That’s
the headline on an article linked from The Drudge Report for the last couple of
days.
But
if it’s true, what does it mean for those of us who are pro-life and
pro-family?
A
recent poll taken by Research 2000 suggests that Senator Harry Reid’s
(D-Nevada) re-election is not the slam dunk he would like it to be.
The
Wall Street Journal article
referenced Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) as another Senate Leader
(Republican Leader) who faced a similar dilemma in 2008. The only problem is that 2008 was definitely
a Democrat year, and there were very few Republican incumbents — especially in
the U.S. Senate — that didn’t have a competitive race. Even Saxby Chambliss (R-Georgia), whose re-election
should never have been in doubt, was forced into a run-off. Fortunately, the pro-life Chambliss had one of
the more radical pro-abortion challengers of 2008 as his competition. As soon as the word got out on his opponent, the
Chambliss re-election was no longer a problem.
The
curious thing about this poll, which has Sen. Reid and others up in arms, is
that it was taken on November 30th of this year — just after the Obama, liberal
Democrat landside. Reid’s re-elect
numbers ought to be so much better.
Instead
you have Sen. Reid on the short end of poll numbers at 46-40 percent, with the
only high number being the 54 percent disapproval rating of the job he’s doing.
That’s
the good news.
The
bad news is that the candidate put up against Sen. Reid in the poll is no
friend to the pro-family, pro-life movement.
Congressman
Jon Porter (R-Nevada) just lost re-election in the third district in Nevada,
and he is the one matched up against Reid.
The other candidate, Lt. Governor Brian
Krolicki (R), is reportedly under a cloud of suspicion and could soon be
under indictment. That might just end
his bid as a candidate for U.S. Senate in 2010 — unless of course he can
exonerate himself pretty quickly. Krolicki claims that Reid is behind the
investigation.
So
right now, you and I are stuck with former Congressman Jon Porter. Take a look at his CWALAC scorecard on the issues you and I care about.
This
brings us to the next question: What do we do with this opportunity?
Rest
assured we are doing everything we can to find a suitable candidate to run
against Sen. Reid, and already there is really good news on that front, so
please stay tuned.
But
what would happen if we weren’t able to find a suitable opponent for Senator
Reid and this critical race in 2010?
Well,
nothing. …
You mean you will just let Sen.
Reid win? Don’t you want Republicans to
win?
Not
really. … You see, CWPAC isn’t a Republican
organization.
It
is true that all of our endorsed candidates are Republicans, but that’s only
because the Republican Party is more conducive to our values at this time in
history. There are a few Democrats in
Congress whom we would consider “friendly” on some issues, but we would be hard
pressed to find a 100 percenter.
So CWPAC wouldn’t support
Jon Porter, if he was “the best we could do” against Sen. Reid?
Nope.
… Not with a vote in favor of the
so-called Employment Non-Discrimination Act, “Hate Crimes” and a vote in favor
of the destructive Embryonic Stem Cell Research Act.
But
then, we don’t need to.
You
see, we have 435 seats up in 2010 and at least 35 seats in the Senate.
Surely
there will be competitive seats where there is a clear choice and a pro-family,
pro-life candidate running that CWPAC could endorse and our members would feel
confident that they were supporting a true conservative.
That’s
why CWPAC doesn’t endorse everyone who runs. We have plenty of races to choose from, and we
just won’t ever feel comfortable endorsing the “lesser of two evils.”
I
am hopeful that we may have found a proven conservative candidate to run in the
U.S. Senate race in Nevada in 2010 that is pro-life and pro-family. But if not, there will be other races in 2010.