The Pornification of Sarah Palin

F

fossten

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
11,817
Reaction score
6
Location
Louisville
The Pornification of Sarah Palin

Thursday, 10/ 2/2008 at 1:21 PM

There's a price to pay for conservative politicians like Sarah Palin who don't swath themselves in pantsuits, wear stylish open-toe shoes and refuse to cut their hair into mannish crops. Apparently part of that price is that, on the very day we should be focusing on Sarah Palin's forthcoming vice presidential debate performance, we learn that porn-peddler Larry Flynt has shot an X-rated adult film starring a Sarah Palin lookalike.

This isn't even the most offensive thing I've heard. Yesterday I read about a Chicago tavern that's hanging up nude Palin paintings. And no, painter Bruce Elliot isn't a fan of her political leanings, he just likes Palin's hot bod. If that's not disturbing enough, Elliot's daughter posed naked as his Palin look-alike muse. (SFW: The link is to a story about the painting, there is no image of the painting itself.

Flynt, Elliot and all the rest of their disgusting male friends hiding in their basements who eat up this filth are sick and sad, but I'm not even going to pretend to act surprised this is happening. It happens to lots of conservative women I know, like Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter and the rest. It happened to me in college when a graduate student photoshopped pornography of me and put it on the internet because of the conservative work I was doing on campus. We know it's par for the course. I would hope that all women would be outraged by this, but people seem to care less when this kind of dirt is directed towards conservative women. I bet this causes less uproar than when the Washington Post's Style section discussed Hillary Clinton's cleavage.

Simply put, conservative women who don't hide their femininity are forced to pay a price. Luckily, women like Palin are willing to pay it with a smile to make it easier for all the young women who will follow in her footsteps later.

What do you think about this?


by Amanda Carpenter
 
And you don't think they weren't looking for Hillary lookalikes for Dominatrix movies.... come on... get real

I liked Palin's shoes too... could have used another inch though
 
The last line of that ad really ruined it for me. What good is a porn without it?
 
foxpaws said:
And you don't think they weren't looking for Hillary lookalikes for Dominatrix movies.... come on... get real
Click to expand...

No I don't think so.
Have you ever heard of one?

Were the political enemies of the Clinton's into hard core porn production?
I don't think so.

I also don't remember the media or the guys on FreeRepublic digging deep to find nude pictures of Hillary or Chelsea.

Larry Flynt is a radical, hateful, politically disgusting, scum bag. After failing to find nude pictures of the Bush daughters and now Gov. Palin, he's just going to do hard core porn with impersonators.
 
I'd heard FAR more people on the Right refer to her in a sexual manner than the Left.

Then again, it's okay to refer to Hillary an ugly lesbian, just don't dare touch the Northern Star.
 
well, you could always buy a stand-up of hillary as a dominatrix...
http://www.lastgasp.com/d/32429/

I am not really going to search for x-rated movies with Hillary lookalikes, blick.

And, you can't judge the left for its radicals - like Flynt, I don't judge the right by its radicals...

And if there weren't any money in it - Flynt wouldn't be making a movie either. Obviously he has noticed the very large amount of photoshop-ing of Palin's head onto bikini clad babes or the large activity of hits on her Miss Alaska swimwuit footage (usually posted by the right) and just wants a piece of the action.

Money, not politics in this example.
 
foxpaws said:
well, you could always buy a stand-up of hillary as a dominatrix...
http://www.lastgasp.com/d/32429/

I am not really going to search for x-rated movies with Hillary lookalikes, blick.

And, you can't judge the left for its radicals - like Flynt, I don't judge the right by its radicals...

And if there weren't any money in it - Flynt wouldn't be making a movie either. Obviously he has noticed the very large amount of photoshop-ing of Palin's head onto bikini clad babes or the large activity of hits on her Miss Alaska swimwuit footage (usually posted by the right) and just wants a piece of the action.

Money, not politics in this example.
Click to expand...
Well, that makes it all right, then.

My mistake.

/s
 
No, it doesn't make it 'right' it makes it 'legal'. First amendment... I personally think the man is appalling.

Oh /s - sarcasm... ahhhhh.. clever;)
 
Heck, we have lots of bad apples over here on the left - just as you have on the right. And all those slimy apples are protected under the first amendment. I would have oddly come to the defense of Dobson as well, in evoking his constitutional freedoms. Both sides have to take the good with the bad in this case.
 
But we're not talking about both sides, Miss Red Herring. We're talking about Flynt in this thread, who is a LIBERAL DEMOCRAT.

If you want to play the silly, tired "both sides" game, start your own thread.

I was going to say Tu Quoque, but realized that you haven't even been able to give an example on the right that's comparable to Flynt. So I'll stick with Red Herring.
 
I defend Flynt's first amendment rights. I don't at all agree with what he does, but I defend the first amendment in this case.
 
Nobody's attacking his First Amendment rights. I'm just pointing out the fact that a) He's a despicable, smutty human and b) He's a liberal Democrat.

Keep backpedaling, though.
 
So, if I just happen across an example or two of 'despicable, smutty humans' that happen to be conservative Republicans I can post them on a new, different thread - but, not on this thread because we aren't allow to play both sides within the thread?
:confused:

However once again, I suppose our definition of despicable, or smutty differs greatly (it is all in the eye of the beholder).

But, maybe not our definition of human?

And Flynt is despicable and smutty in my opinion, human is open to question;)
 
foxpaws said:
So, if I just happen across an example or two of 'despicable, smutty humans' that happen to be conservative Republicans I can post them on a new, different thread - but, not on this thread because we aren't allow to play both sides within the thread?
:confused:

However once again, I suppose our definition of despicable, or smutty differs greatly (it is all in the eye of the beholder).

But, maybe not our definition of human?

And Flynt is despicable and smutty in my opinion, human is open to question;)
Click to expand...
Even if your introduction of an example of "both sides" was acceptable, you still haven't submitted one. So in effect, you're just using a red herring.
 
To tell you the truth, I have only heard of one x-film producer/distributor, Nicholas Boyias, contributing to the GOP (I don't know amounts- probably small, he isn't that good of a pornographer) his company does distribute such classics as "Fire in the Hole.":rolleyes:

However, it probably is hard to find examples of pornographers on the right - the traditional expectations of the Right to limit that part of the first amendment (freedom of speech) would sort of deter pornographers signing up on the party line. Sort of like having pro choice Christians signing up on the left... sort of against their basic ideals, you probably can't name a lot of them. (they are not scum though, I do want to get that across - this is an example of finding a comparable, not an example of finding scum)

But, can I chose other "scum" - like people who would try to remove my forth amendment rights? I find them despicable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 213 (members: 0, guests: 213)
Back
Top