Senators might want to hold David Ogden’s confirmation hearing after the kids go to bed.
That’s because the man in line to become No. 2 at the nation’s top law enforcement agency was once a strident defender of Playboy and other purveyors of nudity.
And some critics are drawing attention to his risque legal work ahead of his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Thursday. In one case, Ogden paved the way for the blind to enjoy Playboy at the Library of Congress.
“There’s essentially a question of propriety,” said Brian Burch, president of the religious conservative group, Fidelis — which released a critical report on Ogden’s past representation. Burch co-signed a letter this week to committee members raising flags about Ogden, up for deputy attorney general, and other nominees.
Read More
Setting good examples for the young kids in America I see! Which that don’t seem to matter to Obama and the democrats does it? These kind of picks will not help the democrats two years from now or Obama 4 years from now! Sarah Palin you’re looking great for 2012!
Playboy for the blind?
Sarah Palin will not get my vote in 2012. She is a Obama’s supporter. She sounded like a ‘Democrat’.
Who do you like in 2012? Are you the Romney guy?
Is this your idea of freedom – deciding that blind people can’t read a magazine in Braille because you disapprove of the pictures that they can’t even see?
Ooooh, Ogden defended girlie magazines! Grow up. Ogden was defending clients on First Amendment issues. Do you thing the First Amendment isn’t worth defending? Do you think that the LOC should only house material that is suitable for children? Who gets to decide what’s suitable for children?
As usual, the best y’all can come up with is a non-issue. We have bigger fish to fry in this country than this nonsense. The majority of Americans realize that and voted Obama into office. You are very, very out of touch.
What’s more American than Playboy?
I hope you get your blackass berry
Moon Jaguar “We have bigger fish to fry in this country than this nonsense.”
Goodtimepolitics: Yes maybe so, the Obama team picks that are tax dodgers and sex hungry gays and freebee handouts to the couch potatoes! Go figure!
As usual, the best y’all can come up with is a non-issue.
From an interesting article on the Ogden nomination by Brit philosopher Roger Scruton.
The idea that pornography is “speech,” within the meaning of the first amendment, and thereby protected by the Constitution, is so absurd that it is hard for an outsider to see how American judges have been persuaded to accept it again and again. Of course porn is big business, and can afford to keep beating at the doors of the courts. But the real reason for the legalization of pornography in America lies in the culture of the liberal elite and in the strategy of legal activism whereby that elite continues its relentless assault on majority values. Porn has been incorporated into the “culture war” precisely because ordinary Americans see it as a threat to family and religious values. This fact is sufficient to prompt the liberal establishment to add porn to its agenda, as one more thing to be defended in the court against the legislature. Again and again we have seen this process at work, as the values and transgressions of elites are seized upon by the ACLU and similar organizations, rebranded as essential liberties, and defended as constitutional rights, regardless of their subversive effect on society as a whole. In the course of the battle the old distinction between liberty and license, made vividly by Locke and essential to the defense of a truly liberal constitution, is forgotten. Transgression is defended as an “alternative life style,” regardless of the damage.
In other words, porn is a tactic in the rulers’ war on the ruled.
And, jag, have you ever known anyone who read Playboy for the articles, really?