[youtube]5CaMUfxVJVQ[/youtube]
YouTube - ‪Wendy's Commercial - Soviet Fashion Show‬‏
YouTube - ‪Wendy's Commercial - Soviet Fashion Show‬‏
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Michele Bachmann promises to ban porn if elected President....
- Thread starter ninerbuff
- Start date
Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
In the immortal words of Eduard Bernstein, "The [Bolshevik] Revolution was killed by a despotic party, which was able to retain power by means of a military dictatorship. And if during these last five years until this day the Communist Party does not permit freedom of action to any political party Socialist or capitalist one sees in this very fact the tragedy of the position of this Party, because this fact bears evidence of its inner weakness.... They [the Bolsheviks] are creating in their own country a new capitalist order which differs from the one only by its being on lower level of culture. Soviet/Maoist porn would still not de-commodify it.
No, I don't. And here is why, even if I feel a bit disrespectful by implying that I must explain: the Dems are emulating the shock value tactics of the GOPs, true. But 1) far as I know, they fall short of actually giving power to nutcases - or perhaps you could more properly say that their nutcases aren't so appealing to voters; and 2) more to the point, I have yet to see something comparable to the self-satire of the most visible Republican names coming from the Dems.
And you would probably be right, were I satisfied with the Dems. But I am still waiting for the firm decisions from Obama and for Guantanamo to close.
I guess I will have to accept that little mystery from you. Because a mystery it is. Two, in fact. How come you are so convinced that I "chose a side", and how come you are so indifferent about how things actually happen while you dream of extreme freedom.
Which doesn't really end up solving much at the end of the day as far as I can tell, unfortunately. We still must take stances.
And now we each know the other's.
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Democrat darling Barney Frank, who allowed his male prostitute partner (well, not sure if he considered him his PARTNER, but he did hire him for sex and allowed him to move into his place) to run a gay prostitution ring out of his (Frank's) apartment.
Rod Blagojevich - Lord help us, what a goober. Besides sporting an incredibly stupid hairstyle, his list of missteps, misjudgments, and criminal acts is a mile long. In spite of his ridiculous behavior, he was RE ELECTED in 2006 as Illinois governor. He even served as the official federal liason for the Democratic Governor's Association in 2005 - so don't tell me he wasn't in good graces with his peers, even though his behavior - both public and private - was spiraling out of control.
Here we have Dick Blumenthal - and a more appropriate first name would be hard to find. Ol' Dick is a US Senator from Connecticut and to this day serves on the Armed Services Committee. Though he did serve a coveted stint in the Marine Reserves (I say coveted, because serving in the Marine Reserves was known to virtually guarantee that you would not be shipped off to Vietnam), he never saw a day of service in Vietnam, but on numerous occasions has said or intentionally implied that he is a Vietnam veteran. In fact, he obtained at least five military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and took repeated steps that enabled him to avoid going to war, according to records.
Can't say that I blame him for trying to avoid combat duty - but his repeated and intentional misrepresentations of his military service are atrocious.
You know - I could go on and on, and post scandal after scandal and weasel after weasel from BOTH parties - but it's just depressing. My point is that both major political parties in the United States are chock full of men and women of poor character. Is this really the best we have to offer? If so, Lord help us all.
Oneatatime
Huh?
No doubt in a few months either herself or a member of her family will turn out to have made a porn film or something similar. Seems to be what happens when a person takes a strong stance against a perceived pervesion.
Do we? In all honesty, I can't say I have figured yours quite clearly yet.
I am half-convinced that it is beyond me, in fact.
Normal people often find me inscrutable, but here it is in a nutshell:
- I see all groups as comprising human beings, who share common traits. And people will do what people do, regardless of what group they belong to.
- This means that if I see any trait (eg, dishonesty, compassion, incompetence) in one group, then I will find it in other groups (even nominally opposite ones)
if I'm open to seeing it.
- To identify with a group carries the risk that one will sing its praises, while being blind to its faults. This should be guarded against. So I see us Libertarians
as no better than Dems, Repubs, or Greens...or Xians, Jews, Muslims, Mormons, etc....we just have different perspectives & values. Alas, I am far from
enlightened, since I still have the petty & elitist feeling that we're better than Nazis.
- There's some philosophy out there which says something like "suffering arises from attachment to desires". (The name escapes me.) This rings true to me in
that I see people become attached to groups, & suffer a loss of objectivity towards members of their own & opposing groups. Tempers flare, emotions sour,
abuse is heaped, & sins are covered up. So I cultivate a disrespect for my own party, & dis Libertarians regularly. Yes, they are feckless gadflies, but they are
my kind of feckless gadfly.
Last edited:
Are you equipped to deal with extremes when you find them, however?
Ya! You betcha!
I am fully equipped fume & fulminate at offenders whom I find outrageous.
But that isn't the issue, is it?
I addressed your pointing the finger at Repubs, while casting a blind eye towards the Dems.
Last edited:
On the contrary, that is exactly the issue. I lack any confidence on your skill at recognizing, much less dealing with, true extremes.
Or to put it another way: you are free to call myself a partisan. I am at least just as free to call it a load, particularly since you don't seem to value your own opinion all that much yourself.
Or to put it another way: you are free to call myself a partisan. I am at least just as free to call it a load, particularly since you don't seem to value your own opinion all that much yourself.
Oh, well....I can't impress everyone.
It's not that I devalue my own opinions, but rather that I recognize & try to address their limitations.
I don't have truth. You seem confident that you have it.
I'd just say that we have different perspectives & methods.
Question: Would you say you're not partisan?
If you are, then towards whom, & against whom?
Last edited:
If the social conservatives keep this kind of crap up, they will insure the re-election of the worst and most dangerous president the U.S. has ever had; who rivals the abominable Jimmy Carter and the Dick Nixon. Woe, woe, woe, be to the United States for its foulness shall be great! 
Last edited:
T-Dawg
Self-appointed Lunatic
If the social conservatives keep this kind of crap up, they will insure the re-election of the worst and most dangerous president the U.S. has ever had; who rivals the abominable Jimmy Carter and the Dick Nixon. Woe, woe, woe, be to the United States for its foulness shall be great!
Jimmy Carter was one of the better presidents, not the worst O_O. At least he's nowhere near as bad as some of the loonies we've had... (Hoover, Nixon, Reagan, Bush Jr, and probably several of the guys from the 19th century that I don't know enough about)
In my opinion T-Dawg, Ronald Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton are three of the best presidents we've had in a long time. The Clinton years were very prosperous for the U.S., but we also had a balancing factor in those years, the 1990's, which was a majority of republicans in the congress and senate which forced Clinton to gravitate more to the center and more conservative in his policies if he wished to get anything done. Oh gawd, I would take Bill Clinton or even his ill-tempered wife any day of the week over Borak Hussain Obama!
Many Sages One Truth
Active Member
Oh great, the right wing has sunk to a new low in it's bid for total control of the people.
gnomon
Well-Known Member
Rick Santorum signed this pledge as well.
Now the FAMiLY LEADER, due to a fair amount of negative reactions to their remarks regarding African American children and slavery, have removed that part from the pledge's preamble. However, they left in the language about porn and still give a big **** you to gay people.
edit: To note. Gary Johnson called the entirety of the thing a bunch of nonsense. There's one Republican candidate who doesn't pander to the "it's about our children" crowd.
Now the FAMiLY LEADER, due to a fair amount of negative reactions to their remarks regarding African American children and slavery, have removed that part from the pledge's preamble. However, they left in the language about porn and still give a big **** you to gay people.
edit: To note. Gary Johnson called the entirety of the thing a bunch of nonsense. There's one Republican candidate who doesn't pander to the "it's about our children" crowd.
T-Dawg
Self-appointed Lunatic
I feel deeply disturbed by the fact that you can think that Reagan is good and that moving to the right is equivalent to moving towards the center, but this conversation is off topic...
How does Bachmann plan to ban porn? Even if it were within her power to do this, it would alienate many voters. While many people are vocally against porn in public, many of these same people view porn in private, and what they do in private is what's going to be voted on in the anonymity of the voting booth.
I personally am I social liberal and a conservative when it comes to economics. And when these social conservatives start vomiting forth their propoganda against what a woman has the right to do with her own body or when it comes to gays and lesbians, etc., and so forth I sometimes begin to wonder why I registered as a republican. If republicans could just stay out of our personal lives and consentrate on the primary problems which confront this great nation, that is jobs and economic stability, I think we would be much better off... however, I am not holding my breath. 
As for Bachmann, I don't see how she could ban porn, as such an act would be in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Remember back in the late 1980's the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Larry Flint in the case of Jerry Falwell vs. Larry Flint. This sort of thing has come up before over the past couple of decades and the SC has always ruled in favor of the FA.
As for Bachmann, I don't see how she could ban porn, as such an act would be in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Remember back in the late 1980's the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Larry Flint in the case of Jerry Falwell vs. Larry Flint. This sort of thing has come up before over the past couple of decades and the SC has always ruled in favor of the FA.
Last edited: