Obama vs. Santorum. Two Populist Candidates,Two Views of Freedom

By Keith A. Fournier
2/22/2012
Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

Rick Santorum regularly reminds all of us that America is a Moral Enterprise and that freedom must be set free

Rick Santorum's view of government - and economics - is from below, with the family as the first government and the first economy. All other government must assist and not usurp its primary role. It must proceed from the bottom up. This is about more than "limited government", though it certainly is that. This is about good government. Can government be good? Yes,when freedom flourishes. Good in the sense of efficient, deferring to mediating structures first - and good in the sense of recognizing the moral foundation needed for a truly free society.

Rick Santorum

Facebook Delicous MySpace

Twitter Stumble Digg

More Destinations

WASHINGTON, DC (Catholic Online) - Finally, we might have it; a real Presidential campaign - with a real choice between two candidates with two very different worldviews. This election will also be a choice about who we are - and who we will become. It is a choice which addresses the foundation of our identity as Americans and the nature of true freedom.

President Obama is in full reelection mode. His campaign theme is that our Nation is divided between the "1%" and the rest of us; between the super rich and everyone else. His rhetoric purports to be "populist", peppered with the mantras of "fair share", and "fair shot". He adds that we should all be playing by the same set of rules. However, his populism is top down; the federal government is the one to ensure that we are somehow all equal through wealth redistribution, legislative compulsion and coercion.

The Obama 2012 campaign wants to take on Mitt Romney in the General election. He is a perfect "uke" (ookie). The term is from the Martial Arts. It refers to the one used in class demonstrations to receive the strikes and techniques from the instructor. Mitt Romney looks as though he stepped out of "central casting" as a caricature of a "1%"er. The Obama reelection campaign believes he is suited for a campaign of caricatures and class warfare. Romney is, from all indications, a good man. However, that is not why they want him to face him in the general election. He fits their narrative.

Rick Santorum strikes a very different image. He is also a populist. He is the grandson of an immigrant coalminer who communicates well with real folks because he is one of us. He does not pit groups against one another but speaks the language of a very different form of populism; one which calls for expanded economic opportunities for all in a free market. However, he recognizes that freedom is a good of the human person. He knows the market is truly free when it recognizes the primacy of "human capital" and expands to offer increased opportunity to all.

President Obama is a big government candidate. He has presided over the largest expansion of Federal power in my lifetime. His solution to perceived needs is to expand federal programs. His concentration of governmental power favors the executive branch. He favors centralized federal economic controls. His multiplication of unelected Czars, a practice begun under his Republican predecessor, has placed the principles of representative democracy and separation of powers in jeopardy. The most blatant example of his misguided governmental philosophy is federalized health care.

Rick Santorum's view of government - and economics - is from below, with the family as the first government and the first economy. All other government must assist and not usurp its primary role. It must proceed from the bottom up. This is about more than "limited government", though it certainly is that. This is about good government.

Can government be good? Yes,when freedom flourishes. Good in the sense of efficient, deferring to mediating structures first - and good in the sense of recognizing the moral foundation needed for a truly free society. Santorum is not afraid to say that America is a moral enterprise. He may be mocked for doing so - but he stands on the shoulders of giants, including the American founders.

During the last campaign, President Obama spoke of our obligation in solidarity to the poor. Yet, he refuses to hear the cry of the poorest of the poor, children in the first home of the human race, their mother's womb. He does not respect the fundamental human right upon which all other rights are founded, the Right to Life. His administration mouths the sophistry of those who promote abortion throughout all nine months of life. However, he does much more; he is their enabler in chief.

Rick Santorum is a champion of the Right to life. He also walks the talk. His Pro-Life record of public service is the strongest of any candidate who has ever run for the Presidency. His family life speaks even more loudly. During this Presidential campaign, the smile of his little daughter Bella Santorum, who has trisomy 18,spoke the truth of the Pro-Life message more eloquently than words ever could. America knows the truth about life. It is revealed in little Bella's smile.

We operate on our neighbors in the womb. We send sonograms of their movements in gift cards. We prosecute criminals who, in the course of another crime, kill them. Efforts to call Santorum's Pro-Life position "extreme" are failing. So, the opponents of the Right to Life are resorting to fear mongering. They want the American people to think that Rick Santorum is a religious "extremist".

The recent efforts to denigrate Rick Santorum have nothing to do with the availability of contraceptives. One only has to go down to the corner drugstore ...

1 | 2 Next Page

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 10 of 64 Comments

Rob
1 year ago
Bravo Pete. You are exactly right. The fight around social issues is merely a diversionary tactic so the plundering of our treasure can continue. The sound bite electorate has been performing as expected. We are pitted one against the other assuring that the status quo will remain. As you mention the 99% versus the 1% (not a reference to occupy Wall Street), once the 1% cashes in all their chips, they will quietly withdraw from the casino and leave us with whatever is left.
JoAnn
1 year ago
Pete Brady: I concur. God bless.
JoAnn
1 year ago
Rob: I don't run to any party. I run to the candidate that is closest to my principles and values as a devout Catholic. If that person happens to be a Democrat, so be it. If Republican, ditto. You can defend Soros all you want. I don't begrudge his wealth. It's promoting communism in America and around the world with his wealth that I object to. And you should too. And, you sure like to throw that word "hate" around. People that don't have hate in their heart rarely use that word. Get this straight. I don't hate Obama or anyone else on this God given paradise. As a matter of fact, what I've seen of him as a person (not politician) has been very congenial. A great husband, father and has a fairly good sense of humor. What I "hate" is what he and his comrades are doing to this country. You say you didn't vote for him and I believe you. BUT, if you did not vote at all and if you do not vote at all this November to get him out of office, that is a back door to supporting him. As far as the "shortcomings" of Reagan and Bush, you are right. There were many things that each of them did that I wasn't too happy with but they weren't anti-American as is Obama. If you want proof of that, read his book. You can't deny his own words. Your post finally reveals who you really are. I am not criticizing that. You are free to think and do and say what you please. Cherish that right while you "still" have it. Like you and I both have said, we will agree to disagree. But don't go throwing around accusations of hatred. It is not very becoming. God bless.
Pete Brady
1 year ago
Should not the following two quotes be of much greater concern to Americans as this election approaches? More so than having a "populist" candidate? In 1924 the former English Chancellor of the Exchequer, Reginald McKenna, said this: "I am afraid that the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can, and do, create money. ... And they who control the credit of the nation, direct the policy of governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people." At about the same time the eminent Catholic historian, Hilaire Belloc, said the following with regard to the creation of money afforded to government: "The first advance had been just over a million. In four years the national debt was twenty millions, and in twenty years it was already over fifty millions. It became a permanent institution. In this fashion governments were enabled, for their purposes, to saddle posterity with the duty of financing their wars, whilst what was worse, wealthy men found the opportunity for levying a permanent tax on the community." Sound familiar? Although almost a century ago, and in Britain, does it not sound all just a bit too familiar? Have we learned nothing? Should not the words "End the Fed" be a resounding cry in America? It is troubling that as Americans go to the various primaries and eventually "the election" they are generally ignorant of the intimate relationship between the FED and rising gas prices, crony capitalism, endless wars, the 99% versus the "one per-centers," and almost every other ill that besets the very well-being and integrity of what makes this nation, "America, the land of the free." Are we to go into the dustbin of history with nary a whimper?
Pete Brady
1 year ago
Now that the bloodletting has subsided a bit there's a question that has bothered me ever since I first read the title to this article. "Populist?" Since Obama (bad) and Santorum (good) are both described as "populist candidates" in pretty much the same breath is that an important thing to have in our presidential candidate? Above other considerations? Is it fundamental to what the Constitution imbues to the executive? Does it help with the problems this nation faces at this time in our history? Or is more at a superficial pandering to a "sound bite" electorate? I am concerned that "populist" is a word that should not be found to be descriptive of any branch of our government.
Rob
1 year ago
JoAnn/Vance, immigration is a funny thing when you look at the actual record. For starters, we've had plenty of time to build a wall and secure our border. Why all of the sudden there is so much outrage that it's not being done escapes me as violence has always ebbed and flowed along the border. Personally, I think it's our government's way to allowing domestic companies who cannot outsource their labor have access to the same third world labor rates. I guess I could take this cry seriously if there was any sort of consistency to it. But when you consider that it was not a democrat but Reagan who enacted the last amnesty and Bush who pushed for comprehensive immigration reform, I have to scratch my head and wonder why Obama seems to be bearing the brunt of all this. In regards to your research, did you happen to do any reading in regards to who is behind most of the immigration bills being picked up by various states? Private prison companies. Never mind the fact that individuals on Jan Brewer's cabinet are former private prison lobbyist or the guy who drafted the bill is neck deep with connections to this industry. Why is this important, because as this bill was being draftet the prison companies were educating lawmakers that immigrant detention was the next big prison boon. I don't offer this to defend Obama. Obama is just as responsible as every other President who has failed to secure the border (although it's hard to say that Reagan probably isn't more responsible and Bush not doing it after 9/11 shocks me). Do I support border security, you bet. I live in a border state. Do I support private companies jerry rigging our legislative process to make a buck, no. As for George Soros and crew, if you don't like the things he does with his money or how he makes it, then convince our legislators to enact laws to prevent it. But when the very party you run to with open arms enacts laws and prevents regulations that protects markets against the very thing that Soros does, I have to scratch my head and ask if you guys have really looked at this situation. Somewhere I think I've gathered from you guys that people are allowed to spend money as they wish. Again, if we don't like the way George Soros is spending money, then find a billionaire with your ideological bent and get him to spend money against him. Given the individual billionaire funders of these super pacs, there are plenty to go around. But I think you are right, we'll just have to agree to disagree. You do not need to convice me about anything regarding Obama as I didn't vote for him the first time and don't plan to this time. But I will not blindly run to candidates who I believe could actually be worse or who are responsible for some of the very laws that got us into this ditch in the first place. As you focus on every single aspect of Obama's history and words, am I wrong to focus on their votes, postions etc? Isn't that what an educated voter is supposed to do? If your hatred of Obama causes you to lose sight of that, well that's your business, but I'm opting off that train.
JoAnn
1 year ago
Vance: You are right. I know who Mr. Soros is. I've done extensive research on him. He has already done his dirty deeds to other countries. He is known as Mr. Lucifer. He does refer to himself as an "angel." He's the "angel" that is going to "fix" America. He is also known as the man who broke the Bank of England. Not to mention devaluing the ruble in Russia. I heard a great line from Ted Nugent yesterday. It's from one of his songs. It's "There's hope for tomorrow - IF you wake up today." You and I know who Obama is, that's why I recommend his books to skeptics. Since they don't believe people's warnings, maybe if they would read Obama's own words, they would. But, then again, there are some people that you just can't get through to. I'm sure they think the same of us. But it does make for lively dialogue. Like Jesus said when he sent His apostles our to preach. If they don't believe you, shake your sandals off and go to the next village. I paraphrased that. That's why I didn't put it in quotation marks. Ole Georgie Boy is dead set on an "Open Society" throughout the world. No borders. That's why Obama won't do anything about the borders and then has the gall to turn around and sue states that are only trying to protect their citizens. I support Jan Brewer all the way. But I think she should have just did the job without all the bru-ha ha. The law was already on the books. All they had to do was just enforce it. Her making a big deal out of it is what was not very wise. I know she was just trying to relay to people that the Federal Gov. wasn't doing its job but, I think, if she was more discreet about it, she would have had more success. God bless.
vance
1 year ago
JoAnn, You hit the nail on the head about Obama and his minions bringing down our country. Might I suggest who the "Mastermind" is. On October 13, 1917 our Lady of Fatima told Lucia, Francisco, and Jacinta that there is an "Evil" rising in Russia and they will spread their "Errors" throughout the world. Now, we know who the "Evil" is. Today, the "Masterminds" are Multi-Billionaire George Soros and Communist Party International. Obama and the Marxist Democrat Party are just dutiful soldiers for their cause. WE DON"T NEED TO READ HIS LOUSY BOOKS. HE'S ALREADY ((( DEMONSTRATED ))) WHO AND WHAT HE IS!! No, I'm not yelling at you. I'm shouting at Rob and other Obamabots. God Bless.
JoAnn
1 year ago
Rob: Right! But I never said that Obama was the "mastermind." He is the servant. God bless.
Rob
1 year ago
JoAnn, I get what you are saying, but I get confused when you call Obama a puppet on one hand but then say he's the mastermind of our country coming apart on the other. When you look at the history of our country, haven't we always had a duality of good and evil. We had a great founding, but slavery. We had self-suficiency but discriminated against blacks. In my opinion, there has always been an effort by those with means to control our society. Whether it be the robber barons of times past or the "elites" of today. Isn't this just one of the prices for living in a free society? At the end of the day, as free people, we can choose to become slaves of whatever worldly system we want, if our own country. Or we can choose to bask in the freedom of living as a disciple of Christ who isn't bound by whatever or whomever is making life tough on us. Maybe you are right and there is more of a concerted effort to bring things down right now. Or maybe this is just a process that we have to go through to get us to wake up. But regardless, the scriptures are pretty clear that sometimes the evil subsists with the good. I think the goal is not to become evil as you fight it. Our country is not the church. God did not proclaim that the gates of hell would not prevail against the USA. Maybe Obama is the grand terrorist who has been ordained to bring this country down, or just maybe he is just another in a long line of puppets who represent those who have been using their money and power to shape things since this country began. This is why we vote right?

Prev12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment