Could the GOP/Right Wing outfox us again? This time on Porn.

[Armstead]

Having once again made Gay Rights and Abortion hot-button issues in recent years, it looks like the latest needlessly distracting wedge "values" issue to hit the fan could be Pornography.

A combination of the guvment and Religious Fundies are going to get all up in arms against pornography and obscenity, and the news media will pick it up as the Latest Hot Issue. We could soon take anotehr enforced trip in the WayBack Machine to re-fight yet another controversy from the past, to avoid the imposition of a New Victorianism.

If this happens, it could go any number of ways.

It could threaten to box liberals, progressives and Democrats into an awkward corner, because we support the freedom of expression. How do you defend Free Speech without looking like you are endorsing Sleaze and Pornography?

It could become another way they distract from real issues and demonize liberalism by associating it with porn and "obscenity values." Just like a significant segment of the population now say "I could never be a Librul or support the Democrats because they promote abortion."...I can just see the folks like Rush and Hannity saying "The problems with these liberals is they WANT to flood us with pornography, as part of their secular anti-religious agenda...."

BUT it could backfire on them. It could be another casse of right-wing overreaching, and finding themselves on the wrong side of an issue, like they did with Terry Schiavo.

Serious libertarian conservatives may oppose this, because of their belief that your private life is your private life. Also because it would hamstring free enterprise with another layer of regulation.

And let's face it. A lot of the "good ol' boys" that the Republicans have also won over are party guys who enjoy their porn, whether the soft-core variety of a gas-station pin up or reading their Playboy or cruising the Net for X-rated websites. They aren't likely to be very happy to be told they have to start looking in National Geographic.

And many of the moderates who don't personally approve of porn might oppose any "Clean Up Crusade" for the same reason they have turned to conservatism. They don't like to be told what to do.

Dunno how this will all play out. But it's probably something we should be prepared for, and be thinking about in strategic terms of how to respond.

Anyone have any opinions or ideas on this?

[TimeChaser]

1. Tell every young man you know

that the republicans want to take away their porn.

:evilgrin:

[Armstead]

11. The same guys who oppose gun control

My guess is that a lot of anti-gun control zealots also enjoy their fun and pron.

I can just see them saying "You will only pry away my porn if it's from my dead cold hands."

[barbaraann]

2. Many large corporations profit from porn, so I don't think it would work

for the GOP to use it as a wedge issue.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/business/mainstream.html

[TayTay]

8. The Hotel industry makes a great deal of money

from selling porn in their hotel rooms. Consider the Marriott International chain, which is still largely controlled by the Marriott family, a group of devout Mormons. (http://www.hoovers.com/marriott/--ID__56078--/free-co-factsheet.xhtml)

It is also possible to fight back using the example of Fox Media. They rail against porn and illegal immigration on the one hand, but with the other they do what they can to encourage both. Hypocrisy.

[Armstead]

9. Porn is great for the News Media too

If this issue catches on, you will see all of the news nets -- including Fox -- having sanctimonious anti-porn crusaders being interviewed, while the visuals will be endless loops of Hot Sex videos to "illustrate" the issue.

[onehandle]

3. They Gay thing will be big in 2008 still.

Look at Time magazine this week.

The THREAT of gay teenagers is the cover story. Hacks.

[NewJeffCT]

28. yes, I agree with you on that

How many states had anti-gay measures on the ballot in 2004 to help increase Fundie turnout? About 10? I suspect about 10 more will in '06, another 10 more in '08, another 10 in '10 and the final 10 states in 2012.

[Oeditpus Rex]

32. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt

by not accusing you of distortion. We'll call it "faulty memory," okay? But here's Time's cover:

[onehandle]

34. The only time they blow someone up like that...

...is to scare you shitless.

This is hardly a "big story".

But they say so and that's good enough for the sheep.

[dkofos]

4. I'm betting more conservatives will admit to

being addicted to porn than Liberals.

Throw it back in their faces

[cally]

5. I think national Democratic leaders have to

promote some form of censorship. They have to adopt something like Tipper Gore promoted with music or how Al Gore promoted the v-chip. I'm fairly liberal on most issues but I've always been bothered by how difficult it is for parents to control the porn and violence children have access to. The extreme postition that parents are responsible for their children only works if parents have the tools to limit what children have access to. I think Dems can make the case to give tools but not restrict what adults have access to.

[Armstead]

7. They should promote Voluntary parental controls but not censorship

When I nwas growing up, my parents had a rule that we could only watch 1/2 hour of television a night. They also made sure whatever show we chose was "appropriate."

IMO "family values" means parents take their responsibility as parents. It's only when they fail to do that do we see children getting access to material they shouldn't have.

Democrats could advocate for corporate responsibility, since business is the source of porn. They should push for broadcasters and other media providers to offer "family friendly" options for those families who want to pre-screen what gets into their homes. But they shouldn't support censorship that limits what adults can see, or that will stifle free expression.

[cally]

24. I basically agree

but parents are stretched to the breaking point in todays society. Too many parents work long hours and have to leave children at home with little supervision. After school activities and day care are out of financial reach for most families. At a fairly young age, children are latch key kids and have access to the computer and TV. All of us agree that it would be better if kids had more adult supervision but they don't. Promoting effective controls and information on content is a good option.

[freeplessinseattle]

6. well, considering Seattle has the strictest strip club rules

of any other US city, and is one of the most liberal cities, that oughta throw 'em for a loop. 'course here the local reich wing radio hosts are blaming the new stricter rules on "those damn feminazis."

[msongs]

10. Majority of porn users are christians -why do they love it so much?

by the math the overwhelming majority of americans are self proclaimed christians yet porn is a huge business.

and what is wrong with pics of people having sex anyway (with some exceptions of coercion perhaps). After all I can see all kinds of other animals having sex on tv, in my front yard, on the mormon church back property behind my house.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/clark2008.htm

[Flammable Materials]

12. In a sense, the Nazis did the same thing.

In 1937 in Munich the Nazis held an art exhibition of what they called Entartete Kunst, or Degenerate Art. The purpose of the exhibition was to let the Germans know that some forms and pieces of art were not accepted by the "highest race", and this art is "degenerate", also called as Jewish or Bolshevistic. During the "Entartete Kunst" campaign over 20 thousand works by more than 200 artists of that time were confiscated.

The grounds for choosing the "unworthy" pieces of art were quite simple and cruel: anything that was out of tune with Hitler's way of thinking, was considered to be "degenerate". Hitler believed the art must serve the purpose of exaltation of the Aryan way of life. In this case, with this great aim, art is perfect and eternal. To Hitler's mind.

The authors of the banned works, mostly expressionists, were proclaimed mad. It would be curious to learn that most of those artists are known as the most prominent among their contemporaries, and are still admired. They are: Paul Klee, Wassily Kandinsky, Edvard Munch, many others, and the most degenerate artist of the world, Pablo Picasso.

This exhibition gave start to a series of art events in Germany of that time, and occurred to be a very powerful way of leading the overall opinion. The Nazis were good psychologists: instead of simply destroying the art works they thought inappropriate, they chose to do it publicly, in order not to create martyrs, so dearly loved by the people. In the way they did it, it worked, and the art of 1930s was labeled by the contemporaries as "incomprehensible and elitist".

[madrchsod]

13. well that would take away around

30 percent of the internet traffic and revenue..

[Armstead]

16. Only 30 percent

My guess is that it'd be more -- at least the traffic.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. Sometimes less combat and more ridicule is the tactic of choice.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. I Don't See A "War On Porn" Getting Much Traction

eom

[leeroysphitz]

17. This one just might blow over. Follow the MONEY... nt

[Armstead]

18. The problem is that they have no problem being two-faced

I think the GOP knows they can play both sides against the middle, because there's so much of a disconnect.

They can capitalize on the image of being morally pure, while structuring things so they don't really affect the bottom line of big corporations.

[leeroysphitz]

21. Of course you're right, they have ZERO problem

being two faced. In fact I'd say it's their bread and butter. But let me ask you this (and I'm not being argumentative, just asking); If the production and distribution of porn is to be outlawed or even curtailed and major corporate contributors stand to lose what has become a startlingly VAST source of PROFIT in this country won't they
pressure the pugs to rethink the whole strategy?

[Armstead]

23. They'll find the right balance

I suspect there'd be a lot of "wink,wink" structuring of anything, that would go after some symbolic targets without threatening the mainstream porn and pandering of the big corporations.

Like going after small websites that have disgusting activities as a cause celebre, while keeping the boundaries away from the big money porn. Or go after something outside the commercial system, like art or literature that is offensive.

Kinda like abortion. I suspect most of the conservative political/corporate strategists realize that abortion is never really going to be eliminated. So they exploit the opposition of people to it for purely political purposes.....Or if abortion is ever truly outlawed, the corporations will just set up clinics in Canada to make a profit off the affluent abortions.

[-..__...]

19. You mean like this?...

FBI forms anti-porn squad
'I guess this means we've won the war on terror,' one agent says

Barton Gellman, Washington Post

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Washington -- The FBI is joining the Bush administration's War on Porn. And it's looking for a few good agents.

Last month, the bureau's Washington Field Office began recruiting for a new anti-obscenity squad. Attached to the job posting was a memo from FBI headquarters to all 56 field offices, describing the initiative as "one of the top priorities" of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and, by extension, of "the Director," Robert Mueller.

The new squad will divert eight agents, a supervisor and assorted support staff to gather evidence against "manufacturers and purveyors" of pornography -- not the kind exploiting children, but the kind that depicts, and is marketed to, consenting adults.

"I guess this means we've won the war on terror," said one exasperated FBI agent, speaking on condition of anonymity because poking fun at headquarters is not regarded as career-enhancing. "We must not need any more resources for espionage."

Among friends and trusted colleagues, an experienced national security analyst said, "it's a running joke for us."


More.


Or this...

(From Thomas.loc.gov)

SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 77--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS SUPPORTING VIGOROUS ENFORCEMENT OF THE FEDERAL OBSCENITY LAWS -- (Senate - October 28, 2003)

GPO's PDF

---

Mr. SESSIONS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:

S. Con. Res. 77

Whereas the Supreme Court in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) held that obscene material is ``unprotected by the first amendment'' (413 U.S. at 23) and that obscenity laws can be enforced against `` `hard core' pornography'' (413 U.S. at 28);

Whereas the Miller Court stated that ``to equate the free and robust exchange of ideas and political debate with commercial exploitation of obscene material demeans the grand conception of the first amendment and its high purposes in the historic struggle for freedom.'' (413 U.S. at 34);

Whereas the Supreme Court in Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973) recognized that there are legitimate governmental interests at stake in stemming the tide of obscene materials, which include--

(1) protecting ``the quality of life and total community environment'' (413 U.S. at 58);

(2) protecting ``public safety'' (413 U.S. at 58);

(3) maintaining ``a decent society'' (413 U.S. at 59-60);

(4) protecting ``the social interest in order and morality'' (413 U.S. at 61); and

(5) protecting ``family life'' (413 U.S. at 63);

Whereas Congress, in an effort to protect these same legitimate governmental interests, enacted legislation in 1988 to strengthen federal obscenity laws and in 1996 to clarify that use of an interactive computer service to transport obscene materials in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce is prohibited;

Whereas the 1986 Final Report of the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography found that ``increasingly, the most prevalent forms of pornography'' fit the description of ``sexually violent material'' (p. 323) and that ``an enormous amount of the most sexually explicit material available'' can be categorized as ``degrading'' to people, ``most often women'' (p. 331);

Whereas the Internet has become a conduit for hardcore pornography that now reaches directly into tens of millions of American homes, where even small children can be exposed to Internet obscenity and older children can easily find it;

Whereas a national opinion poll conducted in March 2002 by Wirthlin Worldwide marketing research company found that 81 percent of adult Americans say that ``Federal laws against Internet obscenity should be vigorously enforced'';

Whereas a May 2 report from the National Academies' National Research Council stated that ``aggressive enforcement of existing antiobscenity laws can help reduce children's access to certain kinds of sexually explicit material on the Internet'';

Whereas vigorous enforcement of obscenity laws can help reduce the amount of ``virtual child pornography'' now readily available to sexual predators; and

Whereas it continues to be the desire of the People of the United States of America and their representatives in Congress to recognize and protect the governmental interests recognized as legitimate by the United States Supreme Court in Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973): Now, therefore be it

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that the Federal obscenity laws should be vigorously enforced throughout the United States.

[Armstead]

20. That's a tragically funny remark

"I guess this means we've won the war on terror."

So damn true. What the hell are they thinking putting so many resources into a puritan witch hunt, when we are unprepared to deal with real; threats and old fashioned real crime?

Sorta makes me relieved Bush didn't nominate Gonzales for the SC (yet).

[Atman]

22. How many porno shops in your area? How many Christian book stores?

Porn is HUGE business, putting BILLIONS into the economy. In most urban (and many SUBurban areas), you have your choice of porn outlets, from seedy little storefronts to fancy couples-friendly outlets the size of an old supermarket. There are usually cars in the parking lots from opening till closing.

What about the Christian book stores? Maybe one, if that, usually in an old half-empty strip mall, and there is rarely more than the owner's car in parking lot.

This is simple marketing, kids. If "Christianity" was big business, there would be Christian book stores on every corner, and happy customers streaming in all day. Likewise, if porn was not popular and profitable, no one would be serving the market. Successul companies don't go into business to lose money, and they're always looking for new markets which make money. So where are all the Christian book stores, and why so many porn outlets?

This is another bullshit smokescreen by a tiny minority of our population who has serious issues with what OTHERS watch and do in the privacy of their homes. Next time one of these people tells you we need to shut down all the porno outlets, ask if they'd like to put up some seed money to put a Christian book store in its place. The bank's loan officer will laugh them out of the branch when they see the business plan.

Oh, and HAPPY PORN SUNDAY!

[Armstead]

25. Problem is the FBI is getting on it

Read the post above about that.

I agree that the real bluenoses are a minority. Just like the majority of the population is either supportive or apathetic about Gay Rights....But a minority linked into the dominant political powers can do a lot of damage, despite the thoughts of the majority.

And -- in a political sense -- it puts Democrats and liberals in an awkward position if they want to support free speech, because peopel superficially will associate that with porn (even if the public critics of liberals have their own "dirty little secrets").

[McCamy Taylor]

26. "FREE SPEECH" highly valued by Joe Citizen. No win for Far Right.

[Armstead]

30. But if it's put as "Free Speech" vs. "Indecency" it's less so

You have to look at these things through the right wing Framing Machine.

Sure everyone supports "free speech." But many will seperate that from what it REALLY means, which is the right to speech that is offensive or obnoxious.

So when you defend the RIGHT of people to be obnoxious, it's easy to spin that into portraying the defenders of rights as being in support of the obnoxious speech that is a byproduct of freedom.

The right wing also specializes in "false choices," as in the phony difference between personal morality and a belief in the rights of others. The reality is that it is totally consistent for someone to be personally straightlaced and moral, while also believing that we should not dictate the sexual morality of others.

That's why the right wing has set up the ACLU as a straw man. Because the ACLU defends speech that, by definition, is unpopular.

IMO the rightires are already thinking three steps ahead on this. Rather than being complacent and waiting to have to defend from attacks on free speech, our side should also be pro-active now, before they have a chance to set the terms of the debate once again.

[readmoreoften]

27. Taking away people's porn?

Now that's a losing issue! Responding is easy. Democrats don't believe in censoring the behavior of adults-- but boy are we gonna crack down on that kiddie porn!!!

This is a LOSING issue for RWers.

[Armstead]

29. I hope so

But being a losing issue doesn;t mean it can;t be used in the arsenal of advantages.

Abortion is a losing issue in the larger sense, because most people supoport abortion rights to some degree. But if it riles up enough people, that can be added to the "base" of the wingers.

[Enraged_Ape]

31. Don't worry. The "Meese Commission on Porn" did jack squat

back in the Reagan days. We spent untold millions of taxpayer dollars for FBI and other Justice Department agents to go to 25-cent peep shows, porn theaters, and topless bars. Then they wrote the most expensive "What I Did Over my Summer Vacation" paper in U.S. history about it. Net result? Nada.

Porn is about the only industry in these United States which is actually still thriving and bringing us BILLIONS in international dollars. This crack-down is being orchestrated only so that our Attorney General and a few other perverted Justice Department types can get their jollies. It's not going to accomplish anything, nor is it designed to.

[Armstead]

33. Check back with me in a few months

If I'm wrong I'll be glad.

But I have a feeling that "The Battle of Porn" is going to be elevated to a hot button issue, with the right wing going on the offense while we're eitehr forced to ignore it or waffle in a "We can't fight back or we'll look like the party of porn."

Don't forget there's an election year coming up, and they need something fresh.

[Armstead]

35. Kick

in honor of National Porn Sunday