Wow. I thought I was tough but fair on Romney in my NRO piece; if you want to see tough and unfair, look at the AP headline on this story, “Romney criticized for hotel pornography.”

Like he was in it.

The objection – that when Romney was on Marriott’s board of directors, he should have led some sort of crusade to get it out of the company’s hotel rooms – doesn’t carry much weight. And some of the criticisms of the candidate and the company are pretty hyperbolic:

“Marriott is a major pornographer. And even though he may have fought it, everyone on that board is a hypocrite for presenting themselves as family values when their hotels offer 70 different types of hardcore pornography,” said Phil Burress, president of Citizens for Community Values, an anti-pornography group based on Ohio.

Thought one: No, Marriott is not a pornographer; they offer people rooms with television sets. Sure, they offer pornography as part of a menu of options you can watch on those television sets, but er, my understanding is that they’re child-locked and customers have to seek it out, they’re not going to encounter Debbie Does Whereever just by flicking through the channels.

Thought two: They counted how many different types of hardcore pornography?

Look, if you don’t like pornography, don’t watch it. I think Romney lays out a pretty reasonable position here:

“I am not pursuing an effort to try and stop adults from being able to acquire or see things that I find objectionable; that’s their right. But I do vehemently oppose practices or business procedures that will allow kids to be exposed to obscenity,” the former Massachusetts governor said.

Keep it away from kids, and let adults seek it out if they so choose.