In light of the impending FEC ruling that will make blogging for a candidate a capital offense, let it be known that Dayton v. Kennedy is on no candidate's payroll. But with the controversy generated by today's disclosure that Daschle v. Thune and South Dakota Politics were being paid by the Thune campaign, I find it necessary to come to the defense of Professor Lauck (since he seems to be enduring the bulk of the assaults). Anyone who cared to do some investigating would know that Lauck had a history of working for then-Congressman Thune when he challenged Sen. Tim Johnson in 2002. Moreover, National Journal already made clear -- in not so veiled terms -- that Lauck and Van Beek of SDP were paid for their efforts:
GOP activists in the state -- several of whom were paid thousands of dollars by Sen.-elect John Thune's campaign committee for research consulting -- launched an unprecedented assault on the Argus Leader. Through an alliance of South Dakota-based Web logs, or blogs, and a pseudo-news Web site, the activists hammered away continuously at the paper's coverage of Daschle and raised persistent questions about the objectivity of its writers.
Simply put, anyone who did not know or suspect this was lazy or naive. Furthermore, Orion himself made clear that he thought candidates paying bloggers was the next phase in the evolution of the blogosphere. Dayton v. Kennedy is not for sale. I have never met Congressman Kennedy or Senator Dayton. This effort was simply borne out of a desire to see the Constitution defended, the Social Security system solvent, taxes reformed and our cities mushroom cloud-free.