Santorum jumps the shark. Pledges to make porn illegal

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Well, RINO's are not for small govt. If they were they wouldn't be promoting things like RomneyCare. Don't worry though liberal Democrats are not for small govt either, they just want Big Govt in a different way, they want universal healthcare and global climate change taxes, they want us all driving electric cars, and no homemade lunches for our kids at school.

edit on 17-3-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

As a Liberal (and also generally a Democrat...changed from Independent to Dem awhile back realizing a Liberal would never get into the white house). I will say this.
I want a smart government. I want government to handle things too big for me personally to even remotely try to deal with.
I can't pave my road..I can't fight a giant corporation dumping sludge into my canal I live on, nor spewing toxic smoke down the street. I can't fight invading forces alone. Othewise, I am good...

As far as the extra's they do. I like some of the concepts (such as universal health care coverege) due to an idealistic view of what we could accomplish. I do however see the corruption as a limiting factor. We will never be as good as places like Denmark..at least not under our current method of doing things. Lobbiests would have to be banned from washington. unfortunately, some lobbiests are good...so, you can't make a sweeping rule for all lobbiests, nor can you target individuals..so, the system itself may be too broken by design to ever fix properly for effective works such as UHC.

If I had to put a word on what I am...well, what I want to be..it is a Technocrat (Technocracy is the best form of government that we currently cannot implement...but it is coming).

A government too small and we have broken highways
A government too large and we have too much bureaucracy, corruption, and waste.
We need a streamlined and well functioning government. That however is a perspective that everyone will debate on in regards to size and numbers of departments.

Don't think you know a liberal. You clearly don't.

reply to post by SaturnFX


heh heh heh ask me if I care what the local fitness freak thinks about the chocolate ice cream in my cart

I would have a hard time going into a porn shop though.

Originally posted by JohnnySasaki
Well he basically just guaranteed himself not getting elected, lol.

Are these really the best people we could find for the job? I would laugh if it wasn't so damn sad.

Who is giving him political advice?

Going to Puerto Rico and telling them all to speak English was another bizarre event.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


Yes, that's for sure and Orwell is one of my favorite authors. He truly did see what was coming down the pike.

For those who don't remember what life was like before the internet, there were more book stores and you actually had to go to an adult store or flea market to get porn.

As long as you can go somewhere to get what you're looking for, your freedoms are not being limited. Yet, as soon as someone says you won't be able to access something online, everyone screams that their freedoms are being limited. No, nobody is limiting your ability to get into your car and drive to "Allen's Adult Outlet". People just have to stop playing the victim card every time they hear that they can't www. something.

Soon enough we'll be told what we can think, and cannot think (Thought Police), whom we can talk to and can't talk to. I used to believe in reincarnation... seeing how the world is turning to a police state very slowly, I never want to come back.

Unless porn stays the way it is...lol, I'm gonna download all the porn I can to preserve it for future generations!

If anything should be banned it's poverty and corporate greed.

I hate my 1 cup of coffee replies.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by jacktorrance

 

As I understand this, and please correct me if I'm wrong, Santorum is just trying to get hard core porn off the internet. I haven't heard him say anything in regards to purchasing it in a store.

He demands a crackdown on the distribution of hardcore pornography on the Internet, in addition to material on cable/satellite TV, hotel/motel TV, retail shops and through the mail.

Cable, stores, hotels, mail, etc.
no, all forms everywhere.
From his website:

Current federal “obscenity” laws prohibit distribution of hardcore (obscene) pornography on the Internet, on cable/satellite TV, on hotel/motel TV, in retail shops and through the mail or by common carrier. Rick Santorum believes that federal obscenity laws should be vigorously enforced. “If elected President, I will appoint an Attorney General who will do so.”

Basically, obscene porn, according to Ricky, is hardcore porn...ban it all wherever it is.
He says illegal porn, but he is very much saying all porn outside of soft stuff is illegal, as it is obscene (to him).

The rest of what your saying is under a wrong assumption...your still trying to find some shreds of sanity..there is none here.

Originally posted by Misoir
Those in government who proclaim not to have a religion – do have a religion. It is called Secularism. And they enforce it thoroughly on society.

That's nonsense on so many levels. And please...not running a 21st century nation on Bronze-age admonitions is hardly a religion.

Originally posted by Afterthought
As long as you can go somewhere to get what you're looking for, your freedoms are not being limited. Yet, as soon as someone says you won't be able to access something online, everyone screams that their freedoms are being limited. No, nobody is limiting your ability to get into your car and drive to "Allen's Adult Outlet". People just have to stop playing the victim card every time they hear that they can't www. something.

So instead of spitting on the 1st Amendment he just wants to limit it. I don't see that as a positive move.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

Well, RINO's are not for small govt. If they were they wouldn't be promoting things like RomneyCare. Don't worry though liberal Democrats are not for small govt either, they just want Big Govt in a different way, they want universal healthcare and global climate change taxes.

Don't worry about the global climate change taxes. The hoax has been exposed.

U.S. Senator James Inhofe has a great new book out. I already read the sample chapters

on Amazon.com after he was interviewed by Sean Hannity - Fox News.

It's called The Greatest Hoax.

Some guy selling a book went on a liar's satire show..yes, clearly this counters the overwhelming global scientific consensus.

Incidentally, who thought up cap and trade?

reply to post by SaturnFX


Thanks for pointing that out. I would like to hear a list of what he considers obscene. If he considers soap opera scenes the only acceptable porn, I have a problem with that.

If anyone is familiar with the Spice Channel, you'll know that they won't show any male genitalia or penetration. Is this what Santorum wants? I think this is discriminating to women.

I would not have a problem if beastiality, child porn, and truly violent stuff was regulated to point of it disappearing, but then the black market would still prosper. None of this stuff can ever be completely erradicated because (I believe) most of the elite do enjoy watching and participating in this stuff.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
A government too small and we have broken highways
A government too large and we have too much bureaucracy, corruption, and waste.
We need a streamlined and well functioning government. That however is a perspective that everyone will debate on in regards to size and numbers of departments.

Don't think you know a liberal. You clearly don't.

We are very in sync in our politics.

I'm still a registered Republican (of course I registered in 1967 when Republicans were still Republicans). I'm going to change it - but not sure what to change it to.

I always say "I like sewers"

Originally posted by Afterthought
None of this stuff can ever be completely erradicated because (I believe) most of the elite do enjoy watching and participating in this stuff.

OR, making a pantload of money off of it.

reply to post by intrepid


If you're too embarrassed to go into a sex shop, that's your problem. You're causing your own limitations at this point.

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by tooo many pills

How is this guy basically the frontrunner for conservatives?

THIS.

He isn't - Ron Paul is. It's just that the GOP and MSM have led you to believe otherwise.

Conservatism is defined by the people who shape conservatism, not by the ideas in your
head. This is conservatism, while Ron Paul is a small portion of it.

You should stick to topics you are familiar with, like Marxism. I suppose you think the MSM is totally unbiased as well.

Unfortunately, reality has a liberal bias, I cannot help it that conservatives can't except reality.
Conservatism is Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran, burn the gays, ban the porno, stick cameras in the
women, color coded terror charts as well as some of Ron Paul's ideas. You can't handle the
truth so you live in perpetual denial. When you vote for the candidate that does and advocates
for exactly those things you deny are you being a RINO?

You've just described the classic liberal characterization of conservatives, an exaggerated caricature that has absolutely no basis in reality. Burn gays? Really? Isn't that a bit dramatic? And I see you couldn't help yourself with the Ron Paul bashing. It's a compulsion with you.

Also, don't presume to know what I am. If you did know me, you'd learn that we would probably agree on more things than disagree, but you insist on taking the faaaaaaaar left stance on every single topic on this site, which makes me believe that you are either an operative, or just plain dumb.

reply to post by SaturnFX


I appreciate the concept of govt handling certain things...as you say paving roads and such(that's mainly local govt anyway not the federal) but, there's no reason for a climate change tax as that's completely bogus to begin with. Sure, Love Canal was a bad, toxic place and there have to be some reasonable regulations on stuff. I never said I was for no govt, just Big Govt. The govt has no place telling us we have to buy health insurance, and they have no business taking over the health care of the country. I am wildly against Universal healthcare(otherwise known as socialist healthcare) and wildly against the govt telling doctors where they can practice and what kind of practice they can do, as that is down the road a bit further, it's just the public doesn't know it yet.

Oh yes, and I forgot to mention, we have big govt now and the highways and bridges are still crumbling in a great many areas. Last year there was no grass planted along the highways here and the sandy soil was exposed. This is because govt is overspending on stuff we can't afford and the spillover goes to local govts too.

Originally posted by Afterthought
If you're too embarrassed to go into a sex shop, that's your problem. You're causing your own limitations at this point.

I would be causing my own limitations because someone has decided that the 1st Amendment doesn't apply to the internet? This goes beyond morality. This is treading on the Constitution. If you can't see a problem with that I don't know what to say.

Santorum actually jumped the shark some time ago, perhaps 6 weeks ago when he said that he wanted women to give birth to their rapists' babies.

He's already alienated gays - a substantial demographic that wasn't very concerned about birth control & abortion - and now he's alienated women (and presumably married men). If he gets the nomination, we might as well have Obama's second inaugural on Labor Day.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
People who say there is no such thing as addiction should just consider themselves lucky they don't have an addictive gene. But just because you don't have an addictiver personality, doesn't mean the condition doesn't exist.

Oh, no...there is addiction for many things. Alcoholism, Drug abuse, etc.
I am saying you cannot become addicted to an emotion..well, you can I guess, but it is not destructive and is pretty much the easiest thing to quit without consequences.

As far as my personal vices. I come from a line of alcoholism and drug abuse (pretty sure thats the same thing actually).
I was well on the path to becoming an alcoholic, and even had a point where I was saying I was out of control and an alcoholic.
I had a moment of clarity one day and decided I really enjoy drinking and wanted to be able to have drinks right up until I die.
So, in order to accomplish that, I could never quit drinking..so, I slowed down
Now, I have about a glass of wine maybe once a month (equivilent, actually its less than that..I have a goal however of having 2 glasses in the evening...just can't seem to find the focus for that to set into habit).
But, on a dime I changed, simply because I decided to drop the helpless programming everyone gave me about my genetic predisposition.

Again, not saying addiction doesn't exist. I do however think people encourage a helpless feeling to trap someone within an addiction once they are there.
There was something absolutely stunningly retarded that Nancy Reagan said.."Just say no".
The more I think about it though, the more it seems the best sort of psychology..not that specific line mind you, but the simple ..just decide not to aspect does actually merit some respect. We are as weak as we allow ourselves to be.

We are all different though, as you say. I however think that training by society makes more victims than need be.
First thing they try to tell you in AA is that you can't do it alone.
Why the hell not? Are they Gods whom have understanding about all humans?
I think I proved them wrong.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by intrepid

 

If you're too embarrassed to go into a sex shop, that's your problem. You're causing your own limitations at this point.

If you think someone with a moral standing which prevents them from strolling into a sex shop unashamed has a problem, then YOU'RE the one with the problem. Don't judge other people's morality.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Can you or anyone tell me why everything has to be online?

What about the independently owned adult porn stores? Everyone always wants to keep the "mom and pop" stores from going under, so isn't the internet going to kill these stores?

I guess everyone won't be happy until you are forced to get everything online.

Slippery slope indeed.

You have said something I agree with -yay's-

The internet has slaughtered main street. What can be done about it?
nothing much.
But oh well.