McKay Coppins book questions Rand's Christianity and alleges Doug Stafford plagiarized

TaftFan

Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
6,077
I came across the first article today and the second yesterday. They are both derived from the same, new McKay Coppins book.

dailycaller.com/2015/12/02/rand-pauls-religious-adviser-expresses-doubts-about-candidates-christian-beliefs-in-new-book/

The man tapped by Rand Paul to serve as senior adviser and religious liaison to his presidential campaign is quoted in a new book on the 2016 race expressing doubts about the candidate’s Christian beliefs.

Journalist McKay Coppins quotes Paul campaign adviser Doug Wead in his new book, “The Wilderness,” saying he is unsure what the candidate actually believes.

“My point is, I don’t know,” Wead says when asked by Coppins if he thinks Paul is a Christian believer. “I don’t think we can know. I don’t know if he knows.”

(The Pauls have long been Presbyterian but Rand recently joined a Methodist church in Kentucky, Coppins explains in the book).

The book goes into detail about how Paul — in Coppins’s words — needed a “crash course in conservative Christianity” in order to appeal to the evangelicals in the early caucus and primary states.

Coppins wrote that “the distinct dialect of right-wing born-agains was as foreign to [Paul] as Swahili.”

“To fix this,” the author continues, “Wead assembled a list of creedal buzzwords that would signal to evangelical voters that Rand was one of them — a sort of Rosetta Stone for Evangelicalese. Soon, with some tutoring, Rand was conversational.”

Coppins continued: “As evidence of Rand’s progress, Wead would later point me to a 2014 interview the senator had given in which he recounted his teenage conversion to Christianity. ‘When [Rand] said, “I accepted Christ as my savior,” an evangelical was hearing that he was born again,’ Wead explained. ‘But that’s not what he’s actually saying… In fact, he didn’t even say Jesus is divine. He didn’t say any of that! But that’s what is heard.’


When Paul named Wead a religious adviser in June, the candidate said in a statement: “He is an incredibly influential conservative and evangelical leader, and I look forward to working alongside Doug to solve our nation’s current moral crisis.”

Coppins also describes in his book how Paul, preparing for the campaign, met with Pastor Brian Jacobs in February 2014. The pastor asked Rand if he had met with other prominent Christians like Dr. Russell Moore, Bishop T.D. Jakes, Franklin Graham and Gary Bauer.

“Jacobs continued to rattle off the names of some of America’s most prominent Christian leaders until finally it dawned on him: the senator sitting before him had no idea who any of these people were,” the author wrote.

Jacobs was quoted by Coppins saying of the meeting: “I had to pick my jaw up off the table.”

According to Coppins, Paul explained to Jacobs: “I’ve lived in the Washington bubble for years, and I apologize that I don’t know who these people are. But that’s why I need your help.”

UPDATE: Reached by The Daily Caller, Paul’s campaign released a statement from Wead: “Rand Paul is a great man and a compassionate Christian. I have heard him talk about his faith publicly on multiple occasions, one of which was in an interview with Justin Machacek. In that interview, Sen. Paul makes it clear that he is a born again believer. Nothing I have ever heard him say privately contradicts the idea of his Christianity.”

(Saw this on Twitter)


buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/new-book-rand-pauls-chief-strategist-was-writer-behind-senat#.rqZ8OV55K

Doug Stafford, the chief strategist for Kentucky senator Rand Paul’s presidential campaign and a former senior staffer in his Senate office, was the culprit behind most of the plagiarized writings that went out under the Kentucky senator’s name.

That tidbit comes from The Wilderness: Deep Inside the Republican Party’s Combative, Contentious, Chaotic Quest to Take Back the White House a new book to be published Tuesday by BuzzFeed News reporter McKay Coppins. (Disclosure: I was interviewed for the book.)
Coppins’s book also provides a sometimes damning minute-by-minute account of how the senator and his office respond to a series of plagiarism accusations that came out over the course of a week in fall of 2013.

It started on Oct. 28, 2013, as Coppins notes, when MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow revealed a speech Paul at the gave evangelical Liberty University cribbed heavily from the Wikipedia entry for the movie Gattaca. The next day, BuzzFeed News posted a story noting the Kentucky senator had again lifted almost word-for-word the plot summary of the Wikipedia article for the 1988 movie Stand and Deliver.
Paul had yet to understand the seriousness of the charges, Coppins reports.

“But while Rand’s advisers understood the seriousness of the charges, the senator himself was convinced he was the victim of a fevered witch hunt,” he writes. “He thought the evidence of his supposed lapse in ethics was outrageously thin and nitpicky. He’d been recapping movie plots in these speeches, not reciting Tolstoy and calling the words his own. He felt certain that if he could just explain this in a neutral setting, his attackers’ petty animus and partisanship would be laid bare.”

In an interview with Fusion’s Jorge Ramos, Paul said the problem was merely about footnoting— leaving aside the fact the speeches were not footnoted on his website. At the time, a spokesperson similarly said to BuzzFeed News that “only in Washington is something this trivial a source for liberal media angst.”

Politico then ran a story alleging Paul’s 2013 State of the Union response had taken language from a Associated Press article. And as Paul raged, Doug Stafford, a senior aide to Paul began to panic, Coppins reveals. Stafford had been with Paul since he launched his political career and wrote much of writing that went out under his name, including ghostwriting Paul’s second book Government Bullies.

“He wrote at home and on weekends, in between meetings and during dull conference calls, on trains and planes and all throughout the long daily commute from and to his far-flung Virginia suburb,” Coppins writes. “From speeches to essays to op-eds to books, Stafford was in charge of it all — and his corner cutting was now costing them.”

Stafford invited Trygve Olson, another Paul adviser, in for a meeting, according to Coppins. Olson questioned whether Paul’s bomb-throwing response on the Sunday shows would be a good idea. Olson warned it would be a horrible move for Paul if there was more plagiarism.
There was.

BuzzFeed News posted on the Saturday night before Paul’s appearance that three pages of Paul’s book Government Bullies were lifted nearly word for word from a 2003 Heritage Foundation study. Subsequent BuzzFeed News stories would show he plagiarized in his Washington Times column and in Senate testimony. The Times would end Paul’s columns over the allegations.

The press would eventually die down, and Paul, clearly annoyed if not humbled by the turn of events would pledge to do better.
“It annoys the hell out of me. I feel like if I could just go to detention after school for a couple days, then everything would be okay,” he told National Review. “But do I have to be in detention for the rest of my career?”

Still, as Coppins later reveals, the incident didn’t dash Paul’s faith in Stafford, who ghostwrote Paul’s next book Taking A Stand.
“Many in the senator’s orbit had privately urged him to find a different ghostwriter for his upcoming book after the egregious cribbing in his last title set off a media firestorm,” Coppins writes. “But Rand, defiant and loyal as ever, stuck with repentant plagiarist Doug Stafford as his chief scribe. Stafford labored over the manuscript as if it were his own masterpiece: researching, writing, rewriting, carefully — very carefully — compiling citations, submitting the drafts to Rand, and then starting all over again once the senator returned the pages with handwritten notes scribbled across the margins.”

Reach for comment, Stafford told BuzzFeed News that Coppins’s book was “fiction.”
“I love fiction, so I am looking forward to reading more Washington media machine stories from ‘sources,’” wrote Stafford in an email. “Also I lived on Capitol Hill from 2011-2014 with a four block commute. And I avoid conference calls like the plague.”
 
I would say that only Rand knows what Rand believes. That said, I remember reading an article some time back where he was honest about his struggles with faith and doubt. Personally, I find that type of honesty very refreshing. However, I look forward to the day when it doesn't matter what a politicians spiritual beliefs are or are not.
 
Makes me even more of a Rand fan. I'm tired of these evangelicals putting people through a religious test and then crucifying them if that person doesn't measure up to their standards. I agree, I find it refreshing that Rand is honest about it, but honesty and integrity will get you nowhere with this crowd though.
 
Rand has done an awful job when it comes to appealing to evangelicals in the presidential race. Unbelievably bad, really. I don't know why, he seemed to have it figured out when he ran for Senate.
 
McKay Coppins is a small-minded @$$hole, Brian Jacobs a self-important clown

What is this obscene snobbery?! :confused:
Do "evangelicals" think they are the only ones that count as "real" Christians?!

If that is the case, fuck those condescending bastards and their whole highfalutin clique!
 
Rand has done an awful job when it comes to appealing to evangelicals in the presidential race. Unbelievably bad, really. I don't know why, he seemed to have it figured out when he ran for Senate.

It's quite apparent he has been walking the tightrope in this race. Somewhat different substance, totally different style. In his Senate race, he was the insurgent. In the presidential race, he has been the professor.
 
Rand has done an awful job when it comes to appealing to evangelicals in the presidential race. Unbelievably bad, really. I don't know why, he seemed to have it figured out when he ran for Senate.

Agree. His language is wrong, and his adamant support for theistic evolution was a bad move.
 
Rand has done an awful job when it comes to appealing to evangelicals in the presidential race. Unbelievably bad, really. I don't know why, he seemed to have it figured out when he ran for Senate.
Like some people I think Rand's religious beliefs are private to him. I feel that way personally, so I get it. My faith is personal and I generally only discuss it in very general terms.
My personal theory is that the religious right are big government Republicans that want to legislate morality, judge others and I can see where a libertarian (ish) person would not get in line there.
This writer is a sleeze bag and works for Buzzfeed....
 
When Rand toured Israel, did he go to the Church of the Resurrection while in Jerusalem? I have not found anything to say he did. That would be unfortunate. He should make this a priority if he goes back.
 
When Rand toured Israel, did he go to the Church of the Resurrection while in Jerusalem? I have not found anything to say he did. That would be unfortunate. He should make this a priority if he goes back.

Ronald Reagan didn't even go to Church while in America and he did just fine with Evangelicals. Hell, Trump is doing just fine with them and he can't even recite a single verse from the Bible. Rand is doing poorly with Evangelicals for the same reason he's doing poorly with everyone - his messaging is terrible and doesn't resonate at all with middle class white voters.
 
Ronald Reagan didn't even go to Church while in America and he did just fine with Evangelicals. Hell, Trump is doing just fine with them and he can't even recite a single verse from the Bible. Rand is doing poorly with Evangelicals for the same reason he's doing poorly with everyone - his messaging is terrible and doesn't resonate at all with middle class white voters.

Yeah, I wasn't speaking for Evangelics per say. I was just saying that for me as a Christian, it is unfortunate to see he didn't visit some of the most revered sites of Christianity while in Israel. But then again, perhaps Evangelicals (and Rand Paul for that matter) does not revere these sites and his not visiting doesn't mean much to them? I don't know. In all honesty though, I don't know that he didn't visit those sites, which is why I asked the question.
 
Last edited:
It's been pretty clear from day 1 that Rand is not an orthodox Christian. The thing is, neither is about 98% of so-called American Evangelicals.
 
Like some people I think Rand's religious beliefs are private to him. I feel that way personally, so I get it. My faith is personal and I generally only discuss it in very general terms.
I can understand that outlook. But he comes off very differently to the voters than he did during his run for Senate.

My personal theory is that the religious right are big government Republicans that want to legislate morality, judge others and I can see where a libertarian (ish) person would not get in line there.
This writer is a sleeze bag and works for Buzzfeed....

That doesn't change the fact that others who hold Rand's, or even stronger liberty views have done very well, and even won the religious right vote. Including guys such as Thomas Massie, Ron Paul, numerous other candidates on various levels, and even Rand himself. Its all about perception, you can sell deeply religious voters on other positions you hold. If he was running as the Rand Paul of 2010 he would be doing far better right now.

I don't think he's changed, but his style and strategy has. Maybe it will pan out, we shall see.
 
I can understand that outlook. But he comes off very differently to the voters than he did during his run for Senate.



That doesn't change the fact that others who hold Rand's, or even stronger liberty views have done very well, and even won the religious right vote. Including guys such as Thomas Massie, Ron Paul, numerous other candidates on various levels, and even Rand himself. Its all about perception, you can sell deeply religious voters on other positions you hold. If he was running as the Rand Paul of 2010 he would be doing far better right now.

I don't think he's changed, but his style and strategy has. Maybe it will pan out, we shall see.
Interesting you mention Massie...I live in his district and religion doesn't seem to have entered into things as much as fiscal and constitutional issues.
That said, Kentucky definitely has some very strong pockets of religious voters so perhaps Rand highlighted more of his stances for their benefit than he is now with a national campaign. I believe he has a spiritual nature and I believe him when he says that his faith guides him. And that's all I need to know really.
 
No he isn't.

Donald Trump Strikes a Chord- With Evangelicals

Well Trump was actually winning the Evangelical vote in September. I haven't seen more recent polling on this particular issues, but since his overall poll numbers haven't dropped any, I doubt the internals have changed all that much. At the very least, it seems Trump is more than holding his own with Evangelicals which confirms my longstanding belief that when it comes to voting, religion is nothing more than a proxy for culture and tribe.
 
Back
Top