CERTAINLY NOT VERONICA CORNINGSTONE GOING BRALESS
FITSNews – June 11, 2008 – Since a freshly-vanquished State Senator recently referred to our little website as “pornographic” (on hundreds of television advertisements, no less) we figured it was high time we addressed what is – and what isn’t – “pornographic” around here.
Oh, and with the recent barrage of political-related posts, we also figured many of our loyal fans were itching for some visual relief, which we hope the above nipple … err, picture … of Veronica Corningstone provides. Ahh, Veronica … we missed you last night in the Lowcountry, baby! And by the way, Sic Willie is still telling his harem that you didn’t really make him stay on “his side of the bed” …
Anyway, “pornographic” is something you have to pay for, people. It’s purchasable images of sex, typically moving images that stream at several thousand kilobytes a second, and sometimes involve midgets (editor’s note: don’t ask ). “Pornographic” is not a couple of semi-nude pictures of Lindsay Lohan, which is the extent of our PG-13 activities here at FITSNews. Obviously, that’s a difficult concept to grasp in a state like South Carolina (where anything other than “married missionary with the lights off” is expressly prohibited), but that’s the way it is.
Plus, bras are friggin’ uncomfortable for those of you who’ve never had to cart your humps around all day … and the fact that we want to celebrate our sisters releasing their heavy burdens is by no means “porn,” its women’s liberation, baby. Lighten (and enlighten) thyselves, yo!
UPDATE – Oh yeah, when the judges in this country overseeing obscenity cases are also partaking of a little porn themselves, forgive us for being a little pessimistic of the system’s ability to make a fair and impartial assessment.