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.