David Ogden - please write or call your reps
Posted By: Zville MT on 2009-02-11
In Reply to:
Obama has picked a man called David Ogden to be deputy Attorney-General. Ogden has made his legal career from representing pornographers, trying to defeat child protection legislation and undermining family values. As reported this week, he once represented a group of library directors arguing against the Children's Internet Protection Act, which ordered libraries and schools receiving funding for the Internet to restrict access to obscene sites. And on behalf of several media groups, he successfully argued against a child pornography law that required publishers to verify and document the age of their models, which would have ensured these models were at least 18.
The Family Research Council has more examples of his contribution to upholding American and western values. In one such case, he expressed the view that abortion was less damaging to a woman than having children:
In sum, it is grossly misleading to tell a woman that abortion imposes possible detrimental psychological effects when the risks are negligible in most cases, when the evidence shows that she is more likely to experience feelings of relief and happiness, and when child-birth and child-rearing or adoption may pose concomitant (if not greater) risks or adverse psychological effects ...
In another, co-authored brief, he argued that it was an unconstitutional burden on 14-year old girls seeking an abortion for their parents to be notified -- because there was no difference between adults and mid-teens in their ability to grasp all the implications of such a decision:
There is no question that the right to secure an abortion is fundamental. By any objective standard, therefore, the decision to abort is one that a reasonable person, including a reasonable adolescent, could make. [E]mpirical studies have found few differences between minors aged 14-18 and adults in their understanding of information and their ability to think of options and consequences when asked to consider treatment-related decisions. These unvarying and highly significant findings indicate that with respect to the capacity to understand and reason logically, there is no qualitative or quantitative difference between minors in mid-adolescence, i.e., about 14-15 years of age, and adults.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
No...I like David Ogden.
This is old news that has been hashed out on the Politics forum and the Faith forum ad nauseum. I support President Obama's choice of David Ogden and will not be calling or writing anyone about it.
I stand by David Ogden.....
It is his legal ethical duty to represent his clients, not his beliefs. My parents decided I was too young to raise a child at 15 and forced me to have an abortion. Yes, the relief was enormous.....as well as the guilt. I got over it and am glad they made that decision for me.
Maybe we can get David Ogden to defend him? LOLOLOL!
Nothing like a hypocrite take a fall to make MY day!
You write/fax/call your state senators over and over and over
--
Ogden basically feels that
censorship is unconstitutional. That was his reason for not having restrictions on certain websites in libraries and schools. However, as a parent, I do not feel comfortable knowing that people can go to porn sites in libraries where my child might see this or at school where children might pull this stuff up. If people want to look at porn on the internet, they can feel free to buy their own computer and watch it from the privacy of their home, but not where children can see. Also, I do not see why it was important to Ogden to oppose a law stating porn distributors had to verify with documentation the age of their models. Doing away with this law would make child pornography easier to do. Having a law making them prove the models age, to me, is a responsible thing to do and also will prevent underage children being used in lewd sexual acts.
I just cannot support a man who would not allow restrictions for obscene sights in public libraries and schools and not see why it is important to have laws to verify that a person is of legal age to be involved in pornography.
Seriously, pornography is intended for the privacy of our homes with adults. Not in public places or involving children whether those children be watching or actually involved in the porn.
This is not a personal attack on Obama. I honestly wouldn't like anyone if they had these views on pornography. I personally feel that all appointees should be scrutinized whether it be dem or pub. I think if we hold them to higher standards than we have, maybe we will start getting some honest people in Washington.
Ogden Nash..."The Rhinoceros" - sm
The rhino is a homely beast,
For human eyes he's not a feast.
Farewell, farewell, you old rhinoceros,
I'll stare at something less prepoceros.
You didn't read the AP news story on Ogden?
I posted it below in a post yesterday.
Oh gt, you think all reps are liars.
I just heard on TV that all the reps from PA ...
voted no. Heard it on the local news. I also heard that it was many of the Democratic leadership that voted no...heads of committees. That is what leads me to believe that the Dems were not going to vote in majority by design...for the reason you said. They don't want to be in majority passing it because it is identified with Bush and if the bailout fails...there they are, supporting a failed Bush policy. Can't have that.
And Reps want the church to tell me what to do.
nm
Who do you think pays the salaries of the Sens and Reps?
Our tax dollars pay their salaries, so under Obama's thinking, we should be able to cap thier salaries. Think that's ever gonna happen? That's right, they just got a raise - so much for not being rewarded for failure.
I bet a lot of Dems and Reps won't be reelected this time.
Support your local moderates, whichever major party they might represent. And in this election cycle, please don't waste your vote on third party candidates who cannot win. Wasted votes will only serve to let the incumbents sneak back to Washington. After the entrenched power base has been broken up, third parties will have a better chance to make some gains in future elections.
Okay. Then let's have David Freddoso...
moderate it.
David Freddos once said - s/m
<< All things in Moderation.>> So maybe he would be the best choice as a moderator. All things do come down to how they are moderated, especially in an election debate.
Geez. I thought we were talking about media reps
Apparently this subject STRETCHES all over the place to encompass unfounded smears, just as I suspected. O supporters all along have understood the nearly insurmountable challenges ANY candidate will be facing in the aftermath of W's scorched earth reign. No deadlines apply. All I expect is for him to do his best with it all and feel confident in trusting him to do just that.
I didn't say I wanted our reps to ignore the calls.
it appears that is what they are doing...ignoring the embittered partisan protests (the likes of which I took issue with in my original post) and hammering out a compromise. In other words, they are doing their jobs. i.e., coming up with something that will move us forward and float SOMETHING that will address the ECONOMY, not partisan interests. So no, your assumption that I am proud of this would be false and your indignation, misplaced.
I agree, and I have written to two of my reps, Whitehouse and Reed, what about you??....sm
I am not talking ideology here, I said I was a "traitor Democrat" jokingly because even though I carry the party affiliation with my in my voting records, I do not vote along straight party lines, and I can admit when my president does something wrong, unlike many others here. I want what is right for my country. why not give O a chance and find ways to help him see where changes have to be made, he has crossed over the aisle before, and plans to do so over his administration. We he be entirely successful? No one is giving him the chance or support to find out, everyone wants a genie in a bottle who will "POOF" make all those big bad problems disappear, erase all the wrong-doing of previous administrations (and Yes, that includes Bill Clinton at times), LET'S FOCUS ON THE PROBLEM AT HAND AND AT THE FUTURE.
David Brooks - New York Times - sm
David Brooks is an objective analyst and I believe his column in today's NYT is very interesting. I see him on PBS along with Mark Shields and always find him fair and nonpartisan.
Google David Brooks or New York Times and take a look at his article today.
Beautiful psalm, written by David
This is a beautiful psalm, written by David, not by G-d, and therefore, is not part of Jewish law.
David Rees is a satirist. This is supposed to
??
My husband does just that. He is on the phone weekly with our sens and reps. state and federal. sm
Our congressment and senators et AL are on speed dial. If my husband has a beef or a question, he is on the phone letting them know (nicely of course) that they screwed up. But on the other hand he does call and tell them thank you when they do something right. One of the congressmen from Michigan voted no on the bailout. So he got a call from both of us. Same with the senator from Michigan who voted FOR the bailout. He got a call saying he has just lost 2 votes. We may be a minority, but the aides in those offices know who my husband is..and all he has to say is his first name. If you keep the heat on, hopefully things can change. Maybe not right away, but hopefully at some time. Just not in my lifetime I am afraid.
Interesting Bhutto interview with David Frost.sm
She is talking about the man who murdered Osama bin Laden. She did not stutter, she did not retract it, and no one corrected her. I guess this is why they can't find him - he's dead. Go to the 6:00 minute mark on the clip and listen for 30 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIO8B6fpFSQ
David Horowitz on "Obama Derangement Syndrome"
I don't think they make 'em much more conservative than Mr. Horowitz. I've never agreed with anything he's had to say, and I disagree with a few statements in this piece, but I totally agree with its premise.
December 08, 2008, 4:00 a.m.
Obama Derangement Syndrome
Shut up about the birth certificate.
By David Horowitz
The continuing efforts of a fringe group of conservatives to deny Obama his victory and to lay the basis for the claim that he is not a legitimate president is embarrassing and destructive. The fact that these efforts are being led by Alan Keyes, a demagogue who lost a Senate election to the then-unknown Obama by 42 points, should be a warning in itself.
This tempest over whether Obama, the child of an American citizen, was born on American soil is tantamount to the Democrats’’ seditious claim that Bush ""stole"" the election in Florida and hence was not the legitimate president. This delusion helped to create the Democrats’’ Bush derangement syndrome and encouraged Democratic leaders to lie about the origins of the Iraq war, and regard it as illegitimate as Bush himself. It became ""Bush’’s War"" rather than an American War —— with destructive consequences for our troops and our cause.
The birth-certificate zealots are essentially arguing that 64 million voters should be disenfranchised because of a contested technicality as to whether Obama was born on U.S. soil. (McCain narrowly escaped the problem by being born in the Panama Canal zone, which is no longer American.)
What difference does it make to the future of this country whether Obama was born on U.S. soil? Advocates of this destructive campaign will argue that the constitutional principle regarding the qualifications for president trumps all others. But how viable will our Constitution be if five Supreme Court justices should decide to void 64 million ballots?
Conservatives are supposed to respect the organic nature of human societies. Ours has been riven by profound disagreements that have been deepening over many years. We are divided not only about political facts and social values, but also about what the Constitution itself means. The crusaders on this issue choose to ignore these problems and are proposing to deny the will of 64 million voters by appealing to five Supreme Court Justices (since no one is delusional enough to think that the four liberal justices are going to take the presidency away from Obama). What kind of conservatism is this?
It is not conservatism; it is sore loserism and quite radical in its intent. Respect for election results is one of the most durable bulwarks of our unity as a nation. Conservatives need to accept the fact that we lost the election, and get over it; and get on with the important business of reviving our country’’s economy and defending its citizens, and —— by the way —— its Constitution.
—— David Horowitz is the author of Party of Defeat.
|
Newsletter: MADONNA SAYS SHE OFFERED DAVID'S FATHER MONEY..sm
Madonna appeared on NBC's Today show yesterday (Wednesday, November 1st) to talk about her plans to adopt 13-month-old David Banda of Malawi. She told host Meredith Viera that the boy's father, Yohane Banda, refused her financial offer to help raise his son. Madge said, When I met (Yohane), I said I would be happy to bring (David) back to your village and help you financially raise him. And he said no. She added, I think he truly felt in his heart of hearts that -- and who knows if he was telling me the truth -- that he would have a better life with me. So, when he said no, that was my sign that it was my responsibility to look after him.
Madonna also said that she was saddened by all of the criticism surrounding her decision to adopt David, adding that a week ago she was in the depths of my depression about the negativity and the state of the world. She thinks that racism has something to do with the reaction as well, saying, I think a lot of people have a problem with the fact that I've adopted an African child, a child who has a different color skin than I do...I think it's still considered taboo. You know, I have people say to me on the streets, 'Why did you adopt a black child?'
As for David, Madonna said he's doing well, describing him as very flirtatious and hysterically funny. He also has a temper.
More of Madonna's interview will air today (Thursday, November 2nd).
Meanwhile, David's father said in a recent interview, Madonna was like a bulldozer who has cleared the way for a better life for my son, according to the Associated Press.
Madonna's new children's book, The English Roses, Too Good To Be True, came out last week.
Tucker Carlson interviews David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor sm
He is a theology professor and member of Scholars for 911 Truth (one of those on the fringe loonies they keep telling you about - you will see he is not).
Check out Tucker's new look (I am LMAO). He is not wearing his trademark bow tie, and looks like he set his hair with curlers.
http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?f=00&g=2a3290a0-4b79-4bf5-8119-b91b7dede110&p=News_Comment%20-%20Analysis&t=m5&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8063292/&fg=
Call me what you want, just don't call me late for dinner. LOL....
GP, I like your sense of humor.
You call it hysteria, some call it concern for the
nm
How many did it take to write this note?
Just wondering.
I know you didn't write it. sm
Another obvious glaring error. Bill Clinton. Not on the list.
They need to write a better bill
This is a mute point now, because the bill was vetoed by the Pres.and for good reason. Why do we have to accept bad bills? This was a poorly written bill, and that's the reason it was vetoed. Why all the vagueness? $83,000 per year is hardly poverty level. If this bill was truly going to help poor kids then write it that way. I don't understand why it has to be so vague. To me it reeks of dishonesty and pork.
Write a good understandable bill...what's the problem with that?
You need to write some more posts
on this board because you really seem to know what you are talking about. Maybe you can explain the popular vote versus the electorial vote to some of the people in posts further up that don't believe thier votes count.
Can't you still write in your vote for someone else?
because they don't like either candidate. Actually, I'm in that boat right now. I don't like either one of them. OTOH, I want to vote because it's my one chance to be "heard," even though I largely agree that the media and politicians have already chosen a president for us (look at Ron Paul--he was able to garner such a large following online where the media couldn't control the people that I think they were actually worried he'd throw a kink in their plan so he was basically shut out in the media). If they weren't trying to control our vote, why else do they shut out any coverage on certain candidates and cover every word said by others? Why wouldn't they just cover all equally and fairly? I'm looking into whether I can still write in a candidate other than the 2 yahoos the current media has chosen for us. Wouldn't it be wild if everyone wrote in someone else and that person won out over both of them? LOL I know, it's a dream, but still, it'd be really cool if that happened and showed the media and politicans of this country that USA is still run BY THE PEOPLE!
What possible write-in candidate has all the necessary
exists, then why were they not nominated?
Maybe he will just write a check... sm
That's what my son used to tell me to do when I told him I didn't have any money. "Just write a check, Mommy," 
Levity, people........... LEVITY!!!!
Interestingly, you write:
"Obama is flying on the premise that he is innocent until proven guilty..."
That's what the Constitution you claim to support so much demands: Innocent until proven guilty (and not a word about "flying on the premise" of same).
I'm just curious. Once this bogus b/c issue is "officially" revealed as such by the SC, you have promised to let this issue go.
What's next on your list to pound this man into the ground about? Because it's obvious that you're never going to give him an honest, fair chance to be a good president. (He hasn't even been sworn in yet.)
So what's the next bogus issue on the agenda that will be raised to continue to try to drag him (and the country) down?
My last question: Did you complain as vigorously about George W. Bush's blatant contempt for the Constitution that you claim to love so much?
The one who is going to write a book
for our country and how he kept our country safe for the last 7 years from terrorists. He could not state it while he was in office, but now he can write a whole book about him being in office. I felt much more secure with Bush than I will with O as he still scares me.
I was just going to write that. No message
x
I did not the write the post, CNN did.
I am glad Obama succeeded in a human life. Hopefully Obama will succeed in the 2 wars of many and the economy, etc. I am glad the Captain was rescued by the SEALs.
If you do not like what I write, MOVE ON.
Your own words. Stick to it and do as you preach.
My goodness - you'd better write and tell someone
Hardly quite that simple or people way smarter than you or I would have solved it. The studies on the effectiveness of preventive measures, incidentally, study people who DO participate in prevention - not those who don't.
you can write to the network
I did and let them know they should be embarrassed for pimping themselves out for this biased promotion instead of two-sided reporting on an issue and told them one less viewer would be looking to them for any attempt at fair reporting. There is a link on their website to contact them.
Relax, I didn't write it.
It was simply for amusement and speculation, not of scientific value.
The Democrats did not write this book.
A man who calls himself a **Christian conservative** did. He was I believe the #2 man on the **faith-based initiative program.** His name is David Kuo. He is a Republican. I think he will be on 60 minutes tonight. I have seen a couple of recognizable names from the Christian right denounce the white house after hearing some of the things Kuo writes. I am anxious to hear what Kuo himself says.
I am a Christian and I do not feel stiffled at all about voting.
Exactly...well, they did manage to write and get passed...
one piece of legislation...the "reform" bill that was supposed to straighten out Fannie/Freddie...instead was the straw that broke the camel's back...forced them to offer those floating rate mortgages to low and moderate income people and the creditworthiness of said people was not to be an issue. The floating rates went UP, and a bazillion people went into foreclosure, and if the Bush admin had not stepped in and taken over, the economy could very well have collapsed. The "reform" bill, plus the crooked Dems at the top of Fannie/Freddie, just about did us in this time. Other than that piece of legislation, they have not done a blessed thing in the year they have been in charge. That is why their approval rating is in the tank.
Not voting for Obama either. Will write someone in instead. nm
//
Well, then explain to us how voting for a write-in
Nobody ever agrees completely with ANY candidates full agenda. You pretty much have to look for the main ideas that matter to you most, at that particular point in history. Sometimes you have to vote for those, and let other principles ride for a while. Not easy, and I HATE letting anything slide in order to vote for what is a more pressing issue to me. But the 'perfect candidate' has not, does not, and never will exist. So we've gotta do the best we can with what we've got to work with.
Boy, that never gets old. Never. You should write Osamabama's speeches.
nm
Don't worry, I'll still write. nm
x
I can't write too fast anymore, but here's what I did get
1. Fiscal Stimulus Plan: Before or after inauguration (sp). Wants to get it moving quickly, but if he has to wait until January 20, so be it, but states he will try during these couple months to push one through now.
2. Retooling assistance plan for automakers for fuel-effieicnt cars. He realizes that the auto industry employs thousands and other companies depend on the auto industry for their jobs. Wants this package done quickly.
3. Review implementaion of plans and not rewarding management for housing problems that are caused.
4. Grow middle class in the long term.
Reporters asked questions but couldn't get them all.
1. He wants to help the states financially.
2. As to going to other countries for conferences: He is developing a team and weighing all his options. Iran's nuclear weapons are unacceptable along with the militants. This has to cease. It's not something he can do in a knee-jerk fashion and wants to be careful (not to p--s them off).
3. Tax plan: 95% of WORKING Americans will get it. His first goal is tax relief for struggling families and to build the economy from the bottom up.
That's all I could get.
Hillary can write another book
And her debt will be wiped clean or pretty near to it. She just is greedy and wants everyone to pay for her expenses. Her and Bill make enough money to wipe out their (or her) debt.
This is ridiculous that the DNC is asking people to give for them. We're already going to be paying a ton for the bail outs they gave a few weeks ago.
M, did u write the post Vie is referring to?
just wondering
|
