How Santorum Swept the South

After a grueling sprint of campaigning in my home state of Mississippi and our neighbor, Alabama, we now know the results of the GOP primary here in the Deep South: Mitt Romney's pandering didn't play any better here than it has in the rest of the country, Newt Gingrich's Southern strategy failed, and Rick Santorum won both states.

That totally disrupted the media narrative, which had predicted Gingrich winning both states with the possibility of a Mitt Romney upset in one. Several polls showed Santorum trailing both Romney and Gingrich by at least a few points. The former Pennsylvania senator simply wasn't supposed to win in two states so culturally removed from his own. But he did.

While the pundits are treating Santorum's win as an upset, anyone who actually understands the South might not be so shocked.

First, it's important to understand why the others didn't win.

Romney, despite initially dismissing the South as an "away game," started to think he had a shot. He came to Mississippi and obtained the endorsement of Mississippi's Republican governor, Phil Bryant, who won the office of governor last November by virtue of being the next in line among the state GOP establishment. Similarly, Romney hopes to win the Republican nomination by virtue of being next in line of the GOP establishment.

That didn't impress Southern voters.
Nor did Romney's proclamation that he had developed an affinity for grits and—God bless him—he had learned to say "y'all." This is the same guy who attempted to assert his redneck credentials by saying he was friends with NASCAR team owners. Here's the thing about Southerners: Most of us like our culture, we're proud of our good home cookin', we like that everyone else thinks our accents are cute, and yes, we like our grits. And if you start pickin' up on some of our tics, well that's just precious.

Mitt Romney speaks with Miss. Gov. Phil Bryant.

But we really don't appreciate an East coast elite with $250 million—some of which is strategically placed in offshore bank accounts—swooping in and trying to convince us that he's really just one of us. That dog don't hunt. Yes, the majority of us may accept the idea that Obama is secretly a Muslim and reject the science behind the theory of evolution—but we aren't that dumb, thank you very much.

We also aren't going to vote for you just because you appeal to our darker elements. When I attended a Newt Gingrich rally in Gulfport over the weekend, Gingrich used the same dog whistles he's previously employed when campaigning in Southern states.

There was an appeal to the idea that Obama hates our religion and represents some "otherness." The man who introduced Gingrich and his wife, whose name I believe was Wendy, indicated that by supporting Gingrich, supporters could take America back from Obama and establish a society "where our Christian beliefs aren't to be questioned." Gingrich's biggest applause came when he said that he would end Obama's war on the Catholic Church. I imagine the only way he could've garnered a greater response would've been if he had replaced "Catholic" with "Baptist."

The GOP, Rush Limbaugh, and the Sluts in the Garden

On the eve of the Super Tuesday contests in the GOP presidential primary race, the Republican candidates weren’t talking about the economy, jobs, Newt Gingrich’s three wives, or Mitt Romney’s wife’s two Cadillacs. Instead, the GOP has been embroiled in a controversy—let’s call it ‘slutgate’—that arose after radio host and GOP darling Rush Limbaugh revealed the true intent behind Republican opposition to women’s healthcare.

President Obama set the candidates up perfectly. He sat back and watched as they made political hay over the issue of whether or not institutions like Catholic hospitals should have to provide insurance that covers contraception for female employees. The GOP candidates signaled that their opposition to contraceptive coverage had nothing to do with women at all; it was an issue of religious freedom, they said.

Indeed, it was about religion, but not religious freedom. That became clear when Obama swooped in and seemed to save the day by announcing that religious employers would be absolved from the responsibility of providing contraceptive care for female employees; instead, the burden would be on the insurance company to reach out to the female employee and offer it.

Boom! Problem solved. Women’s rights protected. Religious freedom protected. Everyone is happy now. Right? Wrong.

Oh, some Catholics were happy. John Gehring, Catholic outreach coordinator at Faith in Public Life, said that the change “shows the White House respects the Catholic community” and that it was “clear the president worked very hard to protect both religious liberty and women’s health.”

But Republican lawmakers were not happy. Nor were the presidential candidates. 

Instead of claiming victory and congratulating themselves for “forcing the president’s hand,” they doubled down in their opposition to funding for contraceptives. Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) attempted to attach a “conscience amendment” to a highway funding bill that would allow any employer to refuse to provide their employees with contraceptive coverage—not only the religiously opposed, but for anyone who could cite a “moral objection” to birth control.

Rush Limbaugh

But wait, “moral objections?” Weren’t Republicans worried about religious freedom—not women and contraception? Enter Rush Limbaugh, the unofficial ideological leader of the Republican party.

When he attacked Sandra Fluke, a college student who testified about the high cost of birth control for women without insurance, he threw the “religious freedom” baloney aside and intimated the real motivation:

“Three thousand dollars for birth control in three years? That’s a thousand dollars a year of sex — and, she wants us to pay for it . . . They’re admitting before a congressional committee that they’re having so much sex they can’t afford the birth control pills.”

[Note: Birth control pills are not taken on the basis of when a woman is having sex; in order to work, they must be taken on a regular schedule regardless of whether the woman is sexually active at the time or not. Additionally, birth control pills are used for numerous healthcare reasons that have nothing to do with having sex. But let’s not allow a pesky thing like reality to get in the way.]