Moxie, you may scoff and call it Rhetoric, but the fact remains that the Battle for the First Amendment begins with a prematurely aged, alchoholic pervert named Paul Little. It's not just Porn that's at stake here, but our most basic Liberties themselves. Again, those who ignore this are burying their heads in the sand.

Did Max ask for it? Yeah, he did. But if it wasn't Max, it would have been Jeff or anyone else on the edge. Those who push the boundaries are inevitably the targets of reactionaries. Ask Gallileo, Thomas More, Socrates or any of Ten Thousand people whose works posed a challange to Conventional Wisdom or Taste.

As for which party would be more likely to criminally prosecute Porn producers, well, you said it yourself: Look at the candidates. Name me one Republican who would kill US v. Paul Little. I can't think of one of them that would. I can easilly see any of the Dems doing it, quietly, as I've noted elsewhere.

Perv, you might be right that there's a greater likelyhood of a Dem prosecuting Porn than Ron Paul, but the simple fact is that Ron Paul is not going to win the nomination, let alone the Presidency. So I'm trying to focus on those who have a chance. And among these, it's the Dems that are less likely, by far, to prosecute Pornographers than any of the (realistic) Republican candidates.