View Full Version : Can't vote for Mitt Romney now...
After I read this.
In specific Romney said, "I want to make sure every new computer sold in this country, after I'm president, has installed on it a filter to block all pornography." He went on to say that he would do it for the children. The full video is in the left-hand margin of this article.
Must protect my porno rights.
http://www.examiner.com/article/mitt-romney-vows-to-ban-pornography-by-installing-a-filter-on-every-u-s-pc
I can see the price of pre-ban computers going up now... [ROFL1]
argonstrom
07-22-2012, 19:15
Good call, because the alternative would never do something like that... [Roll1]
Hitman 6
07-22-2012, 19:18
I would quit my smut habit cold turkey to not have a Socialist President.
I can see the price of pre-ban computers going up now... [ROFL1]
[ROFL3][ROFL2][ROFL3][ROFL2][ROFL3]
jplove71
07-22-2012, 19:19
Shit like this is why I've been building my own computers for the last 15+ years.
islandermyk
07-22-2012, 19:24
Will it void the warranty if I get it "jail-broke" [Tooth]
jackthewall81
07-22-2012, 19:34
I would quit my smut habit cold turkey to not have a Socialist President.
As would I!
islandermyk
07-22-2012, 19:36
[ROFL1]
I was just thinking.... SWAT breaks in cause and while watching Porn... tax payers money well spent [LOL]
spittoon
07-22-2012, 19:38
""byte stryke"" you can retire just by removing the filters[Coffee]
islandermyk
07-22-2012, 19:38
I think there'd be more computers out there than there are guns...
.. they could pry my smart phone off my cold dead hands [ROFL2][ROFL3]
spittoon
07-22-2012, 19:40
.. they could pry my smart phone off my cold dead hands [ROFL2][ROFL3]
that is some funny stuff
islandermyk
07-22-2012, 19:41
Sorry... I'm getting carried away here...
... it blows my mind... PORN?! Really?! PORN?! [ROFL1]
this is not news... he will have his work cut out for him though...
XC700116
07-22-2012, 19:46
I just find it REALLY fricken sad that any presidential candidate has that warped of a view of presidential powers under the constitution. Makes me want to puke.
http://i46.tinypic.com/a5detv.jpg
lol, a 12 year old probably knows more about computers than Romeny. I doubt anyone will have any problem finding porn no matter what firewall is put on at the factory.
I don't think he knows how the internet works. He really shouldn't be going down that slippery slope.
In case he reads this. Try telling people how you are going to remove laws that make no sense. Then do it.
keylay31
07-22-2012, 22:09
Keylay's Broken Record: "Ron Paul 2012!!!!"
Oh wait, he's out of it... I'll probably still write in his name. Why? Because he actually cares what our constitution says. Not trying to start *ANOTHER* flame war about voting for "the lessor of two evils" or not (see other thread), I just feel the need to remind people that there are alternatives. Whether or not you want to vote for the lessor of two evils or for a candidate that has no chance of winning is up to you.
mevshooter
07-22-2012, 22:37
Is it a ridiculous thing to say?
Yes.
Will it prevent me from voting for him?
No.
B.O. has to go.
Keylay's Broken Record: "Ron Paul 2012!!!!"
Oh wait, he's out of it... I'll probably still write in his name. Why? Because he actually cares what our constitution says. Not trying to start *ANOTHER* flame war about voting for "the lessor of two evils" or not (see other thread), I just feel the need to remind people that there are alternatives. Whether or not you want to vote for the lessor of two evils or for a candidate that has no chance of winning is up to you.
Your "alternative" had his chance, he didn't make it...again. I like Ron Paul too but you have to be realistic.
Do what you please with your vote, but at the end of the day, do the math and you will see that your vote still hurts the future of this country if you go 3rd party.
I align this thinking with how most people on this and other gun sites tell liberals, politicians, leaders, democrats etc to take a look back in history and how taking gun rights doesn't work unless the .gov wants to control it's people.
Now along that same line of thinking...how many times has a 3rd party won? How much of a difference has a 3rd party candidate made in an election? How much did a third party candidate change the course of this country? How much influence did the 3rd party candidate have on the elected president?
Some of that is up for debate and I am happy to hear the arguments.
HoneyBadger
07-22-2012, 23:49
Keylay's Broken Record: "Ron Paul 2012!!!!"
Oh wait, he's out of it... I'll probably still write in his name. Why? Because he actually cares what our constitution says. Not trying to start *ANOTHER* flame war about voting for "the lessor of two evils" or not (see other thread), I just feel the need to remind people that there are alternatives. Whether or not you want to vote for the lessor of two evils or for a candidate that has no chance of winning is up to you.
Not starting another Ron Paul battle here, just correcting misinformation.
Ron Paul is certainly 100% NOT out of the race. Ron Paul WILL be on the ballot at the RNC in August. After winning 21 out of 25 delegates in Iowa, Ron Paul has a plurality in 5 states, which is the minimum to be on the RNC ballot.
But this thread isn't about Ron Paul... it's about you losers and your fucked up porn addictions. I'm sure the comments on this thread really cast a great public image of Colorado gun owners. [Bang][Bang][Bang][Bang][Bang]
Not starting another Ron Paul battle here, just correcting misinformation.
Ron Paul is certainly 100% NOT out of the race. Ron Paul WILL be on the ballot at the RNC in August. After winning 21 out of 25 delegates in Iowa, Ron Paul has a plurality in 5 states, which is the minimum to be on the RNC ballot.
But this thread isn't about Ron Paul... it's about you losers and your fucked up porn addictions. I'm sure the comments on this thread really cast a great public image of Colorado gun owners. [Bang][Bang][Bang][Bang][Bang]
So are you against pornography? Is that a personal choice or do you think all people should not be allowed to watch porn?
Does someone who watches porn make them a loser? What is your definition of a porn addict?
HoneyBadger
07-23-2012, 00:33
So are you against pornography? Is that a personal choice or do you think all people should not be allowed to watch porn?
Does someone who watches porn make them a loser? What is your definition of a porn addict?
I don't think it is the government's place to regulate such things, but there are all sorts of moral flaws with pornography. I know it's not a "popular" moral stance these days, but I don't care. I stand by what I said.
Flatline
07-23-2012, 00:42
But this thread isn't about Ron Paul... it's about you losers and your fucked up porn addictions. I'm sure the comments on this thread really cast a great public image of Colorado gun owners. [Bang][Bang][Bang][Bang][Bang]
I think it's about more than just being able to view porn. If it's okay to prevent viewing porn, will it be okay to take the next step? What about cursing, some child could view expletives on the internet and have their morality forever ruined. Maybe we should ban any opinions or statements that portray anyone else in a negative view, since that certainly wouldn't be proper and could hurt feelings.
While we are on this, let's ban alcohol. What good has it done? Is feeling intoxicated worth it's negative effects? Alcohol is a contributing factor in many spousal and child abuses, date rape, and various other acts of criminal or nefarious nature, but I digress.
Uberjager
07-23-2012, 00:46
I need my Porn!
I've got quite the library of it. I have just over a terabyte of it on one hard drive, not to mention dozens of burned CDs and DVDs full of it, and several flash drives full... yet I'm constantly getting more....
Bailey Guns
07-23-2012, 06:34
I think the OP is really digging deep to find a reason NOT to vote for Romney. Depending on your views, there may be many really good reasons not to vote for him. But this?
Sorry. I don't see it as a really big deal. I haven't found anywhere where he states he wants to "outlaw" porn. He just made a really lame attempt to pander a bit to a specific audience. He's saying he wants to give some consumers the ability to block porn if they choose. Big deal.
And I don't see any references to this porn-blocking promise after 2007.
I'm no computer wiz but isn't this capability already available for anyone who wants it? To me, if a parent wants to block the ability to open porn sites on their kid's computer, that's their prerogative and many might see it as responsible parenting.
I'm not of the opinion it's right that he wants the .gov to mandate a "filter" must be installed at the manufacturer. But I also think we have much bigger things to worry about than this.
Bailey Guns
07-23-2012, 06:49
Not starting another Ron Paul battle here, just correcting misinformation.
Ron Paul is certainly 100% NOT out of the race. Ron Paul WILL be on the ballot at the RNC in August. After winning 21 out of 25 delegates in Iowa, Ron Paul has a plurality in 5 states, which is the minimum to be on the RNC ballot.
Maybe. Maybe not. But there's a 100% chance Ron Paul will NEVER be elected president for a variety of reasons. That's true now and it was true the other 2 times he's ran for the office.
To put it in your offensive and tasteless terms maybe you "losers and your fucked up Ron Paul addictions" should figure that out.
(NOTE: I don't really feel that way about Paul supporters despite the fact I don't think he's a good or viable presidential candidate...so don't get your panties in a wad. I just think HoneyBadger's comment was uncalled for and wanted to make a point to that effect.)
But this thread isn't about Ron Paul... it's about you losers and your fucked up porn addictions. I'm sure the comments on this thread really cast a great public image of Colorado gun owners. [Bang][Bang][Bang][Bang][Bang]
Unlike this comment which surely promotes a really positive image of members of this site. I'll be sure to look you up if I need a morality check.
I doubt anyone is laughing harder at Romney's plans to stop pornography than Larry Flynt. Good luck with that Mitt!
therein lie my issues with the (R) ticket.
The (R) want to control our lives so that you live good moral lives as defined by the church.
The (D) want to control our lives so that we live good moral lives as defined by the greater good.
Where are the ones who would just keep the country running (define that how you will) and leave us to define for ourselves what is moral?
bobbyfairbanks
07-23-2012, 08:53
therein lie my issues with the (R) ticket.
The (R) want to control our lives so that you live good moral lives as defined by the church.
The (D) want to control our lives so that we live good moral lives as defined by the greater good.
Where are the ones who would just keep the country running (define that how you will) and leave us to define for ourselves what is moral?
Well said
Bailey Guns
07-23-2012, 09:53
Where are the ones who would just keep the country running (define that how you will) and leave us to define for ourselves what is moral?
That would be about 50% of "the people".
68Charger
07-23-2012, 10:06
Once again, I believe this is getting blown (no pun intended) out of proportion
He wants filters to be INSTALLED, so they're available- you can always change/adjust/remove the filters... he said right away "parents can click on that filter"
He's not advocating censorship of all computers, just the ability of the (hopefully) responsible members of the house would do so easily.
It's a non-issue either way- unless you're too stoopid to be able to download a free filter to install on your kids computer.
I'm no Romney fan, but I can't just sit by and watch people turn something so simple into teenage-type drama- Anyone want to advocate that 11-year olds need to be able to see porn ads/sites?
HoneyBadger
07-23-2012, 10:51
therein lie my issues with the (R) ticket.
The (R) want to control our lives so that you live good moral lives as defined by the church.
The (D) want to control our lives so that we live good moral lives as defined by the greater good.
Where are the ones who would... ...leave us to define for ourselves what is moral?
Very well said.
I have no problem with advocating better filters for pornography or allowing porn sites to use .xxx, but it is NOT the government's responsibility to dictate your activities, your priorities, or your values. Things like this need to be controlled in the home, and government should never venture into your home.
Troublco
07-23-2012, 10:56
Honey Badger, you're not supposed to give a s**t! Yet here you go getting worked up...[ROFL1]
Take a look at http://www.isidewith.com/. It asks a bunch of questions and matches your answers up with the best candidate for you. I know Ron Paul is out, but I matched 97% Paul, 89% Romney, & 27% Obama. It would be enlightening for the general public to actually take a couple minutes to self-assess and answer these questions for themselves....
Take a look at http://www.isidewith.com/. It asks a bunch of questions and matches your answers up with the best candidate for you. I know Ron Paul is out, but I matched 97% Paul, 89% Romney, & 27% Obama. It would be enlightening for the general public to actually take a couple minutes to self-assess and answer these questions for themselves....
Wow, I was 86% Libertarian (Paul) and 81% Romney... [Beer]
HoneyBadger
07-23-2012, 11:20
Wow, I was 86% Libertarian (Paul) and 81% Romney... [Beer]
A little eye opening, right?
Don't let the HoneyBadger fool you. He's ALWAYS on the verge of a rampage about stuff like this. The purpose of our government was originally very clearly defined. Protecting its citizens from foreign enemies and stuff like that. I don't think that promoting or demonizing various moral questions was listed in there anywhere, and I KNOW the government was never intended to have the authority to dictate people's personal lives, their values, or their ammo hoarding tendencies.
Teufelhund
07-23-2012, 11:21
Take a look at http://www.isidewith.com/. It asks a bunch of questions and matches your answers up with the best candidate for you. I know Ron Paul is out, but I matched 97% Paul, 89% Romney, & 27% Obama. It would be enlightening for the general public to actually take a couple minutes to self-assess and answer these questions for themselves....
Took that little quiz when it was posted before. There is apparently no confusion as to which party I agree with the most:
99% Johnson
96% Paul
46% Romney
10% Obama
According to the more outspoken zealots on here, I should ignore this completely and vote for the guy with whom I agree on less than half the issues in order to avoid the guy with whom I agree on the smallest fraction of the issues. . . and the best guy for the job just doesn't count because the TV says so. Not that any of it matters. We are completely and irrevocably screwed regardless. [Bang]
A little eye opening, right?
Don't let the HoneyBadger fool you. He's ALWAYS on the verge of a rampage about stuff like this. The purpose of our government was originally very clearly defined. Protecting its citizens from foreign enemies and stuff like that. I don't think that promoting or demonizing various moral questions was listed in there anywhere, and I KNOW the government was never intended to have the authority to dictate people's personal lives, their values, or their ammo hoarding tendencies.
Well I knew it would put my views most on Paul, but beat out Romney by only 5%? I would have expected like 90% Paul and 70-something % Mittens.
Rucker61
07-23-2012, 11:46
Took that little quiz when it was posted before. There is apparently no confusion as to which party I agree with the most:
99% Johnson
96% Paul
46% Romney
10% Obama
According to the more outspoken zealots on here, I should ignore this completely and vote for the guy with whom I agree on less than half the issues in order to avoid the guy with whom I agree on the smallest fraction of the issues. . . and the best guy for the job just doesn't count because the TV says so. Not that any of it matters. We are completely and irrevocably screwed regardless. [Bang]
Wow, how'd you get so low on Obama? I tried gaming the survey with both extreme right wing and left wing positions and couldn't get below 20%.
Teufelhund
07-23-2012, 11:49
Wow, how'd you get so low on Obama? I tried gaming the survey with both extreme right wing and left wing positions and couldn't get below 20%.
lol I don't know, just answered it honestly. Evidently I'm a little harder on immigration than Johnson, or it would have been 100%. There were only a couple that I answered with a straight "yes" or "no." For most of them, I felt the more specific answers were better.
ETA: I think it's pretty funny that you tried to answer with extreme right-wing views and still agreed with Obama on about a quarter of the issues. Very telling of how the party lines are not so distinct as we're led to believe.
Looks like I'm out of luck: the poll says I agree the most with Johnson, followed by Paul.
Rucker61
07-23-2012, 13:31
Looks like I'm out of luck: the poll says I agree the most with Johnson, followed by Paul.
I'm still trying to figure out how I ended up tied with Green/Libertarian.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.