Who are you Voting for in 2008 - GoFuckYourself.com

PornMogul · 05-22-2007, 01:30 AM

Which candidate supports the porn industry, I would assume a democrat, Who are you voting for in 2008 and why?

StickyGreen · 05-22-2007, 01:33 AM

Ron Paul strongly opposes any regulation of the internet...

fallenmuffin · 05-22-2007, 01:35 AM

Let you know when all 300 of them are whittled down to only a handful.

notabook · 05-22-2007, 02:13 AM

That's easy, Bill Richardson of course.

wyldworx · 05-22-2007, 02:16 AM

I am all for Kevin Rudd. oh, well, we have an election at the end of the year also.

kane · 05-22-2007, 02:53 AM

I'm not even 100% sure that I know who all is running.

Webby · 05-22-2007, 03:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notabook

That's easy, Bill Richardson of course.

Oddly... forgetting political parties and all the baggage they carry and looking at any individuals who may actually have some qualifications/experience to run a country with any competence, prob Richardson has more than any of them.

XSecurityAudit · 05-22-2007, 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StickyGreen

Ron Paul strongly opposes any regulation of the internet...

Indeed. Ron Paul is the way to go.

notabook · 05-22-2007, 04:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XSecurityAudit

Indeed. Ron Paul is the way to go.

BT · 05-22-2007, 05:20 AM

Joey butafuko

montel · 05-22-2007, 05:25 AM

If you are a porn webmaster you shouldnt be voting republican (unless it is Ron Paul - he is A+++). Obama?

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 05:26 AM

Well its kind of hard to actually say since there have been no nominations yet, and the running is very likely to change drastically within the next 6 months. However I am strongly inclined to believe the Republican nominee will be Fred Thompson, and he will get my vote without question.

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by montel

If you are a porn webmaster you shouldnt be voting republican (unless it is Ron Paul - he is A+++). Obama?

Tell us why exactly that is true. Show me one thing the democrats have done in support of our industry. I see a lot of people parrot that same view, but seems pretty baseless to me. If anything if you are doing well enough you get bumped into a higher tax bracket because of porn you should be voting republican. That is the only real difference. Which party is more likely to not fuck you over on taxes.

Wizzo · 05-22-2007, 05:29 AM

Whoever the Dems put up as you have to switch the power back and forth or one party gets too strong...

The Duck · 05-22-2007, 05:43 AM

Im not american but if I was, Ron Paul.

Webby · 05-22-2007, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

However I am strongly inclined to believe the Republican nominee will be Fred Thompson, and he will get my vote without question.

Sounds about right - vote for a lobbyist and a character actor. Just the qualifications the US needs to clear all the wreckage the current admin have generated

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

Sounds about right - vote for a lobbyist and a character actor. Just the qualifications the US needs to clear all the wreckage the current admin have generated

Ill remind you Reagan had the same stigmas applied to him. Maybe you should do some research on him prior to applying your silly labels. Ive done my research on him, and he has a very strong background which incase you didnt realize includes United States Senator.

Typical of you though.

Webby · 05-22-2007, 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Ive done my research on him, and he has a very strong background which incase you didnt realize includes United States Senator.

Sure... that's why the US is so great - anyone can be the President and idiots like you are allowed to vote and breath good air

Seriously Sticky... nothing particularly against Thompson, he's prob an OK guy, but let's put it this way - he would never lead any other country in the western world. The cred and track record just is not there.

Humpy Leftnut · 05-22-2007, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Ill remind you Reagan had the same stigmas applied to him. Maybe you should do some research on him prior to applying your silly labels. Ive done my research on him, and he has a very strong background which incase you didnt realize includes United States Senator.

Typical of you though.

Didn't we just have a your new baby thread where some guy mentioned to make sure you didn't force your political views on your kid.. lol.. G'luck with that. :P

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

Sure... that's why the US is so great - anyone can be the President and idiots like you are allowed to vote and breath good air

Seriously Sticky... nothing particularly against Thompson, he's prob an OK guy, but let's put it this way - he would never lead any other country in the western world. The cred and track record just is not there.

As typical for you, you are a total moron and have not a clue of what the man has accomplished. Let me guess You would prefer Obama ROFL

Quote:

THOMPSON, Fred Dalton, a Senator from Tennessee; born in Sheffield, Ala., on August 19, 1942; attended the public schools in Lawrenceburg, Tenn.; graduated from Memphis State University 1964; received J.D. degree from Vanderbilt University 1967; admitted to the Tennessee bar in 1967 and commenced the practice of law; assistant U.S. attorney 1969-1972; minority counsel, Senate Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities (?Watergate Committee?) 1973-1974; special counsel to Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander 1980; special counsel, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 1980-1981; special counsel, Senate Intelligence Committee 1982; member, Tennessee Appellate Court Nominating Commission 1985-1987; actor; elected as a Republican to the United States Senate in the November 8, 1994, special election to fill the unexpired portion of the term ending January 3, 1997, left vacant by the resignation of Albert Gore, Jr.; took the oath of office on December 2, 1994; reelected in 1996 for the term ending January 3, 2003; not a candidate for reelection in 2002; chair, Committee on Governmental Affairs (One Hundred Fifth and One Hundred Sixth Congresses; One Hundred Seventh Congress [January 20, 2001-June 6, 2001]); resumed acting career.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Humpy Leftnut

Didn't we just have a your new baby thread where some guy mentioned to make sure you didn't force your political views on your kid.. lol.. G'luck with that. :P

How exactly does one thing have anything to do with the other?

Frankly I dont really care about the advice of some dufus on a message board when it pertains to my children. K thx

JP513 · 05-22-2007, 06:20 PM

Republicans are obviously likely to keep the tax bracket lower . . . but also more likely to make our lives more miserable or kill our industry altogether so we don't have any income to pay taxes on.

I'd rather pay 35% on $100k than 31% percent on a $50k office job where I have to show up 9-5, 51 weeks per year.

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP513

Republicans are obviously likely to keep the tax bracket lower . . . but also more likely to make our lives more miserable or kill our industry altogether so we don't have any income to pay taxes on.

I'd rather pay 35% on $100k than 31% percent on a $50k office job where I have to show up 9-5, 51 weeks per year.

Here is a hint, its not Republicans going after us. You guys act like the dems stand shoulder to shoulder with us fighting for our rights.. pft.

JP513 · 05-22-2007, 06:28 PM

No candidate from either party will support porn. You all aren't looking at it the right way.

The question is . . . which candidate will appoint the judges that are the most liberal with their interpretations of privacy and civil liberties statutes. Not just at the Supreme Court but the Federal Appellate level too.

That would be a liberal democrat, most likely. I'd say Obama or Biden or Richardson. The fact that Bush won in 04 and appointed 2 conservatives to the Supreme Court does not bode well for our industry. It's 4-4 now (liberals/conservatives) with one Justice (Kennedy) on the fence. He was a Reagan appointee, and conservative in some areas, but not in all areas. But it's not all about the highest court.

The views of judges who preside in all the courtrooms throughout the Federal judicial system are the largest determining factor in the long term health of the adult industry.

tony286 · 05-22-2007, 06:31 PM

unfortunately so far none of them are worth a shit to me on both sides

BusterBunny · 05-22-2007, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notabook

i think i'm gonna write in kevin spacey thanks to you

Quote:

Originally Posted by BT

Joey butafuko

JP513 · 05-22-2007, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Here is a hint, its not Republicans going after us. You guys act like the dems stand shoulder to shoulder with us fighting for our rights.. pft.

That's not what I am saying--read my above post. But the Christian right (not necessarily Republicans in general) who are going after us. But no way are the Dems "on our side" either. It's a function of indirectly helping us through their platform.

I was just replying to your earlier post where u said something to the effect of (I only skimmed), all, we should vote Republican simply because our taxes would go up otherwise. And it's not that simple.

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP513

That's not what I am saying--read my above post. But the Christian right (not necessarily Republicans in general) who are going after us. But no way are the Dems "on our side" either. It's a function of indirectly helping us through their platform.

I was just replying to your earlier post where u said something to the effect of (I only skimmed), all, we should vote Republican simply because our taxes would go up otherwise. And it's not that simple.

And then you have to weigh in the other factors, such as will our national defense get fucked over like it did with Clinton? Etc etc etc.

notabook · 05-22-2007, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

And then you have to weigh in the other factors, such as will our national defense get fucked over like it did with Clinton? Etc etc etc.

National Defense fucked over with Clinton? ROFL

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notabook

National Defense fucked over with Clinton? ROFL

FACT #1. The size of the U.S. military has been cut drastically in the past decade.

Between 1992 and 2000, the Clinton Administration cut national defense by more than half a million personnel and $50 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars. 14 (See Table 1.) The Army alone has lost four active divisions and two Reserve divisions. Because of such cuts, the Army has lost more than 205,000 soldiers, or 30 percent of its staff, although its missions have increased significantly throughout the 1990s.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Mis...nse/BG1394.cfm

Webby · 05-22-2007, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notabook

National Defense fucked over with Clinton? ROFL

The boy is just a little sick - excuse him

Webby · 05-22-2007, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

FACT #1. The size of the U.S. military has been cut drastically in the past decade.

Why don't you join up instead of pontificating on shit you know nothing about ignoramous??

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

The boy is just a little sick - excuse him

Anyone that seriously argues that the Military was maintained or increased in size and resources is either insanely misinformed or just being silly.

baddog · 05-22-2007, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PornMogul

Which candidate supports the porn industry, I would assume a democrat,

you must be very young or very naive . . . . or both

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

Why don't you join up instead of pontificating on shit you know nothing about ignoramous??

Dont you have a monkey to fuck?

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 09:04 PM

Of the 305,000 employees removed from the federal payroll, 286,000 (or 90%) were military cuts. The statistics for America's defense during the Clinton years reveal the true feelings of the administration toward those who served in the military. The Army was cut from 18 divisions to 12. The Navy was reduced from 546 ships to 380. Air Force flight squadrons were cut from 76 to a mere 50. There were reductions in tanks, armored vehicles, rocket launchers, special forces units, etc., etc., etc.

In addition, President Clinton loosened America's ban on the export of supercomputers and other high-technology products to Communist China; this allowed Beijing to improve the accuracy of its intercontinental missiles. A prime American beneficiary of this Clinton policy was Loral Space & Communications chairman Bernard Schwartz, the single largest contributor to the Clinton campaign and to the Democrat Party.

In 1996 it was discovered that Chinese spies had stolen nuclear design secrets from the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the most damaging security breach in American history -- giving China the ability to produce and deliver nuclear warheads via submarines, mobile missiles, and long-range missiles. A 1998 Senate Governmental Affairs Committee concluded that foreign campaign contributions Clinton had received "were facilitated by individuals with extensive ties to China."

Apparently, while reducing our military capabilities here in the US, President Clinton was helping the Chinese build up their own capabilities. Not much has changed since the days when Clinton marched in London under the flag of North Vietnam.

notabook · 05-22-2007, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby

The boy is just a little sick - excuse him

I wouldn't say sick, I would just say a bit confused on what it would mean to "fuck up" your national defense.

A reduction of personal does very little to "fuck up" your national defense, especially as technology evolves. As our technology becomes more and more advanced we need fewer and fewer personal to run it and as such we should see a continual decline in personal. That's why the US has such high kill:death ratios, our technology rocks and we're needing fewer and fewer personal to use it. The only time that it is necessary to have a huge grunt force is when you go on the offense - like we mistakenly did in Iraq.

I remember when people got upset at Bush for his endorsement of closing 22 major military bases – ones here in the the United States – which of course is beyond horrible and will completely destroy our “national defense”! LMAO

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notabook

I wouldn't say sick, I would just say a bit confused on what it would mean to "fuck up" your national defense.

A reduction of personal does very little to "fuck up" your national defense, especially as technology evolves. As our technology becomes more and more advanced we need fewer and fewer personal to run it and as such we should see a continual decline in personal. That's why the US has such high kill:death ratios, our technology rocks and we're needing fewer and fewer personal to use it. The only time that it is necessary to have a huge grunt force is when you go on the offense - like we mistakenly did in Iraq.

I remember when people got upset at Bush for his endorsement of closing 22 major military bases ? ones here in the the United States ? which of course is beyond horrible and will completely destroy our ?national defense?! LMAO

No Clinton fucked up our military due to more than just reductions.

notabook · 05-22-2007, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

No Clinton fucked up our military due to more than just reductions.

LMAO

clickhappy · 05-22-2007, 09:23 PM

I'm hoping that Michael Bloomberg and Al Gore decide to get into the race and then become the final 2. That would be a great race.

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clickhappy

I'm hoping that Michael Bloomberg and Al Gore decide to get into the race and then become the final 2. That would be a great race.

OMg.....

tony286 · 05-22-2007, 09:26 PM

these republican supporters live in a fucking fog ,all the times pressure has been put on adult its during republican admins:
Nixon
Reagan/meese cost adam and eve 1 million dollars fighting them
W 2257 made a bitch to follow and for the first time inspections start and dont think for a moment everyone got off scott clean, the feds work very very slow.
Atty's fired because they wouldnt go after adult porn, Ashcroft was going to hit porn very hard if 911 didnt happen.
Now under clinton porn grew more than ever before, they didnt support it but felt there were more important things to do with government resources then go after consenting adults.

stickyfingerz · 05-22-2007, 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

these republican supporters live in a fucking fog ,all the times pressure has been put on adult its during republican admins:
Nixon
Reagan/meese cost adam and eve 1 million dollars fighting them
W 2257 made a bitch to follow and for the first time inspections start and dont think for a moment everyone got off scott clean, the feds work very very slow.
Atty's fired because they wouldnt go after adult porn, Ashcroft was going to hit porn very hard if 911 didnt happen.
Now under clinton porn grew more than ever before, they didnt support it but felt there were more important things to do with government resources then go after consenting adults.

Tip Tip Tipper Gore Tipper Gore lol. Coppa? Ring any bells?

12clicks · 05-22-2007, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PornMogul

Which candidate supports the porn industry, I would assume a democrat, Who are you voting for in 2008 and why?

Rudy

because I'm smart.

tony286 · 05-22-2007, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Tip Tip Tipper Gore Tipper Gore lol. Coppa? Ring any bells?

Copa was pushed by the republican congress, tipper didnt want kids exposed to foul language on records wanted a warning label thats so bad. you right wingers are presented with facts and cant be adult enough to admit your wrong.

tony286 · 05-22-2007, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks

Rudy

because I'm smart.

too many skeletons in his closet wont happen. Both sides they all suck ,the more I read the more they all make me want to throw up.

12clicks · 05-22-2007, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JP513

No candidate from either party will support porn. You all aren't looking at it the right way.

The question is . . . which candidate will appoint the judges that are the most liberal with their interpretations of privacy and civil liberties statutes. Not just at the Supreme Court but the Federal Appellate level too.

That would be a liberal democrat, most likely. I'd say Obama or Biden or Richardson. The fact that Bush won in 04 and appointed 2 conservatives to the Supreme Court does not bode well for our industry. It's 4-4 now (liberals/conservatives) with one Justice (Kennedy) on the fence. He was a Reagan appointee, and conservative in some areas, but not in all areas. But it's not all about the highest court.

The views of judges who preside in all the courtrooms throughout the Federal judicial system are the largest determining factor in the long term health of the adult industry.

I weould remind you that consevatives protect freedom of speach far better than liberals.
look at who is the driving force behind kicking Imus off the air etc.

12clicks · 05-22-2007, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

too many skeletons in his closet wont happen. Both sides they all suck ,the more I read the more they all make me want to throw up.

I think we're ready to forgive skeletons now more than ever.

GatorB · 05-22-2007, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony404

Copa was pushed by the republican congress, .

yes idiots that failed civics class forget it's CONGRESS that passes legislation not the President.

tony286 · 05-22-2007, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks

I think we're ready to forgive skeletons now more than ever.

The extreme right has a problem with him, I like Rudy I lived in the city when he became mayor he did great things.

GatorB · 05-22-2007, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks

I weould remind you that consevatives protect freedom of speach far better than liberals.
look at who is the driving force behind kicking Imus off the air etc.

Yes that's why Bush appointed Ashcroft to AG because he's going to defend our freedom of speech. You'll sell your soul to Satan because you think he'll save you a nickle on taxes which is also BS.

05-22-2007, 01:33 AM	#2
StickyGreen . Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 13,076	Ron Paul strongly opposes any regulation of the internet... __________________ Refer Cam Girls and Take Home 10% of Everything They Make For Life

05-22-2007, 02:13 AM	#4
notabook Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Not a Library! Posts: 9,748	That's easy, Bill Richardson of course. __________________

05-22-2007, 05:20 AM	#10
BT Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Ft liquordale FL Posts: 6,481	Joey butafuko __________________ IS Prime Hosting Bald Head Shine "BT" The American Dream, baby! " THE HOST WITH THE MOST!" My ICQ 122994792

05-22-2007, 05:25 AM	#11
montel Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: See sig! Posts: 2,606	If you are a porn webmaster you shouldnt be voting republican (unless it is Ron Paul - he is A+++). Obama? __________________ Barefootsies

05-22-2007, 05:29 AM	#14
Wizzo 2011 GFY Hall of Fame! Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Back in Texas! Posts: 15,224	Whoever the Dems put up as you have to switch the power back and forth or one party gets too strong... __________________ Looking for Opportunity!

05-22-2007, 01:30 AM	#1
PornMogul Confirmed User Join Date: May 2007 Location: LA Posts: 1,495	Who are you Voting for in 2008 Which candidate supports the porn industry, I would assume a democrat, Who are you voting for in 2008 and why? Last edited by PornMogul; 05-22-2007 at 01:31 AM..

05-22-2007, 01:35 AM	#3
fallenmuffin Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 8,170	Let you know when all 300 of them are whittled down to only a handful.

05-22-2007, 02:16 AM	#5
wyldworx So Fucking Banned Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: oz-trailer Posts: 5,144	I am all for Kevin Rudd. oh, well, we have an election at the end of the year also.

05-22-2007, 02:53 AM	#6
kane Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: portland, OR Posts: 20,684	I'm not even 100% sure that I know who all is running.

05-22-2007, 05:26 AM	#12
stickyfingerz Doin fine Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 24,983	Well its kind of hard to actually say since there have been no nominations yet, and the running is very likely to change drastically within the next 6 months. However I am strongly inclined to believe the Republican nominee will be Fred Thompson, and he will get my vote without question.

05-22-2007, 05:43 AM	#15
The Duck Adult Content Provider Industry Role: Join Date: May 2005 Location: Europe Posts: 18,243	Im not american but if I was, Ron Paul. __________________ Skype Horusmaia ICQ 41555245 Email [email protected]

05-22-2007, 06:20 PM	#21
JP513 Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: The Republic of Barebackistan Posts: 1,914	Republicans are obviously likely to keep the tax bracket lower . . . but also more likely to make our lives more miserable or kill our industry altogether so we don't have any income to pay taxes on. I'd rather pay 35% on $100k than 31% percent on a $50k office job where I have to show up 9-5, 51 weeks per year.

05-22-2007, 06:28 PM	#23
JP513 Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: The Republic of Barebackistan Posts: 1,914	It's not about the politicians. It's about the Judges. No candidate from either party will support porn. You all aren't looking at it the right way. The question is . . . which candidate will appoint the judges that are the most liberal with their interpretations of privacy and civil liberties statutes. Not just at the Supreme Court but the Federal Appellate level too. That would be a liberal democrat, most likely. I'd say Obama or Biden or Richardson. The fact that Bush won in 04 and appointed 2 conservatives to the Supreme Court does not bode well for our industry. It's 4-4 now (liberals/conservatives) with one Justice (Kennedy) on the fence. He was a Reagan appointee, and conservative in some areas, but not in all areas. But it's not all about the highest court. *The views of judges who preside in all the courtrooms throughout the Federal judicial system are the largest determining factor in the long term health of the adult industry.*

05-22-2007, 06:31 PM	#24
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	unfortunately so far none of them are worth a shit to me on both sides

05-22-2007, 09:04 PM	#35
stickyfingerz Doin fine Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 24,983	Of the 305,000 employees removed from the federal payroll, 286,000 (or 90%) were military cuts. The statistics for America's defense during the Clinton years reveal the true feelings of the administration toward those who served in the military. The Army was cut from 18 divisions to 12. The Navy was reduced from 546 ships to 380. Air Force flight squadrons were cut from 76 to a mere 50. There were reductions in tanks, armored vehicles, rocket launchers, special forces units, etc., etc., etc. In addition, President Clinton loosened America's ban on the export of supercomputers and other high-technology products to Communist China; this allowed Beijing to improve the accuracy of its intercontinental missiles. A prime American beneficiary of this Clinton policy was Loral Space & Communications chairman Bernard Schwartz, the single largest contributor to the Clinton campaign and to the Democrat Party. In 1996 it was discovered that Chinese spies had stolen nuclear design secrets from the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the most damaging security breach in American history -- giving China the ability to produce and deliver nuclear warheads via submarines, mobile missiles, and long-range missiles. A 1998 Senate Governmental Affairs Committee concluded that foreign campaign contributions Clinton had received "were facilitated by individuals with extensive ties to China." Apparently, while reducing our military capabilities here in the US, President Clinton was helping the Chinese build up their own capabilities. Not much has changed since the days when Clinton marched in London under the flag of North Vietnam.

05-22-2007, 09:23 PM	#39
clickhappy Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 4,027	I'm hoping that Michael Bloomberg and Al Gore decide to get into the race and then become the final 2. That would be a great race.

05-22-2007, 09:26 PM	#41
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	these republican supporters live in a fucking fog ,all the times pressure has been put on adult its during republican admins: Nixon Reagan/meese cost adam and eve 1 million dollars fighting them W 2257 made a bitch to follow and for the first time inspections start and dont think for a moment everyone got off scott clean, the feds work very very slow. Atty's fired because they wouldnt go after adult porn, Ashcroft was going to hit porn very hard if 911 didnt happen. Now under clinton porn grew more than ever before, they didnt support it but felt there were more important things to do with government resources then go after consenting adults.