If the Washington Times thinks Fred`s 100% pro-life Senate voting record in the 1990`s, which gained him two NRTL endorsements in 1994 and 1996, coupled with those consistent pro-life positions he still holds today, can somehow be considered checkered, this article must have been written by a liberal guest editorialist. I can't think of any rational reason for this old conservative newspaper to publish such a sophomoric article.
We've covered all these issues on Free Republic for months on end. Fred`s work for a pro-choice organization in 1991 was minimal. Especially when compared to the work private attorney John Roberts did to assist homosexual groups in the case of Romer v Evans around the same time frame.
The NRTL Committee has spoken. When you look at the top tier candidates, the NRTL`s reasoning makes Fred the logical choice. Methinks the Wash Times won't be backing Fred anytime soon. Something tells me there could be a Mitt Boy or a Huckster in the Times future.
For whatever reason, it is apparently necessary to tear down Fred and the NRLC to pave the way for whomever they have decided to endorse. Since they are completely free to endorse anyone they like, one has to wonder why it is necessary to play these intellectually dishonest games.