tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8385392963347857134.post5674505507952381670..comments2023-10-23T09:51:37.441-05:00Comments on Blog of Pro-Porn Activism: Sex Wars (The Beltway Edition): AGUS Holder Whacks Out DoJ Obscenity Task Force; Wingnutters In Congress ERUPT: "Not So Fast, Hombres!!!"Renegade Evolutionhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17905949172886730262noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8385392963347857134.post-27239379844803507722011-04-27T21:07:31.382-05:002011-04-27T21:07:31.382-05:00If the aboliton of the Obscenity Unit holds up, th...If the aboliton of the Obscenity Unit holds up, then President Obama deserves credit for doing something good that he didn't even promise to do, and that some of us thought he wouldn't do, due to his appointment of Cass Sunstein.<br /><br />At least he's not behind the Clinton curve on this matter.Sheldonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16525894777909361937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8385392963347857134.post-34225273350418888922011-04-19T22:37:12.162-05:002011-04-19T22:37:12.162-05:00I think there's less here than meets the eye. ...I think there's less here than meets the eye. Bill Clinton dissolved the DOJ anti-obscenity unit assembled under previous Republican administrations when he took office. <br /><br />The G.O.P. has actual voters who give rat's ass about adult obscenity prosecution. The Dems, by and large, don't have such voters. Federal obscenity prosecutions cost about four million bucks each on average and, as the Stagliano case demonstrates, don't necessarily end in victory for the government. In a time when money is short for even the most vital public services, not to mention for the public itself, frivolous moral crusades are luxury items that even those who would like to undertake them recognize as a hard sell for both politicians and the electorate.<br /><br />On the other hand, though Dems may be dubious of criminal proceedings with First Amendment implications, they tend to be regulation-friendly and that's one reason why I've been so outspoken regarding the attempt to legislate mandatory condom use in porn. Beyond the uselessness and absurdity of the idea on its own merits (or lack thereof), it's ultimately a tool to control content that works around constitutional protections by pretending to be about something other than hammering porn, which it very much is. <br /><br />I wouldn't expect any support at all from this administration, traditional free speech constituencies and organizations or much of anyone else in challenging the prohibition-by-regulation approach currently being jammed down all our throats. <br /><br />In part because short-sighted porn biz bosses didn't understand the threat posed by enemies on the left like Gail Dines and Bob Jensen, they lost support from liberal pundits like Chris Hedges, Don Hazen and Bob Herbert, who are sympathetically disposed toward arguments, however specious, based on "protecting" performers and opposing "sexual exploitation."<br /><br />Porn never had many friends in the political world and it's let the few it had be peeled away over time by a flanking move from the left.<br /><br />I warned long before the election that anyone hoping for an easier time of it in the world of porn under Obama would be disappointed.<br /><br />Instead of putting us in jail one at a time, the anti-porn contingent in the new crowd would rather just put us all out of business at once through regulatory processes.<br /><br />They'll fail, of course, because porn has always been here and always will be, but they can make the conditions under which it's made restrictive enough to essentially drive it underground, guaranteeing the abuses its detractors have falsely trumpeted become real and widespread.Ernest Greenenoreply@blogger.com