50 Easy going Democrats.

No they aren't. Strict constructionists believe that porn is not protected under the First Amendment.

I love seeing the Republicans cry now. They remind me so much of the democrats in 00 and 04. Priceless.

Politics is dirty and i lets just see what Obama can do

...and none of you fuckin' people wanted to pay attention to the libertarian candidates who believe in personal freedom, lower taxes and getting away from the 2 party system that fucks you if you do or if you don't.

it was actually just us canadians telling you it would be ok

You mean Obama is not going to bring CHANGE and HOPE to our industry? :-(

Sneaky negro. I knew he was up to no good.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

You fucking Republicans never give up. :disgust

I'll take ANY Democrat over a Republican in the White House any day. I'll roll the dice and play the odds nig. More times then not, I am sure I will have no worries with Demo's.

:2 cents:

A porn tax is a very hard sell because when the government taxes something they are in essence "legitimizing" it. If they started taxing porn then it would also be an endorsement of porn and in a way them saying that it is a viable product that people should be allowed to consume. I could potentially see it on a state level, but most likely not even there. If they allow the industry to exist they would be forced to actually work with us and hear our ideas and they want no part of that.

Nobody is our friend. There will never be a politician that gets up on a stage and tells people to check out porn, it is all good. But the odds are, if you look back in history, that there will be fewer prosecutions under democrats. Obama is a pretty far left liberal and this letter was written in 1998 close to the end of the Clinton era. I read it mostly as being against child porn which they should go after and they should go after it in a very big way. But all politicians pander to groups like Morality in Media, it doesn't really mean that it is so.

In the end if this guy becomes the AG, Obama sets the agenda and it is his job to go out there and enforce that agenda. What he wrote 10 years ago doesn't really hold a lot of water today. We will have to wait and see.

Does it really make much difference exactly who is sitting in the AG chair? It seems to me that the AG and DOJ take their priorities from the administration that put them into that chair.

I would think that an administration that isn't as openly friendly to the religious right would have porn as a lower priority than it has been the last 8 years.

Time will tell.

Really has nothing to do with the fact that we don't pay attention...It's just that the country in recent times never has and never will elect an independent candidate. The only reason to vote that way is so that you can bitch about whatever candidate is elected, because if you don't vote for anybody, your bitching isn't valid. :1orglaugh

So you think that it is not okay to stand up against child porn and rape tapes and the like?
You really sound idiotic here Mike, I agree with a lot you say but you also know how to make yourself look like a clown sometimes.

No one mentioned consentual porn in any of the 2 "memo's" you quoted. I too am against child porn and rape stuff, are you going to write about me too now?

I understand that there is always a concern on what the gov't will do next to this industry and I think about those things just as much as the next shooter/webmaster/performer or anyone else in this industry. But you love hyping stuff up and the attention that comes with it.

zzzzzzzz

wake me up when the Obama administration starts jailing pornographers like the tyrannical Bush administration has done repeatedly. Not going to happen, jackass.

Republican pornographers have got to be the most delusional, hypocritical group of people on the planet. Libertarians for Kim Jung Il are a close second.

:2 cents: