Finally: Hef on Palin

posted at 7:45 pm on November 18, 2008 by Allahpundit

I’m torn. On the one hand, we can spare the octogenarian libertine vote. On the other hand, when an entrepreneur savvy enough to build a commercial empire out of wearing pajamas all day while naked women frolic in his midst gives you advice, it’s probably wise to listen.

Dude, I think it’s Jindal in ’12.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Ah, but the genius of Hef is that he saw that porn didn’t have to be “seedy.” He recognized the men who like to look at naked women aren’t perverts, they are just men. Many are smart, capable men who also might enjoy reading John Updike short stories, investigative journalism, and interviews with Ayn Rand.
There were plenty of girlie mags around before Playboy. Hef rose above the rest because he didn’t insult the intelligence of his readers.

justfinethanks on November 18, 2008 at 9:42 PM

Thank you for the html link to the interesting article. I have not read Rand in years.

Your link caused me to go back in time and think about Rand again.

PLAYBOY: Miss Rand, your novels and essays, especially your controversial best seller, Atlas Shrugged, present a carefully engineered, internally consistent world view. They are, in effect, the expression of an all-encompassing philosophical system. What do you seek to accomplish with this new philosophy?
RAND: I seek to provide men — or those who care to think — with an integrated, consistent and rational view of life.

PLAYBOY: What are the basic premises of Objectivism? Where does it begin?

RAND: It begins with the axiom that existence exists, which means that an objective reality exists independent of any perceiver or of the perceiver’s emotions, feelings, wishes, hopes or fears. Objectivism holds that reason is man’s only means of perceiving reality and his only guide to action. By reason, I mean the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses.
***from Rand article***

Years ago, I took some time to really wrestle with the somewhat brilliant writings of Rand, an atheist who advocates her philosophy which she calls Objectivism.

Rand was a very, very good philosopher.

Here is one conclusion of mine:

It is possible to posit or establish an internally consistent system of propositions or ideas (or philosophical circles) that cohere beautifully together, while avoiding the logical sin of contradicting the abstract, universal laws of logic.

Indeed, it is possible to posit many different coherent circles, yet coherence itself is not a sufficient test of truth.

I can easily create a coherent circle of ideas concerning unicorns, yet we all admit that while my “system of ideas regarding unicorns” is coherent, yet these ideas do not correspond to reality as true because unicorns do not exist.

One question I wrestled with back then was:

how does the brilliant thinker behind Objectivism (Rand) come into epistemological access to the very same abstract, propositions which are then posited in her atheistic system of physicalism?

How does the brain come into access with those propositions?

Why does proposition xyz (and not proposition DEF) enter her mind at time T instead of something else?

Think of the concept behind box or deer. That concept does not jump out and grab you because concepts themselves are non-physical and they lack causal powers. They are inert. And propositions, numbers, and sets are causually inert and lack power.

Yet we as humans still think them.

How does the mind “latch onto” and connect to these abstract entities, like propositions and concepts?

But they can’t be heuristic devices or man-made inventions, because the history of philosophy shows the problems inherent with those views.

Here is my personal answer:

http://hotair.com/headlines/?p=23508

One random, chemical or neurotic explosion or C-firing comes to my brain/mental state right now:

from
this book:

on page 233:

A.) Suppose you find yourself convinced that (1) there are propositions, properties, and sets;

(2) that the causal requirement is indeed true; and

(3) that (due to an excessive number or excessive complexity or excessive size) propositions, properties, and sets can’t be human thoughts, human concepts, or human collections…..

then you have the materials for a theistic argument.”

ColtsFan on November 17, 2008 at 1:28 AM

___

In short, we are made in God’s image.

Rationality is the tools given to us to think.

God provides the epistemological equipment for us as thinkers to come into contact with abstract propositions, concepts, sets, numbers, etc.

Thank you for letting me post.

ColtsFan on November 18, 2008 at 10:18 PM

Oh, Lawdy, IT IS a slow news day.

Hef is a living example that only the good die young.

I hear that his “Girls Next Door” are bailing on him faster
than stewards off the Titanic.

kingsjester on November 18, 2008 at 10:21 PM

Sounds like she turned him down.

Jim Treacher on November 18, 2008 at 10:22 PM

The problem with Bobby Jindal…

Firebird on November 18, 2008 at 10:24 PM

This is the only kind of porn I like. (safe link)

Y-not on November 18, 2008 at 9:37 PM

LOVE it!!

4shoes on November 18, 2008 at 10:25 PM

“[Hugh Hefner] … had trouble finding satisfaction through intercourse; instead, he liked the girls to pleasure each other while he masturbated and watched gay porn.”

interesting playboy let that be published.

jp on November 18, 2008 at 10:30 PM

I simply just cannot hate on Hefner…. Agree with him or not but he has done something that less than 1/2 of 1/2 of 1/2 of the entire world population has done

Please, reconsider your math.

keep the change on November 18, 2008 at 10:41 PM

O Shaper of Beauty, Bobby Jindal is far to bright to run in 2012.
He was too bright to run in 2008.

matoko_chan on November 18, 2008 at 10:43 PM

Jindal needs to bulk up and get a more dudely look. And he’s a little too strange looking. I know, shallow observation, but hey.

PC14 on November 18, 2008 at 11:02 PM

Allah, take a vacation man. A long one.

R D on November 18, 2008 at 11:10 PM

Just goes to show, there’s no fool like an old fool.

JFS61 on November 18, 2008 at 11:26 PM

You’re grasping AP. Seriously grasping.

Frankly, I just don’t know what you have against Sarah Palin. She’s sharp, smart, unrelentingly conservative, and hugely popular with the base.

It sounds to me like you have the “religion” bug up your butt again. If that’s the case, then you really have NO POINT. No intellectually honest conservative can say that Sarah Palin would not be a FANTASTIC and WINNING GOP presidential candidate in 2012.

As far as Hef goes, I think it’s obvious where his political allegiances lie. That doesn’t stop me from subscribing to his magazine.

Look. I’m a geek. Been a geek for nearly 15 years. I’ve trolled every nasty, dirty stinking “den of scum and villainy” there IS on the internet, criminal hives included. I’ve seen things that would make you and your dog’s hair stand on end. I’ve seen things that would turn a marine’s stomach, all plastered out there on the internet for anyone curious enough to find it. For a Geek, there is more porn out there available for the taking than one could possibly view in a lifetime. Some of it is vile, some is strange, some is Illegal. Most of it is utter crap.

I subscribe to Playboy because I want something with a touch of class. Something that titillates without being just plain dirty. Playboy not only has that, Playboy INVENTED it. So yeah, I subscribe. I’m also a happily married man with two children. I love my wife, and never expect her to be anything like the idealized versions of women found in Playboy. Neither does she expect me to be a Daniel Craig body double. We BOTH enjoy the articles (This month’s interview with Carol Alt is fascinating. She eats RAW FOOD to stay healthy!) and it’s not a big deal. (I just don’t let my kids see them.)

Those of you that find Playboy to be “Dirty”, I don’t know what to say. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

wearyman on November 18, 2008 at 11:40 PM

…man in his seventies…heartbeat away…

I sometimes wonder what Hef is expecting, once his final heartbeat comes and goes.

Tzetzes on November 18, 2008 at 11:40 PM

Doesn’t matter, Hugh. Her sex life is better than yours.

There. I said it!

newton on November 18, 2008 at 11:44 PM

The problem with Bobby Jindal…

Firebird on November 18, 2008 at 10:24 PM

Second day in a row. What’s your problem?

The Race Card on November 18, 2008 at 11:44 PM

…Those of you that find Playboy to be “Dirty”, I don’t know what to say. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.

wearyman on November 18, 2008 at 11:40 PM


The first step is admitting you have a problem
.

You sound like the pothead who swears that they’re OK smoking 6 joints a day because at least they stopped doing meth.

The Race Card on November 19, 2008 at 12:00 AM

Hef, you don’t have to make video out of everything Bill Maher says under the covers.

Ronnie on November 19, 2008 at 12:09 AM

This is the only kind of porn I like. (safe link)

Y-not on November 18, 2008 at 9:37 PM

Deathpr0n? Fascinating.

Not to say it wasn’t entertaining, but the thought of someone tooting tugger while watching that is… *twitches*

Reaps on November 19, 2008 at 12:14 AM

Oh. Hugh Hefner said it, therefore…It. Must. Be. So.

Now that I’ve been properly corrected, I’ll just go cancel my membership at Team Sarah and change all my beliefs and convictions.

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I’m so relieved.

RightTurnOnly on November 19, 2008 at 12:16 AM

The Race Card on November 18, 2008 at 11:44 PM

My Problem is I’m tired of the media proclaiming Bobby Jindal as the 2012 favorite, thats obviously what they want.
Bobby is a very good governor but has a perceived week side and more of a administrator than a national leader. Bobby’s Jindal’s rally’s would make Biden’s rally’s look exciting.

Firebird on November 19, 2008 at 12:18 AM

People blame the internet for Playboy’s demise, but the cause of it’s decline is the women of Playboy. Today they are all plastic or over the hill actresses looking to revitalize their careers.

Not that I’d really know. I never look at that kind of smut. Ever.

This good Catholic boy is too busy commenting on Hot Air or sorting his holy cards.

Mike Honcho on November 19, 2008 at 12:32 AM

Reaps on November 19, 2008 at 12:14 AM

“warporn” — I’m not sure if Ace of Spades coined the term, but that’s where I picked it up.

And I’m not a guy.

Y-not on November 19, 2008 at 12:35 AM

Mike Honcho on November 19, 2008 at 12:32 AM

Agreed, back when Marilyn posed for Playboy, now that was class.

The plastic silicone botox crap we get today, bleh.

Wanderlust on November 19, 2008 at 12:58 AM

Can you imagine my surprise when I saw Hef speak, and I still didn’t care what he had to say.

Jesse on November 19, 2008 at 1:00 AM

In my B.C. days, I thought Hef sounded like philosopher. Now it’s obvious he’s just a hack with a schtick. One article that I recall from the 70′s brings to mind a quote which I will alter slightly:

“God is dead” signed Hugh Hefner 1970
But sometime soon, “Hefner is dead” signed God

One final quote:
Mark 9:42  ”And whosoever shall be a snare to one of the little ones who believe in me, it were better for him if a millstone were hung about his neck, and he cast into the sea.” … Jesus Christ

Christ set me free from Playboy and all the other porn. PTL!

Christian Conservative on November 19, 2008 at 1:04 AM

My Problem is I’m tired of the media proclaiming Bobby Jindal as the 2012 favorite, thats obviously what they want.
Bobby is a very good governor but has a perceived week side and more of a administrator than a national leader. Bobby’s Jindal’s rally’s would make Biden’s rally’s look exciting.

Firebird on November 19, 2008 at 12:18 AM

So you post photos that seem to mock his ethnicity? I don’t get the connection. Why throw bombs? Who are the “they” to which you refer? Be specific.

You are as full of shit as your writing is full of errors. As annoying as Frum, Parker, Noonan et al looking down their noses, I guess you exist to prove them correct. I can imagine the size of your brow and the slope of your forehead.

I expect you will deny taking any ethnic swipes at the good Gov. So save it. You’re not being accused of racism. You’re being called out juvenile insults.

The Race Card on November 19, 2008 at 3:53 AM

It’s not Jindal in ’12.

Best bet is to make it “Palin / Jindal”.

It’s the dynamite ticket. Palin … The greatest communicator the Republicans currently have teamed with Bobby Jindal … The Smartest man in the world.

Unstoppable.

HondaV65 on November 19, 2008 at 5:43 AM

Since when did a lefty like Hef have an opinion that means anything?

nelsonknows on November 19, 2008 at 5:49 AM

On the other hand, when an entrepreneur savvy enough to build a commercial empire out of wearing pajamas all day while naked women frolic in his midst gives you advice, it’s probably wise to listen.

I was considered watching it until you said this. I like most of what you post AP but this is foolish.

Romans 1:28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

shick on November 19, 2008 at 6:15 AM

ColtsFan on November 18, 2008 at 10:18 PM

Awesome. Do you read Van Til? If not, who?

shick on November 19, 2008 at 6:37 AM

I would love to take Hefner’s robe…AND CHOKE HIM WITH IT! Oh and while you’re at it, add Golden Girl Betty White to those with PDS:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxL7MKsGoPo

Since she was married to Password host Allen Ludden, the Password in this case is…IRRELEVANT!

I am saddened but not shocked at her actions.

BobAnthony on November 19, 2008 at 7:45 AM

how is Hugh seen as some prophet?

even young girls that watch Girls Next Door salivate at his image.

it’s a big loss that HH is seen as some icon instead of the lowly opportunitst freak that he is

and on the sarah palin end
can’t we admire her class and Christian convictions instead of undressing her mentally?

audiotom on November 19, 2008 at 7:55 AM

Well that’s it, the geriatric, porn pushing, syphilitic pervert community has spoken.

My question is, why should I care?

And why would I want this worthless old goat to be on Palin’s side anyway?

NoDonkey on November 19, 2008 at 8:09 AM

Poor Hef, he doesnt know a real woman is like.

He is to busy humping the blond ditz of America, who act on a 3rd grade maturity level. Sure they are great eye candy, but lets face it, they arent the sharpest tools in the shed.

TheHat on November 19, 2008 at 8:11 AM

Frankly, I just don’t know what you have against Sarah Palin. She’s sharp, smart, unrelentingly conservative, and hugely popular with the base.

My fear is that she’s a one trick pony. Plus, you have to rev up more than the base, and I don’t think she can do that.

sheesh on November 19, 2008 at 8:31 AM

The women of NOW are hanging on Hef’s every word.

Bishop on November 18, 2008 at 8:31 PM

Bedfellows.

the_souse on November 19, 2008 at 9:13 AM

Awesome. Do you read Van Til? If not, who?

shick on November 19, 2008 at 6:37 AM

I think I can answer for him, yes he does….and bahnsen.

Interesting thing is the fact that thanks to Hef, our culture does in fact endorse Polygamy. Just because they aren’t married, doesn’t mean Hef and the Girls Next Door aren’t defacto Polygamist, a secular variety though of course. If I was a mormon that still beleived in Polygomy i’d be pissed.

jp on November 19, 2008 at 9:37 AM

except I think he’s a Two Kingdom guy, and not a theonomist like Bahnsen

jp on November 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM

Just a guy who has yet to govern more than a few square feet of mattress, and, from what the girls have been saying, not very well, either.

unclesmrgol on November 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM

“Poor ole Hugh Hefner surrounded by all those beautiful women and can’t do anything about it. He’s like a kid at the amusement park thats too small to ride all the good rides”
- Larry the Cable Guy
(from memory)

MechEng5by5 on November 19, 2008 at 10:46 AM

I’m tired of Palin-bashing, especially by self-proclaimed conservatives. If someone comes up with a viable alternative to the Republican party I’ll join in a heartbeat. It’s Christian-bashing pure and simple, and I get anough of that from the protesters down in the tenderloin – who are all probably big Hef fans.

Bah.

Venusian Visitor on November 19, 2008 at 11:08 AM

You sound like the pothead who swears that they’re OK smoking 6 joints a day because at least they stopped doing meth.

The Race Card on November 19, 2008 at 12:00 AM

And you sound like an uptight weenie who isn’t getting any from his frigid spouse. Like that? If we’re gonna throw around unsupportable crap then let’s get it on. Otherwise keep your hang ups in your closet where they belong.

Look, I realize and accept that there is such as thing as Pornography addiction. I’ve seen guys (and girls, actually) who have it and it’s NOT pretty. However, just as there is a difference between occasional imbibing of alcohol and alcoholism, so there is a difference in swimming in Hard Core porn on a daily basis and a once-a-month magazine subscription of soft-core nudes. You do yourself and those who actually suffer from Porn addiction no favors by wildly bandying about the “porn addict” label on everybody who views porn, no matter how infrequently.

I find Playboy classy and tasteful, with excellent articles and artful nudes. As a former artist and art student, I think the Human body is a beautiful thing, and the female human body is particularly beautiful. My wife prefers the male body, but we can both appreciate God’s creations, male and female, equally without dipping into sexual perversion, adultery, or porn addiction.

I’m sorry that your faith is too weak to hold up to that. I will refrain from opening any Playboys in your presence so as not to cause you to stumble, provided you can judge not lest you be judged.

wearyman on November 19, 2008 at 11:48 AM

Oy. Love all the haters chiming in on this thread. As an unreformed Republican Party Reptile (thank you, P.J.) as far as I’m concerned, Hugh is livin’ the dream. And so are the girls who manage to land themselves a spot at the mansion. “Pimp”? “Exploiter”? Hah. Talk to a stripper some day about who is the exploited and who is the exploiter. This is one Republican who wishes many of his fellow Repubs would get off their moral high horses.

quikstrike98 on November 19, 2008 at 12:26 PM

I’m glad he managed to keep his dentures in long enough for an interview.

AubieJon on November 19, 2008 at 12:42 PM

“My fear is that she’s a one trick pony. Plus, you have to rev up more than the base, and I don’t think she can do that.”

America just elected two no-trick ponies President and Vice President, so that objection is overruled.

The MSM and the Democrats will be out to destroy anyone on the Republican side who is effective and they will laud RINOs like Olympia Snowe to the ends of the earth.

They just won’t get any Republicans elected.

NoDonkey on November 19, 2008 at 12:56 PM

“as far as I’m concerned, Hugh is livin’ the dream.”

Yes, who wouldn’t want to be a geriatric has-been pervert, cuddling with women who despise you deep down?

I wouldn’t trade my life for anyone’s, and especially not this vile and addled old toad.

NoDonkey on November 19, 2008 at 12:59 PM

Leave it to Hef to bring out the erudition in the Hot Air comboxes. Any more of this and I’m upgrading to MM’s blog.

I’m not to proud to beg.

manwithblackhat on November 19, 2008 at 1:07 PM

I’m not TOO proud to beg. Just too proud to spell right.

manwithblackhat on November 19, 2008 at 1:07 PM

And you sound like an uptight weenie who isn’t getting any from his frigid spouse. Like that? If we’re gonna throw around unsupportable crap then let’s get it on. Otherwise keep your hang ups in your closet where they belong.

Hey, you’re the one who admitted to indulging in all types of pornography — including the illegal stuff.

As far as my wife being frigid…well let’s just say we don’t need a church sermon to motivate us. I’m sorry you felt the need to mention my wife since I did not mention yours.

But since you went there, what kind of woman wants a man like this:

Your words:

I’ve trolled every nasty, dirty stinking “den of scum and villainy” there IS on the internet, criminal hives included. I’ve seen things that would make you and your dog’s hair stand on end. I’ve seen things that would turn a marine’s stomach, all plastered out there on the internet for anyone curious enough to find it.

I only know of a few things that make sex illegal in most places — paying for it, doing it with your family or doing it with kids. WHICH ONE IS YOUR FAVORITE? What’s your favorite illegal site you blackhearted animal?

For a Geek, there is more porn out there available for the taking than one could possibly view in a lifetime.

Has nothing to do with being a geek. I’m a geek too…thus labeled since learning to solve Rubik’s Cube at age 11. I talk tech all day in the office. I have never had the urges about which you speak so freely.

Some of it is vile, some is strange, some is Illegal. Most of it is utter crap.

You’ve refined your perversions to such a degree that you are now a connoisseur of filth.

I subscribe to Playboy because I want something with a touch of class.

LIAR!

I love my wife, and never expect her to be anything like the idealized versions of women found in Playboy. Neither does she expect me to be a Daniel Craig body double.

I think it’s nice that you and your wife don’t have any expectations of physical attractiveness. My wife and I work out together and enjoy that intimacy as much as our other “workouts.” I appreciate my wife’s athletic, toned, curves. She appreciates arms and abs. We’ve been together for twice as long as most people my age. I’m glad you two pukes enjoy each other too.

Also, dipshit I don’t consider Playboy dirty. I think Playboy is tame…boring actually. The woman are AIRBRUSHED. Hef takes a perfectly good woman and paints her to look like a Bratz dolls in Hooter’s tights.

As for the reading, I get enough great reading with a wall full of books, about 12 other periodicals and journals and numerous blogs.

For a great book store I recommend Books by the Foot. Hef has nothing on hardbound literature.

***
You admitted to ILLEGAL sexual proclivities are begging for help. YOU HAVE KIDS and enjoy ILLEGAL sex….red flag of red flags. At another point in life…I’d be required to follow up on this. I’m glad you’re not my responsibility.

You are one sick puppy.

The Race Card on November 19, 2008 at 1:09 PM

Well this 39 year old former Marine is currently dating a 25 year old part time model, and I’m studying hard for my professional Dirty Old Man license.

Puritanism: Haunting fear, keeping you awake at night that someone, somewhere is having the time of their lives…I voted for McCain, but where do I sign up for tickets to the Obama Inauguration party at the Grotto? :D

quikstrike98 on November 19, 2008 at 1:11 PM

He’s just irked that she won’t do a photoshoot for him with a rifle and a bear skin rug. Get over it, Hef.

thecountofincognito on November 19, 2008 at 1:13 PM

You are one sick puppy.

The Race Card on November 19, 2008 at 1:09 PM

You know, I could go line by line and point out the stupidity in ALL your assumptions, but frankly, I just don’t have the time to educate someone so willingly blind. Talking with you on this subject is like talking politics with a Liberal. You aren’t using logic, you are running on pure emotion.

However, in my defense, and because I absolutely REFUSE to allow this to stand, I DO NOT, NOR HAVE I EVER enjoyed or indulged myself in Illegal Pornography, PARTICULARLY Kiddie porn. I have, in the course of my various delvings into the dark underbelly of the internet, found Kiddie porn sites, and have duly reported them here. But I do not enjoy that kind of crap.

Apparently, simply having knowledge OF vile things makes one a “connoisseur” of said things in your book. I find it SAD that you feel the need to push such a twisted point.

You can get all huffy and nasty with me all you want, but just remember, YOU started this fight. I was just minding my own business and you saw fit to start making unfounded accusations about my mental state. You had and have no business doing that. I tried to have a high-minded discussion, and you insisted on trolling me. I will not accept any further slander from you, or anyone else here.

To put it simply, BACK OFF BUB. Or I will put in a formal complaint to the Hot Air staff about your abuse.

wearyman on November 19, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Wow. Just, wow. I’m no puritan, but I personally don’t care to know the details of some of these perversions, and I wouldn’t reveal this kind of information to others online. Do we really know others here well enough?

Back on topic, who cares what this ol’ windbag has to say? I wouldn’t trade my years with my husband, poor and fighting for our lives, to put up with the crap required just to live in some mansion. He & I are too compatible, and have too many similar interests, for me to do something stupid like leave him for anyone.

Eight words: “Be able to look yourself in the mirror.” It’s that simple for me, and that’s how I live my life. Maybe that’s what some of Hef’s young gals are finally trying to do, but who knows.

Miss_Anthrope on November 19, 2008 at 1:54 PM

Have we sunk this low that we are looking to THIS GUY for his opinion? Does anyone of sane mind even care what the “pajama-ed” one thinks? Please..in his time he was a visionary..who got lucky. He is a two-bit pimp, selling his soul and dignity to squeeze one last ounce of profit from a tarnished brand that is all the rage with the lounge-lizard sect which will never be resurrected! Change this guys diaper and wheel him out of the room with his “girlfriends”!

nacilbuper on November 19, 2008 at 1:57 PM

Yeah, I value the opinion of a man, who never gets out of his PJs. His parents were religious and he rebeled. Sarah Palin is unashamedly religious and she isn’t qualified..hmmm.. they make vigra for the ills he wants to cure but they don’t have anything for insane in the membrane?

Dr Evil on November 19, 2008 at 2:03 PM

I am still waiting to find out how Obama is qualified to be President

lmwyman on November 19, 2008 at 2:04 PM

Wise to listen to Hef?

AP, it may be time to change your bong water. His scope of expertise is in your drawers. Not that there is anything wrong with that™.

If he considers women at all, it is only as commodities, receptacle, appliances and playthings. So small wonder he doesn’t like Palin. And that assessment may or may not explain your own aversion to a strong, savvy, conservative woman.

NTXLass on November 19, 2008 at 2:13 PM

AP, it may be time to change your bong water. His scope of expertise is in your drawers. Not that there is anything wrong with that™.

NTXLass on November 19, 2008 at 2:13 PM

LOL! Forgot to use my quote..thanks for the reminder:

“I’m a fighter, not a lover.™”

Lock & load! (the AR, dudes…)

Miss_Anthrope on November 19, 2008 at 2:25 PM

His sinister old man laugh at :59 is priceless.

RobCon on November 19, 2008 at 2:33 PM

Porn’s all too easily accessible these days, and I certainly can’t claim purity in that regard. I try, but it ain’t easy and I mess up from time to time. (As noted by someone else – for a geek getting porn is easier than falling off a log)

For all that, I will say this. Sex and sexual energy as directed by conscious thought form a complex and powerful force for directing human behavior. They’re both tied together rather closely with the part of your psyche responsible for forming lasting, intimate connections with another person. That mental circuitry is, understandably sensitive and vulnerable (as many things of great value are).

Whenever a person indulges – looks on a person with lust in their heart, I believe that do to that connection with the “intimacy and connection” part of the psyche it changes them. Perhaps just a tiny bit, but it does happen.

I also believe it to be harmful. Harmful in such a profound way that it should be avoided whenever possible. Something about those fleeting connections acquired and then torn away takes a small piece of you with it when it tears. Weary mentioned a weak faith that can’t handle softcore porn as presented by Playboy. I can testify that one’s faith remains firmly intact after porn. But aside from issues of obedience to divine law (if you’re a Christian it IS sin, quite clearly – I can look up the reference), the damage remains.

I don’t mean to detract from the beauty of the human body at all. I believe God created it, and some of our most beautiful are represents it sans clothing. But when lust pollutes the intent something changes. Given the fairly clear intent of Playboy, I’m not sure how it could be seen as artistic – only lust with high production values. *shrug*

In many ways, porn is a simple concentration of the same problems men (and women, I’ve learned) have always had as we see that sweet young thing walking down the street. But the difference lies in the intent. When you purchase these magazines or find these sites with the intent of (for lack of a better term) getting off, that act is measurably greater in intent, and I believe commensurately greater in the harm caused. Many may laugh this off.

Certainly I don’t expect non-believers to share my perspective on the obedience issues to a God they don’t worship. But I can’t help but encourage everyone to be very, very careful with this stuff. Sex and marriage and the family have always been closely related for a reason. I truly think that these connections that we form and break so casually these days are hurting us. Maybe you don’t believe me … but give it some thought.

TheUnrepentantGeek on November 19, 2008 at 2:39 PM

Looks like Obama had the pornographer vote wrapped up too.

There are sad days ahead for America, considering that there are more degenerates and zombies here than sane normal people..

SaintOlaf on November 19, 2008 at 2:39 PM

To put it simply, BACK OFF BUB. Or I will put in a formal complaint to the Hot Air staff about your abuse.

wearyman on November 19, 2008 at 1:45 PM

BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA!

I’m the uptight one, but you’re going to report me for burying you with your own words? LMBAO!

Whatever insult you lodge against me cannot match the ones you have wielded against yourself — your own words reveal a dimly lit “underworld.”
***

When you do complain to AP be sure to send him this amazing quote:

… I DO NOT, NOR HAVE I EVER enjoyed or indulged myself in Illegal Pornography, PARTICULARLY Kiddie porn. I have, in the course of my various delvings into the dark underbelly of the internet, found Kiddie porn sites, and have duly reported them here. But I do not enjoy that kind of crap.

I’m actually sad for you. Your response reads like a To Catch a Predator transcript.

I didn’t enjoy it when I did it and when I did I made sure to report those guys doing that stuff. But I was just so disgusted that I had to click the link again and again.

***
And what in the hizell is up with capitalizing the “k” in k***** ****? Good grief.

You should probably not be emailing anybody about this discussion. You’re tainted dude. You should probably log off now and toss your hard drive.

The Race Card on November 19, 2008 at 2:40 PM

I am saddened but not shocked at her actions.

BobAnthony on November 19, 2008 at 7:45 AM

She’s (Betty White) a nutter. I’ve been tivo’ing the old Match Game shows (ok, I’m a mindless loser)… filmed in the glorious Ford-Carter era and Betty was a nut then. She was already so far over the top on her animal rights stuff that the other panelists actually modified their answers to certain questions to avoid getting her upset.

Actually, these Match Game shows are fascinating little slices into the liberal mind (I use that term loosely). You can see the beginnings of political correctness from some of the regulars (especially Bret Summers).

Y-not on November 19, 2008 at 3:01 PM

TheUnrepentantGeek on November 19, 2008 at 2:39 PM

You make excellent points, and indeed, I would be hard pressed to disagree with you on many of them. However, I do disagree with the interpretation that simply viewing porn is sin. I think too many Christians have misinterpreted Christ’s admonition’s against lust as admonitions against arousal. This is, of course, wildly incorrect. It is perfectly appropriate to lust after one’s wife, as I do with mine.

It is also perfectly appropriate to appreciate and even be aroused by the human form, as long as this appreciation is limited in intent and scope. Let’s not forget that much is lost in the translation to English. The word “lust” comes from the Greek epithumiô, meaning “strong feeling”. It is translated as lust in many places, in others as “desire” (1 Timothy 3:1), “yearn” (Matthew 13:17), and “covet” (Romans 7:7). A simple word study reveals that “lust” is a neutral word in the Biblical context. One may “lust” or “strongly desire” good things or bad things. This is where INTENT comes into the picture. is your intent merely to appreciate and be mildly titillated? If so, then I think one would be hard pressed to find sin in that.

However, I can also see where this may be considered “splitting hairs” by some, and I can certainly understand that position. Ultimately, it is between God and I on whether I am right or not.

I personally have no problem reconciling my conscience with a bit of Playboy now and again. Obviously, if I was spending serious time on some of the websites, forums, mailing lists and IRC channels I know of for the specific purpose of looking for pornography that would be an ENTIRELY different matter, and would be completely indefensible, particularly with some of the more questionable material I have come across in my time. But Playboy, that’s a different league altogether.

Incidentally, in case anyone here is believing some of Race Card’s crazy rantings, one of my past hobbies was Internet Vigilante (of a sort) I have a few alter egos that used to spend time in some of the less savory areas of the Internet keeping tabs on groups like “Anonymous”, and a few hacker IRC channels (Although these, more and more are Chinese and Russian, and I don’t speak those languages, so I’ve been steadily moving away from that for a some time.) When you spend any significant time around those groups, you invariably come across their porn.

Now that I have a family, I don’t really spend much time doing that anymore. Partly because I’m more and more uncomfortable “around” the kind of people that these groups are made up of, partly because I don’t want my own kids accidentally exposed to these groups, and partly because I felt I was expending quite a bit of energy for a very small “payback”. In the end, I’m just getting too old for it.

Anyway, getting back to the point of the thread, I could care less what Hef’s political opinions are. We all know he’s Liberal, and we all know he’d love to have Sarah Palin in for a shoot. (duh) So I don’t find the video here particularly illuminating. Just another old liberal. Big deal.

wearyman on November 19, 2008 at 3:34 PM

Although my inner Ferenghi is shocked that females wear clothing, Hef is not credible on Sarah Palin.

Hef is a poor businessman, out of touch with most Americans, a pimp, and worst of all a DEMOCRAT!

Right_of_Attila on November 19, 2008 at 3:55 PM

Awesome. Do you read Van Til? If not, who?

shick on November 19, 2008 at 6:37 AM

I proofread Bahnsen’s major book on Van Til, published by Presby & Reformed.

Right_of_Attila on November 19, 2008 at 4:22 PM

Ah…I can now get a good night’s sleep. The fossil has spoken.

HornetSting on November 19, 2008 at 4:28 PM

wearyman on November 19, 2008 at 3:34 PM

Intent is indeed key. I think I just prefer to err on the side of caution in these matters (in theory, anyway).

TheUnrepentantGeek on November 19, 2008 at 4:54 PM

You make excellent points, and indeed, I would be hard pressed to disagree with you on many of them. However, I do disagree with the interpretation that simply viewing porn is sin. I think too many Christians have misinterpreted Christ’s admonition’s against lust as admonitions against arousal. This is, of course, wildly incorrect. It is perfectly appropriate to lust after one’s wife, as I do with mine.

Wrong. A large proportion of American Christians will tell you that the whole Bible counts. And if so…then Paul’s admonition that “It is better for a man never to touch a woman” counts. He only allows for marriage so that naughtiness doesn’t run rampant, not because arousal or sex are desireable in themselves.

Ya’ll have fun in church. I’ll be in the jacuzzi. And can someone give me the number to call for those tickets to the Grotto?

quikstrike98 on November 19, 2008 at 4:57 PM

Allah: Where are your pills? You need ‘em.

Hef: Sad to hear that Sarah turned you down.

Norwegian on November 19, 2008 at 5:10 PM

quikstrike98 on November 19, 2008 at 4:57 PM

I never said that the whole Bible didn’t count. I was merely making a point about misinterpretation based on meaning getting “lost in translation”.

Incidentally, Paul CLEARLY states that it is his own personal opinion, and NOT the revealed Word of God that men and women should remain celibate. That’s no translation error.

Frankly, I’m rather glad most Christians DON’T take that one too seriously. If they did, Christianity would have died out from lack of practitioners quite some time ago.

That, and my wife would be rather upset with me if I decided to start following Paul’s advice on celibacy. ;)

wearyman on November 19, 2008 at 5:11 PM

ColtsFan on November 18, 2008 at 10:18 PM

Awesome. Do you read Van Til? If not, who?
shick on November 19, 2008 at 6:37 AM

Hi Shick:

Yes, I read Van Til. I am not a Van Tilian, in that I disagree with him on the ontological status of the laws of logic. I also disagree with Cornelius Van Til and Greg Bahnsen on their view of ethics.

Van Til was a very brilliant guy. I have learned much from him.

I recommend the writings of Gordon Haddon Clark, whose excellent books can be found here.

Even if one does not agree with everything Gordon H. Clark says, his philosophical writings are very clear, readable, and logically rigorous. Excellent stuff.

One key to understanding the Hot Air posts of ColtsFan is this:

“If I ever articulate a pretty cool philosophical theme or deep truth, 150% of the time it came from a philosopher or theologian who I deeply respect, and not from me.”

I am just a die-hard Indianapolis ColtsFan who reads a lot in his spare time. :-)

I think I can answer for him, yes he does….and bahnsen.
jp on November 19, 2008 at 9:37 AM

You are correct.

except I think he’s a Two Kingdom guy, and not a theonomist like Bahnsen

jp on November 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM

2 points!! Correct again.

By the way, jp, I am very jealous of your Charlotte weather right about now. Here in Chicago, it is cold!!

I might have to consider working for CREP in the future and move to warmer weather!!

:-)

ColtsFan on November 19, 2008 at 5:54 PM

jp on November 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM

ColtsFan on November 19, 2008 at 5:54 PM

I’ve only heard of Gordon Haddon Clark. I’ll ask my pastor about him tonight and check on him later. I am familiar with Robbins works and the Trinity Foundation. I’m not familiar with Two Kingdom or Theonomy. I enjoyed Bahnsen’s “Always Ready” and have listened to a few of his debates.

This former Roman Catholic now identifies himself as a reformed baptist.

Thanks for sharing.

shick on November 19, 2008 at 6:55 PM

This is OT, but Colts do I remember you saying that you subscribe to amillenialism?

TheUnrepentantGeek on November 19, 2008 at 7:16 PM

This former Roman Catholic now identifies himself as a reformed baptist.

Thanks for sharing.
shick on November 19, 2008 at 6:55 PM

You are welcome.

This former Arminian considers himself a Reformed Baptist too, because I consider these propositions to be essentials of the Christian faith.

This is OT, but Colts do I remember you saying that you subscribe to amillenialism?

TheUnrepentantGeek on November 19, 2008 at 7:16 PM

Hello friend:

I lean towards amillenialism, but I do not break fellowship over that eschatological issue. I am comfortable with some traditional Premillenial positions, if they are defined properly. I think my pastor is a premillenialist.

I am not comfortable with Darby dispensationalism though.

Just my .02

ColtsFan on November 19, 2008 at 8:13 PM

This thread is why I don’t come here much any more. To think that a purported conservative would care what the master of arrested development and source of a sub-sophomoric excuse for a “philosophy” would think about anything, much less his opinion about the only person in the general election who was worth voting for, is quite pathetic. AP deserves all the insults he’s gathered here for his overwhelming pettiness in trying to play another pathetic “gotcha” on somebody who should scrape him off the bottom of her boot and leave him smelling up the street.

Captain Hate on November 19, 2008 at 8:49 PM

Hah!

She doesn’t need you , dickhead!
Get over it.

Saltysam on November 19, 2008 at 10:10 PM

Yeah, headlining the opinions of an old and besotted roue on someone’s political ability is pretty lame. I can’t imagine why this would be posted for discussion unless the intent is to bash Palin at every opportunity and with every stick that comes to hand, no matter how weak or ancient said stick may be.

Jeez, at this rate “Us” magazine will be buying ad space here.

Venusian Visitor on November 19, 2008 at 11:37 PM

The “Clearly not qualified.” statement refers to Hugh in this case. IMHO

Da_Hutt on November 20, 2008 at 7:27 AM

Who cares what that scum-bag has to say?

steelman on November 20, 2008 at 11:18 AM

I refuse to listen to an old, worn out pervert who thinks raising children with such unseemly ‘values’ is just dandy.

People who hate Sarah are at least subconsciously ashamed of themselves because she represents good, family values while folks like Hef are already living in hell, but due to their immense denial, they don’t realize it. This is why the gay mafia is going after Christianity: it reminds them how sick, twisted and destructive they are.

Christine on November 20, 2008 at 3:22 PM

“On the other hand, when an entrepreneur savvy enough to build a commercial empire out of wearing pajamas all day while naked women frolic in his midst gives you advice, it’s probably wise to listen.”

A valid point. But is he objective?

Gaunilon on November 20, 2008 at 3:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2