[subego]

Enforcing laws against illegal pornography | Rick Santorum for President

Originally Posted by ricksantorum.com

Congress has responded.  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.”

I see this policy as... problematic.

On about a half-dozen different levels.

[chabig]

I think you're being too hard on him. His opinion is based on solid facts. According to his page:

"A wealth of research is now available demonstrating that pornography causes profound brain changes in both children and adults, resulting in widespread negative consequences."

If that isn't unassailable proof, I don't know what is.

[chabig]

Also, check out my location. Why last night when playing poker, I made a standard raise with pocket queens and got called by 2 5 off suit. That's more proof of masturbation-induced brain damage caused by widespread availability of pornography.

[besson3c]

And this dude is in second place.

How do you intend to prevent distribution of porn on the internet? While you are at it, could you stop the distribution of spam, malware, phishing, and YouTube comments? Hotel/motel TV? WTF, that is a drop in the bucket not even worthy of mention in relation to the internet, which you evidently do not understand.

Republican base (that which are into this guy at least) = Idiocracy (the movie)


Sane Republicans in here: are you a little embarrassed by this guy and people associating his beliefs with the same party you identify with?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Sane Republicans in here...

Sane Republicans vote Ron Paul. 'Nuff said.

You can have all the pron and weed you want.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Sane Republicans vote Ron Paul. 'Nuff said.

You can have all the pron and weed you want.

-t

Now you have me thinking about Ron Paul enjoying porn. Thanks a lot!

[chabig]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Sane Republicans in here: are you a little embarrassed by this guy and people associating his beliefs with the same party you identify with?

Not at all. This is just how politics is played on both sides. Politicians on the left have their own crazy beliefs and trot out similar stories to their voters. Here is an example of how a leftie might do it:

"A wealth of research is now available demonstrating that firearms ownership causes profound brain changes in both children and adults, resulting in widespread negative consequences."

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by chabig 

Not at all. This is just how politics is played on both sides. Politicians on the left have their own crazy beliefs and trot out similar stories to their voters. Here is an example of how a leftie might do it:

"A wealth of research is now available demonstrating that firearms ownership causes profound brain changes in both children and adults, resulting in widespread negative consequences."

And when was the last time that somebody who said this was ever in second place after this many primaries and caucuses?

[subego]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Sane Republicans vote Ron Paul. 'Nuff said.

You can have all the pron and weed you want.

Disclaimer to "'nuff said": only if you live in the right state.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

And when was the last time that somebody who said this was ever in second place after this many primaries and caucuses?

I was simply making a valid example. You can look up the answer to your off-topic question on your own.

[besson3c]

I think the plural for caucus should just be "cauc"

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by chabig 

I was simply making a valid example. You can look up the answer to your off-topic question on your own.

It was a valid example, but I was just making a point of my own: this weed ain't right this time around.

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by chabig 

Not at all. This is just how politics is played on both sides. Politicians on the left have their own crazy beliefs and trot out similar stories to their voters. Here is an example of how a leftie might do it:

"A wealth of research is now available demonstrating that firearms ownership causes profound brain changes in both children and adults, resulting in widespread negative consequences."

There are somewhere around 80 million gun owners in America, who own over 200 million guns, and that number is growing rapidly. I doubt that they're all Republicans.

As to Santorum (or Romney, for that matter), if he gets the nomination, Obama is a shoo-in for re-election. It's almost a comedy show, watching these people make fools of themselves.

Here's an excellent article on the difference between conservatives and the current crop of right wing nut jobs.

A Conservative Explains Why Right-Wingers Have No Compassion | Visions | AlterNet

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

As to Santorum (or Romney, for that matter), if he gets the nomination, Obama is a shoo-in for re-election. It's almost a comedy show, watching these people make fools of themselves.

Based on WHAT?

Obama's (bad) Record?
OBama's (non) moderate stands on the issues?
Obama voting to teach kindergarteners about stuff like masturbation when he was a legislator?
His friendship with domestic terrorists?
HIs longterm associating with bigots and America-haters?

Really, if you think that Obama ever came CLOSE to representing the values of regular Americans, you're living in a glass house throwing stones. Dispite this, Obama got voted in. Why? People wanted to give a new guy a try (and didn't want to seem racist). After a disastrous 4 years, low polling numbers, and most likely no votor remorse if they choose not to do it a second time (after voting a black man in), there's not a whole lot of reason for Obama to get another 4 years. Whoever the Republican is, they are pretty much just going to have to not totally implode to make a reasonable argument to change horses at this point.

I see A LOT of wishful thinking from people who not only don't share the values of the average Republican voter, but really don't have a lot in common with the average "American" in general since it's pretty much a "center/right" country.

Santorum wants to enforce the laws and Obama wants to skirt them? Yeah...the latter is a surefire winner, right there!

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Based on WHAT?

Prolly based on this:

Whoever the Republican is, they are pretty much just going to have to not totally implode to make a reasonable argument to change horses at this point.

They are.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Prolly based on this:

They are.

Not seeing it. At all. Not one of them is close to the colossal embarrassments Obama faced before even getting to November.

[Uncle Skeleton]

To be honest, I'm not surprised you don't see it. But then again your vote was never in contention to begin with, so in a certain way you don't matter.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

To be honest, I'm not surprised you don't see it. But then again your vote was never in contention to begin with, so in a certain way you don't matter.

There is no way Obama can compete with stupdendousman's phantom Obama policy positions.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

There is no way Obama can compete with stupdendousman's phantom Obama policy positions.

Nor his real ones.

The funny thing is that there are people who think that someone saying that they want to enforce laws already on the books is somehow controversial. The folks who would roll their eyes at such things were probably already Obama supporters to begin with, even with 4 years of evidence that he's not qualified for the job.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Nor his real ones.

The funny thing is that there are people who think that someone saying that they want to enforce laws already on the books is somehow controversial. The folks who would roll their eyes at such things were probably already Obama supporters to begin with, even with 4 years of evidence that he's not qualified for the job.

I think I'm going to write a stupendousman bot...

[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

The funny thing is that there are people who think that someone saying that they want to enforce laws already on the books is somehow controversial...

There aren't any stupid laws which shouldn't be enforced?

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

The funny thing is that there are people who think that someone saying that they want to enforce laws already on the books is somehow controversial.

Did you just fall asleep during history class, or what?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

Did you just fall asleep during history class, or what?

No. Did you fall asleep in debate class?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by subego 

There aren't any stupid laws which shouldn't be enforced?

I'm betting that there's a huge segment of the population who don't think making it harder for our kids to get pornography, isn't one of those. I'm also betting that a large segment of those that do would rather have a thriving economy and fiscal responsibility, if they had to make the choice.

Mounatain > molehill.

But if that sort of stuff is the best you've got, and you don't have a good record to run with, you've got to go with the hand you were dealt.

[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I'm betting that there's a huge segment of the population who don't think making it harder for our kids to get pornography, isn't one of those.

How would you do this without breaking the Internet?

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I'm also betting that a large segment of those that do would rather have a thriving economy and fiscal responsibility

Pissing away DoJ resources on this doesn't strike me as fiscally responsible.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by subego 

Pissing away DoJ resources on this doesn't strike me as fiscally responsible.

You're right. The DOJ has greater fiscal priorities, like selling guns to mexican gangs.

[Dork.]

People, we need to focus here! The thread topic is Rick Santorum, and why he's so obsessed with porn!

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I'm betting that there's a huge segment of the population who don't think making it harder for our kids to get pornography, isn't one of those. I'm also betting that a large segment of those that do would rather have a thriving economy and fiscal responsibility, if they had to make the choice.

Mounatain > molehill.

But if that sort of stuff is the best you've got, and you don't have a good record to run with, you've got to go with the hand you were dealt.

Santorum clearly wants to be the Culture Warrior in the race. He thinks he has an advantage over all the other candidates: After all, he believes in the right God (as opposed to Romney and Obama, who believe in the Mormon and Muslim God, respectively). And he really thinks that after four years of Obama, culture warriors will come out of the woodwork to vote for him in droves.

But I don't think it will work this time around. People are more concerned with the budget. Notice how Santorum goes to great pains to note that he wants to enforce laws already on the books? That's because he realizes that even his Conservative base won't go along with the idea unless he can convince them that it won't be a stealth expansion of government authority (and it won't cost any more money).

Plus, I doubt he'll win over many votes in the General Election based on this stance. I can't picture an Obama voter from 2008 saying "I would vote for Obama again, but he's just too soft on pornography for me to give him my vote." Nor can I see that stance winning many new voters. I predict that if he does get the nomination, we'll only see this mentioned deep down on the position statements on his website.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Santorum clearly wants to be the Culture Warrior in the race. He thinks he has an advantage over all the other candidates: After all, he believes in the right God (as opposed to Romney and Obama, who believe in the Mormon and Muslim God, respectively). And he really thinks that after four years of Obama, culture warriors will come out of the woodwork to vote for him in droves.

Huh? They all believe in the same God, or was this sarcasm?

But I don't think it will work this time around. People are more concerned with the budget. Notice how Santorum goes to great pains to note that he wants to enforce laws already on the books? That's because he realizes that even his Conservative base won't go along with the idea unless he can convince them that it won't be a stealth expansion of government authority (and it won't cost any more money).

If people are more concerned with the budget, then come the general election, Santorum would still be the better pick for anyone looking at this rationally.

Plus, I doubt he'll win over many votes in the General Election based on this stance.

It's the primaries right now. The candidates play to the choir in the primaries.

I can't picture an Obama voter from 2008 saying "I would vote for Obama again, but he's just too soft on pornography for me to give him my vote." Nor can I see that stance winning many new voters. I predict that if he does get the nomination, we'll only see this mentioned deep down on the position statements on his website.

True. He's trying to differentiate himself for primary voters. While I'm guessing he does want the laws enforced, I'm betting it's not one of his highest priorities and won't be emphasized later. Like I said...this really won't be that big of a deal in the long run. Obama still would be in one heck of an uphill battle.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

If people are more concerned with the budget, then come the general election, Santorum would still be the better pick for anyone looking at this rationally.

I don't think you can make claims to having some insight to rationality when you refuse to concede that you don't/didn't understand Obama's health care bill, despite claiming pretty vehemently that you do while your understanding blatantly contradicts reality.

[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

True. He's trying to differentiate himself for primary voters. While I'm guessing he does want the laws enforced, I'm betting it's not one of his highest priorities and won't be emphasized later.

So, you posit he's lying about his claim of "vigorous enforcement" merely for differentiation purposes?

Gee. What a defense.

[besson3c]

So stupdendousman, how will Santorum enforce this ban on porn on the internet? Maybe he could do the same for spam, phishing, and other stuff? It's about time somebody thought to make these things illegal!

[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

You're right. The DOJ has greater fiscal priorities, like selling guns to mexican gangs.

Let's see... you ignored my question and statement so you could imply I think something totally off-topic is okay.

[golf clap]

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Based on WHAT?

Based on reality. Look, I'm not a big fan of Obama, but the field running on the other side is nothing if not out of touch with most Americans. Romney doesn't understand working people, Santorum is probably the only true conservative running, but he's a theocrat, who would set women back a hundred years, and Gingrich thinks he's the smartest guy in the room, when he's not.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

Santorum is probably the only true conservative running

I don't think that most people could even agree upon what this means and who best represents this anymore. All this seems to mean is conservative = generic good, liberal = generic bad.

[subego]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

Romney doesn't understand working people

Santorum makes this look good.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I think the plural for caucus should just be "cauc"

Maybe we should call someone who attends a Republican caucus a caucasian....

[subego]

Let's keep the Asians out of this, shall we?

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Huh? They all believe in the same God, or was this sarcasm?

I'm being sarcastic, but I'm wondering if Santorum's supporters get the joke.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

I'm being sarcastic, but I'm wondering if Santorum's supporters get the joke.

Do you think that Santorum has replaced Bachmann as the poster child for batshit crazy politician?

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Do you think that Santorum has replaced Bachmann as the poster child for batshit crazy politician?

Not yet....

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Not yet....

Here's some quotage for you that might lead you to changing your mind:

"I was talking about the radical environmentalists," Santorum said, suggesting that they believe man should protect the earth, rather than "steward its resources." "I think that is a phony ideal. I don't believe that's what we're here to do ... We're not here to serve the earth. That is not the objective, man is the objective."

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Do you think that Santorum has replaced Bachmann as the poster child for batshit crazy politician?

Not yet, but he's working hard at it.

[OldManMac]

Some more lunacy from a Santorum supporter. You can't make this up.

Dating Fails: Santorum Supporter Says Women Should Quit Whining And Use Aspirin As Contraception - EPIC FAIL Funny Videos and Epic Fail Funny Pictures

[besson3c]

I guess I kind of understand the whole debate as to whether insurance providers should cover contraception, sort of maybe, but this whole thing has mutated into all sorts of weirdness in the news lately on a variety of contraceptive issues that seem like they belong in the early 1900s...

[Shaddim]

Of course, this means he has a porn addiction, probably hookers and blow too.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Do you think that Santorum has replaced Bachmann as the poster child for batshit crazy politician?

Nice. When you can't beat them on the issues, call them names. Par for the course!

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I don't think you can make claims to having some insight to rationality when you refuse to concede that you don't/didn't understand Obama's health care bill, despite claiming pretty vehemently that you do while your understanding blatantly contradicts reality.

Get back to me when you make an attempt to point out where I'm wrong, instead of just coming in and smugly crapping on a thread.

Originally Posted by subego 

So, you posit he's lying about his claim of "vigorous enforcement" merely for differentiation purposes?

Gee. What a defense.

No. It well could be both.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

So stupdendousman, how will Santorum enforce this ban on porn on the internet? Maybe he could do the same for spam, phishing, and other stuff? It's about time somebody thought to make these things illegal!

Don't know. 4 years ago I would have asked how the government can unconstitutionally mandate we all buy something. Somehow, the government finds a way.

[Dork.]

No, Bachmann still has the Batshit Crazy standard in my book. Santorum's statements do have a certain logic to them, even if he uses his logic to arrive at the wrong conclusions. Whereas I could never even begin to understand where Bachmann was coming from.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

Some more lunacy from a Santorum supporter. You can't make this up.

Dating Fails: Santorum Supporter Says Women Should Quit Whining And Use Aspirin As Contraception - EPIC FAIL Funny Videos and Epic Fail Funny Pictures

I pretty sure you're missing the point. Girls back in the day where told to use "aspirin". Put one between your knees and hold it there, thus making pregnancy impossible. It's sort of a joke. I think he's pointing out that the only sure way to keep from getting pregnant is to abstain.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I think he's pointing out that the only sure way to keep from getting pregnant is to abstain.

Some people believe it's happened once, why can't it happen again?