Posted on 03/12/2009 5:34:47 AM PDT by IbJensen
The U.S. Senate engaged in a floor debate yesterday regarding the controversial confirmation vote of David Ogden as deputy attorney general. Mr. Ogden’s nomination has come under fire because of his legal work on behalf of the porn industry, as well as his efforts to weaken abortion laws. The Senate vote is expected today.
Mr. Ogden’s nomination was sent to the full Senate after winning approval in the Judiciary Committee by a 14-5 margin.
U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., is the ranking minority member on the committee. Despite the Judiciary Committee receiving 11,000 calls urging the rejection of Mr. Ogden, Mr. Specter voted to send the nomination to the floor, and stated he would vote to confirm the nominee.
“My net conclusion is that he ought to be confirmed,” Mr. Specter said. “I say that based upon a resume that is very strong, both academically and professionally. Then there is the consideration that the president is entitled to select his appointees within broad limits. The deputy attorney general, while important, is not a lifetime appointment as a judge,” he said.
Mr. Specter also expressed concerns the attorney general did not have any deputies at the Department of Justice (DOJ), which has been functioning for nearly two months.
Another of Mr. Specter’s considerations is his view that a lawyer should not necessarily be held accountable for his client’s beliefs.
“[Some of] the objections raised call into focus the issue asto whether an attorney ought to be judged on the basis of arguments he has made in the representation of a client,” Mr. Specter said. “I believe it is accurate to say that the prevailing view is not to bind someone to those arguments.
Mr. Specter cited an article authored by two former Justice Department officials who served under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush that advances the thesis that a lawyer is not necessarily expressing his own views when he represents a client.
Many opponents of the Ogden nomination expressed outrage that someone with a porn industry background would even be considered for the second highest post in the Department of Justice.
“No one who has devoted a career advocating for the ‘right’ of individuals, including pedophiles, to purchase and possess child pornography can be trusted with the responsibility of protecting children and families or prosecuting criminals generally. Yet President Obama has made that choice in
nominating David Ogden,” Family Research Council (FRC) Action President Tony Perkins said in a statement.
The FRC stated its intention include the senate vote on the Ogden nomination in its annual Vote
Scorecard, which tracks votes in Congress relating to family issues.
“We will make every effort to inform the American people how each of their two Senators voted on this far left nomination,” said Mr. Perkins.
A former Justice Department official explained why the Ogden nomination has been so controversial. “Mr. Ogden has not just represented major pornographers in prominent cases. He has been a leader in an effort to get courts to proclaim greater protections for pornography and pornographers,” said Pat Trueman, now an attorney in private practice in Virginia.
Mr. Trueman stressed that Mr. Ogden “volunteered to represent plaintiffs challenging the Children’s Internet Protection Act,” (CIPA) which was designed to protect children by keeping pornography from school and public library computers.
According to Mr. Trueman, Ogden insisted that the Congress acted “unconstitutionally” when it passed CIPA. “Children should not be exposed to pornography in schools and libraries. Yet David Ogden believes the Constitution requires it.”
Michael Geer, president of the Pennsylvania Family Institute (PFI) in Harrisburg, has been urging Pennsylvania’s senators to vote against the Ogden nomination. The institute’s website cited a number of reasons why PFI opposed Mr. Ogden.
“As an attorney in private practice, David Ogden has filed briefs for virtually unlimited abortion license, including opposing Pennsylvania’s informed consent law and against laws requiring parental consent for minors seeking abortions. He pushed for gays in the military. And he filed briefs that claim 14 and 15 year-olds are fully mature enough to decide to have an abortion, but 17 and 18 year-olds are not mature enough to be held fully responsible for decisions to commit murder,” Mr. Geer’s Web site stated.
Additionally, PFI pointed out that Mr. Ogden worked to promote Oregon’s law permitting physician-assisted suicide, and that he has, on numerous occasions, gone to court to defend pornographers.
The organization says Mr. Ogden represented the American Library Association in opposing laws requiring obscenity filters on library and school computers. He also challenged the Child Protection and Obscenity Act of 1988, claiming it was too burdensome to require pornographers to verify that their “models” were over 18 as they produce porn films and photos.
The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins urged all senators to “vote no” on Mr. Ogden. “The American people deserve a Justice Department that will aggressively prosecute those who violate our laws, not someone who has sought to defend and justify some of the most despicable people in our country,” said
Mr. Trueman, the former DOJ official, said he didn’t think President Obama nominated Mr. Ogden to “help” pornographers. “I think he just doesn’t care,” he said. “One would think that Ogden’s past work would eliminate him from consideration. After all, the overwhelming majority of the public must still oppose child pornography and want children protected from pornography in public libraries.”
He added, “it seems that our president just doesn’t care what people think as long as his core group of left-leaning supporters — and that includes more than half the U.S. Senate — support him.”
Mr. Specter concluded his remarks by stating:
“I think those who have raised objections have done so, obviously, in good faith. They are entitled to have their objections considered and to know that the Judiciary Committee is giving very careful analysis to their facts and will do so on the consideration of other nominees.”
I raise my objection, within good faith. we need no specters. I mean really how retarded is this?
Please go away.
At least with Olympia Snow and the other lady you know who they are and what they will do. This, OTOH, is in there only because the Party came to his assistance when the chips were down in his re-election campaign. And let it be known that most conservatives asked, pleaded, begged and then demanded that George Bush and the Party throw him under the next passing bus!
We need to remember when we've been ignored by the GOP powers-that-be and the results have been exactly what conservatives feared. We keep doing the same thing over and over, the same way, but expecting a different result. Mental health professionals have a term for that, “Mentally Ill!”
I will continue to vote Republican, but only because it's usually that or much worse. But the minute there is another choice you can bet I'll be on that bus, hopefully the bus under which all the Rino’s have been tossed!
I can't wait for someone to come along, as did Reagan, and shout out, loud and clear, that he or she is a CONSERVATIVE and proud of it. And then walk the walk. No more of this BS of saying 'conservative' and then acting 'moderate' or 'centrist' or whatever! If you say conservative and then advocate any sort of amnesty or anything short of putting the US Marines on the border with Mexico and shooting on sight anyone who tries to breach that border then it's off the bus for you. A hundred years ago, in the early days of automobiles, there was a song, "Get Out and Get Under" that talked about how often you had to get out of the auto and get under it to get it running again. I suggest a new song for the GOP, "Throw Out and Throw Under!" And until there's a choice on the ballot that meets my needs then they can do without my vote, and my money. Period. "Making a list and checking it twice" is my new motto. On that list are things like controlling the border, no bailouts, picture ID to vote, smaller government, you don't work you don't eat, you have a God-given right to arm and protect you and yours, education is to teach the three R's of reading 'riteing and 'rithmetic, taxes are to support the LEGITIMATE purposes of government not to affect behavior, the military is for breaking things and killing people not for social engineering to try the latest liberal ideas, government is a necessary evil and should be as small as possible, capitalism is the ONLY road to economic success and government's only role is to stay the hell out of the way, marriage is a God thing, not a state thing and it's between one man and one woman, radical Islam and its crazy adherents are a very real and present danger to our way of life and must be opposed by any means necessary including the nukeing of Mecca if that what it takes, congress critters are just people and not royalty and need to serve a term or two and move along, America is a gift from God to the world and it's not wrong to stand up and proclaim that and get a tear in your eye when the flag goes by. The list goes on an on, but you get my drift. Every point on the list is a single point and it's there because it served America well for 200 years. Our problems started when we began to ignore the list and go with new and untried theories about how to run a nation and a society. It's time for the people to come to the party, not the party to try to go to the people. It's that simple.
I like what you say.
Annnnnnd IMO Ogden should be examined by a Psychiatrist to find his true beliefs on Porn, Child Porn and Child Molesters. THEN we'd know if he was "only defending his clients point of view". Or, if he himself is one sick b@st@rd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.