There is a video floating around where Santorum says that he is not a Libertarian and is not happy with the emergence of Liberatrianism in the GOP. He has clearly stated time and time again that he is a conservative. Ron Paul is the obvious Libertarian is the race. He has spent the entire campaign trying to articulate as well as he can the need for the GOP to embrace liberty as he describes it.
So, the conservatives and the libertarians are fighting to lead the GOP. And, given the great support that Paul has garnered, there is clearly a place for libertarianism within the GOP. But, the question is - which view wins?
The Tea Party's emergence a few years ago was for the very specific purpose of reducing the size of government. It opposed TARP, Obamacare, Cap and Trade, and other government spending that Obama was promoting. What's interesting is that it seems that the conservative arm of the party would actually support spending, but the type of spending that supports our social goals.
In other words, Santorum should just as well be saying: I want the government to spend money on programs, just not Obama's programs. Paul would say: I don't want the government to spend money on any program, whether or not I agree with the purpose of the program.
I find for myself that I am a hybrid. Is that possible? I want liberty. I don't want the government to make decisions for me. However, I think that the government should reflect the values of the people. I am still deciding if I am as pure a libertarian as Paul. Probably not.
At CPAC, Phyllis Schlafly discussed the connection between social and fiscal policies. She mentioned that in years past, there was a greater marriage benefit in the tax code than there is now. The savings for "married filing jointly" was greater and has been reduced over time. Santorum has said that things like mortgage deductions, charitable deductions, and the child deduction should continue and are representative of our fiscal policy reflecting our social beliefs.
I find myself agreeing with Santorum on some things, but not comfortable when it gets taken too far. President W. Bush raised funding for religious organizations. I disagree that the government should be funding community groups (the whole point is that they should be privately funded). Gingrich supported the formation of the Department of Education which was the first step toward the mammoth, overreaching agency we have today. I believe that education should be handled by parents and if there are any kinds of rules around education, they should be created as locally as possible to the child (at the state or community level).
So, at the end of the day, do I support Paul's fiscal policies or Santorum's? I'd say Paul's. I'd like to see the government get it's hand out of as much as possible.