Maybe we can get David Ogden to defend him? LOLOLOL!
Posted By: sm on 2009-02-11
In Reply to: ROFL.....(nm) - Just the big bad
Nothing like a hypocrite take a fall to make MY day!
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.
David Ogden - please write or call your reps
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.
lololol....
I end up ignoring most of them, and stop reading....
Funny too, if you think about it. I thought they were supposed to be full of hope, change, and love, and all that Obama stuff. If you don't agree with them, they be nasty!!
Hey, Libby, DeeDee and DixieDew, the neocons think we are the same poster, LOLOLOL
LOL, it is you who is far fetched. So, now Im Libby, DeeDee and DixieDew? You are comical, in kind of a sad pitiful way. Kind of like an ancient demented aunt.
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.
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.
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
??
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=
Would you defend her?
Thursday, March 9, 2006
Last modified Wednesday, March 8, 2006 11:16 PM PST
Woman sues for alleged firing over talk show bumper sticker
By: TERI FIGUEROA - Staff Writer
VISTA ---- A San Diego County woman is suing her former employer, accusing her manager of firing her on the spot when she saw the woman's car had a bumper sticker advertising a progressive talk radio station.
The suit also alleges that, after seeing the sticker, the employer commented that the woman could be a member of al-Qaida.
In a civil suit filed at the county courthouse in Vista, Linda Laroca is targeting both her former manager, Beverly Fath, and the company she briefly worked for last year, Advantage Sales and Marketing, Inc.
Neither Laroca nor the defendants could be reached for comment Wednesday. Laroca's attorney declined comment.
Laroca, who was hired by the company as a sales representative, is seeking lost wages and damages for wrongful termination for violations of both public policy and the state labor code. She is also claiming state constitutional violations and emotional distress.
The California labor code prohibits employers from controlling or directing the political activities of employees.
According to Laroca's suit, the bumper sticker in question read only: 1360 Air America Progressive Talk Radio.
The nationwide syndicated radio programming from left-wing Air America, which describes itself as progressive entertainment talk radio features show hosts such as comedian and author Al Franken. The network programming is carried locally by radio station KLSD 1360 AM.
A call to Clear Channel-owned KLSD on Wednesday afternoon was not immediately returned.
In her Feb. 21 claim, Laroca asserts that on Oct. 8, three weeks after she started working for the marketing company, Fath called her on a Saturday and requested they meet at a nearby grocery store parking lot so Laroca could pass on some documents Fath needed.
During the brief encounter, Laroca charges, the manager pointed to the bumper sticker ---- the only one on Laroca's car ---- and remarked that it was a new sticker and called it that Al Franken left-wing radical radio station.
Laroca alleges in her suit that Fath then told her, The country is on a high state of alert. For all I know, you could be al-Qaida.
A stunned Laroca laughed nervously at the statement, the suit alleges, and then was dealt the final blow when Fath fired her on the spot.
Not asking you to defend ... just an fyi...
in looking for answers to DW's question as to who was opposing the expansion and why, I ran onto an explanation of the President's health care proposal...which I hate to admit, I did not know the particulars of, because no one in media is reporting it. It was in article by the HEW Secretary. At any rate...Bush proposes a $15,000 tax cut for every American family who buys their own private health insurance. It is estimated that it would cover 20 million more American families...the whole family, not just the children...where the SCHIP expansion would only cover 3 million more, and a good many of those newly eligible kids (under higher income limits) are already covered by private health insurance, according to the CBO study commissioned by the bipartisan congressional committee looking at the SCHIP expansion. What that basically means is that children already covered by private insurance would leave that and go to a public assistance program.
Just some alternative information. You do not need to respond and I am not trying to pick a fight. Just giving information.
AW, I am disappointed that you would defend
anyone on these boards wishing anyone else to burn in hell for eternity, particularly two very young and inexperienced women.
As far as the conservative board, if it is a "cesspool," it is at least in part because conservative posters cannot post conservative opinions there without being attacked relentlessly. I suppose it is fortunate for the liberals on this board that they have not had to experience such conditions when voicing their liberal opinions here.
So, how do you defend Mr. O's back-
the comments, the associations, etc......ROFL.
as usual....can't defend...
//
Do you also defend the innocent
people in our local prisons because I'm sure that there are a few in there who are actually innocent......however, most of them are NOT.
As for me not knowing for sure whether they were indeed tortured or not......how do you know that they were tortured? Were you there? Did you talk to them? Do you have a pin pal at Gitmo, do ya?
I'm sure there are some innocent men at Gitmo but this is war. It was war when the terrorists killed thousands of Americans in one day and then celebrated their actions. We have gone from a 9/11 mentality to a pre 9/11 mentality. We seem to have forgetten that we were attacked and that these people desire nothing more than our death.
You mean you defend all people who
are innocent. You cannot know someone else's heart no matter how much you want to think you do. When it comes to these terrorists, they have only one feeling for America and Americans - cold, calculated, murderous, black, hate! You need to wake up to this fact and accept it. I hope you do not think for a moment they would try to defend you for anything. They would cut your heart out and roast it in a NY minute!
I'm sure you defend Cindy Sheehan just the same, don't you?
Not a bet I'd take.
I certainly don't defend the remarks, but they were taken out of context
Obviously, the example Bennett used of aborting every black child was a very poorly thought out example, but his remarks were also taken grossly out of context by the mainstream media. He went on say it would be a morally reprehensible thing to do. He was commenting on the idiots that said that crime or poverty was down since the legalizing of abortion. He thinks abortion of any kind is wrong...he was turning their logic around on them. He certainly does not think that every black baby should be aborted. GRANTED, there are radical right wingers (the KKK, aryan nation etc.) would think this was a great idea, but they are radical and not the mainstream as Ms. Libby FALSELY stated...
Go ahead and defend a racist
even if it's so out of character for a liberal.
Sheez! How do Repubs defend this?
Boggles the mind! But also learned another curious thing tonight - several people have told me they can't buy any ammunition for their guns, I think they told me AR15's or whatever the civilian model of an M16 is? - they said the rounds are not available by mail or at stores and they are told it's all being stopped at the ports and sent to Iraq. Say what??
Anybody else having a similar experience or know anything else about this? Would be curious to know if the situation in Iraq is really so bad that all civilian ammo has to be confiscated so it can be sent there.
Hard to defend something that isn't happening.
No problem getting ammo here in the great NW.
I am not going to defend Free Republic sm
only because no website knows who it is that is posting on it. I used to post on FR but they banned me because I didn't walk lock-step with their philosophy, which does not tolerate dissent. However, I have seen death threats right here on this site, so linking this guy to a web site isn't really relative. I hope they prosecute him. He is sick.
Not necessary to defend Obama. He's doing just fine
.
Nice try. Once again, only way to defend Obama is
nm
I defend anyone who tried to save thousands of
nm
I defend all innocent people....nm
nm
I hope you're not one of the ones who defend the lies that ...sm
launched the war in Iraq ???
If so, the hypocrisy is reeking.
You are absolutely right. And I certainly do not defend Bush on most things.
But as I said in my post to Lurker below, this is not exactly the political forum I am used to posting in. I just could not resist commenting on this issue as I feel it is deeply disturbing and all parents should look at this closely.
Even Newt Gingrich can't *defend the indefensible*
if you missed it on Hannity and Colmes, you can see the video here. Newt in his own words. Definitely worth watching.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/05/12.html#a8260
When you can't defend the present why do you always bring up the past?
Why do you defend killing of innocent civilians?
I have never said I defend Hezbollah. I don't defend Hezbollah. They're terrorists, and they're horrible.
But blindly defending Israel, regardless of what they do, doesn't work for me either. What is most disquieting to me is that you defend Israel's placement of landmines to kill innocent civilians, designed to go off at a later date when people least expect it? Why don't you consider that terrorism, as well?
I don't see how a conservative, prolifer could attempt to defend his statements...nm
x
My post ' I defend all innocent people' was a reply to the
question
'Do you also defend the innocent people in our local prisons because I'm sure that there are a few in there who are actually innocent..'
Even quoting the New Testament here will not defend the horrifying tragedy what was the Bush adminis
nm
|
