� Bastardy & Black Republicans | Main | Charles Sumner, Reactionary �
January 21, 2001
Against Ashcroft
you nominate people because of their beliefs and because of their extraordinary ability. and when you have a mandate from the people to head in a new direction, you have an obligation to place someone in power who will do so. bush has no such mandate from the people, and therefore is being arrogant and divisive in his nomination of ashcroft.
bush did not campaign as pro-life and against row vs wade, these were not campaign promises. he did not campaign as a regressive on civil rights.
think about the primary complaints against janet reno by the opposition. in what way does ashcroft legitimately represent that opposite?
is there any suggestion that ashcroft would disarm the fbi in situations like the branch davidian standoff? is there any suggestion that ashcroft would appoint more special prosecutors rather than less? no.
it is because he is anti-abortion that he is being nominated and that is a direct concession to the christian right and it has nothing to do with substance of what republicans demanded and failed to receive from janet reno.
if the american people ask for x and get stealth religion instead, that is decietful. this is my problem with gwbush & the ashcroft nomination.
Posted by mbowen at January 21, 2001 09:21 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.visioncircle.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3439