron Paul’s stances on domestic issues are so appealing, but, he lives and breathes foreign policy and conspiracy theories. They are the ‘glue’ that holds him together, and to believe that you should settle for a candidate who you like just 1/2 the time, is foolish, at best.

* * *
In summation…If you’re still having troubles deciding on which candidate you should support, as we edge closer and closer to the the caucus and primary schedule for the 2012 race, click this link and find enclosed in the article a link to a handy-dandy “who should you vote for” test.
I did it, and my results were spot on. The guy I’m going to caucus for was in the top 2 results.

And no…I will not be announcing who I will be caucusing for, until the night of the caucus (although I guess I’ve eliminiated Michelle Bachmann, because, as I just mentioned, I will be caucusing for a male candidate). Liberty’s Leviathan will be live-tweeting from our local caucus location, so be sure to follow us on Twitter at:

https://twitter.com/LibertysLev

In the end folks — NONE of the currently-running candidates are perfect. It’s just that some are better than others, and eventually, we will all have to agree on one to nominate….As much as we may take joy, or dissatisfaction, in doing so. But whomever we choose MUST be able to handle obama well in the debates, MUST be able to articulate why conservatism is better for America than the alternative, and MUST be someone who’s able to recognize the most obvious and real issues facing the country right now, and know how to get things done. To accept anything less would be foolish.

| Show Comments(1) | Hide Comments(1)