If you're genuinely concerned about censorship, why would you choose the Democratic Party as the one to trust?
October 7, 2024
"Seventeen pornographic film actors on Monday announced that they had launched a $100,000 ad campaign on porn sites warning that Project 2025.... wants to ban pornography and imprison people who produce it."
"The online ads will run in the states that will decide the presidency: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada.... Vice President Kamala Harris is losing to former President Donald J. Trump among men, but younger men might be winnable — and pornographic websites are among the most heavily trafficked on the internet.... Mr. Trump has sought to distance himself from Project 2025, saying he knows nothing about it or the people involved in its creation...."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
131 comments:
So much of the "Project 2025" fearmongering is predicated on voters just ignoring everything they've known about Trump going back 40 years. Like, just using common sense, you really expect people to believe that a famous playboy and cad who maybe maybe not slept with a pornstar wants to ban abortion and pornography? This is Trump, not Mike Pence!
It's the one stupid thing in the "suggestions" - which is all project 2025 is. Suggestions. No one is going to ban porn.
The lies from the groomers, the abortionists, and the pornographers are becoming genuinely desperate. Can they smell their deaths approaching?
What a waste of money.
If I did porn I think my name would be Chad Hominem, mostly because of what I'd like to say to these gaslighting untermenschen.
As the NYT cheers misinformation.
You didnt think they could get this lame
You're saying Ride Space Mountain isn't your porn name?
$100,000 is really going to move the needle.
"If you're genuinely concerned about censorship, why would you choose the Democratic Party as the one to trust?"
As pornographers I can understand why they would lean toward the Democrat party's understanding of "Free speech". Since the days of the Berkley "Free Speech Movement" they have been primarily out to defend porn. Actual political speech, only if you agree with them.
I'd like to see a porn where Trump is fucking Kamala. That would be funny!
On pornography, the D-party would not censor because it is destructive. Destruction breeds chaos breeds fear breads need for government control.
Ann said:
"If you're genuinely concerned about censorship, why would you choose the Democratic Party as the one to trust? "
---
Because that is not the real target of Democrat party censorship: Political speech and so called "misinformation" is.
Lol. You don't have to keep selling me on Trump ...
Honestly the Democratic Party would be much more likely to support a policy such as this. Not so much on censorship, but rather exploitation.
And at what point in recent history have they been concerned about offending men?
Given Trump's "relationship" with Stormy Daniels, why would Trump ban porn, even if he could? We have a First Amendment. Old Justice Potter Stewart must be spinning in his grave. The hardest of the hard-core porn is free and available to all on the internet.
So they want you to believe DONALD TRUMP wants to ban porn?
Pussy Riot has a funny soft porn music video about Trump.
Make America Great Again.
Saint Croix said...
$100,000 is really going to move the needle.
-----------
The Russians spent a quarter of that on stupid Facebook ads in the 2016 election on a $2B election. Look what the Dem's were able to do with that.
So, they're going with "don't harsh my fap" to reach the youts. Somebody thinks it's 1986 and Jerry Falwell and the Gipper are still in charge. Something tells me Larry Flynt would be a Trump supporter today. Meanwhile, what about this thing I've heard of called OnlyFans?
It's cultural, not political. These folks are tone deaf and not that bright. It's fourth and seventeen, time's running out, and they're going deep.
Putin, the Cheneys, the Ayatollah, Zelensky, Kinzinger, Union bosses, Hollywood celebrities and now some more characters of upstanding virtue, pornographers and prostitutes. They're The Good Guys!!!
Porn actors. Not porn stars? Do mere porn actors have this kind of money?
Stormy Daniels, a real porn star, could fund this all by herself.
After chasing down about 10 of these Project 2025 disinformation campaigns I simply reject out of hand every P25 "argument" I see or hear. Not one has panned out. From banning books to defunding the National Hurricane Center they were all 100% false. FB never labels them false or appends a note to them, because FB likes disinfo from their side. P25 is searchable PDFs. You can find the info in minutes, if not seconds. But Lefties don't do research, they just spread rumors, because Orange Man Bad.
If you're genuinely concerned about censorship, why would you choose the Democratic Party as the one to trust?
But if you're into making and distributing porn, or if it is a priority issue for you, supporting degenerate Democrats makes perfect sense. If you're into pushing transgenderism on little kids, you turn to Democrats. If you're into child mutilation of late term abortion (infanticide) you turn to Democrats.
Look at the naked bike parade to "save the plant" in Madison, WI with children present. All Democrat exhibitionists.
If you're genuinely concerned about censorship, why would you choose the Democratic Party as the one to trust?
Hmmm. Nuerosyphllis?
Chris said…
“What a waste of money.”
A fool and his money are soon parted.
The Project 2025 thing is so weird.
"He's Hitler!"
"He's a rapist!"
"He's a felon!"
And the Harris campaign thinks they can sink his campaign by going on and on about "Project 2025"?
Such a strange campaign.
These are male porn stars who heard Trump cares about the little guy and they were like, what about us?
Yet the NYT could look it up, could see if P25 actually "bans porn," but the alleged reporter just repeats the lie uncritically. Instead of doing journalism. See my comment below for why I call this a lie.
Nah, too close. But I've thought of some other variations:
Ric Flayher - The PAWG Slayher
A Pimp Named Nature Boy
Richard Zinourmus (It's Greek)
Dr. Rizz McMasterschlong
Captain Afterglow
It's important to have lots of options for trademark purposes.
Trump would ban gorilla fight videos before he'd ban porn.
You might see that metaphorically in November. Alternatively, things could go the other way with Kamala dispensing the discipline. A horrible thought, that.
The Trump campaign should run the same ad in the entire Bible Belt.
This is always the problem with the Democratic Party. There’s no reasonable dialogue with Democrats. Project 25 was a well meaning attempt to recommend solutions that the authors thought might solve what they considered to be issues facing our country. Instead of engaging on the issues, Democrats attacked Trump. Campaign issue! It’s all Democrats ever think about. Then idiots complain - why don’t Republicans tackle the deficit, etc. This is why.
Democrats fix your party so we can find mutually acceptable solutions to our problems.
Countering these ads is going to be hard. The Trump people may think they can beat these guys off quickly, but they're just going to keep coming.
...launched a $100,000 ad campaign on porn sites...
Seems like a small budget, but would underpricing of those ads by porn sites constitute an illegal in-kind campaign contribution to the Harris campaign if the ads link Project 2025 to Trump?
The filing of an FEC filed against the Kamala campaign linking her to the porn industry ad campaign might turn the tables.
Repubs ought to be treating the Communist Manifesto like they're doing P2025.
I wonder what the standard is for the Times allowing comments. In at least half the articles I really want to see the reader reaction, comments are closed.
Vice President Kamala Harris is losing to former President Donald J. Trump among men, but younger men might be winnable — and pornographic websites are among the most heavily trafficked on the internet....
Hilarious!!! We all realize men often listen to their little head over their big head. But to assume male Trump voters are porn watching serial masterbaters and you can peel them away via a fake porn ban is why Harris is loosing the male vote so badly.
Cock the Vote
you get your porn name by combining the name of your first pet (first name) with the state you grew up in (last name).
..."Mr. Trump has sought to distance himself..." I notice that it seems the only people talking about Project 2025, are the people using it as an accusation. I've seen zero stories treating it as the principle subject and either discrediting or endorsing it. Not saying that they don't exist - it's just that it's used much more as a prop to discredit opposition.
It's the ultimate MacGuffin.
I rate this article as FALSE. Project 2025 is organized by departments that report to the executive branch. The film industry falls under Commerce (if you have a different suggestion let me know, I'll check). There is no mention of "porn" or any of its iterations, or "film" (nor its synonyms like motion picture, cinema, etc.) or "adult" and even the word "actor" appears only once and not in relation to the profession but in an anodyne reference to another subject. The word "obscene" is not in there either. "Censorship" is mentioned once, in a sentence about stopping Big Tech from doing it.
It's not there. NYT is deliberately spreading disinformation to help the Harris campaign.
Project 2025 is not running for President. Every major candidate for Presudent has condemned Project 2025, Donald Trump specifically had denounced Project 2025. Remember that if you catch yourself thinking to yourself one side lies more than the other…
Mr. Trump has sought to distance himself from Project 2025, saying he knows nothing about it or the people involved in its creation.
I remember an episode of Designing Women where the character portrayed by Dixie Carter was outraged about Playboy magazine and wanted to ban it. The line in the script she uttered was, "everybody knows the first amendment only applies to political speech."
I thought the left already locked up the creepy guy jerking off in front of his computer vote?
ron winkleheimer said...
you get your porn name by combining the name of your first pet (first name) with the state you grew up in (last name).
I dunno. "Goldfish Massachusetts"?
I thought it was the street you grew up on?
Nor does the word "sites" as in "porn sites" appear, you know like in the text Althouse quoted, except for a government URL in the footnotes that contains the word "sites" but not "porn" of course.
Maybe its to ban porn on government computers. I could see why democrats would oppose that. What would the bureaucrats do all day if that happened?
I'm going to bet the majority of porn addicted basement dwelling male masterbaters are beta-male democrats. Walz and Doug Emoff fit the bill.
If I start a group named Pedos for Kamala, does she have to distance herself from it? Or will she embrace it, having already secured the all-important Porn Actor vote?
paying hush money is not 'censorship'??
I changed it to state because the name of the street I grew up on is lame.
Finally found porn mentioned in the FCC chapter (28). Shocker: They want to make sure licensed broadcasters don't show "child pornography." There it is. The one and only mention of porn in Project 2025.
Spunky Carolina
It truly is disturbing how often and how easily the leftist news outlets lie for The Cause. Sure this is dumb issue few care about, but why lie about something so easily checked?
would these ad qualify as PSA?
From the post:
If you're genuinely concerned about censorship, why would you choose the Democratic Party as the one to trust? "
Exactly.
They already have those voters in hand ,(couldnt resist)
Well, in that case, my name would be Baxter Tennessee.
Ladies,
Your resistance he'll disarm,
With his Southern charms.
Does that ban include reporters?
It did in 2016, didn't it?
Pornos for Kamala!
Imagine spending a hundred grand and only winning over David Duchovny, Charlie Sheen, James Franco, and Bill Cosby, who are already voting Democrat anyway.
Screw Porn.
What America will look like if we go full D
My favorite 2025 mandate is the section on page 657 requiring all pizzas include pineapple. As a requirement, not an option
John Henry
That's a nod to the Hawaiian delegation. No stereotyping, because it's true.
Rosie, you're all right, you wear my ring
When you hold me tight, Rosie, that's my thing
When you turn out the light, I got to hand it to me
Looks like it's me and you again tonight, Rosie
Libs love fiction.
Its always been so.
Hereafter in all worldwide communiques: The 17.
My study of history leads me to believe that they will not ban guns in Texas, abortions in New York, and pornography anywhere on earth.....A man is seldom more harmlessly occupied than when he is watching porn. I bet Harvey Weinstein and Sean Combs wish that they were porn addicts rather than players.
Even if they were right, seventeen is an odd account.
Pass the Pussy in a Hat dancing on a global warming tin roof, please.
Front hole galore.
Back hole... whore h/t NAACP and we'll have a gay old time.
Top hole and make it snappy.
Ashley... Biden, Joe too. Democratic, Equivocal, Inclusive (IED) Respect!
If you're genuinely concerned about censorship, why would you choose the Democratic Party as the one to trust?
Because the Democratic Party is not passing laws that mandate censorship and the Republicans do, even though they are the ones claiming they are for the free exchange of ideas.
Consider every case of book banning and ridiculous laws that have been passed in the last few years to censor ideas and discussion of sensitive topics. They are not coming from the Democrats. Just look at at the efforts to pull "And Tango makes Three" or a myriad of other titles, out of public and school libraries.
Not after she paid Trump the judgement he got on her lies.
Look for signs that the Kamala campaign is getting desperate.
This is another one.
Freder is all in for porn and queer books for kids.
Another question. How much does this cohort overlap with the infamous 51 security officials?
Project 2025, eh. The Democrat campaign is wholly based on bull sh!t.
If you're genuinely concerned about censorship, why would you choose the Democratic Party as the one to trust?
Because they're useful idiots who expect the crocodile to eat them last
Bull sh!t and more bull sh!t.
Well, if my favorite porn star "actress" says to vote for Kamala, then by golly I'm gonna vote for Kamala. I know high quality reasoning when I see it.
R's and normals want porn out of the public school library. Lefitsts - right on Q - lie about book banning.
(a) Donald Trump sleeps with porn stars, (b) Donald Trump grabs women by the pu**y, (c) Donald Trump hates women, (d) Donald Trump wants to ban all porn?
My thought, too, as well as having more money than sense.
Vice President Kamala Harris is losing to former President Donald J. Trump among men, but younger men might be winnable — and pornographic websites are among the most heavily trafficked on the internet....
Kind of ridiculous no one's seemed to pick up on this. Pretty insulting to young American men if you ask me. No wonder Harris isn't gaining traction among them.
Explain why "And Tango makes Three" is porn. And there is a difference between "queer books" (and I would like to know what your definition of a queer book is) and porn.
Pornography is downstream from geography. Helene!
Bob Boyd said...
"Trump would ban gorilla fight videos before he'd ban porn."
Harambe nods in approval.
ron winkleheimer said...
"You get your porn name by combining the name of your first pet (first name) with the state you grew up in (last name)."
Guinea Ohio.
She was an unnamed Guinea Pig that I was responsible for. I guess I could go with Cavy Ohio; but we did not know at the time that "Cavy" was an alternative name for "Guinea Pig".
Words have meanings. Not buying a specific book or genre for a public library or shelving a book in a different section of a public library is not ''banning'' it.
Freder - That you do not understand that parents do not want sex, queer, gay sex or otherwise books available to their young kids = why you are a dedicated loyal leftist.
Freder, you need to look at what Prominent Democrats say about Freedom of Speech. John Kerry laments its presence, both Harris and Walz are all about curtailing it, all citing "misinformation" -- as if the solution to misinformation is Government oversight vs. More Speech. I've read not one Democrat voice chastising this kind of idea. Indeed, California seeks to curtail it but then the Feds nixed that -- this time.
Freder - That you do not understand that parents do not want sex, queer, gay sex or otherwise books available to their young kids = why you are a dedicated loyal leftist.
If you are a parent and don't want your children exposed to these things, then don't allow it. It is not your job, nor the government's, to tell other parents what their children can or can not read.
No, it is called "extortion." The one being paid is the criminal.
The massive amount of free speech that the internet provided gutted the traditional adult film industry. So I can see why these porn stars would support Democrat censorship. The Democrats don't really censor corporate free speech; they go after individual free speech. These porn stars probably want the Democrats to apply that model to porn to get rid of the small, independent players out there so they can get back to making some real money.
Freder - these are books found in GOVERNMENT schools. You assume parents are not allowed to reject what their children are exposed to? That just goes to show us - you assume the government knows best. The people have no power. That's backwards, Freder. We The People should control our government. You leftists are authoritarians who have forgotten who is supposed to be in charge.
Freder has trouble telling 4th grade libraries from parent's homes. No surprise.
If it's a choice between censoring porn or censoring political opinions, I know which the founding fathers would choose.
And I'd agree with them.
Shorter liar left: Leftists will groom your children with SEX = Gay and/or otherwise - as superiorist authoritarian leftists see fit, and YOU will shut up about it.
Also leftist: Leftists will LIE and threaten you and use the "Book banning" Lie - to make you shut up.
This is why most of us want to tell you leftists to go F yourselves. Groomers. Stay the hell away from our children.
In the Foreward on page 5 it does say "Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned." So at least in this case there seems to be some basis for the claim about what's in Project 2025. But when you get into the more detailed proposals it only mentions child porn, once in regard to Section 230 (page 849) and once in regard to where the DOJ should focus (page 557).
It's kind of sad when some random blog commenter does more research than an NYT reporter.
Tommy Pistol? Little Puck? Reminds me of this quote from She Wore a Yellow Ribbon:
Captain Nathan Brittles: What? Sergeant... my appointment: chief of scouts! With a rank of Lt. Colonel. And will you look at those endorsements: Phil Sheridan, William Tecumseh Sherman and Ulysses Simpson Grant, President of The United States of America! There's three aces for you, boy!
Sgt. Tyree: Yeah, but I kinda wish you'da been a-holdin' a full hand.
Captain Nathan Brittles: Huh? Full hand? Whaddaya mean: full hand?
Sgt. Tyree: Robert E. Lee, sir.
Captain Nathan Brittles: Oh. Heh... wouldn't a been bad. Let's go
But that's almost exactly the same kind of MacGuffin, isn't it, Freder? Tell you what, how about you name 5 public school districts that have actually banned books, 1,000 extra points if they burned them. What I have found is that school districts, under the prodding of concerned parents, re-classify their books and keep them in 'age-appropriate' shelves, and thereby control what kids check out.
If it were me, there are certain books, not many, that I would ban from school libraries, because they are just too pornographic, and even more insidious, they are in a class of pornography that is geared toward young children. It could be argued that they are sexualizing children before puberty, and nurturing / encouraging addiction. If parents want their kids reading that kind of thing, let them provide it - and own the results. Keep my kids out of it.
You assume parents are not allowed to reject what their children are exposed to?
Actually, that is exactly what I said. Parents should not be allowed to tell other parents what their children are exposed to.
Roger California (pronounced Roe-Gur) checking in.
Some might think it will get Kamala over the hump.
By Freder's logic (seems strange to put those words side by side) I should accept my children being forced to watch snuff movies if there is another parent who wants their kid to see them. BTW, does the same standard apply to religious books?
I meant nothing derogatory about Ms. Daniels' acting chops, which are considerable. She is a star, afterall.
What on earth does that video have to do with censorship? Talk about off-topic. Not that Althouse will do anything about it, she only scolds lefties when they get off topic.
I should accept my children being forced to watch snuff movies if there is another parent who wants their kid to see them. BTW, does the same standard apply to religious books?
Where did I write anything remotely like that?
I didn't, your reading comprehension sucks.
Not really, the Democrats promote sex work as something to respect. You are repressing women by not letting them do porn.
Republicans have a senate candidate with a "porn stash," so they have that going for them, which is nice.
There is growing Democratic fear over how quickly the Wisconsin Senate race is tightening, with party insiders worried they could shockingly lose the critical contest, Axios has learned.
You are right Jaime. I didn't even think to look in the forward. That whole paragraph is a discussion of schools and the radical trans ideology spreading in them, and it says "Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classified as registered sex offenders." And the sentence about outlawing it is within a reference to "exploitation of children."
There's already laws against that, and have been for more than 30 years, where producers have to "verify" the ages of their "actors."
There's a sentence almost verbatim from the NYT article.
Before we even get to what "Project 2025" says or does not say, we ought to think about (a) whether Trump has actually read or even heard about its contents, and (b) whether he'd want or feel in any way obliged to implement those contents if elected. I focused on (b) above (substantively, it's just implausible on its face that Trump has any interest in banning pornography), but it probably fails on (a) too.
It's a piece put out by the Heritage Foundation, which, though a longstanding and influential conservative organisation, is influential primarily with the kind of establishment conservatives that Trump has spent the last eight years smacking around like they owe him money. There's not much reason to think they have Trump's ear or the ear of anyone in Trump's inner circle. Honestly, he's about as likely to listen to a pornstar on a random podcast as he is to listen to a staffer from the Heritage Foundation. The Heritage agenda only gets implemented indirectly if Trump appoints someone who follows their advice, and even then only as long as it doesn't conflict with anything Trump cares about and doesn't make trouble for him politically. And it's already run into major problems on that last bit.
I don't trust the Democrats on censorship, but I don't trust the Church Lady either.
The Heritage Foundation is reducing the possibility that we will remove the Democrats from power with this nonsensical tilting at windmills.
I saw a clip from the interview where Alex was complaining to camela that most men do not know how to use a tampon. Thank goodness we will have tampon Timmy there is a vice president to educate us.
I believe I know how to use one but since I've never had the need I've never paid that much attention to it I suspect most men are the same.
John Henry
Freder, you do not believe in free speech. You believe in indoctrination and state narratives. If Republicans controlled the schools and your kids had to be indoctrinated, you would be unhappy as shit. Give parents school choice and let them send their kids where they want to send them, Mr. Freedom. Hillary wants to shut down the internet because liberals lost control of Twitter. Control, control, control, that's your party, that's what you are all about. So spare us your pretense that you are a free speech guy.
Early in my career, the name was Slappy Kielbasa. I retired as Doktor Spreadum.
A man can stop a woman's menstruation through conception. Reproductive masculinity meets fertile feminiity by choice. It's not a fetish, it's a child.
Freder believes everything the DNC tells him. Parents can show their kids any books they want AT HOME. If high school kids want queer books (like those showing gay sex, Freder), they can have them.
I've pulled out a few where the string broke or the user stuffed too many up there. When the string breaks, that's called a "cotton ;picker."
If I'm shooting an orgy, it's Spunky Carolina, Wags Carolina, Bogie Carolina, Scout Carolina, Katy Carolina, Vanna Carolina, and Blue Carolina.
And it might sound like an incestuous orgy, but we're all second cousins.
What if your childhood pet was one of those purebred show dogs with 50 names?
“Cookieland Seasyde Hollyberry Rhode Island?”
JSM
What Rabel said.
I must've missed the part where the Republican Party adopted Project 2025 as its official platform. Or maybe somebody could provide me a link of a Republican candidate endorsing Project 2025 and vowing to implement it as policy.
That would really help in knowing which candidates to vote for this time.
One day Kristi Noem will do MILF porn with the name Cricket South Dakota.
Consider every case of book banning...
Books aren't being banned, liar. Some of them are being restricted from little kids looking at them in public places.
Project 2025 has two parts: the Heritage manifesto (which, speaking of porn, is like a Penthouse Forum letter: it never happened nor will it ever happen to the writers), and a list of people to fill all the presidential appointments early in a second Trump Admin.
The Dems are attacking the manifesto to make Trump disavow it, but what they are really hoping to do is to make him disavow the list along with it.
One hopes that either Trump or the people around him are smart enough to keep the list and just call it “My Appointee List” or something, so that they dont fall back in the 2017 trap of having to rely on deep-staters.
JSM
Da Boobs following DeBeers to keep prices up.
Post a Comment