Game Politics ([info]gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-07-20 06:16:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Entry tags:ads, campaign promises, candidates, congress, democrats, game violence, phil kellam, virgina

Virginia Congressional Candidate Targets Video Game Violence

Yet another candidate for political office has jumped on the video game violence issue.

Phil Kellam, a Democrat running for Congress in Virgina, is currently airing a television ad which discusses the candidate's promise to stop the sale of violent video games to children.

Although GP has not yet seen the ad, its script is available on Kellam's campaign website, and reads, in part:

"A father of two, Phil Kellam knows that in today's world raising and protecting our children is more difficult than ever. That's why in Congress, Phil Kellam will stand with parents; to stop the sale of violent video games to children, and block children's access to websites with violent or sexual content."

A GP shout-out to forum user Skraith for the heads-up on this one...

Want to talk about it? You can discuss this story via the "comments" feature (click below), or in the new GamePolitics Forums...


(25 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Nevermind the video game bit...
[info]startropics
2006-07-20 12:32 pm UTC (link)
How is this guy gonna protect little kids from lovely delicious porn?

(Reply to this)

Another moron guarantees his defeat
[info]beardoggx
2006-07-20 12:36 pm UTC (link)
No surprise that it's another Democrat running his mouth about something that's never going to happen as there are still parents that don't care about ratings.

(Reply to this)

Good luck with that
[info]enmitywithin
2006-07-20 01:04 pm UTC (link)
even if he gets elected, there's basically nothing to fear from would-be "protectors of the children" armed with crappy game laws.

Block internet access? I'd love to see you try.
Block the sale of games? I'd love to see you try and make it constitutional.

(Reply to this)


[info]anticron
2006-07-20 01:39 pm UTC (link)
Ah, election years. It'll be nice when Congress gets back to more important things, like the economy and wars.

(Reply to this)

Fan Fiction
[info]the1jeffy
2006-07-20 02:06 pm UTC (link)
PK: Boy this bandwagon is sure full, eh Hillary?

HC: Sure is, Phil, I think Yee just stepped on my foot.

PK: Will this really get me re-elected, and you into the White House?

HC: You bet! Protecting children from threats that don't exist is easy, and it sure looks good on a resume!

PK: I hope you are right, because it's crowded in here. [Looks at the bandwagon. It's full to overflowing with electioneering politicians]

HC: Look, trust me on this, Phil. No one who plays video games matters. So it's an easy scapegoat. We don't even really have to successfully pass any laws. As long as we rattle our sabres until the issue dies all by itself, we look like we've done something!

PK: Don't you ever feel the slightest guilt in distracting the American public from the real issues, like the increasingly unstable Middle East. Don't you think we should be trying to prevent WWIII, instead of worrying about pixelated booies and pixelated blood?

HC: Don't say that word! Who knows what mic is turned on? Didn't you see what happened to our asshat President? *chuckles*

PK: Yeah, good point, but seriously WWIII - it's looming.

HC: We'll just let Bush turn that stinking pit of the world into a glass factory, then claim we didn't want it that way. Then I'm a shoe-in for 2008! So for now, eyes on the prize! Let's hit video games where it hurts: right in the Freedom of Speech.

PK: You have no soul, do you? Don't you worry that some citizens might be wise to our plan? And might call us out as election-year moralists? Especially since so many of us are in this bandwagon now. It's so full; it's bound to attract notice.

HC: Ha! Soul, I sold that tired, old thing years ago! Americans are vapid morons. All we have to worry about it the courts. Especially since that Jack Thompson character just farted in Louisiana.

PK: I thought something stunk in here.

(Reply to this)


[info]philoetus
2006-07-20 02:28 pm UTC (link)
Phil Kellam knows that in today's world raising and protecting our children is more difficult than ever.

Yes because with each family having fewer and fewer children, infant and childhood mortality at an all time low, not having to worry about childhood diseases that were deadly just a few decades ago, less farming accidents claiming the lives of children ... etc. I can definately see that this point in history children need more protection than at any other time.

...douche

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]gatz111085
2006-07-20 03:17 pm UTC (link)
the real question is: Is the American public really stupid enough to believe he can do these imposssible tasks that he has pledged to do?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]anticron
2006-07-20 05:52 pm UTC (link)
Yes.

Never underestimate the stupidity of the masses. They regularlly fall for the smarm and charm of.. well, anything.

(Reply to this) (Parent)
Just the line I wanted to comment on
[info]jamesweis
2006-07-20 04:04 pm UTC (link)
It's a matter of perspective, grass is always greener... No matter what the issue of the day is, it's ALWAYS the worst that it has ever been and it always USED to be so much better or easier. No one is more important than #1, and of course their parents could have never seen the problems that they do while raising children.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]gatz111085
2006-07-20 02:44 pm UTC (link)
Politicians really are sleazy, it seems they will say anything to get a vote. First he jumps on a subject that has been overturned several times in 1st amendmant cases, second he seeks to block something that CANNOT be blocked, everyone knows you can't censor the internet. It's like Censoring a man yelling curse words in the middle of a city trapped in an impenatrable box that also amplifies the sound of him.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]malarac
2006-07-21 02:08 am UTC (link)
What about China...
people have been jailed due to what they have typed on the internet. So whilst it can't 'censored' so to speak the government can still try.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]goodrobotus
2006-07-20 04:59 pm UTC (link)
"A father of two, Phil Kellam knows that in today's world raising and protecting our children is more difficult than ever'

...And for the main part it is because of stupid governmental laws which tell parents how to raise and discipline their children and take authority away from them.

And this guy thinks continuing the trand is going to help how exactly?

(Reply to this)


[info]velkrin
2006-07-20 05:02 pm UTC (link)
But....but....but....

I wanted to vote Democrat! How about I vote none of the above?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]bigman_k
2006-07-20 08:46 pm UTC (link)
Vote Libertarian. If we all did that instead of voting for the lesser evil that is the Democrats (if you hate Republicans) or Republicans (if you hate the Democrats) then they might actually have a chance of getting in.
Personally i think both parties suck for this and other many other reasons. The Democrats like nanny-state based laws because it's more government involvement, intervention and regulation in our lives and that what socialists/liberal democrats believe in - bigger more involved government in our society, whether we need it or not. The Republicans like these laws because they appeal to the moralist prudes (manily the ultra-religious ones) who want to shove their so-called puritanical beliefs down our throats.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]elfir
2006-07-20 09:00 pm UTC (link)
Move to Tennessee and maybe you can?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]mechboy
2006-07-21 02:13 am UTC (link)
I happen to live in Virginia and I find myself relieved that this guy is not running in my district.

(Reply to this)

"Conserned" Parent:
[info]lightwarriorr
2006-07-21 02:37 am UTC (link)
Wow! this guy sure has my vote!

I don't have to be responsibable anymore or as much as I need to do. Dispite me having house hold power to tell my child what games he can and can't play.

:D Life is GREAT! I'm gonna now take a 18 year vacation and have Ms. Goverment baby sit my kids for me.

(Reply to this)

Which is worse
[info]yoda133113
2006-07-21 06:19 am UTC (link)
Which is worse Thelma Drake (who will win), who SUCKS, or this moron trying to take over parenting.
Sounds like it's time to vote 3rd party, they won't win, but I won't be supporting either.
(note, i'm in that district, so I actually get to vote against those morons)

(Reply to this)

Whatever...
[info]hayabusa75
2006-07-21 12:18 pm UTC (link)
Just another assclown for the circus. I'm sure he'll be every bit as effective as his peers have been. Their whole flippin' entourage reminds me of the Bad News Bears or the Washington Generals...oh wait, those teams actually won once, didn't they?

(Reply to this)


[info]ryukisargi
2006-07-21 05:12 pm UTC (link)
At least he says he's aiming to stop the sales of violent video games to children, not to everyone in general.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]terminator44
2006-07-22 01:29 am UTC (link)
The problem with this approach is that he's targeting ONLY video games (I doubt his "Internet censorship" promise will pan out) and not other forms of violent entertainment, such as movies, books, music, and TV. I'm sorry, but I just can't get behind the logic that it should be illegal for a minor to purchase GTA yet it should be perfectly legal for that same kid to buy Sin City. For crying out loud, that movie has a scence of a guy ripping off another guy's penis! I don't know any video game that has that.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]terminator44
2006-07-21 10:03 pm UTC (link)
And I've read this news after returning from my week-long vacation in Virginia.

Damn you, irony. GOD DAMN YOU TO HELL!!!

Seriously though, does anybody who lives in that state know if this guy has a good chance of getting elected?

(Reply to this)


[info]grimm24
2006-07-21 11:55 pm UTC (link)
[I]"A father of two, Phil Kellam knows that in today's world raising and protecting our children is more difficult than ever. That's why in Congress, Phil Kellam will stand with parents; to stop the sale of violent video games to children, and block children's access to websites with violent or sexual content."[/I]

Yeah its called parenting, you should try it sometime

(Reply to this)

With all this self awareness among us...
[info]lightwarriorr
2006-07-22 01:10 am UTC (link)
Do you think when the next generation coems around we will try to demonize their favorite things?

I'm sure there will still be some of that in every generation...but maybe less?

What about when we all or most of us become parents?

It's just the sad thing here is I predict the best parents in the next generation will be the gamers of today because of all this "protect the childern." BS we are hating right now.....

It's going to be a little different sounding then we actually would have kids? But I know that we would do the right thing and tell our childern no and not let the goverment do things for us.

(Reply to this)

commercial online
[info]thejccalhoun
2006-07-31 10:29 pm UTC (link)
This is kind of late, but the commercial is online
http://www.philkellam.com/content/content.cfm?pageid=Campaign%20Downloads

(Reply to this)

(25 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…