You never see conservatives concerned about this kind of government waste, but it’s quite ridiculous to have people being paid to look at material that is constitutionally protected free speech.
Tom Rogers, a retired Indianapolis detective, toils away most days in his suburban home office reviewing sexual Web sites and other Internet traffic to see whether they qualify as obscene material whose purveyors should be prosecuted by the Justice Department.
His work is financed by a Justice Department grant initially provided through a Congressional earmark inserted into a spending bill by Representative Frank R. Wolf, Republican of Virginia.
The grant, about $150,000 a year, has helped pay for Mr. Rogers and another retired law enforcement officer in Reno, Nev., to harvest and review complaints about obscene matter on the Internet that citizens register on the Justice Department Web site.
In the last few years, 67,000 citizens’ complaints have been deemed legitimate under the program and passed on to the Justice Department and federal prosecutors.
The number of prosecutions resulting from those referrals is zero.
Dude, how do I get slice of that?
Here’s a hot tip for the Justice Department:
http://www.page3.com/gallery3/
That would be Rupert Murdoch’s pornagraphy you are looking at. Another “family values” hypocrite.
The money and manpower would be much better spent on other projects. No Doubt. HOWEVER, this is only $150K we’re talking about. On a 0 to 10 scale of Government Waste, this rates about .6. If we get rid of this program, we’ll be able to afford that new gym in 53 years!
So, basically, Farris, you’re okay with the government paying people to look at porn? It’s a waste, but it isn’t that much money? Remember, your tax dollars. Or, as per dugger, your sweat equity at work.
Like I said, cut me off a slice.
$150K to download naughty pictures at work?
I’m underpaid.
$150k to download dirty pictures of womyn having teh sex, nothing for operations to catch Osama bin Laden. Telling.
Duros, I mean this in the nicest way possible: are you literate? I’m having a hard time coming up with a rationale as to how you missed the beginning of my post.
And all this time I’ve been doing it for free?! Jesus, where the hell is the want ad for that job listed? Even Craigslist might find that a little too skanky.
No, I got it. It looks like you are saying Phht, what’s the big deal?
While it looks like a waste of money, because you dirty hippie liberals are opposed to it, I’ll just say its mountains and molehills.
It would be okay for you to agree with us once in a while, you know. We won’t tell anyone.
“The number of prosecutions resulting from those referrals is zero. ”
In other words, each time a case is submitted the US Attorney says, “Nope, that’s protected. Nope, protected.”
The whole thing’s just for show for the looneys
Here’s a better idea, repeal obscenity and indecency laws. Make the justice department deal with worst problems.
You need to up that waste number Farris.
67,000 case referrals. That has got to waste someone’s time at the DOJ. Even if all they do is hit the delete button or throw the files in the trash.
That retired guy should set up a decent porn link site while he’s at work, to make it easier for the rest of us volunteers who are constantly online on our watchful quest to save humanity from obscenity.