From a reader:

Subject: Your comments on Santorum Dear Mr. Goldberg: When the Republicans try to figure out why they lost Congress, I hope they have the sense to realize how drastically they have betrayed conservative principles. Look, for example, at Rick Santorum’s legislative record that Brook’s quotes and that you are so (apparently) impressed with: “With Dick Durbin and Joe Biden, Santorum has sponsored a series of laws to fight global AIDS and offer third world debt relief.” — In other words, stick the taxpayers with responsibility for the financial and health problems of third world countries, who, for the most part despise us. “With Chuck Schumer and Harold Ford, he’s pushed to offer savings accounts to children from low-income families.” – In other words, have as many children as you like, we’ll just push the burden to the taxpayers. “With John Kerry, he’s proposed homeownership tax credits.” – In other words, let’s transfer money — “tax credits” — so the taxpayers can pay for someone else’s home. “With Chris Dodd, he backed legislation authorizing $860 million for autism research.” — Let’s soak the taxpayers for every disease that we can discover. “With Joe Lieberman he pushed legislation to reward savings by low-income families.” — In other words, those who make less money have more right to save some of it than those who make more. “In addition, he’s issued a torrent of proposals, many of which have become law: efforts to fight tuberculosis; to provide assistance to orphans and vulnerable children in developing countries; to provide housing for people with AIDS; to increase funding for Social Services Block Grants and organizations like Healthy Start and the Children’s Aid Society; to finance community health centers; to combat genocide in Sudan.” — In other words, make the American taxpayer responsible for every problem on the globe. Good grief. Obviously there is only one thing you Republicans won’t spend money on: embryonic stem cell research. Conservatism is dead.

Me: With all due respect, this strikes me as nonsense. Without addressing the merits of each policy Santorum has embraced (Welfare reform was a conservative victory, for example), is it really so difficult to imagine that I’m separating my judgement on the merits of various policies with what a smart politician would do? After all, I have written that it might be good for conservatives, Republicans and the nation to lose one of the branches. And, my record on compassionate conservatism, big government conservatism etc is as extensive as it is critical. But as a matter of sheer punditry, it’s just plain obvious that Santorum needs to win back moderates and middle-of-the-roaders. Saying so hardly constitutes a blanket endorsement of every policy that appeals to moderates and middle-of-the-roaders. Moreover, if Santorum loses it will hardly be because small-government conservatives have swung to the Casey column. Regardless, I am entirely flummoxed by how this reader thinks Republicans would not lose Congress — or how conservatives would gain — if they lost Santorum and got Bob Casey instead.