I really hope the Republicans nominate Santorum

pron · Post by **pron** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:20 pm

Fuck that guy, he'll get my porn when he pries it from my cold, dead hands. :x

Santorum renews promise to root out obscene pornography

Rick Santorum doubled down Sunday on a campaign promise to crack down on the distribution of explicit pornography if elected president, saying exposure to the content "can be very damaging."

A position paper on Santorum's campaign website argues that current obscenity laws already prohibit the distribution of "hardcore (obscene) pornography," and that the Obama administration has failed to enforce these restrictions. As president, Santorum says he would instruct his attorney general to prosecute those who distribute content his administration deems "obscene."

"We would, of course, as president enforce those laws, because obviously Congress in its wisdom understood that hardcore pornography is very damaging, particularly to young people, and that exposure on the Internet can be very damaging," Santorum said during an interview on ABC's "This Week." "There are laws against purveying hard-core pornography. And that--we have attorney generals in the country, at least under the Bush administration, who did prosecute that. And this administration isn't. And I simply said I would follow the law, which I know in the case of Barack Obama can be somewhat of a hefty challenge for him, but we're going to do it as president."

Santorum, however, has yet to provide a specific definition of what kind of pornography his attorney general would prosecute. Under former President George W. Bush, the Justice Department focused primarily on small distributors that produced what it considered extreme content, but largely left the major production studios alone.

In interviews with Yahoo News last week, porn industry leaders--who produced their content throughout the Bush Administration--said they weren't worried about Santorum's threat to shut down their business.

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:39 pm

Van wrote:No way a guy who can't even consolidate a voting base faced with no other choice but Rick Santorum is going to do squat against the massive media/money machine Obama will have behind him come November.

This has all become much ado about nothing. Short of something disastrous happening between now and the election, Obama is a lock.

Sorry Van, but you're way way off on this one. The election comes down to the final ten million independants. JUST like ALL of them. THE left is dug in, and so is the right. LAST TIME, obama got 5.5 million more than McCain.

THIS TIME will be different. The independants will swing torward Romney, giving him the close election.

You can take that to the bank you imbicile.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:52 pm

I can? Cool. See, I don't even want Obama to win, and still I'll offer you a hungus bet over this presidential election.

Care to back up your big mouth with a bet that will finally force you to leave this place for good?

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:01 pm

Van wrote:No way a guy who can't even consolidate a voting base faced with no other choice but Rick Santorum is going to do squat against the massive media/money machine Obama will have behind him come November.

This has all become much ado about nothing. Short of something disastrous happening between now and the election, Obama is a lock.

Spot on, Van. Obama is sitting back and letting the idiot Republican candidates beat each other up and stuffing his war chest to mount his campaign. It will be a bloodbath in November. Obama isn't my guy either, but he's going to win reelection, and the Republicans will have to go back to the drawing board trying to figure out if there's an intelligent being in their party who would run for president.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:18 pm

Mace, it just seems to me that the Republicans need to quit with all this empty pandering to the religious far right. They're always going to own that voting block anyway, so why make themselves appear so foolish to everyone else?

Diego in Seattle · Post by **Diego in Seattle** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:38 pm

Van wrote:Mace, it just seems to me that the Republicans need to quit with all this empty pandering to the religious far right. They're always going to own that voting block anyway, so why make themselves appear so foolish to everyone else?

I'd say that's 75% of it. Tha last part is having a candidate who can appear to represent more than the country club set. And this will involve a lot more than donning a flannel shirt at certain photo ops with a foot atop a hay bale.

I don't see the republicans having someone fitting those bills getting a sniff anytime in the near future.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:42 pm

Ron Paul fit that bill, on both counts. He's just not electable.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:22 pm

It appears that Van's politics are as simplistic and and hollow as his historical analysis. Ron Paul is a nutjob. A likeable nutjob, but a hack all the same. Sure, he's right about the essential incompetence of the entire American military policy and its historical paradigm, and he's basically sane concerning the insane drug laws in this country. But...that's pretty much it as far as his grip on reality goes. Sure, he's right about the galling shyster Wall Street crimes that have and continue to occur, but...he's a total deregulator. Oh yeah, he supported the dismantling of Glass-Steagall, and even going back to the savings and loan deregulation which brought us Keating and McCain smirking as they robbed old ladies, etc. And despite his weird half-hearted wandering denials, he did in fact name his son after Ayn Rand--surely one of the biggest frauds in the history of modern pop culture. Like Greenspan (who had her picture on his desk), Ron Paul has long since gone down with the ship, a completely disgraced fraud. The fact that he's still dottering about providing some breathing room for folks who want to feel part of the GOP but are properly disgusted at the "frothmix" puddle of crapulence that is the current "race" among ...who?...Santorum and Romney? Are you fucking kidding? But, sure, go on pretending that he's somehow someone you could imagine running the country.

Van · Post by **Van** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:52 pm

All I said was that he met Diego's two criteria: 1. Doesn't pander to the religious far right. 2. Doesn't come off as part of the country club crowd. Among the Republican candidates Ron Paul is clearly the only one about whom those things can be said.

Oh, and I added that he's unelectable, a telling point you conveniently skipped. Once again, though, there you are, spinning off into another nonsensical argument by attempting to put words in my mouth.

You know, Nick, for a reasonably bright guy, you really, truly suck at debate.

Mace · Post by **Mace** » Sun Mar 18, 2012 11:06 pm

Van wrote:Mace, it just seems to me that the Republicans need to quit with all this empty pandering to the religious far right. They're always going to own that voting block anyway, so why make themselves appear so foolish to everyone else?

Agreed. The religous right nutjobs only serve as an anchor around the necks of the candidates to sink them. You'd think they would have figured that out by now.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael · Sun Mar 18, 2012 11:28 pm

Van wrote: You know, Nick, for a reasonably bright guy...

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 12:42 am

Papa Willie wrote:The funniest thing thus far is occasionally dropping by MSNBC. Those lib faggots don't report on ANYTHING other than the Republicans now. The only thing they're interested in is trying to find out which one of them they're going to dig up shit on and cry about. It's actually good, humorous entertainment.

so they should not cover politics? that poitical soap opera crap is what gives all of 'em, Maddow included, boners.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 1:45 am

Rachel Maddow with a boner? Thanks, asshole. That's an image I really didn't need.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:07 am

Papa Willie wrote:crappie fishing accident.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:38 am

Papa Willie wrote:The only thing they're interested in is trying to find out which one of them they're going to dig up shit on

they don't have to dig up shit on any of those assclowns.....their party has been hijacked by bible thumping zealots who've already alienated about 35% of the potential voters just on the issue of womens rights.....none of them stands a chance in hell of beating obama unless they dig up some pictures of him playing basketball with hitler....

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:53 am

Van wrote:Mace, it just seems to me that the Republicans need to quit with all this empty pandering to the religious far right. They're always going to own that voting block anyway, so why make themselves appear so foolish to everyone else?

It doesn't stop democrats from pandering to nigggers, does it?

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:43 am

mvscal wrote:
Van wrote:Mace, it just seems to me that the Republicans need to quit with all this empty pandering to the religious far right. They're always going to own that voting block anyway, so why make themselves appear so foolish to everyone else?
It doesn't stop democrats from pandering to nigggers, does it?

RAAAAAAAAAAAAACK! HISTORIC RACK! ALL TIME RACK! WOW, you hit it out of the universe!!!!

Felix is a fuckin fool, he defends msnbc??? A network that can be summed up like this, Democrats good and perfect, Republicans corrupt and bad and evil. WOW, thats credible.

THEN, the sick libs like felix try to paint Bill O'reilly in the exact same vain, HOWEVER, thats a lie.
During the 8 years of the Bush administration, Bill totally slammed G W whenever he felt necessary.
And thats the point, msnbc thinks Obama is GOD. There is no comparison here.

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:58 am

Van wrote:I can? Cool. See, I don't even want Obama to win, and still I'll offer you a hungus bet over this presidential election.

Care to back up your big mouth with a bet that will finally force you to leave this place for good?

Van, of course you want me to leave this place, it fits your M O to a tee. You are exactly like the far left liberals over at msnbc. They dont want any debate either. Ed Shultz Lawrence O donnell and Rachel Maddow are so corrupt in their liberal bubble, they totally shun any and all debate.
Their shows revolve around patting each other on the back and pushing their propoganda.
Van, you are the exact same, When I come in and debate you, your dick shrinks up into a pussy,
I destroy you with a healthy dose of practical common sense, and your done.

You need to stop being a pussy and "man up" and take your beat downs with a grain of salt.

Truman · Post by **Truman** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 12:43 pm

bradhusker wrote:Ed Shultz Lawrence O donnell and Rachel Maddow are so corrupt in their liberal bubble, they totally shun any and all debate.
Their shows revolve around patting each other on the back and pushing their propoganda.

I don't believe they care how you feel, brad. All they care about is that you watch.

You DO realize these "opinion" shows are designed to entertain a specific, target audience while infuriating others, correct? If you don't like the message, change the channel. Dumbass.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:30 pm

Felix is a fuckin fool, he defends msnbc??? A network that can be summed up like this,

THEN, the sick libs like felix try to paint Bill O'reilly in the exact same vain, HOWEVER, thats a lie.

where do you dredge this shit up? I've said numerous times I'm not a big fan of Obama but o'reilly is an idiot...... if the republicans are going to continue down the path they're on they don't stand a chance in the general election.....Romney has all the charisma of my living room couch and Santorum is a religious nut job who's hell bent on imposing his moral standards on everyone else.....good luck on that....

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:21 pm

mvscal wrote:
Van wrote:Mace, it just seems to me that the Republicans need to quit with all this empty pandering to the religious far right. They're always going to own that voting block anyway, so why make themselves appear so foolish to everyone else?
It doesn't stop democrats from pandering to nigggers, does it?

They aren't staring at a field of candidates including Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul. The Dems can needlessly pander to leper colonies and they're still going to win this next presidential election.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:34 pm

brad, you scurrilous cunt, look, you're the one who boasted that I could "take it to the bank."

So, can I or can't I? Are you going to man up and stand by your claim or are you going to pussy out? I'm offering you a chance to punt me from this board with a victory in November by your plastic milquetoast hero. As confident as you supposedly are of Romney defeating Obama, what have you got to lose?

See, I can't stand seeing you tard the fuck up every thread in which your trolling posts appear, and the Admins have yet to see fit to punt you for your incessant spamming. That being the case, I figure, okay, how else can I get this plague on the board to leave?

I want you gone badly enough that I'm willing to risk punting myself. Based on your own big mouth, you've been handed a smashmouth challenge. What's your answer, vaghusker?

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 5:14 pm

Van wrote:I want you gone badly enough that I'm willing to risk punting myself.

However improbable you might deem that risk to be, it's not worth it.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 5:20 pm

It's a win-win. Either he accepts the challenge and we're finally rid of him, or he pusses out and has to live with everyone here knowing he's not just a horrible troll but also a coward.

I'm betting on the latter.

Terry in Crapchester · Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:22 pm

Van wrote:brad, you scurrilous cunt, look, you're the one who boasted that I could "take it to the bank."

So, can I or can't I? Are you going to man up and stand by your claim or are you going to pussy out? I'm offering you a chance to punt me from this board with a victory in November by your plastic milquetoast hero. As confident as you supposedly are of Romney defeating Obama, what have you got to lose?

See, I can't stand seeing you tard the fuck up every thread in which your trolling posts appear, and the Admins have yet to see fit to punt you for your incessant spamming. That being the case, I figure, okay, how else can I get this plague on the board to leave?

I want you gone badly enough that I'm willing to risk punting myself. Based on your own big mouth, you've been handed a smashmouth challenge. What's your answer, vaghusker?

I want in on this action myself.

So what do you say, brad? You have a two-for-one in place right now.

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:24 pm

Van wrote:It's a win-win. Either he accepts the challenge and we're finally rid of him, or he pusses out and has to live with everyone here knowing he's not just a horrible troll but also a coward.

I'm betting on the latter.

VAN, you really are a clueless prick fag. The reason you make a wager about punting someone from the board is because you cant stand honest debate. YOU are a LIAR, a coward, and a PUSSY all rolled up into one.

I can make a bet, without being run from a forum where we can speak our minds.

People like you are cowards to your very core. YOU dont like debate, you dont like other people's views when they are opposed to your own sick and twisted views.

Thats why I said you were EXACTLY like the liberal cowards over at msnbc, they dont like open discussion and debate over BOTH sides of the issues. THEY absolutely hate other viewpoints different from their own.

NOW, you call me a troll? WHAT A JOKE. I destroy you in debate after debate, and as a result, you resort to name calling.

Typical liberal nutjob wacko, nice.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:31 pm

Terry in Crapchester wrote:
Van wrote:I'm offering you a chance to punt me from this board with a victory in November by your plastic milquetoast hero.
I want in on this action myself.

So what do you say, brad? You have a two-for-one in place right now.

count me in.....

here's your chance to rid this board of three "liberal nutjob wacko"s...

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:33 pm

Truman wrote:
bradhusker wrote:Ed Shultz Lawrence O donnell and Rachel Maddow are so corrupt in their liberal bubble, they totally shun any and all debate.
Their shows revolve around patting each other on the back and pushing their propoganda.
I don't believe they care how you feel, brad. All they care about is that you watch.

You DO realize these "opinion" shows are designed to entertain a specific, target audience while infuriating others, correct? If you don't like the message, change the channel. Dumbass.

Truman? I dont watch it because I expect to see open and honest debate. I watch it so I can inform others of the sheer lies and distortions. DO YOU KNOW WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT?

Because there are thousands of idiots out there who get brainwashed by this crap. If I can help just one person to see the lies and distortions over on msnbc, ITS WORTH IT.

ANY channel that does NOT embrace all sides of an issue, is dangerous. Such a show appears on msnbc at 3 pm eastern time. Martin Bashir, some black muslim mixbreed, spews hate every day.
The main premise of his show is "republicans bad and corrupt and racist," and "democrats are good right and fair".

A show like this is dangerous to stupid people. They watch this shit, and they are brainwashed to the democrat party for life. AND, nowadays, there are more and more stupid fools walking this earth.

My job is to expose this bullshit, one day at a time.

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:40 pm

Felix wrote:
Felix is a fuckin fool, he defends msnbc??? A network that can be summed up like this,

THEN, the sick libs like felix try to paint Bill O'reilly in the exact same vain, HOWEVER, thats a lie.
where do you dredge this shit up? I've said numerous times I'm not a big fan of Obama but o'reilly is an idiot...... if the republicans are going to continue down the path they're on they don't stand a chance in the general election.....Romney has all the charisma of my living room couch and Santorum is a religious nut job who's hell bent on imposing his moral standards on everyone else.....good luck on that....

Felix, O reilly is an idiot? what does that make you then? a retard?

Bill O reilly is an accomplished author. He also has a nightly show where liberals are brought on, and discussions go forth on many many issues. The viewer is then able to hear what BOTH sides think and feel, BOTH SIDES.

I know that your tiny brain cant understand that open debates and discussion between both sides is a good thing.

Go back to msnbc where Martin Bashir talks to Julian Epstein, a democratic strategist who also happens to be a jewish faggott liberal creep, and Dana Milbank, another faggot liberal who appeared nightly with Keith Olberman, before Olberman was run from the station for being a sick wack job.

enjoy your news over there with the creeps and weirdos.

Get fucked · Post by **Get fucked** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:48 pm

bradhusker wrote: . . . nothing much . . .

Do us all a favor and go suffocate in a semen crusted toilet full of trucker diarrhhea. Breath deeep. Drink until you are sated.

and Get Fucked

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:50 pm

Jsc810 wrote::cry:
bradhusker wrote: I watch it so I can inform others of the sheer lies and distortions.

ANY channel that does NOT embrace all sides of an issue, is dangerous.

A show like this is dangerous to stupid people.

My job is to expose this bullshit, one day at a time.
You must be a Fox News watcher as well. Keep up the good work.

Well Jsc, lets compare? shall we?

Martin Bashir, 3pm daily on msnbc. Mixed black muslim, probably hates his own skin color, spews hate every single day. ONLY has guests who agree with him, Creeps like Julian Epstein, a democratic strategist, who also happens to be a dick sucking faggott jew. And, Dana Milbank, another liberal wackjob who happens to be a dicksucker who used to appear nightly on Keith Olberman's show before Olberman was thrown off msnbc for good/

Bill O reilly, the O reilly Factor, 8 pm eastern Fox news.
Bill constantly has opposing viewpoints on his show, famous and not so famous liberals come on the show to have open debate and discussions, AND then the viewer gets to make up their own mind.

What does this mean? It means that I dont care if you like or dis-like Bill O reilly. BUT, the FACT remains that he brings on the opposing viewpoints onto his show nightly. OPEN debates and discussions ensue on a nightly basis. The viewer gets to decide for themselves.

That my friend is the huge difference between msnbc and Fox. If you cant understand that, then you are probably brain dead.

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:53 pm

Get fucked wrote:
bradhusker wrote: . . . nothing much . . .
Do us all a favor and go suffocate in a semen crusted toilet full of trucker diarrhhea. Breath deeep. Drink until you are sated.

and Get Fucked

Hey get fucked troll? Since you dont like my exposing msnbc and the fags like Julian Epstein who appear on Martin Bashir's show, I can only assume that you yourself are a dick sucking creepy weirdo.
die of aids.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:05 pm

brad, since this is apparently your first day in class, allow me to clue you in to a few T1B realities...

1. I am hardly known here as a political liberal. In most things, the TIB liberals view me as their opponent.

2. I don't like to debate?

Did you really just post that?

Yeah, besides Wags' head exploding and a hysterically laughing Mgo tossing himself out a window, let's see how much support you'll get for that one.

See, I'm kinda really well known for...oh, never mind.

So, how long are going to continue dancing around the subject? You've been presented with a clear challenge: Obama wins, and you leave the board for good. Romney wins, and I leave the board for good. Oh, and you even get to include TiC and Felix.

Your choice is clear. Either you man up and accept the challenge in support of your "take it to the bank" guarantee...or you're an admitted coward.

Which will it be?

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:17 pm

Ok, I'll take the bet, I have Romney, and you guys have Obama. This november, we shall see who gets the boot for good.

I take this bet against my better judgement. Not because I think I will lose, BUT because I dont like being banned from anywhere. I liken that to censorship, and as you may or may not know, censorship of any kind is deplorable.

That being said, I accept your bet. Romney vs. Obama. This November. ITS ON FAGGOTTS!!!!!

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:31 pm

Good deal.

And no, it's not censorship. The board isn't banning you. You're agreeing to leave of your own free will should your candidate lose.

How fucking freaky is this, anyway? I've been here over ten years, and now I'm pinning my continued presence at T1B on the success of Barack freaking Obama, a guy who represents everything I completely loathe about modern American politics?

Well, that's it. If Romney wins, I will never post here again—and by "here" I mean T1B as a whole, not just this main board—nor will TiC or Felix. If Obama wins, you're gonzo. No coming back under a different nic, either. This is your honor at stake. Don't even try to Mickey Mouse your way around your word. The day after the election, either you or we will go forever silent.

R-Jack · Post by **R-Jack** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:33 pm

bradhusker wrote:as you may or may not know, censorship of any kind is deplorable.

Bradhusker........................advocate for kiddie porn.

bradhusker · Post by **bradhusker** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:54 pm

Van wrote:Good deal.

And no, it's not censorship. The board isn't banning you. You're agreeing to leave of your own free will should your candidate lose.

How fucking freaky is this, anyway? I've been here over ten years, and now I'm pinning my continued presence at T1B on the success of Barack freaking Obama, a guy who represents everything I completely loathe about modern American politics?

Well, that's it. If Romney wins, I will never post here again—and by "here" I mean T1B as a whole, not just this main board—nor will TiC or Felix. If Obama wins, you're gonzo. No coming back under a different nic, either. This is your honor at stake. Don't even try to Mickey Mouse your way around your word. The day after the election, either you or we will go forever silent.

Actually, it is a form of censorship, though you may dis-agree. Of course I will honor the bet, I am a man of my word, you can count on it. The reason I liken it to censorship is due to the fact that its so permanent, FOREVER!! You could have made the bet for 1 year 2 years, even 10 years! BUT NO, Van being the man of wisdom, chose to make the bet FOREVER! AN ETERNITY of bannishment.

OK, fine by me, BUT know this, its still censorship of thoughts and ideas. AND, if I lose, thats something you'll have to live with all the rest of your days. AND, your heirs too.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:58 pm

it's a stupid bet, either way it turns out.

Van · Post by **Van** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 9:08 pm

That's like saying death constitutes censorship. No, it doesn't. Censorship is when someone or something else denies you the freedom to express yourself.

If this is censorship at all, it's merely self-censorship.

Since you clearly don't have the self-discipline to curb your horrible trolling, the only way I could get you to stop was to appeal to your ego and let you hoist yourself on your own petard.

See, I would've been fine with your idea of a temporary self-bannishment, except that I know you'd just came back and pull the same garbage again the moment you were free to do so. That's not good enough. I'm never not going to cringe whenever I see your childish trolling posts, so why boot you for only a month or a year?

The problem here is what I stated before: What if some disaster hits our economy between now and the election? There is still time for Obama to fall completely out of favor again. As it stands now, absolutely, he's a sure thing to roll Romney in November, and that's what I'm banking on. I just have to hope nothing too major happens between now and then.

R-Jack · Post by **R-Jack** » Mon Mar 19, 2012 10:00 pm

Van wrote:he's a sure thing to roll Romney in November, and that's what I'm banking on. I just have to hope nothing too major happens between now and then.

Like voters under 28 realizing he's half white and a millionare?