Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Can a Hillary fan please explain WTF this is all about?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:14 AM
Original message
Can a Hillary fan please explain WTF this is all about?
We're involved in a war started on false pretenses, have the largest budget defecit in the history of the nation, 45 million Americans without health insurance, 1 in 6 children living in poverty, an underfunded education system being attacked by Bush's NCLB, a White House hostile to the ideas of clean air and water, etc. and to what issue does our illustrious Senator from New York use her high profile to draw attention?

Video games.

How is this not cheesy grandstanding aimed at securing brownie points with the "family values" crowd? Aren't we supposed to be better than that? The items listed in the first sentence of this post are real family values issues and aren't being properly addressed in Washington. If a politician chooses to eschew these concerns in favor of a Tipper Gore style self-aggrandizement crusade, then how am I supposed to take her seriously as a presidential candidate?

(Here's a couple of links, in case you don't know what I'm talking about:

http://money.cnn.com/2005/07/20/technology/personaltech... /

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=5... )

By the way, I know Joementum is doing the same thing. I'm not giving him a free pass here. Rather I'm just assuming that 99.9% of the people at DU already think he's a joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
1. She made a smart move in taking a chunk of the morality
pie from the Republicans.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. I agree,--she has to build a record--slowly and without a lot of contra-
versy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CWebster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Oh please
Her husband's dalliances with the silly intern is an enormous liability with this crowd--except since the Clinton's ambition overrides all, this REALITY in the values equation never gets mentioned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #8
19. So what side of the fence are you on? If a Dem does good,
support them. If we haven't learned anything else, we need to learn to stand behind our party leaders unless they are corrupt. Morality is not the property of Republicans and it's time we made that point.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kraklen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #19
36. And if a dem does bad, don't support them.
And this is a horrible, unethical move.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #36
71. Unethical? And sexual intercourse on a video game is OK? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kraklen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #71
79. Yes, it is OK.
Sexual intercourse is also OK in books, movies, music, plays and even between two real life men.

Sorry to have to break it to you.

And yes, it's unethical to oppose it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #79
83. I'll pray for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kraklen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #83
85. LOL
OK, I'll pray for you. Maybe God can teleport you back to the 17th century.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #71
87. What part of "rated M for mature" don't you get?
Or does everything need to be censored for the level of a ten year old?

I also find it interesting that you're going to "pray for" a person who doesn't care about pictures (gasp!) of naked bodies or people fucking. Apparently you haven't noticed that the vast majority of video games (not to mention movies) contain much more in the way of gratuitous violence than they do sex.. is that not a problem? Shooting people and blowing them up is okay, but god forbid we should witness them engaging in sweaty, lusty acts of copulation!

Yes, heaven forfend.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldcoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #71
118. Clinton's bill would not ban these games entirely
According to the article, the purpose of Clinton's bill is to make it harder for minors to get their hands on these games. This legislation would not prohibit companies from making violent or sexually explicit games for adults.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #19
88. Right. And to me, "morality" means NOT STARTING WARS BASED ON LIES
it doesn't have anything to do -not jack flippin' shit- with getting my shorts in a bunch over porn.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kliljedahl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #88
122. "STARTING WARS BASED ON LIES"
Fits my definition of obscenity.


Keiths Barbeque Central
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr_Spock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #8
22. And you point as a Democrat is?
Do you run from people who are not perfect and are motivated or what are you saying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #8
24. "silly intern" Do you know her personally?
What's wrong with ambition anyhow? This is America afterall, not some collective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #8
63. It's very simple...she is a gifted politician!!!
It is an opportunity to burnish her moderate credentials. Whether anyone here thinks she is a liberal or not is irrelevent. In the country she is portrayed as a liberal. She is taking various opportunities to adjust that image.

It's smart politics, the kind of politics that wins elections.

She is not betraying a matter of principle...she is not calling for censorship. The fact is this content should have been disclosed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #8
64. And those who oppose her here...
For the vast majority of the voters, Bill Clinton's dalliances with the intern are irrelevent!!!

The only ones who seem bothered are the Clinton haters who aren't giong to vote Democratic anyaway, and for Hillary haters here looking for anything to slam her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kraklen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #1
35. It never worked for Lieberman.
To quote Michael Moore, "why order the meatloaf when you can order the top sirloin?"

Plus add to that the fact that what Clinton is doing has nothing to do with morality. Quite the opposite.

And plus it's losing young voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
42. What morality pie?
Aren't real acts of violence like the Iraqi occupation and the Abu Ghraib abuses moral issues, or is it only virtual violence that's the problem?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #42
91. It's not even virtual violence, it's SEX. See, SEX is the ONLY moral issue
specifically, finding out ways to stop people from doing it, watching it, thinking about it... that's what morality IS, silly!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
120. But the "morality crowd" is never going to vote for her.
We should be going after fiscal and paelo conservatives.

Reason No. 567 why Hillary won't win the general election.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:19 AM
Response to Original message
2. John Stewart covered this recently
His reason is all the "big" issues had been taken, so all that is left is "niche" issues.

Good question to cross post in the HC group, with an invitation to comment in this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
3. Yes, exactly how is she distinguishing herself as a Senator? She is
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 08:21 AM by higher class
losing me, but gaining right wingers. I fail to understand the subtlety level she is operating on. Where is her fight against what I am concerned about - imperialism and the right wing takeover of my body, soul, movements, thoughts, income, Constitution, and Bill of Rights, especially voting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeekMonkey Donating Member (418 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:23 AM
Response to Original message
5. She's a mostly good woman that is making a huge mistake
or she's just bumped her head.

Leave the video games alone.

If your kids are too stupid to distinguish reality from video games, kill them now, along with yourself, before your genes get passed on.

I'm so tired of our culture assuming that kids are stupid and the only way to 'save' them is to withold information from them.

<sarcasm>
cuz not telling them about sex works so well to keep them from fucking
</sarcasm>

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SixStrings Donating Member (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
6. Not a Hillary fan...

and I think this finally proves there is only ONE political party. They are all the same, people - wake-up! Jeezus, do you know how lame this looks from this Canadian's eyes?

'Government OF the people, FOR the people, BY the people' should be more than just a quote used to propagandize the masses. It should be a principal of any democratic nation.

Hmmm...let's see. You have a former president's son as current president, that same former president's other son to be the next republican pres. candidate, and a former president's wife as the next democratic pres. candidate. What a crock of shit. If I was a poor minority in the US, I would be making arrangements to get the fuck out as soon as possible. The writing is on the wall.

Video games?!?, with all the other shit going on? She and all Democrats should be ashamed. This just plays into the republican's hands - take heat off the war, Plamegate, DSM memo's. I mean, jeezus, it's all a little too convenient isn't it???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sled Donating Member (430 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. Right on the money...
Maybe the big issue the party needs, is to return to it's roots, instead of this corporatist/federalist one party monarchal charade...start admitting the obvious..."'Government OF the people, FOR the people, BY the people'"...not...for shame, for shame...

What would Jefferson do???

http://www.bartleby.com/65/je/JeffersT.html

"Fearing a return to monarchist ideals, if not to actual monarchy, Jefferson became virtual leader of the Anti-Federalist forces. He drew to himself a group of like-minded men who began to call themselves Republicansa group to which the present Democratic party traces its origin."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ultraist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #6
112. well said SixStrings
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:46 PM by ultraist
We have a 22% child poverty rate, with nearly HALF of our African American children living in POVERTY and she's worried about VIDEO GAMES? fucking ridiculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
electron_blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:25 AM
Response to Original message
7. What laureloak said
She is resume-building. She'll be able to claim she accomplished this one thing (however relatively small in comparison) in a short amt of time.

I'm not defending it, just explaining how it looks to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CWebster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Resume building for what?
the local ladies church group protesting the local rock and roll club?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #9
25. There are plenty of Dems that are dissatisfied with
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 10:52 AM by laureloak
the eroding morality of this country. BTW, are you a parent?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CWebster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #25
29. LOL!
While voting for and sending more to the slaughter? The irony is lost on some obviously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. What has that got to do with sexual content on games?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CWebster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #30
37. You tell me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #25
45. I'm a parent
and I find this "eroding morality" argument to be specious. Misogyny and violence aren't new inventions. When exactly was the golden age of morality? Back when our media was "clean and wholesome", black people had to sit in the back of the bus and homosexuals weren't just being denied their civil rights, but were regarded as mentally ill. If that's the sort of bedrock of moral virtue we're supposed to be aiming towards, then count me out.

As a parent, I can control whether Grand Theft Auto gets played in my house. I can't control whether or not my daughter sees Abu Ghraib photos on the front page of newspapers. Due to poverty, many parents can't control whether or not their children get adequate nutrition, housing, and education. These are the real family issues and values issues. If Senator Clinton is really cares about the needs of families, she should drop the cheap moralizing and start addressing more serious problems.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #45
57. I hope she's multi-tasked enough to do both at once, and more.
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 01:15 PM by laureloak
Let's play fair here - the media is not part of the issue and neither is race, poverty, housing nor education. One can be purple, poor, homeless and ignorant and still be a decent person.

It's our culture - the environment that our children are growing up in - that is shaping them into responsible adults. Parents have very little control over what their children are ultimately exposed to. I'm all for getting control of the violence and sex that has run amuck on tv, music, video games, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeekMonkey Donating Member (418 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #57
59. BS - enforcing your tastes on others is wrong
protect your own kids, leave mine alone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. Great conversation. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeekMonkey Donating Member (418 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #61
74. you're welcome
glad to enlighten you, stop by anytime
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #74
77. LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sepia_steel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #59
95. Right on, geek monkey
I'm so sick of people whining because they expect the government or the teachers to parent their kids for them. Get and stay involved, people, because your kids are going to see bad things no matter what overboard protective tactics you implement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #57
94. Yes. Really. I'm a parent too, and I'm much more worried about the deficit
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 04:31 PM by impeachdubya
... and our eroding stature globally, and about whether or not my children will walk into public school science class and be indoctrinated with some anti-scientific creationist twaddle than I am at all worried about them being "exposed" to the occasional naked boob. And I'm perfectly capable of keeping my kids away from content that is not appropriate for them- I certainly don't need a nanny state using that as an excuse to tell me what *I* can or cannot watch.

I'll be happy to refer you to some of Mark Twain's excellent comments on censorship, but the gist of what I'm saying here is, we certainly don't need to child-proof our entire society to conform to YOUR particular parental sensibilities or attitudes about sex, thank you very much.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stanwyck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #45
70. I'm a HIllary fan - and I think your
points are well taken and stated.
I think too many of these campaigns are absurd. And this is one. I have 21-yr. old twins. I may not have always known exactly which games were being played...which videos watched...but my husband and I did a pretty good job of being aware of what our kids were doing without being complete control freaks.
There are larger issues. More important concerns.
You're absolutely on the mark on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #25
90. I am.
And you know what I do? I KEEP MY KID FROM SUCH VIDEO GAMES.

It's real easy, it's called being a parent. Games with M for mature ratings are simply not allowed in our home. And she's not allowed to play them at other kids' houses, either. Since we raised her with a lot of mutual respect and an authoritative instead of authoritarian or permissive style, she's pretty respectful of our boundaries (and doesn't like video games, anyway, but the same applies to movies).

Geez. Can I conclude that most parents are lazy nowdays and just want everyone else to do their parenting for them, or what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #90
96. It's not so much about keeping kids from watching things they dont like
as it is about keeping other adults from watching them, I suspect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #96
99. Ah.
Well to that, I give a hearty "fuck you" to all trying. I'm an adult, I can watch whatever shit I please. This is America. Shit-watching is what we're all about, for crying out loud!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #99
107. Actually, come to think of it, it might be FUN to tell other people what
they can or can't watch, read, or listen to.

Reality TV? Paris Hilton? FOX News?

Sorry, they're censored- FOR YOUR OWN GOOD.

Those "Left Behind" Books? Burn 'em.

Toby Keith? Ted Nugent? Celine Dion? Jessica, Ashley, or whatever other Simpson they may have in the works? CLEARLY Obscene... and not fit for Public Consumption!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #25
121. I'm a parent and I would forbid this in my home.
My roof, my rules. I don't need government doing that for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
electron_blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #9
105. nahhhhh, either building for re-election or something bigger
It doesn't matter (to some extent) that it's small potatoes to most people. It'll be a done deal, something that she can take most of the credit for.

You can't get as far saying you were "part of" this or that. Much more powerful to say you were "responsible for" blah blah.

Politicians, and other people aiming for re-election, or just election, collect items like this the way you or I might pick a $20 off the ground. A freebie that helps a little.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ultraist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
114. Bwhaha!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:30 AM
Original message
It's pure political gaming. Being against sex is very PC.
And, much safer than confronting real issues. Like the war she voted for.

But, I'm not a Hillary fan. I'd rather break my fingers than vote for her or any other Republican even if she, like her pal Lieberman, have a (D) after their name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
26. That's why Republicans hate Hillary so much because she's one of them?
:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #26
81. That's just wrong....
And if you believe it ignorant...

A simple glance at her positions and her record indicates she is well within the mainstream of Democratic voters!!!

Just a lame talking point by the Hillary haters!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
27. Dems have to conquer middle ground to succeed.
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 10:58 AM by laureloak
Don't you agree?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CWebster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #27
32. The assumption being that the middle ground is automatically
Republican.

Why not try to make a Democratic case to appeal to the voters?

The implication is, the disconnect between and the behavior directed at the voters seem to indicate a lack of adherence to, or faith in, what the Democratic party stands for---even when the majority is ripe for the picking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #32
60. Being Democrat doesn't mean being an extreme liberal
no matter how much Republicans try to sell that idea.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #27
68. "Succeed" at what? Becoming Republicans?
I certainly agree that's what they seem to be trying to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #68
72. Having morals doesn't mean being Republican. Or does it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #72
78. Banning freedom of expression is moral?
If you find depictions of sex immoral then I would advise you to shun it. And, if you have children, raise them to do the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #78
82. Sex is private - Public sex is immoral.
I don't need or want your advice. I want this country clean again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #82
101. Does that include kissing, dancing, handholding? Not wearing a burqa?
All have to do with "public sex". I believe that this is about a stupid, violent, video game.

I believe this is about a video game that you have control over. Much like books, movies, tv. Shall we eradicate all reference to "dirty" sex in those "public" arenas? Shakespeare plays have many smirking references to sex. The bible is full of all kinds of erotica, everything from adultery to incest. The Greek playwrites doted on it. The ancient Indians built statues to it and wrote tomes about it. Some of the best ancient Chines and Japanese literature is about sex.

Or, have a gander at the art of Picasso, Toulouse-Lautrec, Degas, and many others, throughout the ages. How about the music of Stravinsky and Ravel? All on "public" display.

You want a "clean" country? Try Iran or Saudi Arabia.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #101
113. Mark Twain on Censorship:
"Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #82
109. Who the hell are you to tell other adults what they can or can't
read or watch?

If you have a problem with naked human bodies, images of people having sex, erotica, smut, porn, what-have-you...

I would strongly suggest you not look at them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldcoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #82
119. When was the country clean?
It is human nature to be interested in sex. Even when the government tried to regulate sexually explicit publications and films, people always managed to get their hands on this stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #72
110. You tell me.
Please, explain what -to you- constitutes "morality"... and how that relates to what the Republican Party is up to these days.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
84. Wow a politician practicing politics...what a concept...
If we had any politicians on our side who knew how to practice politics it would be nice. We might win an election from time to time.

A cursory glance at her positions and record would show you she is well situated in the mainstream of the Democratic Party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #84
102. She's well situated in the mainstream of the DLC.
As for politicians playing...er, practicing, politics thank you for affirming why politicians have such stirling reputations for honesty. Right along with purveyers of hairgrowth products and diet pills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #102
103. If we had politicians in our paty who knew how to beat the pukes
at their own game...I would be very happy...

And again, if you would bother to look at her voting record and her positions on the issues, you woudl see that she is well within the mainstream of the Democratic Party, and to the left of the DLC on most things..

Hillary Clinton has more than established her Democratic bona fides, and her competence and compassion!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
10. Joe and her
can waste their time all they want. They will not gain RW votes that way. Instead they'll just lose potential Dem voters (that oppose infringements on the arts).

I really must wonder, how much did Lieberman's sanctimoniousness really help Gore during the '00 election? I somehow doubt his pious condemnation of violence in video games and movies helped in any way.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #10
31. Then who will those Dems vote for? .
Gotta move towards center, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. "Moving to the center"
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 11:36 AM by fujiyama
is meaningless, especially on a topic that is very unlikely to bring in new voters (and more likely drive away voters).

The potential voters lost aren't Dems. That's the whole point. They're often disaffected non voting males (usually independents) that aren't very political. But likely they play video games and may be sympathetic to Dems in other issues. This will at best turn them off politics even more, and at worse drive them to the republican party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #34
58. Most people are in the middle. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #58
100. The question is
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 04:42 PM by fujiyama
where is the middle nowadays?

The fact that a centrist like Dean could be labeled a far left liberal just for opposing a senseless war shows how skewed everything has become in the last few years.

Hillary's problem is that she has all the baggage of a leftist, but in reality is a pretty right of center candidate, and all the pandering to lazy parents and the religious right won't help her there.

This whole call for increased government video game regulation serves no purpose whatsoever. We have so many real problems facing us right now, and even if there was any political capital to be had in proposing this, it would still be stupid. The video game industry has a ratings system (check out ESRB if you want more info) and the game in question was not meant for kids (it had an M rating - similar to R for films).


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
11. I love senator Clinton but I dont want her to be the nominee
With respect she is a senator with too thick a paper trail. She wont be able to crack the south and three she is too polar. I will vote for her if she is nominated but I just dont see her getting the swing vote. This is not meant to disrespect in any way shape or form, she's a good person and I think the world of her.
I would rather see Clark/Conyers 08. No more senators in the top spot there to easy to torpedo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shugah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:35 AM
Response to Original message
12. it is crazy
someone needs to tell her that the so-called moral issues voters are never going to vote for her for anything ever. never, never, never.

the only voters she is influencing are younger voters who like to play video games. and she sure isn't bringing them into her camp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSdemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
13. Who says she's not also focusing on the other important issues you mention
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #13
40. Her own webpage seems to suggest neglect on these issues.
Here is the part of her webpage which has her press releases, news, and the like. Almost no mention is made of any of the things on my list. The closest is the Kids Safe Chemical Act, which looks like a good piece of legislation yet is only a small part of what should be a comprehensive environmental policy. (And to her credit, she appears to be heavily engaged in the fight for public broadcasting, something not on my list, but important nevertheless.) Beyond that, most of what she is addressing is minutia, constituency issues, and security issues. All of these things are important, but so is taking a stand and trying to steer the political dialogue in this country.

I accept the notion that the corporate media has the deck stacked against us with respect to getting our message out. The corporate media, however, isn't in charge of the content of the Senator's website. Furthermore, this media bias isn't absolute. I rarely watch CNN, but while channel surfing a couple of weeks ago I landed on it and saw filmmaker Morgan Spurlock being interviewed. He was talking about the difficulties of making ends meet with a minimum wage job. If that guy can get on national TV and try to raise awareness of the issue of poverty, then it's pretty puzzling why one of the most prominent Senators can't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aintitfunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
15. It is politics as usual
Such obvious maneuvering will not bring the Clinton haters on board. It is an obsession with them. I mean, really, with all the shit being wrought by the evil-doers in the Bush Administratoin, how does "hidden sex" on video games suddenly become an issue. It is ludicrous and so sadly dissapointing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RethugAssKicker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
16. I was going to contribute
to her campaign, but after this video game BS, I ain't giving her shit!.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newportdadde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
17. Liberman use to hump this soap box too.
Its getting old, really old. I'm tired of all the parents whining... oooo ooo I just didn't know how violent this was. Well you have two eyes don't you? Get off your ass and go out on the net and read about it yourself... damn.

All this is is parents buying whatever Jim/Jane wants because they are too busy working 70 hrs a week climbing the ladder to buy the McMansion. They feel guilty so they get the kid whatever they wants.. or they just want him/her to shut up and not be loud obnoxious in the store.

As a grown man with a wedding ring in business clothes paying with a platinum Master Card I got carded.. yes.. CARDED for buying a PC game called Diablo 2 which was rated 'mature 17+' lmao. Its just getting over the top.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #17
48. In some cases it's because the parents are too busy working 70 hrs.
a week to put a roof over their kids heads, feed 'em, and save enough to send 'em to college. Clearly in such circumstances, the best thing the government can do to support morality would be to establish living wages and a 35 hour work week such that parents can spend more time with their kids and less time working to make rich people even richer. But that's not as politically expedient as jumping on a soapbox to whine about violent video games.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
18. So, are you in favor of violent video games?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. Racists launch PC game
Racists launch PC game

07/2005 15:10

While anti-gaming critics are busy worrying about a mod that sees two fictional characters engaging in consensual sex, a neo-Nazi organisation has released a game designed to promote racial divisions and encourage violent acts against members of ethnic minorities.

The PC first-person shooter is titled Ethnic Cleansing and is published by Resistance Records, which also distributes racist 'White Power' music. Resistance Records is owned by the National Alliance, the biggest and most active neo-Nazi group in the US.

Players take on the role of either a skinhead or a Ku Klux Klan member - dressed in full KKK robes and carrying a noose - and explore a city that's clearly based on New York. The object of the game is to kill black and Latino people, described as "predatory sub-humans", and their "Jewish masters".
-----------------snip---------------------------------
<http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=60093 >
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kraklen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #18
38. I am.
Are you in favor of censorship?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #38
49. When it comes to
Video games that glorify violence, theft, and other criminal activity in an amoral world, I am in favor of keeping that sort of stuff away from children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeekMonkey Donating Member (418 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #49
51. Then keep them away from your children
My children are smart enough to tell the difference between a video game and reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #49
55. I sse you're in favor of euphemisms too.
Call it what it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kraklen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #49
56. Keep it away from your kids then.
Edited on Wed Jul-20-05 01:09 PM by Kraklen
Stop harassing other people and telling other people how to raise their kids.

Talk about amoral.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #49
92. Parent's job. My job.
Not the government's job. My job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #49
98. You decide what's right for your kids, not for other people's kids
What right do you have to stop my kids from playing video games if I want them to play?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #18
41. No. I'm not in favor of Jimmy Buffett either.
So does that make it Senator Clintons place to start a crusade against parrotheads?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. Get back to me
When she launches that crusade, okay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #43
46. You bet I will.
Your argument seems to be that if somebody doesn't like something, then it's fair game for a Senate investigation. Hence Jimmy Buffett is just as good an issue to tackle as violent video games.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #46
50. Your interpretation of my argument is total bullshit
To the best of my knowledge, Jimmy Buffet doesn't glorify a world of theft and lethal violence against innocent bystanders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CWebster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. No, but Hillary does
with her justification of and recommendation that we send more troops to Iraq.

Is this penetrating at all?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeekMonkey Donating Member (418 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #50
53. No, but he does glorify excessive drinking and being a bum
and, as such, has every right to do so.

Nevermind that his music is weak and uninspired and amatuerish. He still has that right, just as I have the right to not listen to his crap, as you have the right to not buy violent games for your kids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kraklen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #50
67. Jimi Hendrix did.

Hey Joe, I heard you shot your woman down
You shot her down down
Hey Joe, I heard you shot your lady down
You shot her down to the ground



Wow, not only is he glorifying violence, he's glorifying violence towards women.

Better call the thought police.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #50
73. But the Iraqi invasion does...
and she voted for it and continues to support it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #18
44. Are you in favor of freedom of expression?
If the problem is that children get to much unattended exposure to certain kinds of 'expressions', then would it not be better to make it so that kinds can be attended by parents, rather then be left alone in front of the tv/video game, by distorting the system so that the rich get richer while the poor get poorer, thus forcing most parents to have a full time job (or three part-time jobs), leaving them unable to tend to their children?

Or would the better solution be to limit freedom of expression? I must admit it does require less explanation...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #44
54. Generally speaking, yes
But I also think that there are certain forms of expression that young people should not be exposed to. For example, very few people (I'm assuming) would argue that kids should have free access to hardcore pornography. I often hear (particuarly from folks on the left) that "violence is the real obscenity". If this is so, is it not reasonable to think that young people should be kept shielded from some violent video games?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #54
65. I completely agree
But the question is how. Age-limits alone are not enough, and banning would be a violation of freedom of expression.
I claim the missing part is parents spending time actually raising their kids, for various reasons, some outside direct control of the parents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #54
93. Yes, they should.
Which is why I am glad there are ratings on movies, TV shows and video games. It gives me a guide as to what is appropriate and what isn't.

Then it's my job to shield her from it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #18
97. I am in favor of violent video games!
If Hillary doesn't like free speech, she should become a Republican. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neshanic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
21. No explanation. Going down to the Tipper well. It's dry Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. Supporting parents trying to raise moral children is never wrong
Video game rating board in hot seat

Tuesday, July 19, 2005; Posted: 11:44 a.m. EDT (15:44 GMT)


SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- Shooting. Killing. Vehicular mayhem. Sexual conquests. Teenagers can experience it all through today's almost-anything-goes breed of video games, primarily among those rated "M" for mature.

The Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) is responsible for that rating system, and this self-regulating video game industry group has suddenly found itself on the hot seat.

--------------snip------------------
There is no doubting the fact that the widespread availability of sexually explicit and graphically violent video games makes the challenge of parenting much harder," said Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who asked the Federal Trade Commission last week to investigate one of the most violent titles, "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas."
-------------snip-------------------------
<http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/fun.games/07/19/grading.ga... >
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SixStrings Donating Member (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #23
28. Watch any TV lately?

Same thing. Why can't parents accept responsibility for raising their own kids instead of blaming their shortcomings on the 'ills' of our culture?
That's lazy in my opinion. How about this for an answer? "NO, you cannot play those games" and take their video games away? or how about just changing the channel if you don't like what is on?

Land of the freee indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chicagomd Donating Member (437 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #28
39. Parents should step up.
You are right on.

Xbox/Playstation 2 both cost around $150.00, each game costs around $50.00, and you need a TV to play them on. That is a $200.00 investment and the use of a TV for kids to be exposed to these games.

Plenty of chances for parents to step up to the plate. Is it really necessary for your child to have over $200.00 in cash that you have no control over? I am not saying vendors should not enforce the ratings recommendations, but do 10 year olds need to be walking around with that kind of money?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OrlandoGator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
33. I've been asking this question for weeks here on DU.
It boggles my freaking mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Payne Donating Member (30 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
47. This is defintly one of my pet peeves with the Democratic Party.
I just wish that Hillary,Lieberman,and any other Dem who does this would shut up and leave the whining about Morality up to the Repubs.

"To quote Michael Moore, "why order the meatloaf when you can order the top sirloin?"

By the looks of it I say that Moores defintly lived by this advice.


:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laureloak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #47
62. I completely disagree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Payne Donating Member (30 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #62
66. Why
Do you really want to start pandering to fundies who wanna take us back to the 50's just like the Repubs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #66
111. Judging by the responder's other posts..
I suspect the answer to that is "yes".

BTW, Welcome to DU! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noonwitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
69. I think it's a fair issue to take on-Michigan's Governor has taken it up
It's an issue that concerns middle and working class american parents, especially those with younger kids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeekMonkey Donating Member (418 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #69
75. only if they let it
the simple solution, one that doesn't infringe on others' rights, is to control your own kids and what they are exposed to.

If you want your kids to grow up sheltered and unprepared to deal with a less-than-savory world, so be it, but don't try to force that same thing on me and mine.

My kids know the difference between real life and video games because I have taught them such.

I don't want the govt telling me what I can and can't see, or what I can and can't allow my children to see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kraklen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #69
80. What the fuck does class have to do with it?
It's also got to do with what consensual adults are doing in the privacy of their own home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #69
89. Then they should be asking why their "younger kids" are playing a
game rated M for Mature
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
76. She's too chicken to even MENTION the DSM, yet she attacks a GAME???
A game that children are already not allowed to have, legally.

This how the DLC has "helped" us lose the last 3 elections- by focusing on "safe" but BULLSHIT issues while over looking GOP crimes for fear that it will "make us look weak on defense."

I'm unimpressed with Hillary & I hope her nomination bid fails.

I'm looking at Kerry, Gore or Clark instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neshanic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #76
86. Correct. You will never hear her take on Viacom/MTV.
She keeps to the safe fringe. She would not even consider taking on violent mysogonistic music videos that debase women, and glorify guns and violence. That would mean she would have to take on Viacom and all others.

Ya can't have it both ways Hillary. Take them all on and I will be right begind you but picking and choosing like you have blinders on has been done before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #86
104. Hmm- who owns "Rockstar" Games- is it a large company?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magicmax Donating Member (29 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #76
106. Wait a Second Here
This isn't how we lost. This is how they won (if they won.)
They espoused the values, remember those values? they know Americans worry over -like they really cared, right?- while their shill organizations did the dirty stuff. Very clever. Our problem? We're self-righteous, still-in-the-sixties democrats who haven't learned the new game. Looks like Hilary is learning it. Now we gotta beat them at it.
Of course, you're right, our candidate was completely ineffectual, in the meantime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 04:19 AM
Response to Reply #106
115. Seems to me the "self-righteous" folks are the ones blathering about boobs
in video games while our kids are dying in Iraq for a bullshit oil war based on lies.

But thank you for showing up here, seemingly to immediately start helpfully telling "us" what "our" problems are--- like being "still-in-the-sixties democrats".

Welcome to DU. And enjoy your stay.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
journalist3072 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
108. Ok, as a Hillary fan, allow me to explain...
We are smart enough to walk and chew gum at the same time. We can focus on more than one thing.

Hillary has been speaking out on the other issues you referenced, and she has also decided (wisely, I believe) to take on this issue.

I don't see what the problem is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 05:14 AM
Response to Reply #108
116. Sen Clinton is a pandering opportunist.
What are her positions on the real issues such as Iraq, Healthcare, DSM, Social Security, Corporatism, Environment etc.?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
journalist3072 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-05 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #116
117. I disagree....
Hillary has ALWAYS spoken out for protecting children from sexually explicit, violent media. This issue is nothing new to her.

As far as her stance on the other issues, have you HEARD her speeches lately? She's been on fire!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 31st 2014, 09:22 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC