Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid loves to shoot from the lip... Or is someone else pulling the trigger?
What do recently crowned DNC leaders Howard Dean (DNC Chair) and Harry Reid (Senate Minority Leader) have in common? Apparently, they both love to "shoot from the lip." Howard Dean was the first to earn this stylistic distinction during the Democratic Primaries way back in 2003. Senator Reid, on the other hand, began his reign of terror in December of 2004, just before ascending to the Senate Minority Leader post.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Eric Berlin
Wall Street Journal/Washington Times/Fox/Bill O' R/Rush/Hannity/Savage... and the beat goes on.
Oh, and the "left wing" cable news nets are pretty well dominated by conservative/neo-con analysts nowadays...
27 - RealCon
Over the years that Buchanan was smeared most of the voters in this country got their news from sources other than the ones you referenced.
28 - RealCon
I take it that Eric doesn't believe Buchanan was smeared.
29 - Eric Berlin
I can't say for sure, but I find him to be really intelligent and really wacky all at once. He's incredibly incisive when analyzing the current political scene, but the second he veers into his own ideas -- particularly with regard to social issues -- I find him to be on the outer fringes of the right.
30 - Dave Nalle
Oddly I find him to be on the outer fringes of the left, Eric.
Dave
31 - RealCon
Eric -- How did you learn that he was “wacky”? If he's incredibly incisive when analyzing the current political scene, what makes him less incisive on other issues? And what are these other issues? I listed ten areas where he would have been far more preferable for the country than what we have gotten. What are his ideas that you object to? You are simply going along with the crowd that has been taken in by the left wing.
32 - Eric Berlin
No, I'm not, RealCon. You're assuming I'm "going along" based upon your own notions of the press and what it does to "people."
I find his ideas about the "culture war" in this country to be somewhat obnoxious and his positions on social issues (abortion, gay marriage, censorship, 1st amendment, 2nd amendment) to be the polar opposite of what I believe.
33 - RealCon
Eric -- There is a "culture war" in this country. Why deny it? Abortion and gay marriage do nothing to serve the country. Prior to their coming upon the scene the country was better off . It is a good guess that the gay marriage issue cost Kerry the White House. What are your issues with censorship, or the 1st amendment and 2nd Amendments?
I listed ten areas where the country would be BETTER OFF if Buchanan had become president.
This is the crux of the matter -- why is it avoided?
34 - Eric Berlin
I'm not avoiding anything. You accused me of being a sheep to the "liberal" media and I explained why I have a problem with PB. I agree with a few of the points on your list and disagree with the rest. However, PB's particular positions on social issues are what bothers me most about him.
35 - RealCon
Eric -- At least you are more forthcoming than most who blindly accept whatever negative comments are made about Buchanan. But the importance of the REAL ISSUES that Buchanan believes in has not been addressed. The discussion always tends to drift into the left wing social issues which have been promulgated by the liberal news media. Where is the discussion on the REAL ISSUES which are not supported by the left, and what is the relative importance of them? The country is not better off because of the left wing social downslide during the past several decades.
36 - Mark Saleski
"the country is not better off...."
opinions, all.
37 - RealCon
Very true.
38 - RealCon
Mark -- I am awaiting responses to your request for opinions on whether the country is better off as a result of the left wing social downslide during the past several decades. I doubt you will get any responses from the left because the answer is obvious -- the country IS worse off.
39 - Dave Nalle
The country is better off in every way that matters - which means the economy - than we were a few years ago. As for the 'moral' issues, they're all bullshit that scores about a 1 on the 1-10 scale of real importance to anyone - conservative or liberal - with half a brain.
Dave
40 - RealCon
The country is better off in every way that matters? That is real bullshit.
Since the emergence of a moral decline over the past few decades which was fostered by the liberals in this country, the following has taken place:
1. Drugs now permeate our society. The cost to fight these addictions is in the billions and hurts our economy in many ways. The loss in economic productivity is immeasurable.
2. Prostitutes which were once called “Whores” or “Sluts” now have a cleaned-up title and are referred to as “Call Girls“. They openly advertise themselves on the internet and newspapers and they pass around AIDS like candy. Although AIDS has yet to reach its zenith, it is already siphoning away medical resources and funding from more worthy causes.
3. Abortion has resulted in our population dropping by about 40 million from what it would have been otherwise…. Oops -- there goes the mainstay of our Social Security.
4. Since sexual intercourse between nearly anyone, married or not, permeates our culture, many of children in the country are born out of wedlock, resulting in many one-parent children becoming economic wards of the state. Some of unlucky ones are left in dumpsters but that doesn’t affect the economy so I guess that’s OK.
5. Many children who grow up without a father are much more liable to end up in juvenile court, or worse, and become a monetary drain on the country as well as as a danger to society.
6. We have a generation that believes oral sex is normal thanks in particular to one of our
liberal presidents. Who knows where this will lead economically. If it is combined with AIDS, there goes some more billions of taxpayer dollars and a drain on our medical resources.
Even someone with half a brain should be able to see the detrimental effects of a decline in morality over the past several decades.
41 - Dave Nalle
I'm glad RealCon is here, since his racism, homophobia and general intolerance makes those of us who are sensible conservatives look so much more sane.
>>1. Drugs now permeate our society. The cost to fight these addictions is in the billions and hurts our economy in many ways. The loss in economic productivity is immeasurable. <<
You think these drugs are a new thing? Are you not even a little bit familiar with history? With the Heroin and Cocaine use of the 1920s? With the evils of alcohol prohbition? The only answer for the problems of drugs in our society is legalization, regulation and treatment.
>>2. Prostitutes which were once called “Whores” or “Sluts” now have a cleaned-up title and are referred to as “Call Girls“. They openly advertise themselves on the internet and newspapers and they pass around AIDS like candy. Although AIDS has yet to reach its zenith, it is already siphoning away medical resources and funding from more worthy causes.<<
Prostitution is illegal and actively prosecuted in every state but one. There's no indication that it's been legitimized in any way. And once again, how about history? In the 19th century prostitution was just as widespread and unregulated and venereal disease was even more widespread and untreatable than it is today. Read up on Syphillis sometime. Again, the solution here is legalization and regulation and medical treatment.
>>3. Abortion has resulted in our population dropping by about 40 million from what it would have been otherwise…. Oops -- there goes the mainstay of our Social Security. <<
And this is a bad thing? The less our popualtion grows the more jobs, the fewer social problems and the fewer unwanted children to grow up to be criminals. Sounds like a winning plan to me.
>>4. Since sexual intercourse between nearly anyone, married or not, permeates our culture, many of children in the country are born out of wedlock, resulting in many one-parent children becoming economic wards of the state. Some of unlucky ones are left in dumpsters but that doesn’t affect the economy so I guess that’s OK.<<
Sounds like we need more abortions to me.
>>5. Many children who grow up without a father are much more liable to end up in juvenile court, or worse, and become a monetary drain on the country as well as as a danger to society.<<
Not a problem if we abort them.
>>6. We have a generation that believes oral sex is normal thanks in particular to one of our
liberal presidents. Who knows where this will lead economically. If it is combined with AIDS, there goes some more billions of taxpayer dollars and a drain on our medical resources.<<
This is an issue for parental responsibility. Are you saying that as a parent you're incapable of explaining to your kids that what Bill Clinton did was wrong, especially for those who are under age? I haven't had any problem explaining it to my kids or monitoring their activities closely enough to keep them on the right track.
Dave
42 - RealCon
You’re not really glad RealCon is here. That’s why you strain credulity and resort to epithets such as “ racism, homophobia and general intolerance”. This name calling is typical of left-wingers who have no valid argument.
1. Illegal drugs have become an epidemic since the 1970‘s. We had no DEA before 1973. Before that time drug use was trivial, not a national problem as it is today. Go look it up. Use historical facts -- not wild claims that come out of nowhere.
2. Prostitution has been legitimized by the liberal media. Prostitutes have movies made about them and they are glorified regardless of the fact that what they do is illegal, Liberal judges turn them loose as soon as they are booked, The recurrence of syphilis among prostitutes is a problem today. Read up on it. Your proposed solution of legalization, regulation and medical treatment doesn’t do anything for prostitutes infected with AIDS.
3. You say abortion is a not bad thing? Sounds like a winning plan to you? Hitler believed the same thing. He believed that not all lives are the same, and that one not positively valued can be destroyed. Killing undesirables sounded great to Adolf Hitler.
4. You say that we need more and more abortions? You believe that one-parent children who would otherwise become economic wards of the state should be aborted? You say it’s not a problem ---- Heil Hitler!
5. You say that children who grow up without a father should be aborted? You say, “Not a problem if we abort them?” I believe you could get the Iron Cross (First Class) and possibly a promotion to Reichs Fuhrer.
6. You say that juveniles who end up in juvenile court, or worse, and become a monetary drain on the country as well as as a danger to society should also be aborted? You say, “Not a problem if we abort them. But there is a slight problem here. By the time they are juveniles it is too late to abort them. Oh yes I forgot -- this problem can be solved -- a gas chamber can be used. Without question, this will get you a Blue Max from the Fuhrer.
7. You admit that what Bill Clinton did was wrong but in your dreams you also believe it has no impact on adolescents? Give me a break.
In a recent University of Maryland study, “oral sex occurs among 12 to 15-year-old adolescents, with 18% of adolescents reported having oral sex and 75 % of these reported having vaginal sex.” Few adolescents reported using barrier protection during oral sex. Most adolescents thought that penile-vaginal sex (96%) and penile-anal sex (81%) can transmit HIV, but only 68% thought that penile-mouth sex can transmit HIV.
I don’t recall this being a problem when I was growing up and now it is an epidemic.
Heil Hitler!
43 - Dave Nalle
>>You’re not really glad RealCon is here. That’s why you strain credulity and resort to epithets such as “ racism, homophobia and general intolerance”. This name calling is typical of left-wingers who have no valid argument.<<
I'd like the assembled multitude who endlessly lambast me for being an ultra-conservative to note that at this time on this day I was called a 'left-winger'. Scary, no?
>>1. Illegal drugs have become an epidemic since the 1970‘s. We had no DEA before 1973. Before that time drug use was trivial, not a national problem as it is today. Go look it up. Use historical facts -- not wild claims that come out of nowhere.<<
So then you agree that the creation of the DEA is the problem. If we scaled back enforcement and went with legalization we could return to the good old days before the DEA, right?
>>2. Prostitution has been legitimized by the liberal media. Prostitutes have movies made about them and they are glorified regardless of the fact that what they do is illegal,<<
Are you familiar with such novels as Madame Bovary and Camille and Moll Flanders? These are all about prostitutes and they all were written before 1900 and made into silent and then early talking films. So exactly how is the glorification of prostitutes in popular culture a new idea?
>> Liberal judges turn them loose as soon as they are booked, The recurrence of syphilis among prostitutes is a problem today. Read up on it. Your proposed solution of legalization, regulation and medical treatment doesn’t do anything for prostitutes infected with AIDS. <<
Not sure if you're aware of it, but we have a CURE for Syphillis now. Yanking the prostitution license of a prostitute with HIV would pretty much solve the problem if prostitution were legal - but with it illegal there's no recourse like that.
>>3. You say abortion is a not bad thing? Sounds like a winning plan to you? Hitler believed the same thing. He believed that not all lives are the same, and that one not positively valued can be destroyed. Killing undesirables sounded great to Adolf Hitler. <<
Wow, you sound just like a liberal. Don't agree with someon - call him a new Hitler. Are you sure you don't work for moveon.org?
>>4. You say that we need more and more abortions? You believe that one-parent children who would otherwise become economic wards of the state should be aborted? You say it’s not a problem ---- Heil Hitler!<<
Tell me how it's a problem - keeping in mind that I'm an atheist who doesn't give a rats ass about human life much less the life of a cluster of cells.
>>5. You say that children who grow up without a father should be aborted? You say, “Not a problem if we abort them?” I believe you could get the Iron Cross (First Class) and possibly a promotion to Reichs Fuhrer.<<
I'm pretty sure we don't have retroactive abortion technology, but I certainly don't have a problem with encouraging contraception for welfare mothers and encouraging them to have abortions.
>>6. You say that juveniles who end up in juvenile court, or worse, and become a monetary drain on the country as well as as a danger to society should also be aborted? You say, “Not a problem if we abort them. But there is a slight problem here. By the time they are juveniles it is too late to abort them. Oh yes I forgot -- this problem can be solved -- a gas chamber can be used. Without question, this will get you a Blue Max from the Fuhrer. <<
I know you're a bit slow, but my point was that if we keep the population of unwanted children down then the end result is fewer troubled juveniles.
>>7. You admit that what Bill Clinton did was wrong but in your dreams you also believe it has no impact on adolescents? Give me a break.<<
Did I say that? No. In fact what I said was that it's the responsibility of parents to talk to their kids and make sure they know it is wrong and that they don't do the same.
>>In a recent University of Maryland study, “oral sex occurs among 12 to 15-year-old adolescents, with 18% of adolescents reported having oral sex and 75 % of these reported having vaginal sex.” Few adolescents reported using barrier protection during oral sex. Most adolescents thought that penile-vaginal sex (96%) and penile-anal sex (81%) can transmit HIV, but only 68% thought that penile-mouth sex can transmit HIV.<<
Perhaps if they had comprehensive sex education from an earlier age this wouldn't be a problem? Of course, most reposnsible parents would make sure kids were educated on their own, but for the rest one of the few useful things government schools can do is make sure they are informed about contraception.
>>I don’t recall this being a problem when I was growing up and now it is an epidemic.<<
I don't know how it was in the 90s when you were growing up, but back in the 60s plenty of kids in their mid to early teens were having sex.
>>Heil Hitler!<<
You sure do seem to love to say that.
Dave
44 - Steve S
This name calling is typical of left-wingers
but that name calling came from a conservative Libertarian.
I don’t recall this being a problem when I was growing up and now it is an epidemic.
I doubt that it's the fault of the President. It's probably related to a million things like MTV for one. Also, I imagine the reporting/fact gathering is better today. A teen is more likely today to tell you the truth. Ask a teen in the 50's a question like that and they probably would have lied to you, fearing the switch at home.
Teens were promiscuous in the past too, but because there was no HIV, maybe you just weren't made aware of the fact.
45 - Steve S
I'd like the assembled multitude who endlessly lambast me for being an ultra-conservative to note that at this time on this day I was called a 'left-winger'. Scary, no?
This is a good example of someone going on the automatic assumption that since there is disagreement, then the person is an extremist of the other ideological side. I do it, it gets done to me, it's wrong, but it's not scary anymore.
46 - Dave Nalle
Exactly, Steve. It's the same reason that people for months on BC have identified me as a Neocon or a right winger solely because I don't like taxes and support the War in Iraq. Shows how you can look foolish for assuming a person's entire political philosophy falls into a neat little preconceived package just from one or two statements.
Dave
47 - gonzo marx
oh my stars and garters...
well, gentle Readers, you rhumble Narrator is almost flabbergasted by the diatribes spewed forth in the last few comments...so much so that i find myself forced into a public statement...
"RealCon" makes Mr Nalle seem...reasonable
you are aghast..i understand...think how i feel...i mean, we all know how much i enjoy some mental tussle with Mr Nalle..it iS all in good fun, tho we disagree in many respects..i have always found him to be internally consistent and at least open minded enough to listen before he launches into his patented rhetoric..
having done a bit of reading on RealCon's commentary here on BC i find it quite interesting that he is hurling out the "nazi" card so freely...there is an interesting thread on Pat Buchanon's "was world war 2 worth it" diatribe...and RealCon plays an interesting role..
so he wins today's Insidious Troglodyte award...may Bog, in his infinite Wisdom launder the greasy stain of his existence from the soiled underwear of BC...
but i digress...
for the "social conservatives" out there..let me lay the results of a recent study, done by your own folks on you..the source has been quoted with the figures a few weeks ago on Bill Mahr's HBO show..
of those high school children that signed the "abstinence pledge" in the last few years just over 50% have engaged in sex...approximately the same as the kids that did not sign such a pledge...
but wait ..there's more...
those "abstinence" kids were 6 times more likely to engage in oral sex
and 4 times more likely to engage in anal sex..
sounds to me that they, like many ethically challenged "born again" types found some loop"holes" in their contracts...
the preceeding was satirical and ironic in nature, not intended for immature audiences...pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..
we now return you to your regularily scheduled programming...
Excelsior!
48 - Steve S
I can't speak for anyone else, Dave but I consider you a conservative Libertarian, even though you are Republican. I also think of you as a neoCon though, because of a strategy you have, rather than a position on an issue. No matter the topic, you defend Bush. No matter the topic, you turn it into, at the very least, 'but liberals do too!'.
I don't see you as having neo-Con ideology though, more Libertarian. But you are more likely to defend Bush at all costs and just try and oppose every liberal viewpoint put forward, even if it is ultimately an issue you don't care strongly about.
Since in comment 46, you addressed how people perceive you, I wanted to give you my honest perspective.
49 - Dave Nalle
No question that I'm anti-leftist, Steve. You've got me there. I'm just not ready to forget about the sins of the past quite yet, when they could quickly become the oppression of the future.
But here's the thing, I'm really not a Neocon, because I don't actually subscribe to their all-encompassing expansionist foreign policy. My support for Iraq and the situation in the middle east is not a support for policy, but a support for the particular situation. Once we've sorted things out there I'm not sure we should be engaging in further large scale adventurism anywhere else - and that's what the Neocons apparently have in mind.
Dave
50 - RealCon
I know some ultra conservatives -- and Dave is no ultra conservative. But it appears he has the ability to fool some of the people most of the time.
Dave has the drug problem backward -- the creation of the DEA is not the problem. The DEA was created to SOLVE the problem because it had reached epidemic proportions.
Now Dave also wants to legalize drugs so that everyone can become a drug addict. Of course addiction means once hooked you stay hooked -- what a great country we’ll have when everyone’s brain is fried.
Now to justify our promiscuous society -- Dave drags out novels such as Madame Bovary and Camille and Moll Flanders to prove that the problem of having 50% of our children born out of marriage is unrelated to current social mores.
I guess Dave isn’t aware of the billion dollar industry called pornography -- which now involves children even younger than ten. Dave doesn’t know that sex sells and our liberal society has enabled porn actors to become millionaires because liberal perverts endorse it and there is no real outcry against this sordid business. Where did our porn industry come from -- Madame Bovary or Camille or Moll Flanders?
Dave believes that yanking the prostitution license of a prostitute with HIV would pretty much solve the problem if prostitution were legal -- just like we would have no gun crime if guns were legal. What would Dave do with an “illegal HIV prostitute” who was intent on continuing to ply her trade?
Now Dave sees he has really dug himself into a hole by saying over and over that undesirables such as children born out of wedlock, one-parent children and children who grow up without a father are undesirables and should be done away with. He says this “sounds like a winning plan”. I did not say that Dave is“a new Hitler” -- I said that his “winning plan” was the same as Hitler‘s plan. I said it because I cannot see the difference between his plan and Hitler‘s plan. Can someone show me the difference?
So what is Dave’s response to my reference to the similarity of his “winning plan” to that of Adolf Hitler’s winning plan? He says I am a liberal -- Fantastic! -- Dave -- when you get yourself in a hole you can’t get out by digging deeper. Calling me a liberal and bringing in stupid references to moveon.org will get you nowhere. Dave -- go back and look at what you wrote. You said it -- you own it. Admit you went off the deep end and said something stupid -- don’t deny what you said -- Don’t be a coward.
51 - RealCon
Now I find out that Dave is in favor of Bush's little war in Iraq. That shows he is really all over the lot. He says he is not a neo-con (read neo-facsist) but he supports the main agenda of this idiotic cabal. Would the real Dave please stand up and take off the mask?
52 - Eric Berlin
RealCon:
I'd love to see your proof that liberals are the only people along that political spectrum that are into porn.
Somewhat related: There was a great piece, can't recall where I saw it unfortunately, leading up to the RNC last summer in New York about all the prostitutes gearing up for all of our leaders rolling into town...
53 - Steve S
I'm really not a Neocon, because I don't actually subscribe to their all-encompassing expansionist foreign policy.
That's what I'm saying. You're not a neo-con in ideology, you utilize the strategics/tactics of neocons.
And now, with your disagreement with RealCon here, I see the tactic is on you as well. :-)
54 - Dave Nalle
>>Now Dave also wants to legalize drugs so that everyone can become a drug addict. Of course addiction means once hooked you stay hooked -- what a great country we’ll have when everyone’s brain is fried.<<
Studies actually show that there would be little or no increase in addiction if drugs were legalized, plus there would be greater access to treatment for addiction so that more people could resume a useful function in society.
>>I guess Dave isn’t aware of the billion dollar industry called pornography -- which now involves children even younger than ten. Dave doesn’t know that sex sells and our liberal society has enabled porn actors to become millionaires because liberal perverts endorse it and there is no real outcry against this sordid business. Where did our porn industry come from -- Madame Bovary or Camille or Moll Flanders?<<
Yep, pretty much. Porn started as literature, then erotic literature, then eventually porn. But you miss a couple of things in your prudish self-righteousness. There are already strong laws against child pornography, child molestation and even child labor. So how much MORE illegal do you think you can make child porn? So, that being proven a non-point, what do you think gives you the right to tell consenting adults what they can do on film or watch on film? Ever heard of the first amendment? Or is that one of the ones your constitution doesn't have?
>>Dave believes that yanking the prostitution license of a prostitute with HIV would pretty much solve the problem if prostitution were legal -- just like we would have no gun crime if guns were legal. What would Dave do with an “illegal HIV prostitute” who was intent on continuing to ply her trade? <<
Ever heard of criminal negligence? Reckless endangerment? We could make new laws, but we already have some which cover it.
>>Now Dave sees he has really dug himself into a hole by saying over and over that undesirables such as children born out of wedlock, one-parent children and children who grow up without a father are undesirables and should be done away with. <<
Which, of course, I never said. Not even close. What I did say was that with easily available abortion we would have fewer unwanted kids. Not at all the same thing.
>>He says this “sounds like a winning plan”. I did not say that Dave is“a new Hitler” -- I said that his “winning plan” was the same as Hitler‘s plan. I said it because I cannot see the difference between his plan and Hitler‘s plan. Can someone show me the difference?<<
Yes, but this exchange was entirely in your imagination.
>>So what is Dave’s response to my reference to the similarity of his “winning plan” to that of Adolf Hitler’s winning plan? He says I am a liberal -- Fantastic! -- Dave -- when you get yourself in a hole you can’t get out by digging deeper. Calling me a liberal and bringing in stupid references to moveon.org will get you nowhere. Dave -- go back and look at what you wrote. You said it -- you own it. Admit you went off the deep end and said something stupid -- don’t deny what you said -- Don’t be a coward.<<
You need to work on your reading skills. Do please point out where I said you were a liberal, because I sure can't find it.
Dave
55 - dietdoc
RealCon Writes: 2. Prostitutes which were once called “Whores” or “Sluts” now have a cleaned-up title and are referred to as “Call Girls“. They openly advertise themselves on the internet and newspapers and they pass around AIDS like candy. Although AIDS has yet to reach its zenith, it is already siphoning away medical resources and funding from more worthy causes.
Reply: Correction: They are called "Desperate Housewives."
[I return you now to the actual discussion]
56 - RealCon
Dietdoc... you are right - whoring has become so widespread and prevalent that it's become a household word -- thanks to the libertine takeover of our culture.
57 - RealCon
Dave now has to resort to “studies” to show “there would be little or no increase in addiction if drugs were legalized”. I wonder what Dave was smoking when he dreamed this up? He doesn’t realize that among other things, with legalization would come lower prices and this by itself would increase the addiction. Then he goes on to say that there would be greater access to treatment for addiction so that more people could resume a useful function in society, contradicting his earlier claim that his main concern is the economy. Where’s the economic benefit to having an addict treatment clinic on every corner of our cities? And I will say again -- what a great country we’ll have when everyone’s brain is fried.
Then Dave goes on to make his case that porn has always been around. Of course it has been always been around but not in epidemic proportions as it is now. It’s the difference between a common cold and deadly influenza. Both are caused by a virus but one is a greater problem by several orders of magnitude. There was a time in my lifetime when “God’s little Acre” was talked about in hushed tones. Now anything is mainstream. And my point is -- who promoted porn to the current point where it has a hold on much of our society?. Conservatives didn’t do it. If someone can’t see this, they are either blind or ignorant.
Dave is right -- there are new laws against child pornography. But the issue is who is responsible for the vast increase in pornography, not whether we needed new laws after the porn epidemic took place.
Then Dave makes my point when he says-- “so how much MORE illegal do you think you can make child porn?” The point is that without the increase in porn, there would be no need to make it “more illegal”. Dave wants to talk about the infeasibility of doing something to counteract what I said should not have happened in the first place. The issue now is who is responsible for having made it happen.
I did not say anything about what consenting adults can or cannot do in private. That has always gone on. The issue is the widespread extent and open promotion of this behavior now. What I have said is that the consequences of libertine behavior on a wide scale as we now have it, is detrimental to our society and economy because when children are born out of wedlock, our society as a whole suffers in many ways -- and diseases such as AIDS flourish. It’s disgusting that so many innocent victims of AIDS got it from a blood transfusion.
The FIRST AMENDMENT was intended to protect POLITICAL SPEECH, not PORNOGRAPHY. Does anyone really believe that the ORIGINAL INTENT was to protect PORNOGRAPHY??? Only an idiot or an extreme liberal could argue this point.
And then Dave resorts to “reckless endangerment” and new laws to support his proposal for legalizing prostitution in an effort to take care of “illegal legal prostitution”. More laws -- more government… All things we didn’t need before the liberals took over…
Then Dave tries to deny what he said about undesirables such as children born out of wedlock, one-parent children and children who grow up without a father. Dave says, “the less our population grows the more jobs, the fewer social problems… not a problem if we abort them… sounds like a winning plan to me.” Dave’s solution to “children becoming economic wards of the state… Not a problem if we abort them… Dave’s solution to “children who grow up without a father… not a problem if we abort them.”
Then Dave tries to exonerate himself by saying. “what I did say was that with easily available abortion we would have fewer unwanted kids“…In other words… children born out of wedlock, one-parent children and children who grow up without a father are “undesirables”. Now WHO else has advocated the elimination of “undesirables”. WHO else has done this? (I don’t want to put suggestions in anyone’s head).
And Dave now wants readers to believe this was entirely in my imagination. No Dave -- it’s what you wrote…
And finally, Dave claims that I need to work on reading skills and to point out where he said I was a liberal, because he sure can't find it. Maybe Dave needs some work to improve his reading skills.
What Dave did say to me was, “you sound just like a liberal”… and that is something that is totally ludicrous. Evidently Dave uses this device frequently enough to criticize REAL conservatives that he forgets when he says it
58 - Steve S
Dave now has to resort to “studies” to show
Why, the audacity!
Then Dave goes on to make his case that porn has always been around. Of course it has been always been around but not in epidemic proportions as it is now.
Porn has been around since man drew on cave walls. There have been images of erotic, and depictions of graphic penetration on pottery, ancient murals, all sorts of stuff. It is no more an epidemic now than at any time in man's history. We just have more media now with which to distribute the thoughts we've always had.
What is different now, is that there is an increase in those who cannot deal with said art being more vocal now than at any time in our lives. That's all.
59 - RealCon
Eric -- You want to see proof that liberals are the only people along the political spectrum that are into porn? Of course, they are not. I never made that claim. My point throughout has been that our society and culture have been subverted by liberals over the past several decades and it has been liberal (read libertine) thought, practice and effort that has brought us to the sad point where most of the population is now infected. When someone starts a fire in a building filled with people -- it is not only the person who started the fire who gets burned.
60 - Mark Saleski
also common since the dawn of time is that notion that society is going to hell.
bring back the 'good ole days'.
right.
61 - MDE
Ph*cking libertines. Keep 'em stoned and chained to porn screens, I say!
Mark
62 - RealCon
Steve S -- Cavemen drew “porn” on cave walls. But perhaps they were just creating their own primitive versions of “Grey’s Anatomy”. During the ages when peoples were crucified or sacrificed in an arena for the pleasure of the local citizenry, there was a lot going on that we do not now think is civilized. But what we have now is different than what we had between the time this country was founded and what we have had for the past several decades. We should not be captive to what cavemen or other people from antiquity did or did not do. We were founded as a country with certain ideals and these ideals lasted for almost 200 years. It has only been since the 1960’s that our culture has gone into a nosedive. And don’t blame the media -- that’s like blaming the gun for crime.
63 - Mark Saleski
right, don't blame the media, blame the liberals.
...because that's even simpler than blamin' the media.
64 - Steve S
Steve S -- Cavemen drew “porn” on cave walls....there was a lot going on that we do not now think is civilized.
To me, sex is as natural as eating food or breathing air. It is a part of our time here on the planet and so I don't think it's any more 'uncivilized' to have a picture of a sex act than it is to have a picture of a person eating an apple. Both are civilized depictions of humanity as I see it. I do refrain from having erotica on my pottery because of societal mores though, rather than my own thoughts that it is barbaric. Personally, I don't care about the picture on the plate; the plate having food on it, is the important thing!
We were founded as a country with certain ideals and these ideals lasted for almost 200 years. It has only been since the 1960’s that our culture has gone into a nosedive.
And I would say that the difference there is that racial minorities, women, gay people, the handicapped and a whole slew of others now have a voice that they didn't really have in the first 200 years. The culture we have now is a melting pot, a diverse culture of all walks of life. To you, it is in a nosedive. Not to me.
65 - RealCon
Mark -- I believe you missed my point -- I used the term "media" in the sense of the technology, i.e., the "hardware", not in the sense of the people in the business. That's why I compared it with the "gun".
66 - Mark Saleski
at this point, your 'point' doesn't matter to me, as it's based on the assumption that pornography (and other 'social ills') is dragging us down.
i don't agree with that assumption.
67 - RealCon
What I said about the decline in our culture has nothing to with racial minorities, women, or the handicapped.
The nosedive is in the culture, not in the rights of people where Amendments to our Constitution have been made.
The nosedive in our culture has not been achieved by any amendment to our Constitution.
68 - RealCon
Mark -- So you don’t agree that pornography (and other 'social ills') is dragging us down. Read history and see what made other civilizations crumble. Start with the Romans.
69 - Steve S
yeah, I wasn't talking rights or constitution either. I was talking culture.
70 - Mark Saleski
no, i don't.
there are a lot of problems with our society. porn doesn't make the list.
71 - RealCon
Mark -- You say -- there are a lot of problems with our society. porn doesn't make the list.
But saying it doesn't do anything about making a case for it.
72 - Mark Saleski
neither does just saying that we're headed the way of the romans.
73 - RealCon
Pornography and its companion -- sexual promiscuity -- is one of the primary reasons for the decline of the Roman Empire? It's a fact of history --not just something I'm just saying.
74 - Mark Saleski
and there's proof, not mere correlation, of the link between pornography and promiscuity?
don't think so (though i'm sure you can drag up some 'evidence')
75 - Realcon
Pornography has shown to be a strong factor in why serial killers committed their murders. Child molesters have been shown to be strongly attracted to porn. It has no other purpose than to sexually excite people -- which a normal person does not need. Most countries which are overpopulated don’t have porn.