Posted on 06/14/2007 6:16:09 AM PDT by jacknhoo
Hillary and Porn By Sarah Rode June 13, 2007
In Hillary Clinton’s America, pornography would be legal, accessible and protected. That’s the way it was while her husband was president, according to a woman who would know.
Jenna Jameson is a multi-millionaire feminist businesswoman who has endorsed Hillary because under the Clinton administration her industry flourished. She is very critical of President Bush because his administration has not been kind to her line of work — the production and sale of pornography. Despite branching out into some mainstream projects, Miss Jameson is still considered one of the most famous porn stars around. She said in a recent interview, “The Clinton administration was the best years for the adult industry, and I wish that Clinton would run again.” I suppose she would know.
President Bush has been routinely critiqued for not doing enough to crack down on obscenity. According to Miss Jameson, however, it has been an uphill battle for her pornographic business:
When Republicans are in office, the problem is, a lot of times they try to put their crosshairs on the adult industry, to make a point. I look forward to another Democrat being in office. It just makes the climate so much better for us … and I think that getting Bush out of office is the most important thing right now.
If Attorney General Gonzales’ lenient policies have been harsh on the adult industry, one can only imagine how tolerant Hillary Clinton’s administration would be of spreading pornography throughout our country.
Former President Clinton ignored the issue of obscenity, and it is safe to assume that Senator Clinton would do the same. According to an article in the Baltimore Sun, “Obscenity cases came to a standstill under Janet Reno, President Bill Clinton's attorney general … The ensuing years saw an explosion of porn, so much so that critics say that Americans’ tolerance for sexually explicit material rivals that of Europeans.”
Fortunately, under the Bush administration, Attorney General John Ashcroft renewed the fight against obscenity, making the prosecution of obscenity a priority under his leadership. He stated in a speech in 2002, “Obscenity invades our homes persistently through the mail, telephone, VCR, cable TV and now the Internet. This multimillion dollar industry has strewn its victims from coast to coast.” Although he fought against the proliferation of pornography in America, his successor has been silent on the issue, just like Clinton’s attorney general.
It is unfortunate and inconsistent that Hillary and her “feminist” endorsers not only tolerate but also promote pornography. If they were true feminists, they would reject the objectification of women. It is interesting that in their fight to liberate women, they have instead endorsed the image of women as sexual objects. Pornography exploits women’s sexuality for money. That’s liberating?
Who here has the Clinton Xmas Tree story regarding the well hung ornaments. There are two sides, and she is on the side of the devil. Just ask Flip.
Usually I don't criticize spelling, but the intellectual impact of your post isn't exactly all that great when you can't even spell the word "allowed."
The CWA is calling for the enforcement of current law. If you don't like the current law, get it changed. Until; than, I want the AGOTUS to be enforcing what's on the books, and I can't see how wanting him to avoid doing his job is conservative.
Funny
Usually I don't criticize spelling, but the intellectual impact of your post isn't exactly all that great when you can't even spell the word "allowed."
The CWA is calling for the enforcement of current law. If you don't like the current law, get it changed. Until then, I want the AGOTUS to be enforcing what's on the books, and I can't see how wanting him to avoid doing his job is conservative.
Usually I don’t criticize repeat postings!
In any event, the meaning of the word obscenity is what is at issue. The CWA may have a very different idea of what is obscene than the rest of America. Same with the AG. Remember the justice statue was covered with a tarp lest her exposed breast be seen. Somebody obviously found that to be obscene.
I don’t imagine obscenity can exist in a private setting because there is no real definition. Recall “I will know it when I see it.”
Offensive is something else and nothing that is done in the privacy of one’s home should offend anybody else.
Yeah, but their whole point in linking Hillary to this is to remind us that from ‘93-2000 the AG didn’t enforce the law. Presumably we’ll have an AG just like that if Hillary gets in. Forget whether the AG’s a Dem or a Republican, are you OK with the AG just refusing to prosecute obscenity statutes?
My point is, what is obscenity? If there was never a prosecution or there were a million you couldn’t say one way or the other whether the law was being enforced.
I've thought the same thing about Playboy. How many women figure being a Playmate is a great way to kick off their career, and are never heard from again. You'd think it would be obvious to them; after all, Hef is the one with the big fat mansion and all the money...
I doubt it. Hillary is a marxist, and a major Marxist goal is the destruction of the family. She;'d only tax them if we were all goose-stepping down Pennsylvania Avenue and calling her "Madame Premier."
As I said in an earlier post, she looks like Lauren Holly and a Barbie doll were guest starring on Star Trek and were in a transporter accident.
LOL!
Free speech is an absolute.
No, it certainly is not, and to think it is requires being ignorant of case law on the subject. For example, what do you think the fighting words exemption is? Can you yell fire in a crowded theater? Can you libel someone under 1st Amendment protection? What is the law against inciting a riot all about? What about sedition laws and the military regulations governing what a soldier can and cannot say about his superiors, or about politics while wearing the uniform? Heck, even your opening statement shows you don't believe it to be an absolute. An absolute freedom is a freedom that cannot be curtailed by anyone for any reason, yet you begin with a condition on that freedom. If a parent allows their kid to be in child porn, why isn't it just the same free speech as a parent allowing their kid to be in an anti-global warming commercial?
Sorry, no sale.
Ah, but that requires one to believe that to hate porn is to hate freedom. Sorry, but that doesn't follow.
No, you're dodging. The Framers and the citizens who ratified the Constitution quite obviously considered a large number of things to be outside protected speech that you are including in, and when Rebekah asked you to reconcile that, you just kept repeating your definition of speech. Well, if your definition of speech and Thomas Jefferson and James Madison's definition of sppech are different, then you need to explain why we should operate under your definition and not theirs.
oops, embarassingly I forgot for a moment that Thomas Jefferson was not a Framer...he was Ambassador to France at the time. Still, insert George Washington in there and the same point remains.
Why is this an issue? There are more pressing concerns than women agreeing to humiliate themselves on camera.
Porn exploded because of the Internet. The Clintons really had nothing to do with it. Porn exploded in the 80s too because of the VCR, and Reagan was President.
I just wish people would focus on the real issues. Porn is already one of the most heavily regulated industries thus far. If you try and ban it, it'll just go underground and become more seedier than it already is.
Social conservatives who want to stick their heads into everyone's private lives are just as bad as liberals.
Actually, it does. A huge hand with a .44 comes from your monitor and forces you to surf adult websites. < /S >
Uh-huh...If skin stretched across two cantaloupes is natural,that is.
She looks like a man who has breast-implants, she also looks way too skinny, does she have AIDS?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.