DVDizzy Forum

ajmrowland wrote:

disneyboy20022 wrote:And People say the War on Drugs doesn't work....so how in the Sam Hill will this work....I don't like porn (one of the big reasons is it belittles women and sadly they make more money at a strip club probably than a waitress at Denny's) and for anyone that wants to look...I tell them get an actual book....don't stream it online or anything because there's a computer virus just waiting to attack your computer...why do you think of the the viruses is named a Trojan Virus

But it sounds stupid........ The War on Porn....sounds like either a porn film or Seth Rogan leading the fight to keep Porn alive in a movie

Porn has belittled men almost as much.

At least the free stuff sort of puts them on equa level.

Meanwhile, I've received more Trojans from faux anti-virus software than porn.

One of my Friends (who I no longer talk to, due to them stabbing me in the back and stealing lying etc...I was a Fool..

Anyway the one friend I had stayed up late at night on the computer which my parents had said at the time no computer for anyone after 9pm....Guess what my Genius 16 year old friend did...stayed up on the computer and looked at Gay Porn and Female Porn...(.and this was omg 8 years ago I'm feeling so old ) There were a ton of viruses...I mean like a Hornets Nest full of the links he clicked on...and his response was it was a pop up...So I'd buy it was a pop up but not for about 50 sites he went to and killed the computer....we had pay $400 to get our computer (it was a tower) to cleanse itself...and a lot of the viruses were something trojan or some other slant double meaning words (one of the viruses was something involving virus that mention it had the word cum trojan in it...) I also think that why many viruses are called Trojan are for all the reasons listed throughout this tread...the trojan horse that fooled Troy and all...


That's why if any guy who feels the need to look at Porn (I don't but that's who I am) The Last time i talked to the guy who damaged the computer. I said get a Playboy....you won't get any viruses through that....and I told him if he does get a virus from reading playboy.....that he might want to see a shrink...

Anyway Back on Topic

Michelle Bachmann is stupid. I saw that someone asked her on a news channel or interview that what if Obama is able to fix or greatly improve the economy hypothetically speaking by the time 2012 comes around, and she said I hope not or she won't win the white house or something like that maybe not in those words exactly..either way. Bachmann Apparently had a freudian slip

This woman makes Sarah Palin look more suitable for President. I don't kid.

disneyboy20022 wrote:

ajmrowland wrote: Porn has belittled men almost as much.

At least the free stuff sort of puts them on equa level.

Meanwhile, I've received more Trojans from faux anti-virus software than porn.

One of my Friends (who I no longer talk to, due to them stabbing me in the back and stealing lying etc...I was a Fool..

Anyway the one friend I had stayed up late at night on the computer which my parents had said at the time no computer for anyone after 9pm....Guess what my Genius 16 year old friend did...stayed up on the computer and looked at Gay Porn and Female Porn...(.and this was omg 8 years ago I'm feeling so old ) There were a ton of viruses...I mean like a Hornets Nest full of the links he clicked on...and his response was it was a pop up...So I'd buy it was a pop up but not for about 50 sites he went to and killed the computer....we had pay $400 to get our computer (it was a tower) to cleanse itself...and a lot of the viruses were something trojan or some other slant double meaning words (one of the viruses was something involving virus that mention it had the word cum trojan in it...) I also think that why many viruses are called Trojan are for all the reasons listed throughout this tread...the trojan horse that fooled Troy and all...


That's why if any guy who feels the need to look at Porn (I don't but that's who I am) The Last time i talked to the guy who damaged the computer. I said get a Playboy....you won't get any viruses through that....and I told him if he does get a virus from reading playboy.....that he might want to see a shrink...

That's a rare occurance. There are safe porn sites out there and, even without protection, my computers can go months without a problem. That reminds me I gotta purchase some software. and Playboy is costly and has very little action.

Anyway Back on Topic

Michelle Bachmann is stupid. I saw that someone asked her on a news channel or interview that what if Obama is able to fix or greatly improve the economy hypothetically speaking by the time 2012 comes around, and she said I hope not or she won't win the white house or something like that maybe not in those words exactly..either way. Bachmann Apparently had a freudian slip

She pretty much killed her chances of winning. They're just beginning to legalize gay marriage here in NYS, and there is NO flippin way you can take away a man's fix.

Super Aurora wrote:

milojthatch wrote: So, I think folks who like porn (you disgusting people you) .

I'm such a disgusting person. But I'm not as disgusting as a anti-gay faggot.

Okay, that's warning number 2, <b>Super Aurora</b>. milojthatch may have the unpopular opinion but how are you proving your point with hate speech?

As to the matter at hand -- this is not so much about moral issues as it is about personal freedom.

pinkrenata wrote:

Super Aurora wrote: I'm such a disgusting person. But I'm not as disgusting as a anti-gay faggot.

Okay, that's warning number 2, <b>Super Aurora</b>. milojthatch may have the unpopular opinion but how are you proving your point with hate speech?

As to the matter at hand -- this is not so much about moral issues as it is about personal freedom.

When were you under the impression I called him an "anti-gay faggot"? All I said is that I'm not as disgusting as one. No where did I say he is one.

I think you're reading too much into things.

Super Aurora wrote:

pinkrenata wrote: Okay, that's warning number 2, <b>Super Aurora</b>. milojthatch may have the unpopular opinion but how are you proving your point with hate speech?

As to the matter at hand -- this is not so much about moral issues as it is about personal freedom.

When were you under the impression I called him an "anti-gay faggot"? All I said is that I'm not as disgusting as one. No where did I say he is one.

I think you're reading too much into things.

Hopefully I was reading too much into things. If that's the case, I'm sorry.

ajmrowland wrote:[...] That's a rare occurance. There are safe porn sites out there and, even without protection, my computers can go months without a problem. That reminds me I gotta purchase some software. and Playboy is costly and has very little action.

See what I did there? I cut out all the quotes! It can be done!

What you want to do, is subscribe to the free 90 day trial period of McAfee, and after 90 days, throw it off your pc and sign up again with a different e-mail adress... and so on. Works fine for me, but it does conflict with Internet Explorer (I use Firefox). And you're right, when you know the right adresses, you won't get viruses from porn sites.

Porn really can''t be banned unless President Bachmann (now there's a scary thought) wants to block all porn sites with servers outside the US, which a.) is an impossible thing to do, because there are so freaking many of them; and b.) it's exactly what they do in countries like Saudi-Arabia and Iran etc. But then again, surpressing gay rights, describing homosexuality as a disease, the idea of banning porn are all things we usually see in Middle-Eastern or Asian islamic dictatorships.

I've always found it amazing that Americans seem to have much more issues with expressions of sexuality than with expressions of violence. I mean, you would never hear a politician vow to ban violent movies, let alone do something about gun control --even though the teabaggers still think their Kenyan muslim president is going to take away their guns! Yet anything depicting sex is considered fair game. I bet Michele Bachmann is also a supporter of abstinance-only education in high schools. These people don't care that it has only counter-productive effects (Bristol Palin, anyone?), it's just ideology for them that counts.

It's like Bachmann's Freudian slip: I do believe Republicans don't want the economy to recover, because they want to win the White House on that issue.

Well, I might try that. I'm currently eyeing a basic AVG package I saw at a department store cuz it's cheap(until I upgrade of course), but I might try McAfee. I've actually used the siteadvisor before, so no problems there. Of course, I dont have Firefox anymore, but I can get that. I prefer it to IE.

ajmrowland wrote:Well, I might try that. I'm currently eyeing a basic AVG package I saw at a department store cuz it's cheap(until I upgrade of course), but I might try McAfee. I've actually used the siteadvisor before, so no problems there. Of course, I dont have Firefox anymore, but I can get that. I prefer it to IE.

Siteadvisor comes in handy when checking pornsites for viruses, eh?

Goliath wrote:It's like Bachmann's Freudian slip: I do believe Republicans don't want the economy to recover, because they want to win the White House on that issue.

So they can run us further into the ground and then blame the next Democrat president for it. Isn't that always their game plan?

I know I shouldnt be thinking such thoughts, but imagine the impossible notion that somebody assassinated the entire Republican Party of government, maybe then they'd get a clue.

Goliath wrote:How could it have come so far that a broad like her is now polling second amongst Republicans as their nominee?

Did you seriously expect anything better from the Republican Party?

$10 she signed this after finding her husbands stash of gay porn.

Sotiris wrote:Did you seriously expect anything better from the Republican Party?

There once was a time when men like Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower represented the Republican Party. Nowadays, they would be booed off the stage as flaming commie liberals. The two-party system has always been a bad thing, but it's even worse when one of two parties is insane. It basically forces all sane people to vote for the other remaining party... which then doesn't have any incentive anymore to look after their voters. All it has to do, is just be there as an alternative to the crazy party.

@ ajmrowland: Impossible. Only leftwing/liberal politicians and activists get assassinated or 'commit suicide' or 'have an accident'...

^Yeah I know. My post was purely hypothetical

Slavery language removed from group’s marriage pledge for candidates

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/slav ... 33885.html

An Iowa conservative Christian group last week essentially asked presidential contenders to say black families were better off during slavery.
That's right.

"THE FAMILY LEADER," a group run by failed GOP gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats, last week solicited GOP presidential candidates to sign a pledge attesting their support for traditional marriage, entitled "The Marriage Vow--A Declaration of Dependence upon Marriage and Family" as the first step in potentially earning their support for 2012.

Social conservatives Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum quickly signed on.
But after the public had a chance to examine the complete document, outrage ensued over multiple provisions, including one that reportedly stated the following:

Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA's first African-American President.

Pathetic.

Disgusting platform. Even worse is the MSM ignoring libertarian leaning candidates like Ron Paul in order to promote the extreme right candidates like Bachmann. They need to quit giving her attention.

Goliath wrote: How could it have come so far that a broad like her is now polling second amongst Republicans as their nominee?

I don't think she really is. Ron Paul has been consistently ranking second, even first in some polls, among GOP candidates but the MSM has been hiding that fact (especially CNN and FOX News). I almost NEVER see him in poll results or discussed by the MSM, and yet he continually ranks higher then the crazy no-shot contenders they can't stop talking about. There are even polls showing that there are less Republicans against gay marriage then there are for it. The extreme right wing is becoming extinct but the MSM doesn't want people to find out.

Goliath wrote: How could it have come so far that a broad like her is now polling second amongst Republicans as their nominee?

All I can say about this Woman and Sarah Palin being seriously considered as candidates is

Goliath wrote:The two-party system has always been a bad thing, but it's even worse when one of two parties is insane.

Tell me about it! I'm a British born Australian