Your answer is in your question...the Republican party does not relect more of their beliefs and that is why they remain as Democrats.

You are on the right track...certain social issues...are the primary separators.

What are some of the specific things that Dems stand for?

Dependent upon where you stand as a Democrat...ultra liberal...liberal...moderate...but generally speaking.

Abortion on demand.
Against the death penality.
Gay marriage.
Gun bans.
Total and complete freedom of speech and assembly.
Legalized drugs...particularly MJ.
Sanction Cities.
Abolishment of anything of a religious nature that has anything to do with government...be it city...county...state or federal.
Decrease of defense spending.
Social programs.
Usually higher taxes.
Morally speaking...virtually anything goes.

There are more but I am sure that you are aware of them.

easy, the one without the track record. Cant be any more corrupt than a seasoned politician.

hmmm,I'd listen to your argument more...if it didn't happen to take place on A FUCKING PORN SITE...you are reeeeallly full of shit..go work in a church dude

Minus the higher tax part, that sounds like a pretty nice country to live in. :2 cents:

I totally believe that to be true. His comments and philosophy are similar to traditional democratic ideals - the thing is, todays republican party - is nearly identical to the democrat party of 20-30 years ago - while todays democrat party mirrors what a national socialist party would stand for.

This is why the republican party is in complete turmoil. There are no substantial conservatives in the party anywhere - and the country, for the most part (much like Europe) is beginning to lean to the conservative side as things tend to get out of hand all around the world.

While none of us want or appreciate the war in Iraq/Afghanistan and it's cost in life's & taxes, it is none the less thought to be needed by nearly all in Washington - Democratic or Republican. NONE of the major candidates will bring home the troops. Thats just a fact - and when McCain said that troops would be there for 100 years - he is just stating the obvious. Shit - we've still got troops stationed all over the world in regions where wars ended decades (if not a century) ago.

Either way it goes down in Nov., "We The People" will be bent over. We will pay more taxes, get less for it and be told to smile all the while.

What to do? Who knows... but I can guarantee you that electing either of these turds is not the answer!

so STFU ..... if he can speak for himself ... How is ConUs doing lately .... :1orglaugh

Shithead...he still can speak for himself...just as I spoke for myself. The CONUS if still the richest most powerful nation on the earth...got it...sport.

obama > mccain

:thumbsup:thumbsup

Just a reminder, the American population is MOSTLY WHITE...so it's bullshit to say only Black people are voting for Obama.. he is 6 points ahead in the polls... THis is the time where you racists mutha fuckas need to pack it up and all of you move to WV and KY.. I'll send McBush there to be your personal president

exactly.
who wants another 4 years of bush. YUCK
clinton didn't have a track record when he was voted in and he ended up being a great president.

I know my position is correct if it is the opposite of yours and people like you.

Thank you.

Dude... WHO THE FUCK CARES ABOUT A "TRACK RECORD"?! This country is so fucked I would have no problem with letting an 18 year old running it for 4 years, fuck it. 100% Honest

You gotta give it to the Obama dirt machine ...

Things like McBush, "he wants to be in iraq for 100 years", "he let himself be captured" (what was he supposed to do ... swim back to the US?) etc have really stuck. Regardless of whether you like Obama or not, you have to admit his filth marketing team is very clever and effective. They massacred Hillary, and have really gotten to work on McCain.

I dont' get the reference.

if mccaine did not have any other negatives at all........ the fact that he dosent know how to use a computer is evidence enough of his inability to function in the capacity as commander in chief of the united states.

can you say global information driven economy?

The guy is a joke.

Here's a question for baddog and stickyfinger... if you were starting a computer company tomorrow.... who would you want on your team.... the guy who was the CEO of IBM in 1985 or Michael Dell??

If you were starting a new marketing and ad company with aspirations of global reach who would you want on your team....... the guy who founded yellow book...or Eric Zuckerman

old vs new......

innovation and evolution are linked tighter then twin girls on myspace....

Obama 08

and I know if your position aligns with that of theking and daddyhalbucks that I am so happy to be at the opposite end of the spectrum to you

thank you

if mccaine did not have any other negatives at all........ the fact that he dosent know how to use a computer is evidence enough of his inability to function in the capacity as commander in chief of the united states.

can you say global information driven economy?

The guy is a joke.

Here's a question for baddog and stickyfinger... if you were starting a computer company tomorrow.... who would you want on your team.... the guy who was the CEO of IBM in 1985 or Michael Dell??

If you were starting a new marketing and ad company with aspirations of global reach who would you want on your team....... the guy who founded yellow book...or Eric Zuckerman

old vs new......

innovation and evolution are linked tighter then twin girls on myspace....

Obama 08

I wonder how many of the adult webmasters here will continue to stick by Nobama as he continues to court the Christian Conservative vote. You know, those people that like to try to censor our industry? Mr. Hussein Obama is pursuing their vote.

McCain on the other hand has already met with some anti-adult censorship groups. Whatever he said to the censorship crowd, they sure as hell weren't happy about, which can only be good news for our industry:

http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com/20...-independents/
and from http://mediamatters.org/items/200806100013

So those who want to shut down our industry don't want anything to do with McCain, and Obama wants their vote.

Obama would be 4 more years of government persecution of this industry. Whatever your opinion of McCain is otherwise, you don't see him stuck in church being told what to do and what to think by some pastor/priest/what have you.

Mr. Hussein Obama has no problem selling out to the crowd that wants you out of business or jailed.

It's no longer as simple as looking for a 'D' or an 'R' next to the candidate's name to see where they stand on our industry :2 cents:

I'll spare you my other political opinions here, I rarely post on this board anymore, but please make an informed decision. We've had 8 years of government harassment of our industry already and could use a break.

If you think for one second that McCain isn't going after the Christian Conservatives then you are smoking some premo dope. The reality is without the conservative Christians the republicans have a very difficult time winning any kind of election. The republicans sold the party to the Christian conservatives in the 80's and now is at their mercy. Just look at the last congressional election. The Christian right turned their backs on the republicans and it cost them the house and senate. Obama is doing the right thing. He is letting the Christians know that it is okay for them to vote for him and that he is not the devil.

McCain has often blasted the Christian right and lost their support a long time ago. Now he is trying to use Bush and others in the party to get it back. Will they come back to him? Who knows. McCain put the Evangelicals in play and both are now courting them, but if it comes down to who would prosecute adult more who do you think it would be: the guy that is against internet censorship of any kind and is connected to the online generation or the guy that has never used a personal computer, wants to end net neutrality and is from the party that is essentially populated by religious zealots?

the presidential election is not a matter of electing a party, it is a matter of electing an individual.

I do not think it is a good idea to elect someone who is easily influenced by religious zealots such as Mr. Hussein Obama.

You can spin it any way you want, however one candidate has been rejected by those who want to put us out of business, and another is seeking their support.

A vote for Obama is a vote against our industry.

All sound good to me. The higher taxes part is generally a given for supporting social programs and whatnot, however the current republican administration hasn't exactly been taking it easy on spending either. They've overspent on useless projects, created a huge debt and someone is going to have to pay it. Taxes must be raised and will be raised, but you certainly can't blame that on the democratic party regardless of who gets elected.

You can look at it that way if you choose to. Electing a president is electing an individual, and their party. It is saying that you are in agreement with their beliefs and the beliefs of their party. If it was just about individuals there would be no need for a party system but by aligning yourself with a party you are telling everyone that you at least share many of the same core values. The Republicans have relied on the religious vote since Reagan. Many of these conservative Christian groups have voted republican no matter who the candidate is. Bush and Rove were very good at getting them behind him and he rode them to victory twice because unlike the democrat party bases, these people are organized and actually turn out to vote.

That all said I think when it comes to matters of the adult internet I would feel better having the guy that is anti-censorship and pro-internet in the white house than the guy who will have to work to appease the base of the party and is surrounded by conservatives.

I haven't found any information about McCain saying he will attack porn. He has pushed for mandatory filters on public library computers, but that is a far cry from shutting us down, but that doesn't mean he won't.

the power of the ...
 

Depends how bad you hate the old turds plans on what we should spend money on and what taxes should be.

I love that when people can't find a reason to make a shit decision, they like to claim it's forward-thinking.

Well whatever McCain said to that anti-porn group that sent them away pouting indicates to me that he is very unlikely to be stepping on our toes. TBH, I found it shocking that he would be willing to stand on principle in apparently tacit support of the adult industry and risk exclusion of such a powerful voting block as the christian conservatives.

Obama has already been proven to have deep ties to wacky religious groups/leaders and frequently makes references to spiritual matters; it is fair to say that he is influenced by them to a great degree. If he was willing to throw his own reverend of 20 years "under the bus" for the sake of political gain, it seems likely that he'd be willing to do the same to smut peddlers :2 cents:

Sometimes "change" can mean change for the worse...

Look, Obama isn't the only guy that here who has links to wacky religious leaders that they have thrown under the bus. McCain has ties to a handful of these guys. McCain changes his positions all the time to suit the group he is talking to. What happened to all of his fire over campaign finance reform? Oh, that's right that came after 2000 when the republican machine squashed him in favor of Bush, but now that that same machine he was trying to bring down is on his side he isn't so worried about it.

We can argue the semantics of it for days but in the end neither can be sure. Until the guy gets into office you don't know how he will run his presidency and what he will decide to focus on. When you are the president you get to decide what you want to do so we can't say for sure one way or the other that either of these guys will go after porn or not.

:eek7:helpme

You are so transparent its almost not funny.