Archive for July, 2010

CTRL+ALT+DELETE: Time to Shut Down Pentagon Porn

Monday, July 26th, 2010

Yet again, an investigation into the computer habits of government employees has revealed practices that are not just shocking, they are down right despicable.

The latest report shows that dozens of Pentagon officials and contractors have been purchasing and downloading illegal child pornography — sometimes even using their work computers to buy and view it.

Purchasing and viewing child pornography is never justified.  Child pornography violates all standards of human decency and is a sick perversion that should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

The fact that government officials — paid with our tax dollars and supposedly working to defend our country — are indulging in this illegal and immoral activity is horrific and completely unacceptable.

Alone, these allegations would be appalling enough.  However, this is only the latest in a long string of discoveries of malfeasance.  Still, when the Transportation Services Authority recently announced its list of banned website categories for employee computers, pornography was not on that list.

How many times will the gross abuse of taxpayer resources have to come to light before the federal government finally does something?

By ignoring this culture of corruption, our national security officials are putting our safety — and the safety of our children — in jeopardy.

At the very least, all government employees immediately involved in this child pornography operation should be terminated without pay.  So far, no other government agency caught up in a pornography scandal has taken sufficient action. 

Crossing the Tan Line: Tanning Salon vs. Abortion Regulations

Tuesday, July 13th, 2010

Here's one headline you won't see.The Pennsylvania Senate has voted unanimously in support of The Indoor Tanning Regulation Act, S.B. 460.  Sponsored by Sen. Pat Browne (R-Lehigh/Northampton/Monroe), the bill would require “informed consent” from tanning patrons so that they can tan safely for their skin type.  It also requires parental consent for those under 18, a signed parental waiver citing proper tanning practices and risks associated with UV exposure for those 14-16, and children under 14 must have written permission from a licensed physician.  The bill also includes *gasp* a required 24- hour waiting period — between tanning sessions, that is.

But you aren’t hearing howls from tanning salons in the state.  According to a report in The Express-Times, tanning salons there think the requirements are so commonsense that a number of them were already doing it.  Not one of the salon managers interviewed criticized the proposed tanning requirements as “biased” or “coercive,” and no cries were heard from patrons that they had a right to control their own bodies.  If this bill becomes law, I have to wonder if a boyfriend or unrelated adult might whisk a minor to another state to avoid the parental consent requirement — in the minor’s best interests, of course.

Seriously though, contrast that with the reaction of abortion advocates when Pennsylvania passed similar regulations on abortion.  Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania challenged those regulations signed into law by then-Governor Robert Casey all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.  Thankfully, the high court upheld all but one of the Casey provisions (spousal notification), and today, states are allowed to place modest, commonsense requirements on the abortion industry.

It’s as clear cut as a tan line.  The abortion industry is out of step with the thoughts of most citizens, and it will spare no expense to fight even the most commonsense regulations.

Hollywood’s Roman Road

Monday, July 12th, 2010

I am the mother of a thirteen-year-old daughter.  What I know, and other moms will agree, is that thirteen-year-olds are children.  One minute you get small glimpses into the young women they will someday become, but the vast majority of the time they are still wonderfully innocent and childlike. 

The news that the Swiss have sided with narcissistic Hollywood’s pressure to release child rapist Roman Polanski and refuse to extradite him to the United States to face criminal charges for drugging and raping a 13-year-old girl in 1977 makes me beyond angry.  Who are these people?

Many of the Hollywood A-listers rallied behind the film director as an accomplished artist who shouldn’t have to face these charges.

Talk show host and outspoken actress Whoopi Goldberg said what Polanski did wasn’t “rape-rape.”

You be the judge.  Roman Polanski lured the 13-year-old into a hot tub, but she decided to get out. He told her to go lay down on the bed and kissed her, but she refused.  He then raped her, but once he figured out she wasn’t using birth control, he sodomized her.

What part of that isn’t rape? 

Why do so many in Hollywood think that they are exempt from the rule of law?  Forget Lindsey Lohan!  Look how many came to Polanski’s defense, including film mogul Harvey Weinstein, Woody Allen, Pedro Almodovar, Martin Scorsese, and Costa Gavras and signed a petition that expressed “stupefaction” at Polanski’s arrest. 

The attitude over at the Huffington Post was: “Move on, everyone.  Nothing to see here.  Keep on directing, Roman.  Love ya!”

Let’s be clear here.  These people are so entitled that they have even stooped to defend a child rapist!  We at Concerned Women for America find this heinous and unacceptable, both that anyone would come to Polanski’s defense and that that the Swiss would refuse to allow him to stand trial in the United States for his crime. 

When will Hollywood wake up to the fact that real America is becoming fed up with their outrageous behavior?  It’s sad when it’s Lindsey Lohan’s train wreck of a life, but it’s outright dangerous when their poison spills over to harm other people’s children. 

Controversial: The Big, Bad … Concerned Women?

Tuesday, July 6th, 2010

Via CBS News, posted on Drudge, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) released a list of five categories of websites that it will be blocking its employees from accessing from a government computer.  Here’s the list (which isn’t defined of course):

  • Chat/Messaging
  • Controversial opinion
  • Criminal activity
  • Extreme violence (including cartoon violence) and gruesome content
  • Gaming

The news today is over the “controversial opinion” websites, which I and many other conservative analysts and pundits agree are those websites that purport a differing view of the Administration, like MichelleMalkin.com, HotAir.com, Drudge Report, RedState.com, Human Events, and probably Fox News.

That is certainly concerning, but what’s the category that’s missing in that list? You get one guess — links here and here should help.

Pornography.

The TSA, under the Obama Administration, apparently aren’t that worried about blocking pornography websites.  In fact, they’ll apparently block an opinionated conservative over a porn site.

I don’t think it’s an oversight either.  More than a few employees at government agencies have been caught surfing pornography at work, some up to eight hours a day, and have received little to no punishment.  I’m not advocating government employees spend all day on the Drudge Report or Fox News, but I think it’s okay to check the news or opinion sites maybe during their lunch break, whereas surfing pornography is always a bad idea and should never be condoned, especially at work.

What kind of society do we live in that now views pornography as less harmful than ConcernedWomen.org websites?