Booming Porn Faces Backlash (Porn Biz Explodes During Bush II Admin)

[Mark E. Smith]

The Sunday (London) Times October 29, 2006

As its earnings pass $12 billion, the American industry is attracting
the attention of legislators.

The American pornography business is growing so fast that for
the first time in a decade it is attracting the unwelcome attention
of the White House and federal prosecutors.

When George Bush entered the Oval Office in 2001 he accused
his predecessor Bill Clinton of being "soft on porn" and vowed to
crack down on an industry that was generating $9.8 billion a
year. But anti-porn campaigners in Bush's own party say that
since then the president has been distracted by the war on terror
and has done little.

With an average 40% profit margin on DVD sales, explicit porn
is twice as profitable as the music business. Porn revenues in the
US are higher than all money generated by the combined
professional American football, baseball and basketball
franchises.

Production is booming, too. According to Adult Video News,
13,500 titles were released last year, compared with 8,000 in
1998 and 1,250 in 1988.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2095-2426135,00.html

Another nasty business that has prospered under the oh-so-moral
Bush administration, and yet another war that Georgie has lost.

[NYCGirl]

1. Is it your opinion that it's a "nasty" business, or are you being facetious? NT

[expatriot]

32. it can be very exploitative and abusive.

and yes, i think the gaping holes are nasty. i am sorry.

[NYCGirl]

34. I'm sorry for you too. And, BTW, no one is forcing you to watch it. But if

consenting adults want to, it's no one's business but their own.

[JoFerret]

48. I wish it were that simple

But it's not

[Shipwack]

49. "It's not that simple..." because?

If I don't want to watch porn, I don't go to the video store, rent a movie, and put it in the DVD player.

Seems simple enough to me.

[Trillo]

60. Interesting Frame.

Video stores. Adult video stores? Or all video stores? And all DVDs are of course porn.

I think one of the reasons I don't visit DU as often anymore is that there used to be significant thoughts expressed. Now, there are only one and two liners.

While it's likely expressed below somewhere, the juxtaposition of allowing gross violence in so many movies, but not allowing sex, or only allowing sex in a defined subset of movies, could have been such a well fleshed out concept on DU in its old days of nuanced and thoughtful writing.

Now that the psychological operations squad has taken over, everything can be expressed in two short sentences.

[VegasWolf]

63. Amazing!

You manage to write four paragraphs consisting of one and two-liners, yet you fail to grasp the significance of the simple statement of the previous poster.

Perhaps, DU has moved away from whatever you previously had interpreted it to be.

Psychological operations squad signing off.

[Trillo]

64. Why don't "you" tell us what the other poster said?

While you're at it, why don't you expand on what I, according to you and your psychic skills, allegedly "fail to grasp"?

[VegasWolf]

67. He said perfectly adequately what he had to say.

You, on the other hand, completely failed to make a point, instead, you rattled off some oblique, ad hominem attack on DU. If you don't like porn, don't buy it, period. That is all the other poster said. Comprehend? Nothing else needs to be said except by religious wing nuts.

[Trillo]

70. Is "perfectly adequate" one of those oxymoronic doublespeak

Is "perfectly adequate" one of those oxymoronic doublespeak phrases people use to keep the commoners in line?

I disagree with it anyway. His/her post was not perfect, there is no such thing in my experience.

The other poster wrote what he/she wrote. He/she and another poster seemed to be ganging up on the other person expressing their view. I responded to his post with what was in my mind and memory of video stores that have never had any porn for rent. Perhaps those video rental stores have changed, it's been some time since I've been in one, but I rather doubt the underlying reason for the lack of porn in "video stores" has changed, which is likely legal in nature, though I'm no legal expert. Mongo would know the legalities. If I want a DVD, I buy it instead of renting it, and the stores that sell DVDs where "I" occasionally buy a movie do not have pornography for me or anyone else to buy.

It's possible the other poster is in another country with different laws, but if so, that poster didn't specify that. Perhaps the phenomenon I'm noting regarding lack of pornography in these various stores I visit is more local in nature, and that poster is somewhere other than where I am located in the U.S. It's hard to guess.

Clarification is not an attack. It seems his/her statement is inaccurate at best. You jumped to his/her defense, without even thinking about what he/she wrote just like you failed to comprehend what I wrote. I note that you were quick to jump the gun in regards to who failed in their comprehension, this is a trick of psyoperators that I've seen here many times on DU. That and the ganging up on a poster expressing the objection, which they have a right to do. Dissent is good, remember? Apparently not.

Since when is pointing out the reason why someone doesn't visit a site as much as one used to an "ad hominem" attack? Or any kind of attack? It is simply a true statement that should be verifiable by moderators so inclined to investigate it. However, the republicans in office, that we all wish to get rid of soon, have often been accused of making ad hominem attacks, the very thing they publicly accuse their opponents of doing.

"Nothing else needs to be said except by religious wing nuts."

Ah, yes, so the implication is that if I defend myself against your psychological warfare, I must be a religious wing nut. Nope. Guess again.

You claim I "completely failed to make a point."

Read that statement of mine again, and perhaps you will see a significant, albeit brief, argument of government hypocrisy. If the first poster's brief statement is "perfectly adequate" and since I "rattled off some oblique, ad hominem attack on DU" when I make long-term observations of community and a truthful statement about my recent participation, then surely your lack of understanding of the point I did make has nothing to do with its brevity.

Here's what I wrote that I refer to: "While it's likely expressed below somewhere, the juxtaposition of allowing gross violence in so many movies, but not allowing sex, or only allowing sex in a defined subset of movies, could have been such a well fleshed out concept on DU in its old days of nuanced and thoughtful writing."

1a) We have a government which is involved in a war of lies in Iraq. 1b) The government used the media to propagate the lie of WMD to the populace and evidently to congress and the UN. 1c) We have censored news. 1d) We have a government that evidently approves of much violence in movies, judging by the violence I see in them regularly. 2a) We also have a government that seems to disapprove of pornography, but doesn't seem to be able to do much about it. 2b) We have a government that sets out bureaucratic fines when a nipple is shown in the middle of a violent football game (Janet Jackson is who I have in mind). 2c) We have a culture that thinks there's something wrong with feeding babies mothers milk from mother's nipple, judging from formula use statistics I've seen, which is good for certain large corporations selling formula, so it's not that far a jump to wonder, with all of the other manipulations, if the culture has been manipulated to be against the public breast feeding of babies.

Conclusion:
It seems the message of our government (which is known to lie to the people--seemingly routinely), their main bullhorn being the TV media opiate supported by advertisers of its corporatist network, is that violence is good, but that humans natural love, or even lust, and feeding the potential child therefrom is bad, unless that food comes from corporate. Accidents happen and birth control isn't 100%.

This means we have a deliberately manipulated visual media presented to our mirror neurons--psyops.

5a) We have schools that put children in rooms to shower together (gym class), that at least when I was a kid was forced and mandatory even when we objected to it with all of our willpower. 5b) We have schools that have punished kids with expulsion who are caught having sex. 6) In the past, and only with some very recent breaks in the legal dam, our government has not supported the sexual rights of gay people, only a narrowly defined group of breeders.

Conclusion:
Our corporatist has been molding the minds of us and our children at least since the beginning of TV in ways that are quite familiar to us--psyops.


My personal view of porn is that they are short visual stimuli, not really movies per se because they are largely lacking in plot and story substance. They seem designed to influence us at the level of our lowest animal nature utilizing mirror neurons in our own brains. Fuck and fuck some more -- because that's what the synthetic image fed to our minds is designed to do, elicit a known animal response. At the same time they only show the same thing every farm boy and/or girl has seen most any pair of non-human animals do from time to time. It is a part of our animal natures, as well, and I mean this in an inalienable rights sense.

If anything, violence in movies is much more repugnant to me, and I watch violent movies from time to time, I can't seem to get away from them because most often movies with intelligent plots and story lines don't seem to make it through to mass-distribution without violence included in them for some reason.

Conclusion
In a country that idolizes war as much as we do, the reason we're shown these violent images for our own mirror neurons to fire is obvious. It's psychological warfare to condition a pacified populace to accept violence as part of life.

Possible problem: earth's environment. We have too many people.

I do worry that since it's obvious we do not have a free media (in either a liberty or money sense), then a controlled media that's distributing pornography and making it widely available (which it already is) will have the consequence of stimulating conception overall, likely in those who are too caught up in the moment to think of using birth control, or the young that don't understand the consequences, therefore, it's a matter for the regulators to weigh, but it's already legal AFAIK for 'adults' in most places I'm aware of. The environmental effects of even more people is likely dire if what our scientists tell us about the current population levels as unsustainable is true. What happens when post-puberty male and female underagers have it around them constantly? Do they start having more babies? If so, this could be a social cost from several standpoints. Perhaps the age of consent and financial responsibility will need to be slid downward to the average age of puberty to adjust.

This may also be the common ground with religious fundamentalists who want more people on the planet for the day when their savior arrives, and for the corporatist who benefits economically by an expanding populace. These would be the "leaders" of your signature.

Another place of commonality with religious fundamentalists is the pornography that I've seen seems patriarchal. A male and a female. A male and two or several females. But never two or several males and one female: Perhaps it exists in the pornography world (lots of things exist for connoisseurs that aren't 'common'), but I've never seen any with just two males, though I've heard that it exists and can probably found if one searches for it. My conclusion is that the type of pornography that is commonly available is skewed to pander to the fantasies of heterosexual males. This may be a marketing issue, or where the money in it seems to be, I don't know, and I don't really care, but it seems to be a problem when one considers that the common type of it seems sexually skewed.

From a mirror neuron standpoint, this artificial male/female ratio skew of common pornography would seem to be discriminatory.

Yet, in spite of this, if we desire to have a free country with free media in the liberty sense, I cannot object to pornography on logical grounds. That's my personal view. Comprehend?

***

The only point you and I seem to agree upon, is that DU has changed, just like everything eventually changes.

Thanks for proving my original observation of psyops here on DU as truth, you weren't the first one I've tangled with, but you were the first to admit to it in writing.

:hi:

[pokercat999]

71. Holy shit! Do you copy and paste or just have nothing else

to do? :crazy:

[Trillo]

72. More lack of respect I see.

Is this common in the pornography business?

By the way, please stop spamming my blog with all the porn spam. Poker too.

[VegasWolf]

73. Now see that wasn't so hard!!!!

After reading your carefully elaborated statement, I believe that I know where you are coming from. I have never heard before an argument that suggests that porn is responsible for the world's overpopulation, personally I believe that has more to do with a lack of adequate sex education around the world, a prohibition a birth control devices and a "just say no" attitude by zealot religious leaders.

You apparently think about porn in a much more logical and abstract way than many of us do. I personally do not think that porn requires that much philosophy, it is pretty much a bump and grind thing. The women that I have known like porn also, although they prefer much more character building and dialog than guys need!

My problem is after 6 years of the Bush administration, I will be happy never to hear the word religion, be it christian or muslim, ever again for the rest of my life. The people who wish to prohibit porn because of religious zealotry turn my stomach. Just a personal thing with me.

You appear to have a different take that is not based on moral certainty, one that has some intellectual standing, even though we don't agree!

Thanks for your elaboration and glad to see you contributing to DU again.

:toast:

[NYCGirl]

51. And what's not simple about it? NT

[Nolo_Contendre]

2. Best customers are repressed Foley Repukes

no doubt.

[kerrygoddess]

3. They are hypocrites

Just look at the flap over Jim Webb - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=4576

[Mark E. Smith]

4. Exactly!

Like with all the other promises he made to his "values" constituents,
Bush did not deliver.

[lostnotforgotten]

5. 50 Year Old Man Here - No Dates In 10 Years Since Divorce

What would you have us do - become celibate?

You are attacking something you know little about.

[Vidar]

28. Welocme to DU. I agree.

[wickerwoman]

37. Um... the same thing 50 year old single men did

before the invention of the camera (about 150 years ago). Use your imagination... No former victims of sexual abuse necessary.

I don't think porn should be illegal but "men need porn"? Come on!

[lostnotforgotten]

40. Maybe Age Effects Imagination Differently

It's been so long for me, I have forgotten what it's like.

[Penance]

52. They used their imaginations?

You have a very sanitized view of the 19th century. Those were the days when men were men and women were chattel. Compared to the rampant sex trafficking of that era, including the perfectly legal use and abuse of slaves in our own country at the time, our modern practice of (badly) paying (mostly) consenting (mostly) adults to be in porn DVDs doesn't seem so bad.

[NYCGirl]

54. Before cameras, there were illustrations. There were cave paintings of

people engaged in sex!

[jonnyblitz]

59. self-delete

responded to wrong post. sorry. :hi:

[bluestateguy]

6. Big government conservatives who hate free enterprise

are the only ones who would waste time on this nonsense.

[Kagemusha]

7. Cracking down on oil companies would be more popular.

But that'll never happen.

[Rabrrrrrr]

8. Why is this even an issue? Porn is legal. Why does something "need to be done"?

What assholery.

[Anakin Skywalker]

79. "Porn is Legal". For now. Social CONservatives want to overturn that, see?

Yes, they are @$$holes.

[Pale Blue Dot]

9. I think that there is little to fear from a well-regulated porn industry.

The emphasis being on "well-regulated."

This applies to every other industry in America as well.

[marmar]

10. America, where it's considered perverse to watch sex on TV....

or for two men or two women to romantically kiss in public, but it's fine to walk around with a concealed weapon.
No wonder the less sexually-repressed world (ala Europe) thinks we're a joke.

[krispos42]

25. It's okay to show violence on TV but not sex

So, the pro-life people want to act in a way that might limit procreation but act in a different way to increase murder?

:banghead:

[kurth]

11. Porn actresses are more religious than other people

They praise God a lot as they work harder.

[MnFats]

30. You remind me of this old joke: (sanitized for DU)

"Why don't atheists enjoy sex?"
"There's no one to talk to when they ***."

[Anakin Skywalker]

80. Now That's a Religion I Can Get Into!

LOL

[mike_c]

12. this, more than anything, is iconic of America....

The porn business thrives because there is a strong and apparently insatiable desire for its products-- and bear in mind that the porn biz is only a portion of the overall sex industry-- while the same nation that creates the huge demand wrings its hands and moralizes about it.

[Richard D]

13. Dang!

Looks like "Sisters" and "The Apprentice" won't make it to the silver screen.

Friggin hypocrites.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

14. Wow, your rage is showing. There's nothing wrong with the porn industry.

The fundies war against porn is a good war to be lost.

[freethought]

17. "Frontline" on PBS did a fantastic expose on porn

It was more than just the business of porn but also the "unofficial" policy to intimidate it under Ashcroft.
On the business side of porn there were a number of very large, very well known corporations who have their fingers stuck in the porn industry. The profits to be realized are just too good to pass up. These corps go to great lengths to keep their names from being associated with pornographic media. We're talking some fortune 500s here.

On the govt. side you had John Ashcroft who went on a tear against the porn industry and had justice dept attorney as his champion, a woman whose name escapes me now. The problem? Porn is nearly impossible to legislate away. Justice Dept. had to find another angle to go after pornographers. Justice Dept. pretty much focused their attention on a small number of porn producers that were producing some pretty extreme stuff. When I saw the documentary the case against one production company was still pending. I don't recall what the legal logic was for bringing the case to federal court. I believe the overall strategy was to make an example of these small-but-extreme porn producers as a means of intimidating larger producers and distributors.

[Vidar]

31. As usual, government action has only served to knock out

the small-time, usually more creative, independents & concentrate production for the corporations, while driving up costs. But that's pretty much the real purpose of government in this country.

[freethought]

15. Lewis Black said it best

On "Back in Black" he said there are few things that republicans respect more than the sanctity of the free market. But there is nothing they hate more than porn. The conflict is that the free market LOVES porn.

[krispos42]

29. I love Lew

He desperately needs his own weekly political show on HBO, like Bill Mahr does. "Rules of Enragement" made me bust a gut!

[jokerman93]

16. Porn saves lives.

:party:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

36. It's probably created a few, too.

;)

[onehandle]

18. Marriott traffics Millions of dollars of porn each year.

And I don't see the GOP refusing their sizable cash payoffs to the party.

Why doesn't the religious right look over the Republican's books more closely?

[daleo]

19. He said "soft on porn"

Heh, heh, heh, heh...

[Boo Boo]

20. ..."soft on porn"...

:rofl:

[Qutzupalotl]

21. Bush is Hard On porn.

[Truebrit71sbruv]

56. Nah... he just acts like a "hard-on"

Fucks anything, doesn't give a shit about whether what he does is any good for anyone else, and then dumps his load all over the place, leaving someone else to clean up his mess....

:evilgrin:

[Qutzupalotl]

68. Have we met?

:rofl:

[Truebrit71sbruv]

76. heh...

... we have now :toast:

[truthisfreedom]

22. i don't spend a penny on porn, but i wouldn't call it a nasty business.

it keeps people off the streets, generates tons of revenue, and probably reduces marital cheating (although this is just a guess.)

[krispos42]

24. I don't spend a penny on porn either

got 47 gig somehow, though. Imagine that... :-)

[tabasco]

46. LMAO! I love DU. So many comedians.....and good ones!

:rofl:

[expatriot]

33. it can get real nasty real quick.... as far as the workers go....

there are many people in porn that have control over their lives, have it all together... unfortunately it exploits people... and i am not even thinking of all the foreign porn who stars some cute thai girl who by the time you watch it is chained to a toilet stall in the back of some Bangkok brothel dying of AIDS.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

42. American porn is well-regulated, not exploitive.

Actors must submit regular STD tests, there's a shift towards everyone wearing condoms. The actors tend to be well-treated and for women, it can be very lucrative.

I have no clue about foreign porn, but American porn is not exploitive.

[TankLV]

58. Gee - another moralizer telling US how we should act...

Countless studies have PROVEN that those who rail against something are themselves the biggest practitioners of said practices...

So, how much "vile" "nasty" porn do YOU watch and buy?!?!

Get a life = geesh...

[krispos42]

23. "...the president has been distracted by the war on terror "

Oh, no, that can't be! Didn't Tony Snow say that the administration can multitask?

[iconoclastic cat]

26. Mongo will be very displeased with you.

Besides, if consenting adults want to bone on camera, why do they need your approval?
;)

[Divine Discontent]

39. that is true

but it's up to the govt to bust the dirty side of porn, where people are used as commodities and kept in run down apts, given drugs to stay in control, etc...

sounds like the republican congress.


www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable <<-- antibush prodem stickers/shirts

[Mark E. Smith]

27. I guess there is one thing that has happened ...

...during the Bush admin that you guys are happy about.

I kind of thought the point of this post was juxtaposing
Bush's hypocritical attack on Clinton regarding porn to the
actual results of his own nonexistent efforts.

You live and learn, don't you?

As far as the porn business being nasty, I would think
that any industry that coerces 18 year old women into
fucking on camera for a couple of hundred bucks might
be seen by some here as being less than noble.

Damn.

[muntrv]

35. Keep bad mouthing porn, Chimpy. You're just making it more valueable

and creating more demand.

[mark0rama]

38. Bush admin wants to gut one of the few very profitable businesses?

Imagine how bad our economy would be if we didn't have the runaway success of the porn business to help prop it up.

[gulliver]

41. Bush wasn't distracted by the war on terror.

Everything and anything that can make a buck is allowed under Bush. The GOP's mammon worship is the root of all evil. Blowing the tops off of mountains, war profiteering, corporate music, porn, job exportation, the awful crassness and selfishness that has gone through the roof... that's Bushian, GOP philoshophy. That's its result.

[Nolo_Contendre]

43. Except that porn is not evil like war and environmental destruction

Unless you are a religious fundamentalist.

[gulliver]

53. I don't think most porn is evil. I only included it in the list....

... for people who think it is. People who are fundamentalists and think porn is evil know who they can blame: GOP and moneyed interests.

[Ian David]

44. See also: GOP Donors drip with hot, sticky porn money

GOP Donors drip with hot, sticky porn money
Topic started by IanDB1 on Dec-23-04 12:11 AM (6 replies)
Last modified by Moderator on Dec-23-04 01:30 AM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1093853


Addicted to Porn: How Members of Congress Benefit from Pornography
Topic started by IanDB1 on Mar-10-05 03:41 PM (2 replies)
Last modified by gratuitous on Mar-10-05 04:30 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1651620


Porn activity detected at DHS (maybe)
Topic started by quaoar on Jan-29-06 12:48 AM (21 replies)
Last modified by BR_Parkway on Feb-06-06 03:50 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2072129


Local (FL) Pastor Arrested On Child Porn Charges (WJXX)
Topic started by Up2Late on Jul-08-05 07:53 PM (35 replies)
Last modified by IanDB1 on Jul-09-05 10:51 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1613535


Bush administration targets obscenity
Topic started by madinmaryland on May-05-05 03:08 PM (54 replies)
Last modified by mongo on May-06-05 08:32 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1447449


Former porn star Mimi Demayo running as Republican Governor of Nevada
Topic started by IanDB1 on Jul-20-06 01:49 PM (19 replies)
Last modified by fujiyama on Jul-21-06 02:04 AM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2732476


Porn stars, politicians not that different (Better families through porn)
Topic started by IanDB1 on Jun-15-05 02:03 PM (2 replies)
Last modified by AX10 on Jun-15-05 03:28 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1856853


Bush fete with porn star to raise $23 mil for GOP
Topic started by IanDB1 on Jun-14-05 02:36 PM (18 replies)
Last modified by Roland99 on Jun-14-05 05:11 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1854504

[Scout]

45. how tragic! men might not get any new material to masturbate to!!!

oh the horror, oh the humanity!

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

47. There are plenty of women out there who enjoy porn, as well.

[DuaneBidoux]

50. I'm amazed at how many pickup trucks with "W" stickers I have seen at

adult video stores. My wife and I pick up videos every so often and I don't have a problem with it. It's the hypocracy that bothers me.

[BadGimp]

55. The GOP has sank to the Depths of Depravity

I have a message for the Righties:

STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM MY PORN!

[Odin2005]

57. I rember reading somewhere that when Sweden legalized porn...

...the number of rapes per year there dropped dramatically! :wow:

[onager]

62. That's true, and not just for Sweden

That was one of many findings completely ignored by the Meese Commission On Porn. You may remember Reagan formed that ludicrous commission, with the intention of discrediting an earlier Presidential porn report from the Johnson Administration.

(These facts are from my rapidly degenerating with no hope of reboot memory. Like our pResident, to learn more just use the Google. Left-handed for most of you, probably...)

1. The Meese Commission initially hired a few no-shit objective sex researchers and experts. This balanced out a commission mainly made up of right-wing prudes, bluenoses and do-gooders.

2. The real experts studied data from nations with the most liberal laws on porn and sex in general: Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands, etc.

3. They found that not only rape was down dramatically. The same also applied to sexually transmitted diseases and sex crimes against children, among many other problems.

As I remember, they took special note of how sexual crimes against minors were handled in those godless "sexually liberated" nations. Because children were not taught from birth that sex was dirty, there was no shame attached to a minor reporting a sex crime. It wasn't seen as some dark, ugly secret the child should be ashamed of. It was seen, correctly, as just a crime an adult had committed against a child victim. Because of that, child molesters were reported (and usually caught) very quickly.

4. Naturally, Edwin Meese and Ronald Reagan didn't want to hear any of this slap-happy liberal crap. They wanted sex to be kept VERY dirty and shameful.

In no time, they had fired or otherwise forced out all the real experts on the commission, and left it completely in the hands of the religious fanatics and the Republican Anti-Sex League.

Result: the Commission ended up relying on experts like the saintly Father Bruce Ritter. You probably won't be surprised to learn that Father Bruce was eventually nailed for sexual abuse of teen-age boys placed under his Gawdly care.

[AngryAmish]

77. Rapes are way down over last 20-30 years

Porn is way up. Correllation yes but there is good research that strongly implies causation.

[Anakin Skywalker]

82. Angry Amish, What Are You Doing on the Internet?

You are not a real Amish at all! :)

[dailykoff]

61. Hilarious Google ad atop this thread. . . .

Guy kickin' back in front of a laptop with a hand in his lap and a blissful expression. . . .

:rofl:

[Akoto]

74. Yeah, don't you love The Google?

It seems to know exactly what ads to place for maximum comedic effect. :rofl:

[judaspriestess]

65. Fuck porn

}( sorry for the one liner, I couldn't resist

[rucky]

66. I'm in the wrong line of work. n/t

[Supersedeas]

69. Shhhhh, wait til after the elections

[VegasWolf]

75. Hey, does this mean that Mongo will start voting Republican?

:toast:

[Anakin Skywalker]

78. How Will Cracking Down On a Booming Industry Jibe w/

pro-business Rethuglicanism??? Explain that, Repugs!

[Anakin Skywalker]

81. Religious CONservatives, I Got Four Words For Ya!

LET THE MARKET DECIDE!

Hah hah! Ya like that, mofos? Using your very own words against you mothaf*ck**s!