At the South Carolina debate, Santorum, Gingrich and Romney all three nagged each other like wives in a harem. There was bickering about healthcare, effectiveness of leadership, and conservative verity. I observed the following.
Santorum thinks that government and labor unions not freedom are the key to success. He said that freedom is not an absolute and that government must regulate freedoms. It was the most shocking endorsement of government power I’ve heard. It sounded like Obama’s claim that the government must act on people’s behalf, but even more extreme in tone. It doesn’t sit well with this rugged individualist and it should not sit well with any American.
Santorum at one point parried a free-market thrust from Ron Paul by pledging to be for Right to Work legislation when president. While senator, Santorum opposed Right to Work, claiming it didn’t fit Pennsylvania (the unionist parts especially). This position alone is contorted. He says that the the policy was bad for Pennsylvania, but he would impose it when president. Of course, that means he endorses federal power even in the case of a law he disagrees with. Santorum the contortionist should be getting a stipend from Barnum and Bailey for the twists in logic. But, to be fair many conservatives are confused about the necessity of state sovereignty. Most believe the 10th amendment has been repealed by unanimous derision and the 14th amendment.
At the end of the debate, conversely Santorum claimed abortion is a federal issue (supporting the federal jurisdiction which lead to Roe vs Wade). He cited Ron Paul’s low rating by the National Right to Life Committee (@nrlc), which thinks federal legislation will overturn the federal Supreme Court Ruling. But, this position validates federal jurisdiction. Effectual repeal of Roe vs Wade must be established by restoration of a constitutional mainstay, like state sovereignty, or risk having no reason against repeal by a subsequent generation of legislators. The reversal must be that States are restored to a first line of defense against abortion, like in the case of murder. Only if an abortion ring is crossing state lines would federal jurisdiction take a secondary role. Without the Supreme Court’s usurpation of state sovereignty in the name of defending the 14th amendment, Roe vs Wade would not be the death of hundreds of thousands of American babies each year. By claiming it is a federal issue, Santorum shores up the rationale of the Roe decision.
Santorum uses social issues as tools, but he doesn’t believe in self-governance, which is the ultimate key to social issues. Ron Paul pointed out in the debate that morality is the main issue with the culture, the acceptability of abortion culturally is the problem. Culture determines laws not visa versa.
Lastly, it just came to my attention that for 2009 through 2011 Ron Paul has a perfect rating with NRLC, which means that Rick Santorum lied about Ron Paul’s voting record. He also supported pro-abortion Judicial Committee member Arlen Specter over a pro-life conservative Pat Toomey. And, Santorum voted to expand the pro-abortion Medicaid Plan under George W. Bush.

Good analysis of Santorum vs. Paul, and the superiority of the latter’s _political_ view. For those who might like to know more, two other resources may be useful:
* This 2005 Reason Magazine critique of Santorum’s book _It Takes a Family_…
http://reason.com/archives/2005/12/01/goodbye-to-goldwater/print
* Isaiah Berlin’s classic 1958 lecture “The Two Concepts of Liberty”. Santorum’s conception of freedom is implicitly that of “positive liberty”. As Berlin observes, this often devolves into a notion of “forcing people to be free” via the application of political power — which is the opposite of liberty…
http://www1.nsd131.org/classpages/bwilliamson/Shared%20Documents/Two%20Concepts%20of%20Liberty%20Berlin.pdf