Carolyn's Home Page

Politics

Voices of Support

Key events

More Articles

Original Page

Hate Mail

Paula Jones

Please Read:

10/31/00 - Clinton sure can pick 'em by Anne Coulter

10/24/00 - Paula, How Could You? by Jane Chastine at WorldNetDaily

Yes everyone -- I have heard that Paula Jones is posing nude in Penthouse. Do I think it's a wise thing for her to do? No -- personally I think it's incredibly stupid, shows very bad judgment, and generally leaves an overall bad impression, especially after Penthouse published photos of her without her permission a few years back. I never stated that I agree with everything she does, just that she deserved a right to be heard, just like anyone else. However, if she chooses to pose nude, does that mean that suddenly she lied about everything and Clinton didn't lie? Does that mean she now "deserved" to be harassed? Using that logic, then any woman who chooses to pose nude is automatically a liar and deserves harassment. Yet her decision leaves me questioning her motives.

There is so much irony in this Penthouse bit, I don't know where to begin. Many people would call me an uptight, judgmental right-wing wacko if I called a woman who posed nude a slut. "They have a right to do that -- just because you don't agree doesn't mean women who choose to do that are sluts!" Yet I'm hearing the "slut" word being thrown all over the place regarding Paula by the same people who would ridicule a right-winger for disagreeing with someone posing nude. And how many people, who scream about her being a slut, will wind up buying the magazine and looking at the pictures?! On the other hand, Paula always stated that she didn't care about money -- that she only wanted to clear her name. Now, knowing that posing nude would probably hurt her reputation due to the Clinton scandal, the claims that she cared only about money, etc., she still chooses to pose nude for money regardless of what it would do to her reputation? The whole point of her case was that she wanted her reputation back - not money. I and many others who supported her (such as Anne Coulter - please read her article above) are left with a very bad taste in our mouth.

I still believe the idea that someone with a "lower social standing", who does not have powerful friends, has less of a right to bring charges against someone is wrong and elitist. That was the point of this campaign in the first place. I have not changed my stance on that position, but as for my opinion on Paula -- yes, that has changed. I'm sorry she chose this route -- while I don't dispute that she has the right to pose if she chooses, if she needed the money, I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who would have helped her, as they did before.

I'm sorry Paula -- I can't put up a web page supporting you on this decision.

This is the page that used to be he entry page for my Paula Jones site. That page is still available as it explains my reasons for starting this campaign, (which started in June, 1997) but this page now serves as the entry point due to the court ruling which took place on April 1, 1998, Paula Jones' subsequent decision to appeal, and finally, the settlement of the case. Who would have thought that this case would result in finding out what we have about our President? Thank you Paula.

For all those who have supported this campaign, I offer a heartfelt THANK YOU! This page will remain up, because even though the case has been settled, I, and others, still want to voice our support for Paula Jones.

More Resources and Articles:

This page has been featured in...

  • The Washington Post (Thursday, January 15, 1998; Page B05)
  • The Washington Times Weekly (October 5th, 1998 Edition)
  • The WorldNet Daily
Political Site of the Day