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?
Jenna Jameson has “evolved” into some kind of airbrushed
“virtual” creature surrounded by beefy bodyguards who wear T-shirts which say TOUCH HER AND DIE. She represents the wishful “mainstreaming” of porn, such as it is-—she is an entrepreneur, appears on Howard Stern’s show, has the obligatory terrible book or two out, and is apparently stupid enough to think enough people are stupid enough to think she has anything to do with porn. She doesn’t , so no wonder she thinks it’s been an uphill climb for her and her enterprises: her “brand” of Porn is the brand of Jenna Jameson, which is that of a cartoon bimbo exhibitionist whose only appeal is to huckster sleaze merchants who link with her and her “enterprises”. Porn these days is a very different thing from even ten years ago, and yes, the Internet has EVERTHING to do with it: there are sites, right now offering 3000 plus porn movies, that you can get access to for $10 per month, 24-7, and offer downloads & viewing as the main part of the package.
See my post # 62-—that pic is pathetic, but I’ve seen more pathetic ones. This is what happens when someone gets the bright idea they should be “marketed” to mass appeal, rather than just staying in their dangerous little countercultural goodtime niche of porn: look at her—she’s a post-porn Barbie Doll.
ditto that and you can bet your ass they media and queers want to “ refocus” our kids......
You beat me to it. LOL
Oh, I think that there are plenty more areas that fit this description than porn. Really, any "vice"....cigarettes, drugs, booze, women, etc etc etc.
But your point is well taken. Honestly, I think that most Nanny-staters would do better with minding their own business and not mine. However, "The Gov't NEEDS to do SOMETHING About This NOW" is a clarion call for opportunistic politicians.
I suspect she’s receiving several hot dogs from fighters at Ortiz’s Big Bear training site.
“Jenna is featured constantly on TV Guide as a great talent”-—————
Well, that would surprise me. Could you cite any times and issues for this?
not issues and sorry for the fog.......On cable channel 97 here in Phoenix is the TV Guide channel with all those talking heads like the American Idol hosts etc........well every now and then they interview Jenna and she opines her wisdoms ( you get the drift)
“Just a tad. Not everything has a political angle . . .”
I think in Jenna’s case they would be political curves.
What I meant to say is that porn is the number one e-commerce business or at least it was a few years back.
Porn is the one area when otherwise-conservative people suddenly mutate into huge nanny-staters, demanding that the government save them from themselves (and from the free market).
Don't forget the war on drugs too. ;-)
Supreme,
I hate it when porn stars are inaccessible too. Touch her and die? Pfft. Where’s the luv???
;)
What I meant to say is that porn is the number one e-commerce business or at least it was a few years back.
I believe it still is. What I was trying to say is that I'm also pretty sure that most people know this. Not a secret at all, dirty or otherwise.
Don't forget the war on drugs too. ;-)
Okay, officially time to revise my comment. I should have said: Porn is the one area when otherwise-conservative people suddenly mutate into huge nanny-staters, demanding that the government save them from themselves (and from the free market).
Porn should be legal as long as no children are involved and no one is coerced and/or hurt.
Free speech is an absolute.
The real threat to 1A are ultra liberals. They would ban anti-porn speech, protests and boycotts of porn and porn makers if they could get away with it.
You can have my porn when you pry it out of my cold, dead, clenched, behaired palms. Now shut up, bitch, and pass the Cheezits.
“Could be that they just don’t like it so nobody should be aloud [sic] to watch it?”
Women should be obscene and not heard.
Phew, now THAT's a topic for discussion. Who's more dangerous....people that want to ban porn? OR....people who want to censor people that want to ban porn?
I'd argue that the latter are. People that have a strong moral center still can be reasoned with. But, people who are both amoral and unreasonable are dangerous IMHO.
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.