Sunday, August 27th, 2000
First Hardcore Films Approved In Britain
Several newspapers carried a report this week saying that 23 R18 videos had been passed since the change of guidelines. Of these videos, 19 were passed in a cut form with a few hardcore snippets (i.e., pre cut for old standards, not cut by the BBFC). The first 4 videos passed after August 16th are full hardcore, i.e.:
Moving Violations (Prime Time)
Search for the Snow Leopard: Eve of the Hunt (Prime Time)
Wicked Cover Girls (Prime Time)
Buck Adams' Centerfold (Prime Time)
Curious writes: Luke, did it ever occur to you that in a matter of a few short months it is entirely possible that Limeys across the British Isles will be wanking to your porn epic, 'What Women Want'? The Brits are so starved for real hardcore they might even perceive your amateurish disaster as adequate and demand a sequel. Are you ready to don your director hat again? Click here: BBFC Watch: August 2000
Dc writes Luke: I read how you produced and made only one porno that stared women. What were the ups and the downs of getting a movie made in the adult biz and how much did you sell it for?
Luke: Get the scoop here.
Barefoot Confidential 9
Patrick Riley writes on RAME: Mark Archer, the cameraman, designer, set decorator, grip, and everything else (except editor) for this movie used to be the managing editor for AVN until he left to take the job of promotions guy at Elegant Angel. At the time of the Robert Black/Tom Byron bloodbath he moved to Legend and then very quickly moved once again to become the promotions guy at LFP Video, now known as Hustler Video. Along with his promotions work, he started the Barefoot Confidential series and more recently the Chica Boom series, both of which are put out by his own company, Toe-To-Toe Video.
Chica Boom, of which I have only seen #2 specializes in "Hot Latin
Chicas" which I presume means "Hot Latin Chicks" although I'm sure that
there's some obscure reference to a long forgotten rock song in there
Chica Boom #2 has a fun feel to it with interviews of the girls by the unseen Archer during which they play a game with dice which in turn determines what they'll do with the assigned stud. The rules of the game didn't seem to be too well formulated but it provided an excuse for interaction and that in turn gave the movie a fun feel. Of the cast however, only Mariah Kane and Dee, both of whom appeared with their boyfriends/significant others, were girls I would want to f--- and even they weren't too passionate in their scenes, the "stud"/boyfriend of Mariah having wood problems and Dee just doing the same thing I've seen her do dozens of times before. The other girls were Monique DeMone (worn out her welcome long ago), Destiny (marginal looking and coming from years earlier), and Franky LaRue (marginal off-color black girl).
Chica Boom #1 and #3 are dubious rentals based on the absence of anyone really stunning or new.
Barefoot Confidential is, as the name implies, a foot fetish series where lots of time is devoted to admiring the girls' feet, massaging them, and using them to jerk off the male. Depending on the volume there may actually be in-out as well.
Feet per se do absolutely nothing for me but then again I don't really see them as anything bad especially not in this context. I presume that they're well scrubbed with Carbolic prior to the activities and even if some laxity enters into the hygiene arrangements, I've never heard of anyone getting athletes foot of the mouth so it doesn't seem to be a risky behavior. Nor does it involve any degradation or pain, at least that I can see. You could probably say a foot job is like a handjob, both designed to get the guy off, the means being unimportant. I realize that foot fetishists, who actually see the foot as something erotic in and of itself, may not agree with this analysis, but screw them. They should be grateful that unlike the big boob fetishists, the facial fetishists, the rimming fetishists, the anal fetishists, etc, I don't see them as deviants-in-need-of-re-education.
Barefoot Confidential got off to a bad start in 1998 with #1 with a poor quality cast: hefty whorish Brittany Andrews and Timber, Roxanne Hall after she'd used up her welcome, and smarmy Michael J. Cox. The only redeeming factor was Allison Dark (Avalon) who did a g/g with Roxanne and crushed worms under her feet but otherwise put in a sterile performance. (Nothing wrong with crushing worms. We slaughter animals all the time, as we should. They exist for our benefit. PETA weirdos can raise the issue on acme and if I'm otherwise bored I'll argue with them there.)
#2 through #5 didn't supply anyone of note although in retrospect, might be worth re-visiting given what I now know about #7, 8, and 9.
#6 was reviewed positively by voyager and I'm sure his dissertation is filed away in the rame archives.
#7 has the first appearance of Summer, a high quality cutie pie who also appeared in Young, Dumb and Full of Cum #3, Nineteen #30, and Naughty Little Nymphos #4. Unfortunately Summer is a popular name and the #$%^*@$ assholes in the industry don't seem to be willing or able to force these girls to get a last name and stick to it--they don't even apologize for their ineptitude! Anyway she's pretty with a nice lithe body, tight waist, flat belly, small medium tits, lithe body, and golden blonde shoulder length hair. She says she's married and has never screwed anyone but her husband. Hey, that's good, a nice girl! She lets a condom-free Brandon Iron be the second in this movie. Not fake (good) but you can see that she's not aroused by the experience. The others in the movie are Nikki Andersson (hefty Euro whore) who does an insipid g/g with Jewel Valmont (also a little on the fleshy side) and Allysin Chaynes (worn out her welcome) who gets screwed by her boyfriend, Mark Vega.
#8 has Ariel Lane and Shiloh and even if Ariel stood there naked and did nothing else, it would be worth watching. She's at the quality level of the mainstream teens on (say) Popular. Shiloh, sounding positively intellectual, screws her and then later she gives him a foot job. Also of note is Deanna High, who later appeared in one of the Barely Legal series and was originally in Carolina Girls #1. Her sex scene with Steve Taylor is almost normal, a rarity in the porn business. They both look like they're actually aroused by each other and the sex is almost in ignorance of the camera. The other two girls, Katrina Rose and Gabriela (one of the many) are not particularly cute and only masturbate but their interviews show a preview of the technique used in #9.
#9 subtitled "Footjobs R Us" has no in-out, just masturbation for some
of the girls and footjobs to Archer for all of them except India. It
all takes place in the same bedroom with the girl sitting on the sheet-covered
bed sometimes minimally clothed progressing to nudity, the girl squirting
her body with water from a spay bottle, massaging of olive oil into
her feet and lower legs, masturbation, and then the footjob. They do
change the sheets although I noticed some stains so I presume it's just
rotation. Alternatively this could be Archer's own bed
First the girls. Unlike many out there I want my women to be presentable, not attainable. I (presume I'm age-appropriate) would like to be able to take them to the office cocktail party and present them to the boss and my friends without having them snicker about "How much did you pay for the whore?" And I'd like the girl to be able to carry on a conversation on topics other than porno movies, wrestling, their latest STD, how many kids they have, the conditions inside the prison system, the quality of the crank in the area, etc. I'd also like them pretty, sweet, and deferential. And, oh, I'd like to be able to bounce them on my knee, this requirement having to do with weight and size, not with age. The girls here apparently meet, with some reservations, those requirements.
Secondly, the quality of the rapport between the guy and the girl. In this movie, Archer really shines. He's much more articulate than TT Boy but like TT he can get the girl to laugh and show some emotion in her response. In terms of screen presence--or perhaps I should say interview presence--Ed is sometimes better than TT but balanced against that is Ed's concentration on himself and especially the "Please say that you love old ugly guys" line. Archer almost ignores himself altogether in this. The focus is totally on the girl. I was very impressed.
Thirdly the point of the camera focus. There's a guy called CT (IIRC) who posts here from time to time who has some PC old biddy overtones but who also complains about the constant focus on the penis. I've been thinking about his comments and I've come to the conclusion that he's right about the penis part. The focus should be on the girl. It's her you're fantasizing about, not the guy. There's an R-rated arthouse movie called The Cement Garden where the young guy masturbates in front of a mirror, getting aroused from watching himself get aroused. How narcissistic can you get!
In BF #9 the camera spends 90% of the time admiring the girl's body and her face (and feet) and only about 10% where Archer's dick is seen. Think of a Rodney Moore POV camera angle. Even then it's just an instrument; because of the foot fetish tone there's still a lot of emphasis on the feet doing the work. All cum shots are on the feet.
Let's go through the girls:
Kaylynn adds some interesting information to what we already know. She says she's 5'9" instead of the past 5'7", 118lbs, and 34B bust size. The B seems like an exaggeration. Her ethnicity is Puerto Rican/English and when is comes to where she grew up there's a blur of states including Massachusetts. Her previous statement of Birmingham AL may just indicate the last port of call. I wonder if there are any studies linking a location-unstable childhood with promiscuity? Anyway she sounds sweet, smiles nicely, and goes along with Archer's requests. On close examination she does not seem to be big in the clitoris area--non-existant would be more apt.
Pamela (the box girl) says this is her first video and that she's 19 years old. She has a pretty face, tongue pin, medium tits, flat belly, very tight waist, short brown hair, splooge of pubic hair, fleshy labia majora, nice little butt, tattoo on her right ankle, a string of paw prints (looks like) tattoo on her left hip, and a small tattoo on her right hip. Normally tattoos turn me right off but as for Ariel Lane, I'll put up with them if the rest is good as it is here. She says she's a B cup but both Archer and I think she's more like a C and she says she has only slept with three guys in her life. OK, that keeps her out of the whore category and although she's a little coquettish, that probably depends on the day.
When asked about masturbation, Pamela denies doing it, and says she's not a guy. Hmmm, interesting comeback. She has no problem with the footjob, though.
India is *the* India and she's dressed quite elegantly in what looks like an adaptation of the sort of African garb you see at the street festivals. Does she have implants? If so it was a very good job. The other thing noticeable about India here is the soles of her feet. Imagine taking a nude white girl and having her stand in one place while you sprayed her with dark brown dye. The bottom of her feet would remain white and that's what India's feet look like. Maybe there are a lot of black girls like this and I've just never noticed before. India is difficult though and clearly self-centered going on about how pretty girls can send her their picture and if she thinks they're worthwhile she'll write back. Maybe she's only doing girls now? She obviously refused to do the foot job.
C.J. Sullivan is also new but has done a (multiple?) bondage video(s) and does appear on a website, URL not given. She has shoulder length white blonde hair in a pony tail, black roots, pretty face, flat belly, tight waist, small/medium tits (34C according to her), nice little butt, tongue pin, slightly stubbly pussy, and a lithe body. She either nervous (most likely) or on something because she keeps moving around. She can't keep still, at least at the beginning, and later her way of speaking is to try and justify her statements as though everything she says was disbelieved by the listener. Might be a dose of lack of self-confidence in there too.
Mariah Kane tells how the boyfriend she appeared with in Chica Boom #2 was "retarded" and that he's no longer her boyfriend. She's another one who says in other tapes that she doesn't masturbate although she does here lethargically. Rumor has it that Mariah was a mother prior to her entry into the business (doubtless thanks to Clinton's welfare reform) and you can see here that her body is gradually changing from the way it looked at her entry two years ago. She still has a wonderful smile and a nice friendly attitude.
Rachael Teez aka Bolivia Samsonite aka Chantel aka Anastasia actually has as good a conversation with Archer as she had with Ed, and repeats much the same thing, again saying that she doesn't masturbate but will for the camera if required. Archer requires and she does, perfunctorily. Silly.
Unless you get a girl who has a male level libido and you can maintain a calm relaxed environment, don't bother. Well, maybe there's some use and that's to watch and admire the girl's form and face.
And now for something completely different...
I also saw Intitiations #4 the other night.
There's a movie from the early seventies called The Devils about the inquisition at the convent of Loudon in the South of France during the middle ages. The opening scene of The Devils has a horseman riding along a road where the trees at the side are festooned with guys who have been executed and have been hung there as a warning to others. Smoke is drifting across the road. It's a very powerful scene. Now could we find a road in LA where we could hang by their testicles the little rodent Vince Voyeur and his scumbag friends, Jon Dough, Eric Everhard, Mickey G., some fat f--- called "Rich", and their patron Chris Roos? If they survive they won't be doing any more pornos and if not...who cares.
This is misogyny end to end with notable nauseating sequences of the aforementioned fat f--- getting his asshole rimmed and the rodent delighting in telling the camera that one of the new girls couldn't take it and burst into tears and they had to abort the scene. There's also a baby crying in the background.
The girls unfortunately are high quality but they should know that like appearing in a Max movie, by appearing here they shorten their useful lives considerably.
Let's hope that the new administration, of whatever flavor, starts to take an interest in the porno industry. I'll gladly sacrifice the occasional good movie for the pleasure of seeing this lot subjected to some cruel and unusual punishment.
Praise For Luke F-rd
Jechu Prospect writes from North Korea: Dear Mr. Luke F-rd!
Your exploits in the world of pornograph production now stretch across all the world's seas!
Dorank Assifat Diasseny, Minister in Charge of Defence of the Presidential Manhood of Guinea, met the DPRK ambassador to Guinea on Aug. 21 and highly praised Luke F-rd's exploits. He said he is greatly admired by the fact that Luke F-rd laid down specific sexual orientation and ways to achieve the establishment of an authentic workers' adult cinema at an early date and opened a new phase of Korean culture through his energetic activities.
The recent developments in world proletarian history prove that the cultural situation as honed by Mr. Luke F-rd is developing according to the five-point policy of great national purpose put forward by Kim Jong Il, he noted, and went on:
Following the situation on the Korean peninsula with great attention, I felt once again that Luke F-rd is, indeed, a great artist with distinguished leadership, clairvoyance and practical ability. The international authority of Luke F-rd is rising unprecedentedly higher as he has accepted Kim Jong Il as his leader and he provides wise guidance.
Advice For An Amateur Orgy Goer
DS writes on RAME: i am about to take part in an amateur orgy with 30 guys and i dunno how many girls, and was asking for any tips. Thanks to those guys who replied - i enjoyed your humour. Its still a week away but to be honest - i'm kinda having doubts (but not strong enough to stop me from going). Maybe in a year or even a month,after i 've been in it, i'll look back and think - 'what was i doing?'. I'm single (male) and i probably wouldn't be doing this if i was in a relationship. But i'm quite horny.
What i'm trying to say is when i'm an old man with kids and stuff, i'm not sure how i'd feel looking back on this experience. Will i have any self respect? When i watch the guys who take part in World Biggest Gangbang type videos, i see kinda sad lonely guys and sorta feel sorry for them - but will i be no different? In my normal life, i'm known as a nice person - the kind of guy who'd help a lady across the street. And i like to think i am a nice person - but surely this would make me a fake? I feel like, on the one hand, my dick is saying GO GO, but my heart is saying don't - my dick's voice is louder. If anyone knows what the hell i'm trying to say, please offer your opinion/spin. Sorry for babbling like a godamn girl!
Rob replies: Why don't you wear one of those full face wrestling masks that the one guy who turns up all the bukkakes does? It might be a little hot, but it could save your senatorial campaign in the future.
General Schvantzkopf replies on RAME: If you're having doubts then don't do it. Ask yourself the following questions
1) Would you tell your mom about it, how about your boss? If you make a porno movie you have to assume that everyone you know is going to find out about it. You've probably told a couple of friends, even if you asked then to keep quiet about it they are probably going to mention it to a couple of people they trust, who will then mention it to a few more people who will think it's funny and as a result will tell it to lots of people, pretty soon everyone you know will have heard about it. Even if the movie only sells 1 copies, 9 of them will be in the hands of people you know. What's more everyone at your company, even the people who don't know you, will make an effort to find out who you are.
About 20 years ago I worked for a company where some girl, who probably had a summer job there, appeared in a Playboy pictorial called the Girls of High Tech with the company's name mentioned in the caption. No one knew who she was, but for a week trying to figure out which department she worked for was the number one thing on everyone's agenda.
2) This thing is going to be around forever, how would you feel if some future girl friend, wife or offspring found out about it? Some guys in these things wear Zorro masks, as if that were enough to keep anyone from figuring out who they are. If you do this you might want to consider a gorilla suit.
Heather Barron - Rules For Living In LA
Amused writes: As a public service message, Burbank Escort/Philosopher, Heather Barron has published her insights on living in the LA scene. Luke, you could learn from this chick. (As usual my asinine comments are in parenthesis.)
Heather's LA RULEBOOK:
1. Keep your parties to a minimum. (Those Tupperware ladies do soak up your free time.)
2. Don't do drugs. There are enough dazed and confused. Stay alert! (Herpes medications are OK though.)
3. Water your dog regularly. It's hot in the valley. (Is this some new name for 'golden showers' ? Water your dog?)
4. Keep in mind that the schmuck counting change and cleaning floors at the minimart in Van Nuys might be a hell of lot smarter than the prick sitting next to your at work who's drives a Land Rover and racks up 90K. At the same time, the rich old guy at the country club might be a lot more likely to lend you a kind word of advice than the 16 year old kid who sure as hell could use YOUR help. (But the guy at the minimart does not speak English?)
4. f--- once a day. You are not getting any younger and contrary to popular belief your holes and poles don't get tighter and longer by holding out for the girlfriend of your dreams or the guy who you can tie down with rope to marry you. (What about the Orthodox Jew who dutifully abstains from sex during his wife's period? Anti-Semite!)
5. Don't trust anyone you haven't f---ed...because they might be out to f--- you. (That's true. As a young alter boy I never trusted my Priest until he f---ed me. Hi Father Dominic!)
6. Keep in mind, the best actors are the ones who don't need to read for the parts. Because they are the ones hiring your sorry ass for next to nothing to read lines that you think you could write better. (Duh! Heather, you want to be in porno. A fifth grader could write better lines than your average porno script.)
NOTE: For those new to l-keford.com Heather Barron is a 32 year old former Boston bank employee who dumped her three children with her ailing parents in January, moved to Burbank to become a porno actress / escort / script writer, had 10K in plastic surgery, and has still yet to be defiled in any pornographic video. Click here: On Burbank
Stupid Porn Names
From the RAME debate on stupid porn names:
Red Man wrote: > Can anyone tell me what these guys have in common: > >
Peter NORTH >
Mike SOUTH >
Nick EAST >
Randy WEST > >
Maybe the porn industry could be looked at with more integrity and > intelligence if they didn't have some silly names? My favs are: > >
1. Cinnabunz >
2. Letha Weapons(LOL--this is god awful) >
3. Temptress( Excuse my ignorance but what is a temptress?) >
4. Slayne Wayne >
5. Spontaneous Exxcatasy(you know the way-to-big tittied black > girl?
The 500 man gang bang?) >
6. Dynamite >
7. King Tung >
8. Tony Montana(Boy,was he original) >
9. Jenteal (what is a jenteal?) >
10. Erik Everhard >
11. Tony Eveready >
12. Kid Vegas(wanna be kid rock) > >
I know there are more stupid ones so please leave a line...I think these > names are a riot!:)
RedRubber wrote with much sincerity: My contribution to the Silly Porn Name Fund:
1. Wendy Whoppers
2. Dick Nasty
3. Little Oral Annie
4. Seymore Butts
5. Rip Hymen
6. T.T. Boy (What's a T.T. Boy?)
7. Long Dong Silver
8. Julian St. Jox
9. Busty Dusty
10. Flex Luger
11. Lotta Top
12. Sandra Scream (shoulda been Teri Weigel's name)
Rob wrote: No stupid porn name can top .... Rambone!
Redman writes: Here are some other ones:
1. Arnold Scwarzenpecker(I know I didn't spell it right but you know what I mean actaully this is more tongue and cheek)
2. Mandingo(I thought at first this was a racist name you call blacks? However I knew a kid in high school with this name. I still think it sounds funny.)
3. Mr. Marcus(Come on why does it have to be Mr.?) [MOd: To make up for *Miss* Sharon Mitchell? :-) -- Jeff]
4. Tyce Bune(nothing that makes it sound weird just don't like it)
5. Liz Borden(isn't this someone famous? From the 40's or something? my mind is drawing a blank. If it is people are not very original these days in porn land.) Had a brain freeze couldn't think of much names today oh well you get my drift:)
Ramsey writes: Ramsey writes: Here's my list: - Demia Moore (Demi Moore) - Asia Carrera (Tia Carrera) - Kylie Ireland (Kathy Ireland) - Arnold Schwarzenpecker (Arnold Schwarzenegger) - Bunny Luv (Buddy Love?) - Kate More (Kate Moss) - Laura Palmer (Laura Plamer from Twin Peaks) - Janet Jacme (Janet Jackson) - Michael J. Cox (Michael J. Fox)
Luke Gets Mail
Bik writes: My question is what happened to Cellar Dwellers #2 (Rob Black). Cannot find it at any video store or on-line - did it get pulled for legal reasons?
Gary writes: while surfing at 3:00am this morning,( insomnia) i find that one of what i think is perhaps one of the most beautiful women in the adult industry in a long time,is doing a stint at kitty's,a brothel near reno.who you ask ? jeanie rivers.what gives do you suppose ? thought she had a brighter fututre than that.
J.D. Considine writes: Asks Rumdar "As a Celtic-American I am insulted. You must have heard of the Pogues." Not only have I heard of them, but I actually saw them on their first U.S. tour, just after Cait O'Riordan left. Drunkest band ever to hit the stage (litearally, some nights). But as an Irish-American, I always felt a bit weird about these London-born stage Irish. Their whole act was a bit too close to the old Pat & Mike show, if you ask me. Then again, the Mayor of Baltimore, who fronts a lame Celtic rock band of his own, positively adores Shane McGowan (and absolutely hates me), so what do I know?
Goddess writes: i had to review the book [by Peter North] "Penetrating Insights" once for a column i was writing, and i can honestly say there was nothing even remotely "penetrating" or "insightful" about that book.
Lynne writes: I went to look for my morning's assignment and found Friday still in place, in the middle of the anti-Dennis Prager rant. Is it my server, or is Luke especially lazy, or has he actually gotten lucky and found a woman who took his mind off the site and his hands off the keyboard? Just what every man needs -- a woman who loves him so much that she interferes with his work.
Chocolate writes: I heard a rumour that Triple HHH (Hunter Helmsley) from the WWF was once an adult film star. I even saw a video with a man that I am 95% sure was him...but there is still that 5% uncertainty. Can you confirm or deny?
Hebrew writes: Luke! Hey bro, hope things are hangin' well. Guess what? My new job has a web filter on that blocks your site, can you believe it??? They view my reading Luke F-rd at work as a waste of company time, the nerve of them! How'm I gonna get my LF fix??? Damn fascists!...
So I'm walking around Manhattan recently and I spot an ad for a new indie movie coming to a small theater here, starring none other then Ron Jeremy in a major supporting role! The flick seemed to be something about a Brooklyn Pizza place, gangsters, that kinda thing. What a shock, Mr. Jeremy appears to be... (drum roll)... the comic relief! Anyway, yet another porn star turns down the money to gain "street cred" by appearing in a legit flick.
Luke, why do you think porners ache so badly to be accepted by mainstream America? What happened to the outlaw mentality? With appearances on E!, Howard Stern, etc., are porners becoming more mainstream? Is this good or bad for the industry?
Luke: Yes, we porners long for mainstream acceptance and respect. I certainly do.
Sammie writes: I have been a fan of porn for about eight years. I have collected many videos over the years and there are two performers in particular that I love! One is Janine, the Vivid girl and the other is Nick East. I'm curious to know why Mr. East has never won an award by AVN?
From the information I have gained through using the Internet, I have found glorious reviews of his on-screen performances. I guess you can say that I am just a little confused about this. Could it be that Mr. East has been overlooked (which I guess can happen to many actors/actresses)or is there information that I have seemed to have missed? Who makes the award decisions and is there a way that fans like myself can take part in the voting process?
I have heard that many male performers in the business take Viagra and inject their private parts with something to stay hard. If someone is being "awarded" on performance that can easily be bought then I guess any male could be a Porn Star, right?
Elronde writes: Hi there Luke, I was wondering if you could tell me what ever happened to Lori Lovett? believe it or not I actually went to high school with her and both my brother and I dated her before she got into the porn business. I have heard that she is either passed away, or in jail. Can you tell me if this is true, or is she doing something else.
Rob writes: Revised inscription on the base of the Statue of Liberty. "Send me your tired, your poor, your hungry ... your gay transvestites yearning to breathe free." Click here: Court Grants Gay Mexican Transvestite Asylum
Michael writes Brittany O'Connell: *Brittany* After reading the irc transcript, your displeasure at having untruths posted is understandable. But don't blame Luke. Remember that it was only a few weeks ago that *Chaim*, Lukes spirtual advisor advised him to "Lie, Lie, Lie", to his new love about LFord.com. Why have an advisor unless you follow their advice...hmmmm. Seems that there is plenty of bulls--- to call all around.
Personally, I think your right, you asked Luke to stick around and "have it out", admit his crimes , and he probably should have. Maybe you could lead by example, starting by admitting here that we know each oher. Then perhaps we can talk with Luke about the importance of honesty, and how talking about someone behind their back is harmful ...together. "What's the matter", afraid of a guy who wear's glasses?:-) My prediction is [a] no response [b] a denial of acquaintance (possibly accompanied by an accusation of mental instability) [c] or the always popular "whatevrrrr", but enough people reading this also know both of us, (as well as Luke and *Chaim*) and any of the above will put a serious dent in your ability to "call bulls---" on anyone again (hypocrisy is a hard thing to build credibility on). I believe thay used to refer to the situation as "put up, or shut up". What do you say...for Fords sake?
Jack Chick Knows What Awaits Porners In The Afterlife - Do You?
The positive response to Jack Chick's Christian comics has been tremendous. Daily Mr. Chick has been bringing the word of God to the spiritually hungry readers of l-keford.com. His cartoon ministry continues today with a summary of what awaits all sinners in their final judgment. Porners ... are you right with God? Click here: X-E - CHICK COMICS THEATER: Tossing The Damned
Regis Philbin - Racist?
From MrMarcus.com:
On 8/23/100 23:20 Mark Furman wrote: > Did you see the black guy on 'Who wants to be a Millionare' last week. The f---er got the first question wrong and used all three of his lifelines. He was asked, "Who is your Dad? <
On: 8/23/100 23:22 Marcus wrote: didnt catch the show, is this some true s---?
On 8/24/100 23:31 Total K wrote: > What do you expect out of a typical dumb nigger?
On 8/24/100 23:42 nigger killer wrote: > i don't know k you tell us since your a typical dumb white nigger.
On 8/25/100 07:07 Count Chocula wrote: > They used a trick question on the brutha. Regis asked, "Who's your father?" Sheiiit! If his mama don't know the father how can he?
On: 8/25/100 14:44 wrote: Mr.Marcus Stupid s---. Ya'll eat this in the morning or what?
On 8/25/100 19:47 count chocula sr wrote: > he doesn't know who his father is but at least you know now.Sorry to break this to you son "i'm your father" count chocula sr.
On 8/25/100 23:53 Count Chocula wrote: > Daddy come home!!!!
On: 8/26/100 02:01 Pops wrote: Can't do that son.You was a accident and also your mother is a hoe cake.Have a good life son.By the way i heard you are a biracial faggot.
Struggle With This
Jechu Prospect writes from North Korea: Dear Mr. Luke F-rd!
It is high time that you commenced your struggle with the revolutionary traditions of Mt. Paektu. General Secretary Kim Jong Il's on-the-spot guidance to the revolutionary battle sites in Mt. Paektu area demonstrated his fixed will to carry to completion the revolutionary cause of the President Kim Il Sung.
Rodong Sinmun stresses this in his writings: To carry to completion the revolutionary cause started by Kim Il Sung is a noble maxim cherished by Kim Jong Il in his early years. The revolutionary traditions of the Worker's Party of Korea are the greatest and most glorious ones which are based on the Juche idea and which were established and developed in depth in the crucible of the most arduous and complicate revolutionary struggle ever known in history.
As years go by and the revolution moves forward, greater efforts should be channelled into the work to defend, carry forward and develop the revolutionary traditions. That is the will of Kim Jong Il. His on-the-spot guidance gives a strong impetus to the revolutionary struggle with which all the Korean people are pushing ahead full of faith in a certain victory and revolutionary optimism as the anti-Japanese revolutionary forerunners did.
It is associated with his lofty aim to ensure forever a continuation of the ever-victorious history made by Kim Il Sung with the revolutionary optimism. Only when we fight with the noble revolutionary optimism, can we successfully make any "arduous March." With Kim Jong Il carrying forward and developing the traditions of the anti-Japanese revolution with credit and the revolutionary people remaining unfailingly loyal to the WPK and the revolutionary cause the Korean revolution is able to emerge ever-victorious.
The on-the-spot guidance of Mr. Luke F-rd in developing an erotic cinema of the proletariate will not fail! Mr. Luke F-rd - the time is near for you to give us a date for transit to guide the struggle of the Pyongyanggang bignoise. We await your enthusiastic and voluntary cooperation is this and all other revolutionary matters. Comrade Jechu Prospect
Behind America's Moral Decay
Luke: I finally read a Dr. William Pierce (a Nazi who wrote "The Turner Diaries") rant that I almost totally agreed with (except for the last four paragraphs). Here it is:
The subject is the general decline in moral fitness of White Americans. In fact, I believe this moral decline is an affliction not just of Americans, but of White people nearly everywhere. I don't want the word moral to be misunderstood here. I'm not talking at all about the same thing some Christians refer to when they lament the decline of morals in America. I'm not talking about sex, for example.
By moral fitness I mean such things as strength of character, toughness, degree of self-discipline, willingness to endure hardship. But moral fitness is more than that. Being morally fit also means having an internal code of behavior and sticking to it. It means having values and standards that one applies in a systematic way to guiding one's own behavior and to judging the behavior of other people. It means having some purpose in one's life and directing one's life in accord with that purpose.
What I see around me in America today are very few people with much moral strength -- fewer, at least, than we had 50 years ago: fewer men, for example, of whom we can say with confidence, "he is a man of his word"; fewer men and women who are willing to work really hard over a long period for the achievement of a goal. And I see many more men and women -- especially young men and women -- who are soft, self-indulgent, undisciplined, and with neither moral standards nor purpose in their lives.
Well, that's a bit too general to have much meaning, I'm afraid. Let me try a few specific examples to illustrate my point. I'll begin with glassblowers. Before the Second World War every chemistry department and every physics department at a university large enough to sustain any sort of scientific research had a glassblower on the staff for making specialized glassware. Glass is not especially easy to work with, and learning how to make glass scientific apparatus with it, and make it well, requires much training and much practice. But before the war there were enough young Americans willing to spend several years in apprenticeship to an experienced glassblower in order to learn the necessary skills. They could then count on secure employment at a university or at a company engaged in scientific research or in manufacturing scientific apparatus. By the 1950s, however, good glassblowers were becoming hard to find in America, even though more jobs were available and salaries were going up. Some large companies had their own training programs, but universities who needed glassblowers generally had to import them from some place such as Germany, where apprenticeship programs for skilled trades were still the rule.
I mentioned the shrinking supply of glassblowers, because that is something with which I had personal experience, but my impression is that the phenomenon is more general than that: young men are less willing to enter trades which require long periods of training before they are fully qualified and can earn more than an apprentice's wages. I'll generalize even further: Americans are less willing -- in fact, less able -- to postpone gratification than they were half a century ago. Of course, we all would like instant gratification -- but we used to have the willpower and self-discipline to postpone it a bit when that was advantageous. In talking with young people especially, I get the definite impression that there is much less willingness to focus on long-range goals.
Another example of this is to be seen in the spending habits of Americans. Before the Second World War young families went to a bank to borrow money to buy a house, but that was about it; everything else required cash. If you wanted to buy a piece of furniture or a radio or a new suit, you had to have the money first. Even in buying a car, the common practice was to save the money from one's salary, and when one had enough one purchased the car. Credit cards may have been around, but they certainly weren't as common as today. In order to acquire the things they wanted, Americans had to plan ahead and exercise some self-discipline.
In today's age of plastic credit that is much less the case. And it seems to me that there has been a real loss in self-discipline. The average American today ends up paying much more for things simply because he not only can't wait until he has earned the money for the things he wants, he can't pay off his credit card debt at the end of every month and avoid interest. He just doesn't have the willpower. He can't control his desire to have more shiny junk and to have it now, and so a good bit of his income goes to paying interest. If he had the willpower to wait, he could avoid interest and actually own many more things.
Of course, we always had people without self-discipline and who were unwilling to postpone gratification. There always were people who had to be paid every week. If you paid them only once a month they would spend their whole paycheck in the first two weeks, and then they would starve during the next two weeks until another payday. It just seems to me that the problem is worse today than it used to be.
Here's another example for those of you who are employers. I've had many people who are in business for themselves complain to me about how difficult it is to find young Americans who are good for any kind of work. And I've noticed the same thing myself. A young employment prospect seems eager and enthusiastic; he talks a good line. But you give him a real job to do, and you quickly discover that he has no conception of what work is. He really believes that a plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance. He believes that going through the motions and putting on a good show of working is the same as working. He never accepts responsibility for the results of his work. Responsibility is an alien concept to him. It is as if the work is not quite real, and he doesn't quite grasp that the consequences of adequate work or inadequate work, of success or failure, are real too.
Poor work habits are part of this problem. Young Americans these days have not had much experience at real work as they were growing up. Most of them have not had to deliver newspapers or mow lawns or wash cars or do anything else to earn their own money from the time they were 11 or 12 years old. Delivering morning newspapers is an especially good discipline: it forces a young boy to crawl out of his warm bed at three o'clock in the morning and go out into a dark, often cold or wet, world and do hard work by himself for a couple of hours. And he must do it every morning, whether he feels like it or not. It is inevitable. Most young White Americans never have been faced with the inevitable choice of no work, no money; they've always had a way around it, and not having had to face that inevitability has stunted their moral growth.
Well, it's worse than that. I refer to these young people who can't cope with real work as members of the Star Trek generation. On Star Trek a meteoroid hits the spaceship and knocks a big hole in it. The air is rushing out into space. Electrical wiring is arcing and sparking. Fires have broken out all over the ship. Vital systems have stopped functioning. So the crew members grab fire extinguishers and screwdrivers and run around for a few minutes fixing things up, and pretty soon everything is more or less back to normal -- whereas in reality everyone would be dead. Kids raised on television have been given a grossly distorted conception of reality, a distorted reality in which there are no really painful consequences for failure, a distorted reality in which every problem has an easy solution.
And it's not just television. It's also a welfare system, which protects people from their own folly and weakness and vice and keeps them aware that if they fail at whatever they're trying to do, there's something to fall back on, so they don't really have to succeed. And it's an educational system which has shifted away from rigor and hard rules and performance toward fuzzy concepts and lots of verbalizing and social conditioning. Problem solving, with exact answers required, is out; being able to wave your hands and talk about a concept is in. Using language with precision and understanding the structural functions and relationships of words, are out; that's too masculine and analytical. Studying the history of our people and our civilization and learning the values and traditions that gave us strength in the past are out; that doesn't mesh with multiculturalism.
In fact, the schools in America have abandoned completely the task of building character and instilling values in young people. If you think I'm exaggerating, go to your library and check out a set of the McGuffey's Readers that were used widely in American public schools in the latter part of the 19th and the early part of the 20th century. McGuffey's Readers not only taught young Americans how to use their language far more precisely and elegantly than young Americans are taught today; they also taught children values. Every anecdote and story and reading selection in the McGuffey's Readers taught a moral lesson: a lesson about courage or honesty or perseverance or loyalty or correct behavior. Compare the quality of the language in the McGuffey's Readers and their content with the reading material in America's elementary schools today.
None of these aspects of moral decay I've mentioned is new -- with the possible exception of the loss of a sense of reality resulting from watching thousands of hours of television. We've always had soft, lazy, self-indulgent, irresponsible people with a short attention span who had insufficient self-discipline to postpone gratification. But the problem is substantially worse today than it was 50 years ago. There's more hedonism and less responsibility, more softness and less perseverance, today than in the past. There's less purposefulness in young people's lives and less willingness to work long and hard and carefully to achieve what they want. Of that I am certain, even though I don't have hard statistics to prove it.
So what are the causes of this moral decline, other than television, and what can we do about it?
Undoubtedly the sustained material prosperity of the past half century has been a significant contributing factor to our moral laxity. The natural conditions of life that kept us hard and morally tough in the past have been abated to a large extent by our relative material wealth. Soft and ill-disciplined individuals who would have perished a century ago and who would have been kept at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder 50 years ago are so sheltered from Nature's selective forces today that they are able to thrive almost as well as more fit individuals.
The morally debilitating effects of wealth have been recognized for a long time. The Roman patrician, Cato the Censor, railed against the moral decay of the citizens of the Roman Republic 2200 years ago, and he directed most of his criticism against his fellow aristocrats and their self-indulgence. He called upon them to return to the Spartan ways of their ancestors and to raise their children with the same rigor and austerity that had prevailed during the time of their grandfathers. Cato undoubtedly had some effect, but he lacked the authority to enforce measures sufficiently severe to stem the tide of decay. Then as now, most people, rich as well as poor, were inclined to take the course of least resistance, with little thought for the consequences; as long as they could indulge themselves they did. Nevertheless, the Republic lasted another two centuries -- which is a lot longer than America is going to last.
The destruction of the American family certainly is a major cause of our moral decay. Before the Second World War the nuclear family was the norm among White Americans, with the mother at home to take care of the children. That was true in working-class families as well as in the middle class. There were no daycare centers for preschool children, and when the kids came home from school their mother was waiting for them. Children, in other words, got vastly more parental guidance and influence then than now. And they got a lot less permissiveness.
You know, it used to be that there was a clear distinction between childhood and adulthood. A child was fully under the control of his parents, and he was completely dependent on his parents. An adult, on the other hand, was on his own. He was independent; he could do whatever he wanted; but he was completely responsible for himself. As a child approached the magic age of 16 or 17 or 18, he looked forward with eagerness to becoming an adult and having his freedom. He looked forward to other things too: sex, being able to choose a mate, being able to buy things for himself and choose his own life-style, being able to have a car. But he understood that he would be responsible for himself. He would have to support himself, and he would be held accountable for what he did. His parents no longer would be there to support or to shield him.
This distinction between childhood and adulthood is a very fundamental distinction, and among humankind it has been nearly universal, from every European society of which we have records down to the most primitive non-White tribes -- until now. Among White Americans the distinction really has become blurred since the Second World War. On the one hand the parental control and the restrictions that formerly were characteristic of childhood almost have disappeared. Nowadays young kids have money, sex, freedom to do almost anything they want -- but no responsibility. And on the other hand far too many young men continue to be supported by their parents well into their 20s or even into their 30s. They shun independence. It's an unhealthy situation all around.
There's another reason, in addition to the softening influence of too much wealth and television's loosening of the grip on reality and the lessening of parental guidance, for the decline in moral strength of Americans today. That reason is a deliberate policy of moral destruction which has been implemented with increasing effectiveness during the past half century. In every society there are factions who want to push social or political changes in particular directions. There are egalitarians, for example, who really believe that people ought to be equal even if Nature didn't make them that way. They have combined forces with the feminists to reduce competition in the lives of children at school and at play. They have downgraded the idea of winning or losing, of success or failure, of excellence or mediocrity. They have instilled into children's minds the notion that cooperation is better than competition, that working in a group or on a committee in which no single person is responsible for the outcome is better than individual striving, that a uniform level of achievement is better than having some individuals excel and some fail. In addition, the feminists have played a major role in the destruction of the family, not just by teaching that the family is a repressive institution which is unfair to women, but by using their political influence to push policies which have undermined the family.
Then there are the multiculturalists, who are absolutely determined that we must integrate Blacks and Vietnamese and Mexican mestizos into our society in a way in which the various non-White minorities will be happy and successful.
They are determined to change White social institutions in any way necessary to facilitate their goal of a happily integrated society. Lowering achievement standards in the schools and performance standards in the workplace and in the armed forces in order to accommodate Blacks, for example, seems to them a small price to pay for successful integration. Likewise, they are happy to phase out the teaching of history to young people in order to weaken their sense of European identity and make them more willing to accept multiculturalism. The fact that people with a weak sense of identity tend to be people without strong values is not half as important to them as achieving integration. There are people -- White people -- who actually prefer the moral situation we have today to the one we had before the Second World War. They feel more comfortable with weak, indecisive, self-indulgent, and irresponsible people around them. They don't like strong, self-confident, independent people.
We've always had this interplay of ideological factions in our society. What's really new is the role of the mass media in favoring some factions over others. In the past the factions with really nutty and destructive ideas didn't have much influence over policy. A faction that believed the family repressive and wanted to weaken it, for example, would have a hard time prevailing over the general feeling that the family ought to be kept strong -- unless Hollywood began backing the anti-family faction. A faction that wanted to lower performance standards so that Blacks could do better relative to Whites wouldn't have made much headway -- without media backing.
When the Jews began gaining control over the mass media of news and entertainment early in the 20th century, they began using their growing influence over public opinion to favor the factions with the most destructive ideas and goals. The Jews not only backed feminist policies, for example; they actually supplied most of the feminist writers and propagandists themselves. They not only supplied most of the money and brains behind the postwar drive for a muticultural society, they also launched programs to weaken the opposition by undermining the character of the White population. In the 1960s, during the drive to weaken and discredit the forces of tradition, the Jews were the prime movers, and the mass media were their indispensable weapons.
I apologize for this crude and unscientific explanation of the fact of the moral decay of White America. I believe, however, that if you look soberly and carefully at the evidence all around you, you will find that there is much truth in what I have said.