If the GOP nominates Rick Santorum, we will lose. Rick is a social conservative, and I personally applaud that – as I’m sure most of you do as well. The issue is the fact that this election cannot be about social issues; this election must be about economic issues. Yes, Obama has failed miserably in the area of social policy, but the issues where he is most vulnerable are economic. If we nominate Rick Santorum, Obama will frame the debate around social issues – along with his msm cronies – and we will lose. This is already happening.

Our objective is to defeat Obama. We cannot win if we are stymied from discussing the issues that damage him most. Those issues are economic. Go “Google” Rick Santorum. How many stories pop up about his economic policy? Exactly. The fix is in. If Rick is the nominee, we will not get around to economic issues, and Obama will win.

There is an additional danger. Leftist cabals like PP, NARAL, Emily’s List type folk – you know the rest – social issues are their red meat. Start talking about jobs and tax rates, and they snooze. That’s exactly where we want them. Nominate Rick Santorum, and they will go into a frothy frenzy. That is exactly what we don’t want. Rick Santorum will activate, awaken, and enrage social radicals into action. I say, let sleeping dogs lie.

Rick has already demonstrated his inability to re-frame the debate and re-focus on economics. Ever since the contraception issue was manufactured by Obama – yes, it is an intentional distraction – Rick has been unable to talk about anything else. The moment George Stephanopoulos raised the issue, seemingly out of nowhere, Team Obama tipped its hand. They want to go there. We must not.

Team Obama does not want to talk about jobs (or lack thereof), unemployment, Green Energy Sector failures, crony capitalism, or any of its otherwise socialist economic policy. If we nominate Rick, they won’t have to. We’ll be talking about “women’s issues” all the way through November, until we’re cooked. The Church is doing a magnificent job taking it to Obama – and they don’t have to run against him. Let the Church and other religious institutions deal with those issues.

So, please consider what I have said. Rick may be a great guy, but 2012 is not the year of the Social Conservative. Think about what four more years of Obama would look like.

I got news for you: The left hates Gingrich and Romney just as much. They may not throw the pink mafia into quite the same hissy fits that Santorum does, but remember that they hated George W. Bush, the moderate, just as much as they did Ronald Reagan, the conservative.

We have to deal with that hatred no matter who is our nominee.

Seven reasons for Rick Santorum

Who has won the most states without the benefit of their own money, last election's organization or a billionaire casino sugar daddy?
Who is everybody's second choice when he isn't their first?
Who can get both the Romney people and the Gingrich people, who hate each other, to vote for him?
Who has the best record on immigration?
Who has the best plan for repealing ObamaCare? And is the only GOP candidate who didn't help write or approve legislation which helped spawn this fiasco?
Who has the best plan for expanding the American economy and strengthening American families?
Who is the closest thing we have to the "generic Republican" which polls show consistently beating Obama and is most likely to make the election about Obama's sorry record rather than about himself?

This, unfortunately, is what the GOP-e has been saying for decades. Ronald Reagan talked about the social issues, and they hated him and tried to force him out.

George Bush talked about the social issues, and he won—twice, even though he was weak on economic issues. Then things started to go south after he started listening to Rove and failed to do some of the things that the voters had expected him to do after his landslide re-election.

The first mid-term, the GOP did very well in congress. The second midterm, they did lousy. Because Rove won the argument and Bush backed off the social issues. He even voted for stem cell research on lines where fetuses had already been harvested, although he blocked the rest. That got him anger from BOTH sides. Another typical Rove move.

Why do you think the left uses Orwellian duckspeak when talking about stuff like abortions? “A woman’s right to choose” instead of “killing an unborn baby”? Because most voters don’t really approve of abortion.

If McCain had said in the debates that Obama was the most pro-abort presidential candidate ever, and that he voted three times to throw babies born alive into the trash or onto the roof to die in the heat, he probably would have won. But he didn’t, because the social issues are not popular, don’t you know? And, of course, Sarah wasn’t allowed to talk much about them, either.

Facts for Video: “Votes” (MI, AZ, OH) Rick Santorum voted to raise the debt limit five times.

■FACT: Santorum voted to increase the debt ceiling in 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2006. Together, these five votes boosted the federal debt limit by nearly $3.5 trillion. (H.R. 2015, Roll Call Vote #209, 7/31/97; S. 2578, Roll Call Vote #148, 6/11/02; H. J. Res. 51, Roll Call Vote #202, 5/23/03; S. 2986, Roll Call Vote #213, 11/17/04; H. J. Res. 47, Roll Call Vote #54, 3/16/06; Mindy R. Leavit, “The Debt Limit: History and Recent Increases,” Congressional Research Service, 9/9/11) Rick Santorum voted for billions in waste, including the “Bridge to Nowhere.”

■FACT: “Santorum was a prolific supporter of earmarks, having requested billions of dollars for pork projects in Pennsylvania while he was in Congress.” (Club for Growth, 2012 Presidential White Paper #4, Rick Santorum)

■FACT: “The announcements flowed out of Rick Santorum’s Senate office: a $3.5 million federal grant to Piasecki Aircraft to help it test a new helicopter propeller technology; another $3.5 million to JLG Industries to bolster its bid to build all-terrain forklifts for the military; $1.4 million to Medico Industries to upgrade equipment for its munitions work. … But an examination of Mr. Santorum’s earmark record sheds light on another aspect of his political personality, one that is at odds with the reformer image he has tried to convey on the trail: his prowess as a Washington insider. A review of some of his earmarks, viewed alongside his political donations, suggests that the river of federal money Mr. Santorum helped direct to Pennsylvania paid off handsomely in the form of campaign cash.” (Michael Luo and Mike McIntire, The New York Times, 1/15/12)

■FACT: Santorum voted for the 2005 highway bill, which included hundreds of earmarks, including the bridge to nowhere, a teapot museum. (H.R. 3, Roll Call Vote #220, 7/29/05)

■FACT: Santorum supported the “Bridge to Nowhere” – twice. Santorum “voted for the 2005 highway bill that included thousands of wasteful earmarks, including the Bridge to Nowhere. In fact, in a separate vote, Santorum had the audacity to vote to continue funding the Bridge to Nowhere rather than send the money to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.” (Club for Growth, 2012 Presidential White Paper #4, Rick Santorum)

■FACT: Santorum admitted he voted for bridge, and defended vote: “People say that I voted for ‘The Bridge to Nowhere.’ I did. I went with the federalist argument, which is, ‘Who am I in Pennsylvania to tell Alaska what their highway priorities should be?’” (William Petroski, Des Moines Register, 12/29/11) In a single session, Rick Santorum co-sponsored 51 bills to increase spending … And zero to cut spending.

■FACT: “In the 2003-2004 session of Congress, Santorum sponsored or cosponsored 51 bills to increase spending, and failed to sponsor or co-sponsor even one spending cut proposal.” (Club for Growth, 2012 Presidential White Paper #4, Former Senator Rick Santorum) Rick Santorum even voted to raise his own pay.

■FACT: “Santorum also supported raising congressional pay at least three times, in 2001, 2002, and 2003.” (Club for Growth, 2012 Presidential White Paper #4, Former Senator Rick Santorum)

■FACT: Santorum voted three times – in 2001, 2002 and 2003 – to preserve Congressional pay increases. (Roll Call Vote #360, 12/7/01; Roll Call Vote #242, 11/13/02; Roll Call Vote #406, 10/23/03) Rick Santorum joined Hillary Clinton to let convicted felons vote.

■FACT: In 2002, Santorum voted “to secure the Federal voting rights of certain qualified persons who have served their sentences.” Santorum was one of only three Republican senators to vote with Sen. Hillary Clinton for the measure, which failed in the Senate. (S. 565, Roll Call Vote #31, 2/14/02)

■FACT: Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), who sponsored the measure, on the purpose of his amendment: “Basically what this amendment does is ensure that ex-felons, people who have fully served their sentences, have completed their probation, have completed their parole, should not be denied their right to vote.” (Sen. Harry Reid, Remarks on the Senate Floor, 2/14/02)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.