Larry Flynt
Publisher of Hustler magazine and free speech advocate
8/16/11
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-flynt/privacy-revisited_b_928321.html
For the average American citizen, the notion of privacy is extinct. Any information you put out into cyberspace could come back to bite you in the ass. Retail stores sell your purchase history to third parties without your consent. Social media sites and search engines act as data mines, storing information that could later be accessed by the government and used against you in court.
The Feds have no problem letting companies collect and exploit our personal information because it makes running a surveillance state that much easier to do. Whenever the government wants to find out what weird shit you're up to on the Internet, guess what they¹re going to find out? You can thank Google, Facebook, Walmart and all the other megacorps for that.
Be alert: Big Brother is watching you.
Showing posts with label Larry Flynt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Larry Flynt. Show all posts
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Thursday, May 5, 2011
The secret sex lives of the Founding Fathers
Larry Flynt argues that political sex scandals -- from tawdry affairs to closeted pols -- are as old as our nation
Tracy Clark-Flory
Tuesday, Apr 26, 2011
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/04/26/flynt/index.html
If anyone could spice up the tale of our nation's birth, it would be Larry Flynt. When the infamous pornographer set out to do just that, he quickly discovered that our Founding Fathers were pretty smutty to begin with – it's just that the presidential orgies and brothel visits have been whitewashed from American history textbooks.
Flynt endeavored to set straight the record – which is, well, actually pretty gay, according to him – in his entertaining new book, "One Nation Under Sex: How the Private Lives of Presidents, First Ladies and Their Lovers Changed the Course of American History." With the help of coauthor David Eisenbach, a professor of American political history at Columbia University, he argues that Benjamin Franklin's womanizing ways helped win him favor with the French and gain the country's military support during the Revolutionary War. He claims that James Buchanan's intimate same-sex relationship with a slave owner might have influenced his secessionist support on the brink of the Civil War. These aren't just sex scandals; they're history-changing sex scandals. As Publishers Weekly puts it: "Those looking for salacious details will find them, but Flynt and Eisenbach favor analysis over sensationalism, providing a new perspective of the men and women who have shaped our nation." Flynt also offers fascinating and well-sourced explorations of Thomas Jefferson's relationship with a 14-year-old slave and Eleanor Roosevelt's intense relationship with journalist Lorena Hickok. Then there are the more salacious tidbits, the merits of which are questionable – like the allegation that Jackie O miscarried because of a venereal disease given to her by JFK.
The book is most gripping, and problematic, when it raises the question of sexuality (which can be a rather murky thing even without the distance of a couple of centuries). Flynt isn't the first to suggest that Buchanan, Abraham Lincoln and J. Edgar Hoover had gay relationships, but that isn't to say that the allegations are uncontested. For example, part of the evidence for Lincoln's homosexual leanings is his close friendship with Joshua Speed, with whom he shared a bed for many years. But historians have pointed out that in the 19th century it was not uncommon for men to sleep in the same bed. (Sleeping together doesn't necessarily mean sleeping together.) Such is the trouble with reexamining the sexual identities of historical figures from a 21st-century perspective. The available details of the close same-sex relationships enjoyed by these men certainly cast them as more complicated figures, but there is nothing conclusive here. All we have from this historical vantage point is enough evidence to believe whatever we want to believe – and it's no secret what Flynt hoped to find here.
In his new role as pornographer-cum-historian, the free-speech advocate's mission is the same as when he first entered the spotlight back in the 1970s as the publisher of Hustler: to challenge the puritanical and hypocritical elements of our culture. It's only natural that he would set out to prove that our Founding Fathers were pervs. This book either reveals how much our history books have lied to us, or shows just what a successful huckster Flynt is. (It might prove both at once, actually.) Salon recently spoke with him by phone about the biggest presidential playboys, the sex scandals that shocked even him, and the conservative senator he hopes to soon force out of the closet.
Why do the sex lives of presidents matter?
Well, we're often preoccupied with it even in our present society. Over the last 30 years there were a lot of corrupt politicians – usually involving sexual scandals. I just thought it would be interesting to go back and start with the Founding Fathers and see if still existed. I was amazed it was so prevalent.
What was most shocking to you?
So much was shocking. For too many years, we never would believe – and historians were a part of this – that Thomas Jefferson, this great man who wrote the Declaration of Independence, fathered six children by his slave girl Sally Hemings.
We often think that muckraking and tabloid journalism emerged in recent years. But in 1729, 40-some years before the revolution even started, Benjamin Franklin was publishing a tabloid newspaper that had the first-ever sex advice column. He was really a fascinating character with a reputation for seducing women, and that actually helped him in getting France's support for the war. He was the ambassador to France at the time. So even the Founding Fathers were a rowdy bunch of guys.
There were some women that were notorious in the early years too. Dolley Madison was without a doubt the most colorful first lady we ever had. She had a couple of her sisters live with her in the White House, and they were really pretty wild girls. They used to throw parties there, and they would invite members of the Continental Army. One of President James Madison's Cabinet members said to him, "I know you don't want to hear this, but your wife has single-handedly turned the White House into a brothel."
How did the first political sex scandals come about?
The first sex scandal investigated by congress involved Alexander Hamilton, who was the secretary of the treasury. He was having this affair with a woman and was giving her money because, I think, he felt sorry for her more than anything else. She was married. And all of a sudden this guy named James Reynolds, who was her husband, tried to start blackmailing Hamilton. He paid the blackmail for some time, and when the word finally got out and reached Congress, there was an investigation and the Congress found that he had not used state money to give to her and that he was pretty much entrapped in the situation. They didn't find him guilty of any wrongdoing or crime.
They even knew about Jefferson and the slaves in the beginning, and a lot came out in his campaign for the presidency, but it was just, like, so unbelievable that most people did not believe it. We actually did not know for sure until 1998 – over 200 years later, it was proved by DNA testing. [Ed. note: The test proved that Jefferson or a close relative fathered at least one of Hemings' children.]
Why are sex scandals so enmeshed in American politics?
Well most people like sex – they always talk about it, but they lie about it. They like to get it, they lie to keep it under wraps, and people's libidos have always been the same since the very beginning. But because of our puritanical values in this society, they always try to keep sexual behavior under wraps.
Everybody always accuses me of picking on Republicans, but it's not true – they just tend to be easier. They have so much baggage, and when they live a conservative life, everything stays so well hidden – but it's like a pressure cooker and eventually it comes out.
Which president would you say was the biggest playboy?
I would say it was a tie between Harding and Jack Kennedy. 'Course Wilson was in the mix too. It was often said about Wilson and Harding that Wilson preferred the brothels of Paris and Harding preferred the whorehouses of Columbus, Ohio. Those guys' entire presidencies were just tattered by affairs and relationships.
Then there's Kennedy. There was much more than what people even thought at the time. I think he just sort of felt he was infallible, and in his quest of women he was very reckless. Most of these encounters weren't really thought out very well.
Don't get me wrong, I'm one of the first guys to defend a philandering president. I think if you can fight two wars and balance a budget at the same time you can do whatever you want to – but you need a certain amount of discretion.
When did gay sex scandals pop up in American politics?
The first was when James Buchanan was elected president. He was the first gay president we ever had. From the time he was first elected, Senator William Rufus King said he was having an affair with him and moved into the White House with him. Everybody knew it – they would call them "Aunt Fancy" and "Miss Nancy" [common slang for gay men]. Everybody knew, and it was somewhat accepted. [Ed. note: Historians are not in agreement on this issue, though Flynt is correct there is corroborating evidence.]
You would have thought someone who was gay would identify with people who were oppressed, but he did not. He was a staunch segregationist, and he handed Lincoln a real mess.
What can we learn now looking back at the Monica Lewinsky scandal?
We really don't learn much; it's just that more people have knowledge of what's going on and that politicians have always behaved this way. I would like us to become less uptight about sex and more like the Europeans. Over there it's commonly accepted that if you're a politician, you have a mistress. It's gonna happen; it's just human nature. I'm not opposed to it. I'm opposed to the lack of discretion.
What kind of dirt do you have on the 2012 candidates?
We always have several investigations going. I've never printed a word about anybody that wasn't true, and we're very meticulous about what we do. We're presently investigating a senator who's gay and the reason why that's important is that he's so hypocritical. We were almost ready to break the story, and we found out his lover was married. Our attorney felt that even if he was gay or bisexual, that really complicated the issue, and we felt we didn't have enough information to go ahead.
Is it possible that will still come out?
It's very possible.
How do you expect sex to influence American politics in the next decade?
I don't think it'll be much different from the past – it's just you need to accept that sex influences everything we do. Other than the desire for survival, the strongest single desire we have is for sex. We use it to communicate more than any other medium, but we understand it less. That's what's confusing about it.
After all the research you did for this book, what would you say is your big takeaway in terms of the intermingling of sex and politics in America?
The biggest thing I took away from this book is the degree to which it's existed since the founding of our nation almost 250 years ago. When I started the book, I didn't even know that we had a gay president, and I didn't know that Lincoln's sexuality was called into question. Historians really get under my skin because I think they're the most anal-retentive group of professionals I've ever met. They can look at Mount Rushmore and get writer's cramps. Historians never wanted to believe that this magnificent man who drafted the Declaration of Independence had actually fathered children by a black slave.
The publishers of history books tend to be conservative and they only want to know about policy and politics. They don't want to know about sex. That's why it's left out of these books and has been for centuries.
Tracy Clark-Flory
Tuesday, Apr 26, 2011
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/04/26/flynt/index.html
If anyone could spice up the tale of our nation's birth, it would be Larry Flynt. When the infamous pornographer set out to do just that, he quickly discovered that our Founding Fathers were pretty smutty to begin with – it's just that the presidential orgies and brothel visits have been whitewashed from American history textbooks.
Flynt endeavored to set straight the record – which is, well, actually pretty gay, according to him – in his entertaining new book, "One Nation Under Sex: How the Private Lives of Presidents, First Ladies and Their Lovers Changed the Course of American History." With the help of coauthor David Eisenbach, a professor of American political history at Columbia University, he argues that Benjamin Franklin's womanizing ways helped win him favor with the French and gain the country's military support during the Revolutionary War. He claims that James Buchanan's intimate same-sex relationship with a slave owner might have influenced his secessionist support on the brink of the Civil War. These aren't just sex scandals; they're history-changing sex scandals. As Publishers Weekly puts it: "Those looking for salacious details will find them, but Flynt and Eisenbach favor analysis over sensationalism, providing a new perspective of the men and women who have shaped our nation." Flynt also offers fascinating and well-sourced explorations of Thomas Jefferson's relationship with a 14-year-old slave and Eleanor Roosevelt's intense relationship with journalist Lorena Hickok. Then there are the more salacious tidbits, the merits of which are questionable – like the allegation that Jackie O miscarried because of a venereal disease given to her by JFK.
The book is most gripping, and problematic, when it raises the question of sexuality (which can be a rather murky thing even without the distance of a couple of centuries). Flynt isn't the first to suggest that Buchanan, Abraham Lincoln and J. Edgar Hoover had gay relationships, but that isn't to say that the allegations are uncontested. For example, part of the evidence for Lincoln's homosexual leanings is his close friendship with Joshua Speed, with whom he shared a bed for many years. But historians have pointed out that in the 19th century it was not uncommon for men to sleep in the same bed. (Sleeping together doesn't necessarily mean sleeping together.) Such is the trouble with reexamining the sexual identities of historical figures from a 21st-century perspective. The available details of the close same-sex relationships enjoyed by these men certainly cast them as more complicated figures, but there is nothing conclusive here. All we have from this historical vantage point is enough evidence to believe whatever we want to believe – and it's no secret what Flynt hoped to find here.
In his new role as pornographer-cum-historian, the free-speech advocate's mission is the same as when he first entered the spotlight back in the 1970s as the publisher of Hustler: to challenge the puritanical and hypocritical elements of our culture. It's only natural that he would set out to prove that our Founding Fathers were pervs. This book either reveals how much our history books have lied to us, or shows just what a successful huckster Flynt is. (It might prove both at once, actually.) Salon recently spoke with him by phone about the biggest presidential playboys, the sex scandals that shocked even him, and the conservative senator he hopes to soon force out of the closet.
Why do the sex lives of presidents matter?
Well, we're often preoccupied with it even in our present society. Over the last 30 years there were a lot of corrupt politicians – usually involving sexual scandals. I just thought it would be interesting to go back and start with the Founding Fathers and see if still existed. I was amazed it was so prevalent.
What was most shocking to you?
So much was shocking. For too many years, we never would believe – and historians were a part of this – that Thomas Jefferson, this great man who wrote the Declaration of Independence, fathered six children by his slave girl Sally Hemings.
We often think that muckraking and tabloid journalism emerged in recent years. But in 1729, 40-some years before the revolution even started, Benjamin Franklin was publishing a tabloid newspaper that had the first-ever sex advice column. He was really a fascinating character with a reputation for seducing women, and that actually helped him in getting France's support for the war. He was the ambassador to France at the time. So even the Founding Fathers were a rowdy bunch of guys.
There were some women that were notorious in the early years too. Dolley Madison was without a doubt the most colorful first lady we ever had. She had a couple of her sisters live with her in the White House, and they were really pretty wild girls. They used to throw parties there, and they would invite members of the Continental Army. One of President James Madison's Cabinet members said to him, "I know you don't want to hear this, but your wife has single-handedly turned the White House into a brothel."
How did the first political sex scandals come about?
The first sex scandal investigated by congress involved Alexander Hamilton, who was the secretary of the treasury. He was having this affair with a woman and was giving her money because, I think, he felt sorry for her more than anything else. She was married. And all of a sudden this guy named James Reynolds, who was her husband, tried to start blackmailing Hamilton. He paid the blackmail for some time, and when the word finally got out and reached Congress, there was an investigation and the Congress found that he had not used state money to give to her and that he was pretty much entrapped in the situation. They didn't find him guilty of any wrongdoing or crime.
They even knew about Jefferson and the slaves in the beginning, and a lot came out in his campaign for the presidency, but it was just, like, so unbelievable that most people did not believe it. We actually did not know for sure until 1998 – over 200 years later, it was proved by DNA testing. [Ed. note: The test proved that Jefferson or a close relative fathered at least one of Hemings' children.]
Why are sex scandals so enmeshed in American politics?
Well most people like sex – they always talk about it, but they lie about it. They like to get it, they lie to keep it under wraps, and people's libidos have always been the same since the very beginning. But because of our puritanical values in this society, they always try to keep sexual behavior under wraps.
Everybody always accuses me of picking on Republicans, but it's not true – they just tend to be easier. They have so much baggage, and when they live a conservative life, everything stays so well hidden – but it's like a pressure cooker and eventually it comes out.
Which president would you say was the biggest playboy?
I would say it was a tie between Harding and Jack Kennedy. 'Course Wilson was in the mix too. It was often said about Wilson and Harding that Wilson preferred the brothels of Paris and Harding preferred the whorehouses of Columbus, Ohio. Those guys' entire presidencies were just tattered by affairs and relationships.
Then there's Kennedy. There was much more than what people even thought at the time. I think he just sort of felt he was infallible, and in his quest of women he was very reckless. Most of these encounters weren't really thought out very well.
Don't get me wrong, I'm one of the first guys to defend a philandering president. I think if you can fight two wars and balance a budget at the same time you can do whatever you want to – but you need a certain amount of discretion.
When did gay sex scandals pop up in American politics?
The first was when James Buchanan was elected president. He was the first gay president we ever had. From the time he was first elected, Senator William Rufus King said he was having an affair with him and moved into the White House with him. Everybody knew it – they would call them "Aunt Fancy" and "Miss Nancy" [common slang for gay men]. Everybody knew, and it was somewhat accepted. [Ed. note: Historians are not in agreement on this issue, though Flynt is correct there is corroborating evidence.]
You would have thought someone who was gay would identify with people who were oppressed, but he did not. He was a staunch segregationist, and he handed Lincoln a real mess.
What can we learn now looking back at the Monica Lewinsky scandal?
We really don't learn much; it's just that more people have knowledge of what's going on and that politicians have always behaved this way. I would like us to become less uptight about sex and more like the Europeans. Over there it's commonly accepted that if you're a politician, you have a mistress. It's gonna happen; it's just human nature. I'm not opposed to it. I'm opposed to the lack of discretion.
What kind of dirt do you have on the 2012 candidates?
We always have several investigations going. I've never printed a word about anybody that wasn't true, and we're very meticulous about what we do. We're presently investigating a senator who's gay and the reason why that's important is that he's so hypocritical. We were almost ready to break the story, and we found out his lover was married. Our attorney felt that even if he was gay or bisexual, that really complicated the issue, and we felt we didn't have enough information to go ahead.
Is it possible that will still come out?
It's very possible.
How do you expect sex to influence American politics in the next decade?
I don't think it'll be much different from the past – it's just you need to accept that sex influences everything we do. Other than the desire for survival, the strongest single desire we have is for sex. We use it to communicate more than any other medium, but we understand it less. That's what's confusing about it.
After all the research you did for this book, what would you say is your big takeaway in terms of the intermingling of sex and politics in America?
The biggest thing I took away from this book is the degree to which it's existed since the founding of our nation almost 250 years ago. When I started the book, I didn't even know that we had a gay president, and I didn't know that Lincoln's sexuality was called into question. Historians really get under my skin because I think they're the most anal-retentive group of professionals I've ever met. They can look at Mount Rushmore and get writer's cramps. Historians never wanted to believe that this magnificent man who drafted the Declaration of Independence had actually fathered children by a black slave.
The publishers of history books tend to be conservative and they only want to know about policy and politics. They don't want to know about sex. That's why it's left out of these books and has been for centuries.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Confessions of a Raving, Unconfined Nut
From PaulKrassner.com, Website of THE Paul Krassner:
Confessions of a Raving, Unconfined Nut:
Misadventures in the Counterculture
by Paul Krassner — New Expanded Edition
– for $22 (plus $3 S&H)
“Krassner has the uncanny ability to alter your perceptions permanently.”
— Los Angeles Times
“Wickedly funny... Chillingly funny... A convincing look at a man who knows how to wield absurdity.”
— San Francisco Chronicle
“Krassner is one of the best minds of his generation to be destroyed by madness, starving, hysterical, naked — but mainly hysterical. His true wacky, wackily true autobiography is the definitive book on the sixties.”
— Art Spiegelman
“Paul¹s own writing, in particular, seemed daring and adventurous to me; it took big chances and made important arguments in relentlessly funny ways. I felt, down deep, that maybe I had some of that in me, too; that maybe I could be using my skills to better express my beliefs. The Realist was the inspiration that kept pushing me to the next level; there was no way I could continue reading it and remain the same.”
— George Carlin
“He is an expert at ferreting out hypocrisy and absurdism from the more solemn crannies of American culture.”
— New York Times
“Krassner lives in a world where Truth and Satire are swingers, changing partners so often you never know who belongs with whom.”
— Playboy
From Amazon:
Kindle Price: $9.99 includes free wireless delivery via Amazon Whispernet
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004K1EY0W/thekonformist
In December 2010, the writers’ organization PEN presented Paul Krassner with their Lifetime Achievement Award. This expanded edition of his autobiography — Confessions of a Raving, Unconfined Nut: Misadventures in the Counterculture — provides the reasons for that honor.
He published a groundbreaking satirical magazine, The Realist, from 1958 to 1974, and reincarnated it as a newsletter in 1985. “The taboos may have changed,” he wrote, “but irreverence is still our only sacred cow.” When People magazine called Krassner “Father of the underground press,” he immediately demanded a paternity test. The final issue was published in Spring 2001. All the issues are online at The Realist Archive Project.
His style of personal journalism constantly blurred the line between observer and participant. He interviewed a doctor who performed abortions when it was illegal; Krassner then ran an underground abortion referral service. He covered the antiwar movement; then co-founded the Yippies with Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin (writing a few animated re-enactment scenes for the documentary Chicago 10 four decades later). He published material on the psychedelic revolution; then took LSD with Tim Leary, Ram Dass and Ken Kesey, later accompanying Groucho Marx on his first and only acid trip.
In Confessions, you’ll read about his friendship with controversial comic Lenny Bruce, his association with Hustler publisher Larry Flynt, and his investigation of Scientology and Charles Manson. There’s an entire chapter, “The Parts Left Out of the Kennedy Book,” about his most notorious article.
Tom Robbins: “Thanks to Paul Krassner for continuing to be the lobster claw in the tuna casserole of modern America.”
Arianna Huffington: “Paul Krassner–confidant of Lenny Bruce, co-founder of the Yippies, defiler of Disney characters, publisher of The Realist, investigative satirist extraordinaire--as soon as we decided to create the Huffington Post, I knew I wanted Paul involved. His irreverence was just what the blog doctor ordered.”
Kurt Vonnegut: “I told Krassner one time that his writings made me hopeful. He found this an odd compliment to offer a satirist. I explained that he made supposedly serious matters seem ridiculous, and that this inspired many of his readers to decide for themselves what was ridiculous and what was not. Knowing that there were people doing that, better late than never, made me optimistic.”
Lewis Black: “I have been a fan of his since I was a snot-nosed kid, and his words have been a driving force and influence on my life. If you have read his work before, you know the joys that you are in for. If you haven’t, start reading, and consider this your lucky day. For Paul Krassner is an activist, a philosopher, a lunatic and a saint, but most of all he is funny.”
On the other hand, a couple of FBI agents went to one of his stand-up performances and stated in their report, “He purported to be humorous about government policies.” His FBI files indicate that after Life magazine published a favorable profile of him, the FBI sent a poison-pen letter to the editor, complaining: “To classify Krassner as a social rebel is far too cute. He’s a nut, a raving, unconfined nut.”
In May 2004, he received an ACLU Uppie (Upton Sinclair) Award for dedication to freedom of expression. At the 14th annual Cannabis Cup in Amsterdam, Paul Krassner was inducted into the Counterculture Hall of Fame -- “my ambition,” he claims, “since I was three years old.”
Format: Kindle Edition
File Size: 599 KB
Publisher: Paul Krassner (January 18, 2011)
Sold by: Amazon Digital Services
Language: English
ASIN: B004K1EY0W
Friday, August 28, 2009
Common Sense 2009
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-flynt/common-sense-2009_b_264706.html
Larry Flynt
Publisher of Hustler magazine and free speech advocate
August 20, 2009
Common Sense 2009
The American government -- which we once called our government -- has been taken over by Wall Street, the mega-corporations and the super-rich. They are the ones who decide our fate. It is this group of powerful elites, the people President Franklin D. Roosevelt called "economic royalists," who choose our elected officials -- indeed, our very form of government. Both Democrats and Republicans dance to the tune of their corporate masters. In America, corporations do not control the government. In America, corporations are the government.
This was never more obvious than with the Wall Street bailout, whereby the very corporations that caused the collapse of our economy were rewarded with taxpayer dollars. So arrogant, so smug were they that, without a moment's hesitation, they took our money -- yours and mine -- to pay their executives multimillion-dollar bonuses, something they continue doing to this very day. They have no shame. They don't care what you and I think about them. Henry Kissinger refers to us as "useless eaters."
But, you say, we have elected a candidate of change. To which I respond: Do these words of President Obama sound like change?
"A culture of irresponsibility took root, from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street."
There it is. Right there. We are Main Street. We must, according to our president, share the blame. He went on to say: "And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th-century economic crisis -- the Great Depression -- was overwhelmed by the speed, scope and sophistication of a 21st-century global economy."
This is nonsense.
The reason Wall Street was able to game the system the way it did -- knowing that they would become rich at the expense of the American people (oh, yes, they most certainly knew that) -- was because the financial elite had bribed our legislators to roll back the protections enacted after the Stock Market Crash of 1929.
Congress gutted the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial lending banks from investment banks, and passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which allowed for self-regulation with no oversight. The Securities and Exchange Commission subsequently revised its rules to allow for even less oversight -- and we've all seen how well that worked out. To date, no serious legislation has been offered by the Obama administration to correct these problems.
Instead, Obama wants to increase the oversight power of the Federal Reserve. Never mind that it already had significant oversight power before our most recent economic meltdown, yet failed to take action. Never mind that the Fed is not a government agency but a cartel of private bankers that cannot be held accountable by Washington. Whatever the Fed does with these supposed new oversight powers will be behind closed doors.
Obama's failure to act sends one message loud and clear: He cannot stand up to the powerful Wall Street interests that supplied the bulk of his campaign money for the 2008 election. Nor, for that matter, can Congress, for much the same reason.
Consider what multibillionaire banker David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 memoirs:
"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure -- one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
Read Rockefeller's words again. He actually admits to working against the "best interests of the United States."
Need more? Here's what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order." They're gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.
Journalist Matt Taibbi, writing in Rolling Stone, notes that esteemed economist John Kenneth Galbraith laid the 1929 crash at the feet of banking giant Goldman Sachs. Taibbi goes on to say that Goldman Sachs has been behind every other economic downturn as well, including the most recent one. As if that wasn't enough, Goldman Sachs even had a hand in pushing gas prices up to $4 a gallon.
The problem with bankers is longstanding. Here's what one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, had to say about them:
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their father's conquered."
We all know that the first American Revolution officially began in 1776, with the Declaration of Independence. Less well known is that the single strongest motivating factor for revolution was the colonists' attempt to free themselves from the Bank of England. But how many of you know about the second revolution, referred to by historians as Shays' Rebellion? It took place in 1786-87, and once again the banks were the cause. This time they were putting the screws to America's farmers.
Daniel Shays was a farmer in western Massachusetts. Like many other farmers of the day, he was being driven into bankruptcy by the banks' predatory lending practices. (Sound familiar?) Rallying other farmers to his side, Shays led his rebels in an attack on the courts and the local armory. The rebellion itself failed, but a message had been sent: The bankers (and the politicians who supported them) ultimately backed off. As Thomas Jefferson famously quipped in regard to the insurrection: "A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Perhaps it's time to consider that option once again.
I'm calling for a national strike, one designed to close the country down for a day. The intent? Real campaign-finance reform and strong restrictions on lobbying. Because nothing will change until we take corporate money out of politics. Nothing will improve until our politicians are once again answerable to their constituents, not the rich and powerful.
Let's set a date. No one goes to work. No one buys anything. And if that isn't effective -- if the politicians ignore us -- we do it again. And again. And again.
The real war is not between the left and the right. It is between the average American and the ruling class. If we come together on this single issue, everything else will resolve itself. It's time we took back our government from those who would make us their slaves.
Larry Flynt
Publisher of Hustler magazine and free speech advocate
August 20, 2009
Common Sense 2009
The American government -- which we once called our government -- has been taken over by Wall Street, the mega-corporations and the super-rich. They are the ones who decide our fate. It is this group of powerful elites, the people President Franklin D. Roosevelt called "economic royalists," who choose our elected officials -- indeed, our very form of government. Both Democrats and Republicans dance to the tune of their corporate masters. In America, corporations do not control the government. In America, corporations are the government.
This was never more obvious than with the Wall Street bailout, whereby the very corporations that caused the collapse of our economy were rewarded with taxpayer dollars. So arrogant, so smug were they that, without a moment's hesitation, they took our money -- yours and mine -- to pay their executives multimillion-dollar bonuses, something they continue doing to this very day. They have no shame. They don't care what you and I think about them. Henry Kissinger refers to us as "useless eaters."
But, you say, we have elected a candidate of change. To which I respond: Do these words of President Obama sound like change?
"A culture of irresponsibility took root, from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street."
There it is. Right there. We are Main Street. We must, according to our president, share the blame. He went on to say: "And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th-century economic crisis -- the Great Depression -- was overwhelmed by the speed, scope and sophistication of a 21st-century global economy."
This is nonsense.
The reason Wall Street was able to game the system the way it did -- knowing that they would become rich at the expense of the American people (oh, yes, they most certainly knew that) -- was because the financial elite had bribed our legislators to roll back the protections enacted after the Stock Market Crash of 1929.
Congress gutted the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial lending banks from investment banks, and passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which allowed for self-regulation with no oversight. The Securities and Exchange Commission subsequently revised its rules to allow for even less oversight -- and we've all seen how well that worked out. To date, no serious legislation has been offered by the Obama administration to correct these problems.
Instead, Obama wants to increase the oversight power of the Federal Reserve. Never mind that it already had significant oversight power before our most recent economic meltdown, yet failed to take action. Never mind that the Fed is not a government agency but a cartel of private bankers that cannot be held accountable by Washington. Whatever the Fed does with these supposed new oversight powers will be behind closed doors.
Obama's failure to act sends one message loud and clear: He cannot stand up to the powerful Wall Street interests that supplied the bulk of his campaign money for the 2008 election. Nor, for that matter, can Congress, for much the same reason.
Consider what multibillionaire banker David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 memoirs:
"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure -- one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
Read Rockefeller's words again. He actually admits to working against the "best interests of the United States."
Need more? Here's what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order." They're gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.
Journalist Matt Taibbi, writing in Rolling Stone, notes that esteemed economist John Kenneth Galbraith laid the 1929 crash at the feet of banking giant Goldman Sachs. Taibbi goes on to say that Goldman Sachs has been behind every other economic downturn as well, including the most recent one. As if that wasn't enough, Goldman Sachs even had a hand in pushing gas prices up to $4 a gallon.
The problem with bankers is longstanding. Here's what one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, had to say about them:
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their father's conquered."
We all know that the first American Revolution officially began in 1776, with the Declaration of Independence. Less well known is that the single strongest motivating factor for revolution was the colonists' attempt to free themselves from the Bank of England. But how many of you know about the second revolution, referred to by historians as Shays' Rebellion? It took place in 1786-87, and once again the banks were the cause. This time they were putting the screws to America's farmers.
Daniel Shays was a farmer in western Massachusetts. Like many other farmers of the day, he was being driven into bankruptcy by the banks' predatory lending practices. (Sound familiar?) Rallying other farmers to his side, Shays led his rebels in an attack on the courts and the local armory. The rebellion itself failed, but a message had been sent: The bankers (and the politicians who supported them) ultimately backed off. As Thomas Jefferson famously quipped in regard to the insurrection: "A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
Perhaps it's time to consider that option once again.
I'm calling for a national strike, one designed to close the country down for a day. The intent? Real campaign-finance reform and strong restrictions on lobbying. Because nothing will change until we take corporate money out of politics. Nothing will improve until our politicians are once again answerable to their constituents, not the rich and powerful.
Let's set a date. No one goes to work. No one buys anything. And if that isn't effective -- if the politicians ignore us -- we do it again. And again. And again.
The real war is not between the left and the right. It is between the average American and the ruling class. If we come together on this single issue, everything else will resolve itself. It's time we took back our government from those who would make us their slaves.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
How Many 'Xs' in Bailout?
http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2009/01/how-many-xes-in.html
How Many 'Xs' in Bailout?
Patt Morrison
January 7, 2009
I guess you have to give them points for trying. Just don't give them any of my money.
Porn mogul Larry Flynt and a fellow named Joe Francis, who dreamed up those "Girls Gone Wild" videos, are asking Congress for a $5-billion bailout for the porn industry.
Now, I've always read that when times get bad, porn prospers. When times are good, porn prospers. Porn, in sum, is a foolproof economic performer. These two admit that the porn industry isn't exactly facing the perils of Detroit, or even California and its budget, but as they declared in their press release, "Why take chances?"
Just in case anyone's even thinking of taking this seriously, please, Congress, don't put a $20 or any other public money in their thongs. Heck, Francis is scheduled to go on trial in a couple of months in L.A. on felony federal tax-evasion charges. That's the only kind of relationship he should have with the federal government.
But I do think that porn's lobbyists could take their case to Congress, just for the entertainment value. Back in 2001, the California porn industry went to Sacramento to lobby over taxes and Internet privacy.
Nearly two dozen porn performers, strip club operators and others campaigned office by office, handing out fliers showing just how much money their business makes in California; one of them, Nina Hartley, said, "We are a revenue generator, and we'd like a little respect."
It was a trifle ... what's the word? Awkward. But persuasive. One conservative lawmaker was "dour" when the adult industry group first showed up in his office, but after 20 or 25 minutes, he'd warmed up so much that he invited the head of the Free Speech Coalition to play golf with him.
Imagine if that act went to Capitol Hill. Trying to josh with John Kerry, maybe trying to get a laugh out of Oklahoma's Tom Coburn with a naughty joke.
One exotic performer made a huge splash in D.C. years ago. Democrat Wilbur Mills ran the House Ways and Means Committee in 1974, at least until he ran up against some cops.
They stopped him as he drove a bit woozily around the Tidal Basin at 2 o'clock in the morning, a month before the 1974 election. Drinking and driving, not such a big deal back then. But it didn't stop there. His passenger leaped into the water to get away. Her name: Fannie Fox, a.k.a. the Argentine Firecracker, a top-drawer stripper. Fox changed her stage name to the Tidal Basin Bombshell and wrote a book, "The Stripper and the Congressman."
Mills won reelection a month later -- there's no accounting for some voters' taste -- and then called it quits.
And they call those the good old days.
How Many 'Xs' in Bailout?
Patt Morrison
January 7, 2009
I guess you have to give them points for trying. Just don't give them any of my money.
Porn mogul Larry Flynt and a fellow named Joe Francis, who dreamed up those "Girls Gone Wild" videos, are asking Congress for a $5-billion bailout for the porn industry.
Now, I've always read that when times get bad, porn prospers. When times are good, porn prospers. Porn, in sum, is a foolproof economic performer. These two admit that the porn industry isn't exactly facing the perils of Detroit, or even California and its budget, but as they declared in their press release, "Why take chances?"
Just in case anyone's even thinking of taking this seriously, please, Congress, don't put a $20 or any other public money in their thongs. Heck, Francis is scheduled to go on trial in a couple of months in L.A. on felony federal tax-evasion charges. That's the only kind of relationship he should have with the federal government.
But I do think that porn's lobbyists could take their case to Congress, just for the entertainment value. Back in 2001, the California porn industry went to Sacramento to lobby over taxes and Internet privacy.
Nearly two dozen porn performers, strip club operators and others campaigned office by office, handing out fliers showing just how much money their business makes in California; one of them, Nina Hartley, said, "We are a revenue generator, and we'd like a little respect."
It was a trifle ... what's the word? Awkward. But persuasive. One conservative lawmaker was "dour" when the adult industry group first showed up in his office, but after 20 or 25 minutes, he'd warmed up so much that he invited the head of the Free Speech Coalition to play golf with him.
Imagine if that act went to Capitol Hill. Trying to josh with John Kerry, maybe trying to get a laugh out of Oklahoma's Tom Coburn with a naughty joke.
One exotic performer made a huge splash in D.C. years ago. Democrat Wilbur Mills ran the House Ways and Means Committee in 1974, at least until he ran up against some cops.
They stopped him as he drove a bit woozily around the Tidal Basin at 2 o'clock in the morning, a month before the 1974 election. Drinking and driving, not such a big deal back then. But it didn't stop there. His passenger leaped into the water to get away. Her name: Fannie Fox, a.k.a. the Argentine Firecracker, a top-drawer stripper. Fox changed her stage name to the Tidal Basin Bombshell and wrote a book, "The Stripper and the Congressman."
Mills won reelection a month later -- there's no accounting for some voters' taste -- and then called it quits.
And they call those the good old days.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Death of 'D.C. Madam' Becomes Rich Ground for Conspiracy
Robalini's Note: Coming to bash the DC Madam conspiracy theory is David Corn, the CIA's main man (along with Mark Cooper) in the establishment left.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,353876,00.html
Death of 'D.C. Madam' Becomes Rich Ground for Conspiracy Theory
Thursday , May 01, 2008
By Greg Simmons
WASHINGTON — Police in Tarpon Springs, Fla., said there was "no question" that Deborah Jeane Palfrey committed suicide by hanging Thursday, but that was not enough to stop immediate speculation that the infamous "D.C. Madam" was the victim of murder.
Hustler magazine publisher and free-speech advocate Larry Flynt -- one of Palfrey's staunchest advocates -- was the strongest voice forwarding the notion that Palfrey's death was not by her own hands.
"I think the media should be very cautious in treating this as a suicide," Flynt told FOXNews.com in a telephone interview from his Beverly Hills office.
Asked if he believed Palfrey was murdered, Flynt responded: "I personally believe that's what happened, but I have no proof."
Palfrey was found guilty of federal racketeering charges on April 15 in connection to her prostitution business, Pamela Martin & Associates, which operated out of California but hired Washington, D.C.-area women for its operations.
The case drew wide attention early last year when Palfrey gave media organizations phone numbers of her clients, but not their names, in the hopes that the clients would support her claims that her business was a legitimate escort service.
Flynt was an integral part in keeping Palfrey's story public and worked with her and investigative reporter Dan Moldea to break the story that the phone number of Sen. David Vitter, R-La., was among those numbers in Palfrey's client list. Flynt targeted Vitter because he had campaigned for office on a family-values platform.
Vitter apologized in July 2007 for his name appearing on Palfrey's list, saying, "This was a very serious sin." The senator never explained his relationship to Palfrey's business. His office did not respond on Thursday to a phone message seeking comment.
The Palfrey case also contributed to Randall L. Tobias' resignation from a position at the State Department after a news report identified him as a Pamela Martin client. A receptionist reached Thursday at Tobias' Indianapolis foundation said, "There will be no comment."
Flynt said he met Palfrey around the time of her indictment in March 2007 and discussed her case with her on several occasions.
Palfrey's defense relied on an argument that her business was a "sexual fantasy" business but did not involve paid sex -- at least none that Palfrey was aware of.
But Flynt outright dismissed that notion. Asked if she knowingly sold sex for money, Flynt said there's "no question."
But she also was an intelligent woman, he said.
"She did not have the demeanor of the type of person that would carry certain signs of suicide, like being withdrawn or depressed," Flynt said. "You know, those are the kinds of signs that you look for. She didn't display any of those traits. ... She was very friendly. ... Very bright. She was by no means a dummy. She knew what she was doing."
Flynt said he believes that in her quest to avoid prison time -- her sentencing hearing had been scheduled for July -- Palfrey was prepared to release one or two final names connected to her case.
"She had a lot of names, and I know she was holding on to them for a reason," Flynt said. He said he knew some of the clients' names, and they include big-hitters in the political and media worlds. None of those names came to light, though, because they didn't fit the mold that Flynt was pushing for: politicians who said one thing and did another. Only Vitter, Flynt said, appeared to match that description.
But Flynt hinted at much juicier material to be unearthed.
"Let me put it this way, there were more Democrats on it than Republicans," he said, supporting his theory that the only reason this case was of interest was because of the number of Democrats who could be targeted by the Bush administration.
But Flynt said his conversations with Palfrey were off the record, and if any investigators come knocking on his door for names, they'll have to look elsewhere.
Flynt said the only person who might know more about those conversations with Palfrey is Moldea, who was working with Palfrey on a book. Flynt said he has no financial stake in that book.
While Flynt's version of events might be the most intriguing, they are not the only version. Many believe justice ran its course -- however misguided -- and the case won't have any lasting effect, said David Corn, Washington bureau chief of Mother Jones magazine and a Washington-based journalist who reported on the case.
"I met her once -- and it was not in a sordid fashion -- as a reporter, and I kept asking her, 'You know, if you had any famous, high-profile clients.' And she said, 'Well, not really. A lot of people wouldn't recognize these people anyway,' " Corn recalled on Thursday.
He said it struck him as odd that the prosecution focused on her case, rather than any of the other "escort services" that can be found in the local phone book. Corn said Palfrey seemed to have a "why me?" attitude.
Corn did not question that Palfrey had taken her own life.
"There's a certain sad element to this -- anytime there's a suicide," Corn said. "She went to her grave, her death, not fully understanding why hers became the only escort service to be targeted for such prosecution."
And he said he did not think her death was the result of any sort of conspiracy.
"You hate to say this about anybody, but Jeane's death won't have any consequence to Washington," he said. "She's not taking any secrets with her. She seemed to not have them in the first place."
A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Washington did not return a phone call Thursday, and Palfrey's defense attorney, Preston Burton, was not available for comment. He issued a statement through a colleague at his firm, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe.
"This is tragic news. My heart goes out to her mother," Burton said, according to Orrick attorney John Pitts.
FOX News.com's Catherine Donaldson-Evans contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,353876,00.html
Death of 'D.C. Madam' Becomes Rich Ground for Conspiracy Theory
Thursday , May 01, 2008
By Greg Simmons
WASHINGTON — Police in Tarpon Springs, Fla., said there was "no question" that Deborah Jeane Palfrey committed suicide by hanging Thursday, but that was not enough to stop immediate speculation that the infamous "D.C. Madam" was the victim of murder.
Hustler magazine publisher and free-speech advocate Larry Flynt -- one of Palfrey's staunchest advocates -- was the strongest voice forwarding the notion that Palfrey's death was not by her own hands.
"I think the media should be very cautious in treating this as a suicide," Flynt told FOXNews.com in a telephone interview from his Beverly Hills office.
Asked if he believed Palfrey was murdered, Flynt responded: "I personally believe that's what happened, but I have no proof."
Palfrey was found guilty of federal racketeering charges on April 15 in connection to her prostitution business, Pamela Martin & Associates, which operated out of California but hired Washington, D.C.-area women for its operations.
The case drew wide attention early last year when Palfrey gave media organizations phone numbers of her clients, but not their names, in the hopes that the clients would support her claims that her business was a legitimate escort service.
Flynt was an integral part in keeping Palfrey's story public and worked with her and investigative reporter Dan Moldea to break the story that the phone number of Sen. David Vitter, R-La., was among those numbers in Palfrey's client list. Flynt targeted Vitter because he had campaigned for office on a family-values platform.
Vitter apologized in July 2007 for his name appearing on Palfrey's list, saying, "This was a very serious sin." The senator never explained his relationship to Palfrey's business. His office did not respond on Thursday to a phone message seeking comment.
The Palfrey case also contributed to Randall L. Tobias' resignation from a position at the State Department after a news report identified him as a Pamela Martin client. A receptionist reached Thursday at Tobias' Indianapolis foundation said, "There will be no comment."
Flynt said he met Palfrey around the time of her indictment in March 2007 and discussed her case with her on several occasions.
Palfrey's defense relied on an argument that her business was a "sexual fantasy" business but did not involve paid sex -- at least none that Palfrey was aware of.
But Flynt outright dismissed that notion. Asked if she knowingly sold sex for money, Flynt said there's "no question."
But she also was an intelligent woman, he said.
"She did not have the demeanor of the type of person that would carry certain signs of suicide, like being withdrawn or depressed," Flynt said. "You know, those are the kinds of signs that you look for. She didn't display any of those traits. ... She was very friendly. ... Very bright. She was by no means a dummy. She knew what she was doing."
Flynt said he believes that in her quest to avoid prison time -- her sentencing hearing had been scheduled for July -- Palfrey was prepared to release one or two final names connected to her case.
"She had a lot of names, and I know she was holding on to them for a reason," Flynt said. He said he knew some of the clients' names, and they include big-hitters in the political and media worlds. None of those names came to light, though, because they didn't fit the mold that Flynt was pushing for: politicians who said one thing and did another. Only Vitter, Flynt said, appeared to match that description.
But Flynt hinted at much juicier material to be unearthed.
"Let me put it this way, there were more Democrats on it than Republicans," he said, supporting his theory that the only reason this case was of interest was because of the number of Democrats who could be targeted by the Bush administration.
But Flynt said his conversations with Palfrey were off the record, and if any investigators come knocking on his door for names, they'll have to look elsewhere.
Flynt said the only person who might know more about those conversations with Palfrey is Moldea, who was working with Palfrey on a book. Flynt said he has no financial stake in that book.
While Flynt's version of events might be the most intriguing, they are not the only version. Many believe justice ran its course -- however misguided -- and the case won't have any lasting effect, said David Corn, Washington bureau chief of Mother Jones magazine and a Washington-based journalist who reported on the case.
"I met her once -- and it was not in a sordid fashion -- as a reporter, and I kept asking her, 'You know, if you had any famous, high-profile clients.' And she said, 'Well, not really. A lot of people wouldn't recognize these people anyway,' " Corn recalled on Thursday.
He said it struck him as odd that the prosecution focused on her case, rather than any of the other "escort services" that can be found in the local phone book. Corn said Palfrey seemed to have a "why me?" attitude.
Corn did not question that Palfrey had taken her own life.
"There's a certain sad element to this -- anytime there's a suicide," Corn said. "She went to her grave, her death, not fully understanding why hers became the only escort service to be targeted for such prosecution."
And he said he did not think her death was the result of any sort of conspiracy.
"You hate to say this about anybody, but Jeane's death won't have any consequence to Washington," he said. "She's not taking any secrets with her. She seemed to not have them in the first place."
A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Washington did not return a phone call Thursday, and Palfrey's defense attorney, Preston Burton, was not available for comment. He issued a statement through a colleague at his firm, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe.
"This is tragic news. My heart goes out to her mother," Burton said, according to Orrick attorney John Pitts.
FOX News.com's Catherine Donaldson-Evans contributed to this report.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Penthouse wants Ashley Alexandra Dupre
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2008/03/13/2008-03-13_penthouse_wants_ashley_alexandra_dupre_f.html
Penthouse wants Ashley Alexandra Dupre for cover shot
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Updated Thursday, March 13th 2008
The woman at the center of the Eliot Spitzer call girl scandal will have no problem cashing in on her notoriety: Penthouse and Hustler are already knocking on her door.
"We’ve been looking at that very closely. She’s young. She’s pretty. She’s a model," said Hustler magazine publisher Larry Flynt. "We would love to do business with her, and we will approach her."
Penthouse has been trying to reach out to 22-year-old Ashley Alexandra Dupre, too, but had yet to make contact Thursday afternoon.
Penthouse Magazine Group president and publisher Diane Silberstein said she would "love to have her in the magazine" and would consider offering her a cover shot.
"She sounds like a very interesting and talented young woman, and I’m sure she has a great story to tell," Silberstein said. "We promise to make it worth her while."
The New Jersey-born Dupre was thrust into the limelight this week when The New York Times identified her as the high-priced call girl whose arrangements for a rendezvous with New York’s governor at a Washington, D.C., hotel were secretly monitored by the FBI.
So far, authorities haven’t filed charges against Spitzer or Dupre, who was identified in court papers only by her escort agency pseudonym, Kristen, but she has a lawyer and hasn’t been speaking about her encounter with the governor while the case is under investigation.
Flynt, who last June took out a full-page advertisement in The Washington Post offering $1 million for anyone who could prove he or she had illicit sexual relations with a prominent politician, suggested that by the time Dupre starts talking she may be too big a media phenomenon for a simple magazine spread.
"She is no doubt going to do a book. There will probably be a movie," he said. "I think she is going to have so many offers coming in that it will probably be wishful thinking just to get in the door."
Penthouse wants Ashley Alexandra Dupre for cover shot
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Updated Thursday, March 13th 2008
The woman at the center of the Eliot Spitzer call girl scandal will have no problem cashing in on her notoriety: Penthouse and Hustler are already knocking on her door.
"We’ve been looking at that very closely. She’s young. She’s pretty. She’s a model," said Hustler magazine publisher Larry Flynt. "We would love to do business with her, and we will approach her."
Penthouse has been trying to reach out to 22-year-old Ashley Alexandra Dupre, too, but had yet to make contact Thursday afternoon.
Penthouse Magazine Group president and publisher Diane Silberstein said she would "love to have her in the magazine" and would consider offering her a cover shot.
"She sounds like a very interesting and talented young woman, and I’m sure she has a great story to tell," Silberstein said. "We promise to make it worth her while."
The New Jersey-born Dupre was thrust into the limelight this week when The New York Times identified her as the high-priced call girl whose arrangements for a rendezvous with New York’s governor at a Washington, D.C., hotel were secretly monitored by the FBI.
So far, authorities haven’t filed charges against Spitzer or Dupre, who was identified in court papers only by her escort agency pseudonym, Kristen, but she has a lawyer and hasn’t been speaking about her encounter with the governor while the case is under investigation.
Flynt, who last June took out a full-page advertisement in The Washington Post offering $1 million for anyone who could prove he or she had illicit sexual relations with a prominent politician, suggested that by the time Dupre starts talking she may be too big a media phenomenon for a simple magazine spread.
"She is no doubt going to do a book. There will probably be a movie," he said. "I think she is going to have so many offers coming in that it will probably be wishful thinking just to get in the door."
Sunday, December 2, 2007
"Larry Craig" Angle to Resignation of Trent Lott
http://www.rightsourceonline.com/welch/bnews2.cfm?rank_cho=4914
November 26, 2007
Caveat Lector (Let the Reader Beware): Homosexual Activist Blogger Claims There's a "Larry Craig" Angle to Resignation of Senior Republican Senator Trent Lott
[Editor's note: The following is republished from Towleroad.com, a site maintained by a Lavender Lobby activist for whose accuracy I cannot vouch. Given the plethora of recent GOP scandals involving closeted homosexuals masquerading as "family values" conservatives, the following account is at least worthy of our attention. -- WNG]
Mississippi Senator Trent Lott announced today he'll be resigning by year's end.
The decision to retire only one year after a re-election many people saw as a rebound from the Throm Sturmond birthday scandal that caused him to lose his Majority Leader post had some scratching their heads.
Others are already alleging that it's a pre-emptive resignation designed to lighten the fallout from a scandal that is just about to hit.
That's what the site Big Head DC is saying, anyway:
Via Big Head DC: "The boy happens to be real, and his 'stage name' is Benjamin Nicholas. One of the politicos Big Head DC has learned he's alleged to have been involved with is the married Sen. Trent Lott, 66, who unexpectedly announced his retirement on Monday. Lott is well-known to have been against a plethora of gay rights issues throughout his terms in Congress. He was also good friends with Sen. Larry Craig throughout his time in Congress. Nicholas told Big Head DC today via e-mail that he didnt want to go on the record to talk about his dealings with Lott, because, said Nicholas, 'Trent is going through his fair share of scrutiny right now and I dont want to add to it.' However, e-mail and other records confirm that the two have met on at least two occasions. 'All I can say at this point is no comment,' Nicholas told us. 'Its the professional thing for me to do.' In a subsequent e-mail message, Nicholas confirmed that another publication is working on a story about a 'possible relationship' between Lott and himself, but Nicholas also 'politely declined' an interview for that story. 'As I said before, Lott has quite a bit on his plate right now and I dont really want to add fuel to the embers,' Nicholas told Big Head DC."
More at the source. Benjamin Nicholas, the alleged escort, who once wrote an article for Seattle's The Stranger newspaper about the importance of confidentiality in the escort business, is denying relations with Lott: "I will continue to offer a great sense of confidentiality to the people I see. I have not, nor have I ever seen or had contact with Senator Trent Lott. It's as simple as that. It never happened."
And as far as that "other" publication, Larry Flynt just told FOX he's "hoping to expose a bombshell" within the next week or two. We'll see, I guess.
Take it for what you will, but given that 2007 is the year of the hypocritical Republican, nothing would surprise me.
November 26, 2007
Caveat Lector (Let the Reader Beware): Homosexual Activist Blogger Claims There's a "Larry Craig" Angle to Resignation of Senior Republican Senator Trent Lott
[Editor's note: The following is republished from Towleroad.com, a site maintained by a Lavender Lobby activist for whose accuracy I cannot vouch. Given the plethora of recent GOP scandals involving closeted homosexuals masquerading as "family values" conservatives, the following account is at least worthy of our attention. -- WNG]
Mississippi Senator Trent Lott announced today he'll be resigning by year's end.
The decision to retire only one year after a re-election many people saw as a rebound from the Throm Sturmond birthday scandal that caused him to lose his Majority Leader post had some scratching their heads.
Others are already alleging that it's a pre-emptive resignation designed to lighten the fallout from a scandal that is just about to hit.
That's what the site Big Head DC is saying, anyway:
Via Big Head DC: "The boy happens to be real, and his 'stage name' is Benjamin Nicholas. One of the politicos Big Head DC has learned he's alleged to have been involved with is the married Sen. Trent Lott, 66, who unexpectedly announced his retirement on Monday. Lott is well-known to have been against a plethora of gay rights issues throughout his terms in Congress. He was also good friends with Sen. Larry Craig throughout his time in Congress. Nicholas told Big Head DC today via e-mail that he didnt want to go on the record to talk about his dealings with Lott, because, said Nicholas, 'Trent is going through his fair share of scrutiny right now and I dont want to add to it.' However, e-mail and other records confirm that the two have met on at least two occasions. 'All I can say at this point is no comment,' Nicholas told us. 'Its the professional thing for me to do.' In a subsequent e-mail message, Nicholas confirmed that another publication is working on a story about a 'possible relationship' between Lott and himself, but Nicholas also 'politely declined' an interview for that story. 'As I said before, Lott has quite a bit on his plate right now and I dont really want to add fuel to the embers,' Nicholas told Big Head DC."
More at the source. Benjamin Nicholas, the alleged escort, who once wrote an article for Seattle's The Stranger newspaper about the importance of confidentiality in the escort business, is denying relations with Lott: "I will continue to offer a great sense of confidentiality to the people I see. I have not, nor have I ever seen or had contact with Senator Trent Lott. It's as simple as that. It never happened."
And as far as that "other" publication, Larry Flynt just told FOX he's "hoping to expose a bombshell" within the next week or two. We'll see, I guess.
Take it for what you will, but given that 2007 is the year of the hypocritical Republican, nothing would surprise me.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Mag Pairs Hot Chicks With Cold Stiffs
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Flynt is tracking congressional sex scandal leads
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/flynt-is-tracking-20-congressional-sex-scandal-leads-2007-07-11.html
Flynt is tracking 20 congressional sex scandal leads
By Elana Schor
July 11, 2007
Larry Flynt, the porn-industry magnate who first linked Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) to the escort service of the “D.C. Madam,” said Wednesday that his investigators are tracking more than 20 leads on alleged congressional sex scandals.
As Vitter remained missing in action for two Senate votes on defense policy, Flynt insisted that he exposed the conservative lawmaker’s sexual indiscretions only because they contradicted Vitter’s longtime defense of the “sanctity of marriage.”
“If someone’s living a life contrary to the way they’re advocating ... then they become fair game,” Flynt told reporters. “I don’t want a man like that legislating for me, especially in the area of morality.”
In addition to the phone records of “D.C. Madam” Deborah Jeane Palfrey, accused of prostitution and racketeering by federal authorities, Flynt is mining responses to an ad he placed last month in The Washington Post. The ad promised a million-dollar reward for anyone providing evidence of illicit encounters with members of Congress.
The 20-plus new leads, Flynt said, come from the newspaper ad and not Palfrey. The Hustler publisher, arrested and jailed multiple times during his decades-long career, vowed to provide clear proof and only out lawmakers whom he perceives to be hypocrites.
“You guys always know, [from] the past, I deliver,” Flynt said. “And if I fail to, the mainstream media will crush me like a bug.”
The Vitter scandal has touched off new anxiety among Republicans over whether their party will pay the price for members who fail to live up to their moral principles. Flynt, an unabashed Democrat, acknowledged that the GOP provides him with easier targets.
“Republicans are more fun because they get caught so easily,” Flynt said. “They’ve been living a repressed life all their life. Democrats are liberal — they wear it on their sleeve. Their sex life is what it is. They don’t spend their whole life trying to cover it up.”
Flynt released the particular wireless phone bill containing Vitter’s phone number on Palfrey’s calling list, confirming that the Louisianan contacted the escort service while serving in the House. Flynt also claimed to have testimony from five New Orleans prostitutes about their sexual encounters with Vitter, adding that that quintet would likely share the $1 million bounty with Palfrey.
Flynt is tracking 20 congressional sex scandal leads
By Elana Schor
July 11, 2007
Larry Flynt, the porn-industry magnate who first linked Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) to the escort service of the “D.C. Madam,” said Wednesday that his investigators are tracking more than 20 leads on alleged congressional sex scandals.
As Vitter remained missing in action for two Senate votes on defense policy, Flynt insisted that he exposed the conservative lawmaker’s sexual indiscretions only because they contradicted Vitter’s longtime defense of the “sanctity of marriage.”
“If someone’s living a life contrary to the way they’re advocating ... then they become fair game,” Flynt told reporters. “I don’t want a man like that legislating for me, especially in the area of morality.”
In addition to the phone records of “D.C. Madam” Deborah Jeane Palfrey, accused of prostitution and racketeering by federal authorities, Flynt is mining responses to an ad he placed last month in The Washington Post. The ad promised a million-dollar reward for anyone providing evidence of illicit encounters with members of Congress.
The 20-plus new leads, Flynt said, come from the newspaper ad and not Palfrey. The Hustler publisher, arrested and jailed multiple times during his decades-long career, vowed to provide clear proof and only out lawmakers whom he perceives to be hypocrites.
“You guys always know, [from] the past, I deliver,” Flynt said. “And if I fail to, the mainstream media will crush me like a bug.”
The Vitter scandal has touched off new anxiety among Republicans over whether their party will pay the price for members who fail to live up to their moral principles. Flynt, an unabashed Democrat, acknowledged that the GOP provides him with easier targets.
“Republicans are more fun because they get caught so easily,” Flynt said. “They’ve been living a repressed life all their life. Democrats are liberal — they wear it on their sleeve. Their sex life is what it is. They don’t spend their whole life trying to cover it up.”
Flynt released the particular wireless phone bill containing Vitter’s phone number on Palfrey’s calling list, confirming that the Louisianan contacted the escort service while serving in the House. Flynt also claimed to have testimony from five New Orleans prostitutes about their sexual encounters with Vitter, adding that that quintet would likely share the $1 million bounty with Palfrey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
