A few years back I equated the Republican Party with a breed of dinosaur going extinct, but that doesn't quite know it yet. These old, rich, white fat cats sitting around counting their money and smoking their cigars might have tried their hardest to maintain their conservative empire, but progressive thought can only be held at bay for so long. This doesn't mean that intelligence or altruism is winning by any means, but it does offer a look at the destruction of the social conservative.

Mitt Romney won the Iowa Caucus last night by eight votes, sharing the spotlight with little known former Senator Rick Santorum. The only reason I even knew who Santorum was comes from my years of living in New Jersey, with Pennsylvania as our close neighbor. The media sees Santorum's rise as another example of the Republican base's inability to embrace the more moderate Romney, but in reality, they need to be looking in the other direction. This really is a visible strain on the Republican ability to coalesce around a single anti-Romney candidate.

The big talk is about the social conservatives. They hate Romney because he's a Mormon and might not hate gay people as much as they do. These social conservatives, in recent years, have adopted an extreme fiscal conservatism that aligns them with the Tea Party. These aren't the same bases, however, and it's showing. Social conservatives worry too much about their Christian beliefs and somewhat anti-science stances, while the Tea Party is supposed to be all about returning to Constitutional policies. They overlap in the small federal government ideology, but true Constitutionalism has a libertarian taste, which includes freedoms that Evangelical Christians don't like to give other races, nations and creeds.

This overlap and blurred line between the two, while secretly disagreeing on the freedoms of individuals has prevented a unified base, and thus, a unified candidate.

Michele Bachmann rose as a Tea Party favorite, but the intelligent people in this amalgamated base knew that she lacked the credentials to be a good leader. Their secret crush on Rick Perry was showing. Perry entered the race as the clear front-runner, but his inability to form complete thoughts turned off some of the more intelligence Republicans (like those donating money), and his record on immigrant education and creating government jobs angered too many. Herman Cain then rose as the outsider candidate, and for a minute, I thought that the GOP had truly lost its mind. Luckily, what little damage his utter lack of knowledge about anything not looking like a pizza price (thanks for that quip Jon Huntsman) was made up for by his extramarital affairs and sexual misconduct. This tends to turn off the Evangelical Christians. Then came Newt Gingrich. Gingrich is a very intelligent man who produces four good ideas out of every five. Unfortunately, he believes that all five are great, when that fifth one usually scares the crap out those of us who like our civil liberties. Gingrich started tanking because he has always been a dick. People in his own party hate him. He might have accomplished a lot as the Speaker of the House, but he stepped on a lot of toes doing it.

This brings us to Rick Santorum. Santorum is the current flavor of the GOP because Jon Huntsman is deemed too moderate (and he's also Mormon), which is odd because Huntsman is probably the most intelligence candidate. He also has a proven track record, understands China, and comes up with common sense ideas. In other words, he must be too sane for the common Republican.

Santorum, meanwhile, is getting pounded about earmarks while he was in the Senate. He's a social conservative darling, but for the small federal government Tea Party crowd, this is going to be an issue.

As an aside, Ron Paul is Tea Party to the max, but social conservatives aren't going to vote for someone that wants to legalize drugs and end wars. It's not their style.

Let's recap real quickly. The Republican base is divided into three groups: moderate, social conservative and Tea Party. These groups overlap in some ways, but not enough to unify completely. Meanwhile, none of the GOP candidates can capitalize on more than one group. Bachmann is the closest by being both a social conservative and a fiscal conservative, but her lack of truly doing much in Congress makes intelligent voters pause, while her husband's ability to "cure" gay people ensures the moderates won't vote for her. Perry might be a social conservative, but his immigrant education record hurts him, and his government job creation turns off the Tea Party. Cain was just a joke who pissed off conservatives more concerned with social issues than the important topics of today. Gingrich is really a moderate (he likes science and believes in climate change), and is also a dick (did I say that already?). Santorum is a social conservative, but is heavy on the earmarks. Romney and Huntsman, meanwhile are both moderates (and Mormons - Evangelical Christians hate this), which seems to turn off the common sense switch in most social conservatives.

This shows the fractured nature of the Republican Party. People are searching for a pure candidate in their little slice of politics, but that candidate doesn't exist. Reality gets in the way.

The Republican Party needs to evolve, but in order to do so, they need to understand that the social conservative is a dying breed. I moved to a small town in Virginia that is overwhelmingly Republican. Most of the people here define themselves as social conservatives, but if you look at those who are in their teens and 20's (and even some in their 30's) you see people much more inclined to support women's rights, personal freedoms and gay rights. This, of course, is a gentle way of saying that you'll run into people who have had abortions, use drugs and have homosexual friends. Although many probably still have little love for the environment and science, that's starting to change too.

The new Republican Party will be defined by it's more moderate stance on many issues. Although there is a good chance that President Obama will lose the 2012 election, America's disdain for Congress is likely to tip Congressional power back into the hands of the Democrats. When that happens, the Tea Party revolution that gave us quite a few uncompromising jackasses will finally die, but not before the larger GOP base finishes absorbing the small federal government, less spending ideology of the group. This fiscal conservatism will meld with a more moderate approach to social issues that will continue to become more progressive as staunch social conservative views fall out of favor with the younger generation. This will end up positioning the Republican Party as the states' rights, small federal government opponent to the spendthrifty Democrats.

This seems to be the most common sense path for the GOP, but far be it for them to ever embrace common sense (especially in today's world). Regardless of what ways they choose to shape their party, we can be confident that the social conservative is a dying breed, fighting with it's last few breaths.