Hardly an indication of his strength of character or judgment.
As for your statement that he stands for the "pricnipal of subsidarity," rather than for strict construction of the Constitution--which is the issue, here, not some philosophic substitute--that hardly recommends him.
He clearly showed his failure to recognize foundational principles--as opposed to inclinations of the moment--in his support for the Congressional intrusion into the Terri Schiavo case in Florida. See Abandoned Reason.
Frankly, I like the way Rick addresses some issues. He just does not understand what is really basic in the American context.
William Flax
You mean you think the constitution has no underlying philosophic principles? Subsidarity is one of these. Individuals in families, in Churches, and in businesses are more fundamental than local government. Local governments are responsive to these than either state or federal government. The demand that a man be judged by his peers, that the law by which he is bound shall be written by men elected by him and his peers, is based on the idea that power should be exercised by those as close as possible the persons most directly affected.
Principle and conscience are different things. Santorum did poorly when he explained why he voted for NCLB. The outcome of NCLB was largely an unknown, the outcome of violating religious Conscience is understood.