Politically motivated folks throughout the nation will be keeping their eyes at the ready this weekend, waiting for that proverbial finger to be moistened and lifted skyward. Still, it remains to be seen how much information about Iowa's social conservatives can be mined from a reduced field of cupie doll candidates.

First, in honor of that special Republican who might be leaving us come Sunday, let's have a little straight talk. The Ames Straw Poll is the sparkly thong across the Iowa GOP's gyrating buttocks. Above all else, the straw poll — much like politics today — is all about the money.

Most Iowans who travel to Ames this weekend will do so on a candidate's dime. The participating Republican candidates rent the buses, buy the ballots, pay between $10,000 and $25,000 for tent space, arrange entertainment, provide food, shell out chum and, basically, do everything short of marking ballots for their supporters.

Historically, the Ames Straw Poll has had a significantly lower turnout than the real (and free) straw poll that happens on caucus night for the Republicans. Still, the one-third of regular caucus goers who come to Ames are the party's loyalists. Ironically, it is that fact which makes this year's fund-raiser even less of an indicator for the thoughts and opinions of Iowa Republicans in general.

For those of us concentrating on that finger in the air, a very important piece of information may be missing from the analysis of this year's straw poll because of the absence of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Sen. John McCain of Arizona. While both candidates' names will appear on the ballot, they made it clear some weeks ago that they would not be busing in participants or handing over sums of cash to the state party. Because of their decisions, it is doubtful we will have a clear picture of where participants stand on hot-button issues. When it comes to the divisive issue of abortion, for instance, there are really only two scenarios that would provide any insight.

If Giuliani somehow manages a first- or second-place finish, it will be safe to say that those who attended the straw poll did not base their support solely on divisive social issues. Giuliani's differing stance on abortion — he believes the decision is not one which should be made by government — placed him far apart from the remaining field of candidates. Even Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who has been showered with online accolades for many of his positions on other issues, stands with the most ardent of anti-abortion activists. On these matters it is difficult to slide a hair between the stances of those participating Saturday.

On the flip side of the abortion coin we find Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas. During the past few months Brownback has been pushing his pro-life/whole-life stance for all it is worth via robo-calls, mailers and personal appearances. His campaign has issued numerous press releases attacking Iowa front-runner Mitt Romney on abortion and his evolving stance on the issue. On Saturday, Brownback will be accompanied by Norma McCorvey, the original plaintiff in the landmark Roe v. Wade case who has since become adamantly pro-life.

Brownback is the obvious choice for those who want a 100 percent guarantee that abortion will remain at the top of the national conversation and on the top of the Republican ticket. If he ranks first or second in Ames on Saturday, a clear message will be sent that Iowa social conservatives believe this issue must play a significant role in the 2008 general election as well as the Iowa caucus.

While it is interesting to note that Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee also have firm anti-abortion beliefs, a win for either one will not send the same message that a win would for Brownback. Because of the Brownback campaign's continued pummeling of Romney and other candidates on this issue and because of Brownback's campaigning with notable pro-life supporters, he alone can be viewed as the anti-abortion candidate in this race.

In addition, his stagnant polling in Iowa only enhances the ability of a strong showing in Ames to catapult divisive social issues onto the national stage. In as much as the negative campaign ads have solidified Brownback as the social conservative in the race, they have put Iowa front-runner Romney on sifting soil. He obviously believed at one point that women should have the right to choose whether or not to continue a pregnancy. Just as obviously, he is now wearing his pro-life credentials as a badge. Back-pedaling spinmeisters now say that Romney was actually anti-abortion all of his life, but played the part to win the governorship in Massachusetts, a state known for its liberal tendencies. That being the case, it is difficult to determine what a Romney win says about Iowa conservatives.

Should a Romney win be interpreted as forgiveness or ignorance of a past stance on the issues? Does it signal an end to the "gotcha" politics of labeling position changes as "flip-flopping"? Or, could it mean that Iowans supported Romney despite his problems within the abortion issue because they view him as the only viable candidate? Or, perhaps because he was the only candidate willing to give them a free ride to the event?