Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Jamie B on March 18, 2012, 01:45:15 PM
-
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/santorum-renews-promise-root-obscene-pornography-163813068.html
As president, Santorum says he would instruct his attorney general to prosecute those who distribute content his administration deems "obscene."
Santorum, however, has yet to provide a specific definition of what kind of pornography his attorney general would prosecute.
Lord help us.
I don't recall a national referendum requesting Santorum to be the conscience of the US.
If I need someone to tell me what to do, say, or read, I will ask SWMBO.
-
ANYONE BUT OBAMA!
-
Sometimes the devil you know is better than the devil that you don't. ???
-
There goes 90% of California's economy :laugh:.
-
War on Poverty
War on Drugs
War on Terror
War on Sex
;/
-
Ayep. And he means it.
We booted him out of PA. Please do not let him back into power.
-
Well this just means Romney will be the nominee.
-
My gawds... this guy might just be enough to make me vote for the big 0...
-
Looks like the GOP misses the point yet again....makes Newt's Mars base look reasonable....
-
And he just made my choice easier. One, regardless of material at hand, that's a freedom encroachment that is intolerable. Two, the fact he would do it via executive power, and three, that he feels it's important at all.
While nothing will make me vote for O, this limits my choice to "not O" (mitt). As regardless of what I feel about Romney (he sucks), until we have a decent candidate, I will take ANYONE that is in any way right of O, as I am truly worried by what he might do if given a second term.
I honestly wish Hillary had beaten him...she at least would have likely taken her husbands lead and triangulated to retain power...not exploit our nations idiocy to do so.
-
:facepalm:
What a time for the repukes to screw things up........ :mad:
-
Ayep. And he means it.
We booted him out of PA. Please do not let him back into power.
Someone needs to tell him that he is not the Golden Child of conservative politics.
-
Well this just means Romney will be the nominee.
Not according to Ricky!
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/17/10737243-rick-santorum-if-i-win-the-illinois-primary-i-win-the-nomination
Rick Santorum: If I win the Illinois primary, I win the nomination
Ricky, thy name is *expletive deleted*bag! He is truly a legend in his own mind.
The worse part is that he is Catholic, and is giving us Catholics a bad name.
-
From a personal moral stand point, I actually agree with him. But, what business is it of the governments? Especially what business of it of the executive office if not passed into law by the congress?
Legislating morality doesn't work. It's never worked and it never will work. The state church sounds well and good....so long as you're in agreement of course. Sure sucks to be a Catholic when the King decides he wants a divorce.
-
There were a lot of concerns regarding JFK's Catholicism when he was running.
I saw a replay of the speech that he gave, advising that the Vatican would not rule his decision making as POTUS.
Obviously, he was specifically not worried about the 7th and 10th Commandments.
-
If I brought up the fears people expressed about John Kennedy's religion, we would all happily excoriate those people for being bigots and rubes and fear-mongerers.
But fear-mongering about present-day candidates' religion passes for sophisticated, moderate politics.
Sorry to quote from a different thread but it reminded me of a previous Santorum discussion. It seems that the "fear-mongering" surrounding him may not be unfounded.
-
[Scratches head] OK, just what can the Justice Department do about "obscenity"? According to the article, he thinks the Bush administration enforced the law, and he wants to do what the Bush administration did. If the Bush admin. shut down the porn industry, I don't recall hearing about it. ???
Sorry, Dittohead, just sounds like more fear-mongering. Not that I want the president to go after pornographers, but it seems like another molehill masquerading as a mountain.
Well this just means Romney will be the nominee.
Meh. The establishment press usually decides how important each issue will be. We'll see.
-
Sorry, Dittohead, just sounds like more fear-mongering. Not that I want the president to go after pornographers, but it seems like another molehill masquerading as a mountain.
You're wrong. That thread was all about how Santorum would in fact try to push his morality on the rest of the country, and this is just one example of how he would do so. Santorum is exactly that type of politician, it's part of the reason we tossed him out of office in PA.
-
From a personal moral stand point, I actually agree with him. But, what business is it of the governments? Especially what business of it of the executive office if not passed into law by the congress?
Legislating morality doesn't work. It's never worked and it never will work. The state church sounds well and good....so long as you're in agreement of course. Sure sucks to be a Catholic when the King decides he wants a divorce.
Legislating morality works very well -- when the majority agree on the "morality." What do you think laws prohibiting murder are about?
The problem is pornography is a dicey subject. Even a renowned justice once quipped he couldn't define it but "knew it when he saw it."
To most people, this election cycle seems primarily about the state of the economy and a 16 trillion dollar debt. Considering the difficulty of removing a sitting president, it's better to concentrate on those issues.
-
You're wrong. That thread was all about how Santorum would in fact try to push his morality on the rest of the country, and this is just one example of how he would do so. Santorum is exactly that type of politician, it's part of the reason we tossed him out of office in PA.
I didn't dispute that. I'm saying there's a lot of exaggeration going on here, both as to how much he's actually going to attempt, and how much power he would really have to do all that.
He said he wants to emulate Bush II on this. What was Bush doing about pornography that was so dreadful?
-
I think I saw the video of him emulating dubya II.
It was on EyeTalibanStallion.com
-
He said he wants to emulate Bush II on this. What was Bush doing about pornography that was so dreadful?
Not downloading it personally? Yeah, that's downright unAmerican.
So many skirts over so many heads in just one thread.
-
I didn't dispute that. I'm saying there's a lot of exaggeration going on here, both as to how much he's actually going to attempt, and how much power he would really have to do all that.
He said he wants to emulate Bush II on this. What was Bush doing about pornography that was so dreadful?
As a person involved in PA, no. It is not exaggeration. He really does believe what he says. He may not have the legal backing to do a tenth of what he wants, but he would try anyways. He's not above breaking rules for personal advantage. He would do so fully believing he was morally justified.
Bush did the expected thing. Say the right things to pander to the religious vote bloc, toss them a few sops, but do nothing substantial. Which is the preferred notion. Oh, libertarian utopia, politicians would mind their own business and stick to their own debauchery. Real world, a lot of Americans socially and publicly frown on sin but get very angry if their "sins" are impacted. If Santorum could magically make all porn disappear, he would be thrown out of office within hours
-
I didn't dispute that. I'm saying there's a lot of exaggeration going on here, both as to how much he's actually going to attempt, and how much power he would really have to do all that.
He said he wants to emulate Bush II on this. What was Bush doing about pornography that was so dreadful?
Here's what Santorum's website said he would do:
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.”
http://www.ricksantorum.com/enforcing-laws-against-illegal-pornography
-
Huh. OK. Doesn't seem like the best use of the AG's time. Still funny that enforcing current law is characterized as "imposing his morality on us!!1"
-
Two issues.
1. As you know full-well, anti-freedom should not be enforced. I am sure Revdisk et. al would prefer the AG ignore the issue as he does with Obama.
2. I think you and I agree that a law like this allows for very wide discretion. It appears that Santorum intends for it to be interpreted widely and enforced vigorously. This seems to be against... most people's concept of individual liberty.
Individual liberty is the most important political issue, is it not?
-
Huh. OK. Doesn't seem like the best use of the AG's time. Still funny that enforcing current law is characterized as "imposing his morality on us!!1"
How about using the AG to enforce the laws that gov't agencies are violating now?.....
-
How about using the AG to enforce the laws that gov't agencies are violating now?.....
Or tax laws for WH employees.......
-
OK... does anyone else remember what Bush's first AG did with the statue of Justice? Is THAT what we think needs to be addressed?
-
Makes sense for him. Have any of you come across his comments on Libertarians?
I didn't think he'd be dumb enough to say it, though. He's hands-off on contraception, but hands-on on porn?
-
Makes sense for him. Have any of you come across his comments on Libertarians?
I didn't think he'd be dumb enough to say it, though. He's hands-off on contraception, but hands-on on porn?
Wouldn't be the first to be "hands-on" WRT porn. :angel:
"Look Honey, no hands!"
-
Makes sense for him. Have any of you come across his comments on Libertarians?
No. I'm guessing, he don like 'em?
I didn't think he'd be dumb enough to say it, though. He's hands-off on contraception, but hands-on on porn?
Playing to the evangelical vote, that cares a lot more about dirty pictures than contraception.
-
Huh. OK. Doesn't seem like the best use of the AG's time. Still funny that enforcing current law is characterized as "imposing his morality on us!!1"
No, it does not seem like the best use of the AG's time. And that is a legitimate concern. Time spent on an anti-pornography campaign is time not spent on other activities.
And yes, it would be accurately characterized as imposing his morality on us. "Pornography" has numerous grey areas. It is fairly obvious that "hardcore" porn is porn. What about pictures of nekkid folks? Tasteful nekkid folks? Not tasteful nekkid folks? Medical journals? How do you write up the EXACT legal definition to cover the situation?
Of course, that's a trick question. Pornography laws, with exceptions of certain categories (involving nonconsent, etc), are properly not valid as the federal government has no standing to limit freedom of speech, which covers written and artistic works. Even commercial ones. Just because a law was passed does not mean it holds water under the Constitution. More than a few laws are ignored by the executive and judicial branches because they KNOW it won't hold water, too hard to enforce, will make them look like a laughing stock, politically incorrect to enforce, etc. Use taxes, Robo-Signing, illegal immigration, etc.
Of course, SCOTUS does not always rule in favor of the Constitution either, and is not particularly loath to invent legal doctrine out of thin air. Categories of judicial review were invented in 1938, and basically determine how easily a Constitutional right can be infringed. Korematsu v. United States "legalized" internment. Dred Scott v. Sandford "legalized" slavery.
So yes, intentionally enforcing laws historically not enforced is a deliberate political statement.
No. I'm guessing, he don like 'em?
Playing to the evangelical vote, that cares a lot more about dirty pictures than contraception.
No, he does not like libertarians, and sees them as contrary to the interests of the Republican Party specifically and the United States generally. Yes, he is playing the religious (not just evangelical) vote. But you misunderstand him. He believes what he says. That is what makes him more of a concern than the average politician.
"Nothing worse than a monster who thinks he's right with God." - Captain Malcolm Reynolds
While obviously, Mr Santorum is not a monster. But he does honestly, no kidding, believe his beliefs are absolute right and all contrary beliefs are absolute wrong. And that God would directly back his beliefs. Thus he does believe any violations of the law and the Constitution in implementing his beliefs upon the citizenry would be valid. He's not stupid, he was a career politician. But anything he could implement, he would.
-
I was unaware that so many people thought porn policy was such an important part of a presidential platform. Sorry if I'm not going to lose any sleep over Santorum's campaign promises on same.
-
Makes sense for him. Have any of you come across his comments on Libertarians?
I didn't think he'd be dumb enough to say it, though. He's hands-off on contraception, but hands-on on porn?
That's a thread win! =D
-
I was unaware that so many people thought porn policy was such an important part of a presidential platform. Sorry if I'm not going to lose any sleep over Santorum's campaign promises on same.
Nor should you. But... If everyone from PA warns you he is very bad news, and he does become the Republican's great hope for POTUS... That will be an interesting day.
He would be a more worrisome POTUS than Obama. Obama is a Chicago politician. SOME part of him still knows he's just another shyster politician telling folks what they want to hear. Admittedly, far less than would be healthy. Santorum has no voice in the back of his mind whispering "Hominem te esse memento".
-
Just fyi, but Romney's campaign platform website statement about enforcing federal obscenity laws is almost exactly the same as Santorums. Of course you could argue that he doesn't really mean it (God knows he has a history of that) but officially the two are the same.
-
Nor should you. But... If everyone from PA warns you he is very bad news, and he does become the Republican's great hope for POTUS... That will be an interesting day.
He would be a more worrisome POTUS than Obama. Obama is a Chicago politician. SOME part of him still knows he's just another shyster politician telling folks what they want to hear. Admittedly, far less than would be healthy. Santorum has no voice in the back of his mind whispering "Hominem te esse memento".
Interesting is a kind word.
The only voice in his head seems to tell him to 'keep talking, POTUS King', as opposed to 'Engage brain before mouth, Ricky'!
-
So is Santorum worse than Romney now? I'm already not voting for Romney, due to health care. I'm still willing to vote for Santorum. (in the general election, if one of the two wins the primary)
What say the rest of you?
-
I'd not vote for either, although Romney's prostitute-like willingness to fake whatever his client wants almost makes me go for him.
-
Nor should you. But... If everyone from PA warns you he is very bad news, and he does become the Republican's great hope for POTUS... That will be an interesting day.
He would be a more worrisome POTUS than Obama. Obama is a Chicago politician. SOME part of him still knows he's just another shyster politician telling folks what they want to hear. Admittedly, far less than would be healthy. Santorum has no voice in the back of his mind whispering "Hominem te esse memento".
Santorum isn't my answer, but you see a different--that is to say, humbler and saner--Obama than I do.
-
Nor should you. But... If everyone from PA warns you he is very bad news, and he does become the Republican's great hope for POTUS... That will be an interesting day.
He would be a more worrisome POTUS than Obama. Obama is a Chicago politician. SOME part of him still knows he's just another shyster politician telling folks what they want to hear. Admittedly, far less than would be healthy. Santorum has no voice in the back of his mind whispering "Hominem te esse memento".
Rather large and unsupported assumption. Ol' Jug Ears has been told he walks on water for decades. His every act signals he believes his own hype. His wife promised we would have no choice but to change once he was elected.
The goes-to-mass-and-confess every week R Catholics (the "Catholic Wing of the R Catholic Church") do seem have an understanding of Original Sin, and usually have an understanding of their own wretchedness before their Lord. It is the theological liberals that think their shinola don't stink. Preaching good morality is not necessarily a sign that someone is unaware of their own foibles.
-
the "Catholic Wing of the R Catholic Church
Guffaw. Like.