Friday, August 20, 2010

So-called Paul critic plans on voting for him

Lest anyone think that I brought it up, let me make it clear that my quote in the Associated Press story on a contribution received by Rand Paul from a founder of a porn website resulted from my answering a question addressed to me from a reporter who happened to call this afternoon.

Let's explain how this process works:
1. Bored reporter sits at his desk looking for what to write about that day;
2. Bored reporter thinks about what he can say about the Rand Paul campaign that hasn't already been said;
3. Bored reporter turns up something which could possibly attract attention: a donation to a conservative candidate from the founder of a porn website.
4. No longer bored reporter calls me (known conservative) for a response;
5. Me says "Well, he can't control who he gets contributions from, and we're confident he'll return it," along with a few other brief comments;
6. Positively enthusiastic reporter writes the story including those comments;
7. Some news sources delete the comments that indicate I think this is not Paul's fault, leaving only the ones that say he should give the money back;
8. Liberal wacko bloggers (I'm thinking specifically of Jake here) spin it as a big fight between me and Paul.
Of course, it's nothing of the kind. Yeah, he needs to return the money (I can't imagine he won't), but I'm also personally planning (barring any good reason not to) on voting for the guy.


Anonymous said...

There is one thing you left out!

Step one: A leak from the Conway campaign to a trust favorable news reporter.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...


I don't think he should return the money. Conway has taken money from Charlie Rangel, Myron Cherry, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, and on and on... Those people have done tons more to harm our country than some "soft porn" website based in California.

Is Jack going to return his Planned Parenthood money?

Martin Cothran said...

Agreed, except for the part about returning the money. If I'm Paul, I'll return the money and then point those things out. I hope they're listening.

Anonymous said...

The only reason to return a donation such as this is if you want to admit that donations buy influence. I don't think that is a message Dr. Paul wants to send. Why not take the money and put it to good use? I know I would.

Returning the donation is a slippery slope that it is best to avoid sledding down.

Lucas said...

Martin, thanks for writing this report of what happened.

I thought you initiated the story, because I wouldn't think the AP would just out of nowhere fish for quotes about controversial donations to Rand Paul. Gladly, I was wrong.

This episode shows the AP has become nothing more than a division of Jack Conway's P.R. department.

Lucas said...

Martin, I forgot to ask... TechCrunch reported that calling zivity porn is controversial, a bit of a stretch for some, because they don't seem to really publish naked pictures, but are more suggestive without showing it all.

Just I thought I'll let you know, but I know some would consider it porn.

Technorati article:

The so-called "porn" website.

Anonymous said...

18% think Rand's mother is Rue Paul.

Art said...

Maybe Paul will refuse and return the votes of those whose "morals" he denigrates. After all, if he's going to turn away financial support (THE medium for political speech in these times), then he should, if he is interested in being ethically consistent, turn away all other support.

Eric said...

I don't think he should give it back. I don't think that really accomplish anything and as another poster pointed out opens up a slippery slope. He needs all the money he can get to defeat CONway. The website is relatively tame anyways. Some of the models are topless, but nothing going on there besides that. It's just some kind of artsy modeling website. Maury Povich on the other hand, who donated $4800 to Conway, has contributed MUCH more sleaze to this country, but remarkably AP has never tried to drum up any controversy about THAT.

KyCobb said...


Paul is a libertarian, not a conservative, so I doubt he has a problem with porn and he probably won't see any reason to return the money.