U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft Resigns 1275
andyring writes "In a move that will undoubtedly make many /. readers jump for joy (although perhaps not myself), Attorney General John Ashcroft announced he will resign, according to multiple news sources. While many here dislike him, others have more favorable opinions of him. He became the point man on the USA Patriot Act, which typically ignites harsh opinions on both sides of the aisle."
Reader cnsc1rtr , referring to the AP's version of the story, writes "He gave Bush a five-page, handwritten letter in which he stated, 'The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved.'"
SAFE! (Score:5, Funny)
That is the BEST NEWS EVER! How come he didn't tell us about this before?
What a day! (Score:5, Funny)
2) Halo 2 Released
3) John Ashcroft Resigns
4).... Profit!!!
What a day it's been!
Re:What a day! (Score:5, Insightful)
Who the hell does everyone think Bush is going to replace him with? Michael Moore??
-
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Insightful)
This is and example of one thing the Bush administration understands, how to kill discussions. The trick is to say something so outlandish and WRONG that everyone who pays attention will know as wrong and the discussion dies there, while at the the same time, the less observant get the desired impression. The fun part is, if you have a valid argument that is even remotely related (rational or emotional level) against the individual, a lot of people will dismiss you without hearing you thinking 1. you are on the same level as them (that's just how politicians are) or 2. you're a conspiracy nut. (he's just reading too much into this political nonsense).
Really impressive use of the media if you ask me. If you say enough factually wrong soundbites, people will dismis you AND the people who are after you. Those who don't dismis you will think you are amazing.
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This whole article should stop now. (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, he can be a real thread Nazi.
Oops, here come the Godwin Nazis to shutt me up.
Oops. Here come the Spelling Nazis to correct me error above.
Oops. Here come the Grammar Nazis to correct the error following the last error.
Oops. Here come the joke Nazis to say i should have stopped after the first line.
Oops. Here come the /. Nazis to say this would be much funnier if it had a 1)? 2)? 3)Profit! in it somewhere.
Oops. Here... I give up. Call me France. I surrender.
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not even a strawman, it's literally the fucking Chewbacca defense.
That the press and most (maybe) of the electorate falls for this is the main reason why so many on the left are willing to believe the election was rigged.
-dameron
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe his handlers are masters of doublethink, but Bush himself is master of nothink, and that's why his handlers picked him.
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Insightful)
Technically (which is what counts in court) he didn't lie. He asked beforehand what the phrase "sexual relations" was defined as, got the answer that it specifically meant intercourse and proceeded to tell the narrowly defined truth: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman". He omitted "She did suck my dick once and I did push a cigar up her pussy which I then proceeded to smoke with great pleasure, but y'all didn't ask about that, now did'ya?".
Then again, it's more serious if the President almost lies about if he got a blowjob or not than if he lies to invade a sovereign nation, killing 100,000 ragheads and a few thousand GI Joes in the process.
They just happened to be the ones he was stupid enough to utter under oath.
Clinton is many things, but stupid isn't one of them. He's like a combination of Nixon's slickness, JFK's libido and the fiscal sense of FDR. Bush OTOH has Nixon's malice, no libido, no fiscal sense and Quayle's brainpower.
Re:SAFE! (Score:4, Funny)
I fear for this country without Ashcroft around. Let the eagle soar, John. Let it soar.
P.S.: If you need someone to annoint you with cooking oil for your next job, just give me a call. I've got a bottle of Wesson in the cabinet.
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Funny)
That is the BEST NEWS EVER! How come he didn't tell us about this before?
well, he's just now resigning....
Resigning To Focus On Core Responsibilities (Score:5, Funny)
"well, he's just now resigning...."
Clearly due to the fact that his stint as Attorney General was interfering with his duties as Sith Lord.
Re:SAFE! (Score:4, Insightful)
So, can I have my rights back, now?
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Insightful)
How about the right to know if the government has peaked at my medical records, or noticed what books I've checked out at the library? Now, I can't prove they have, but no one can prove they have not since I simply don't have the right to know. I would like that right, and I would like the right to not have to think "Anything I check out here can be used against me" while I browse for books.
If the US government wants freedom to be "on the march" shouldn't we, as an example to the nations we wish to make free, be steadfast in preserving our own rights and freedoms? While the death of 4,000 on 9/11 was of course a tragedy and measures need to be taken to make us safer, is sacrificing freedom worth it? About 40,000 people die in car accidents every year, yet we don't have a "war on cars" that I am aware of, and I'm pretty sure in every state you can drive before you are legally an adult.
Americans are still very emotional about 9/11, and will likely remain that way for years to come, just as it was with Pearl Harbor. However we can learn from history, and I tend to believe that perhaps half a century from now the PATRIOT Act will be viewed almost as negatively as the Japanese Internment after Pearl Harbor is viewed today.
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Funny)
- Made of Stone
- Made of Bronze
- Made of Plaster
- Standing behind a Bush Cabinet Member
- The verdict is still pending for made of Silicone
Being made of flesh and showing nipple(s) is strictly forbidden! Think of the children! No! Don't think of their nipples you perv! Think of their small impressionable minds! Without taboo they would be heathens.Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:SAFE! (Score:5, Funny)
"With my resignation the objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved."
Yes, completely out of context! (Score:5, Interesting)
Taken out of context, it loses very little. The man claims we've beaten both crime and terrorism.
Have we?
- A.P.
Re:Yes, completely out of context! (Score:5, Insightful)
The paragraph:
"The demands of justice are both rewarding and depleting. I take great personal satisfaction in the record which has been developed. The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved. The rule of law has been strengthened and upheld in the courts. Yet, I believe that the Department of Justice would be well served by new leadership and fresh inspiration. I believe that my energies and talents should be directed toward other challenging horizons."
Wether he actually meant what he said is another thing. Which I don't care about one way or the other. Useless politics...
Re:Misson Accomplished!! (Score:5, Funny)
On the one hand, an AP report by someone who did the research, tracked the documentation, talked to the people most directly involved,
VERSUS
A
WHO DO I BELIEVE? PLEASE, GOD HELP ME, WHO DO I BELIEVE?
Re:Misson Accomplished!! (Score:5, Informative)
Must be reassuring to the USMC presently in Fallujah that what they're doing isn't a major combat operation.
Because it looks like one to me.
Today Ashcroft (Score:5, Funny)
oh please oh please oh please oh please oh please oh please oh please
Re:Today Ashcroft...Tomorrow Justice Ashcroft (Score:5, Insightful)
Stalking horse (Score:5, Insightful)
The Democrats need to watch out for this, and keep up the resistance against anyone on the right wing that Bush tries to put on the Court. We still have 45 seats in the Senate, that's enough for a filibuster. The ability to filibuster is there for a reason -- to stop a President and 51 Senators (or in this case 55) from the same party from putting an extremist on the Supreme Court. The Democrats need to make sure Bush comes up with nominees that are at lease somewhat moderate.
Re:Stalking horse (Score:5, Interesting)
He's not just a postmodern bureaucrat. He's a bloody nihilist.
Re:Stalking horse (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Stalking horse (Score:5, Informative)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:SN
STATUS: (color indicates Senate actions)
10/4/2001:
Introduced in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time. (text of measure as introduced: CR S10307-10333)
10/9/2001:
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 187.
10/11/2001:
Measure laid before Senate. (consideration: CR S10547-10630)
10/11/2001:
S.AMDT.1899 Amendment SA 1899 proposed by Senator Feingold. (consideration: CR S10570-10575; text: CR S10570)
To make amendments to the provision relating to interception of computer trespasser communications.
10/11/2001:
S.AMDT.1899 Motion to table amendment SA 1899 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 83 - 13. Record Vote Number: 299.
10/11/2001:
S.AMDT.1900 Amendment SA 1900 proposed by Senator Feingold. (consideration: CR S10575-10577; text: CR S10575)
To limit the roving wiretap authority under FISA.
10/11/2001:
S.AMDT.1900 Motion to table amendment SA 1900 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 90 - 7. Record Vote Number: 300.
10/11/2001:
S.AMDT.1901 Amendment SA 1901 proposed by Senator Feingold. (consideration: CR S10583-10586; text: CR S10583)
To modify the provisions relating to access to business records under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.
10/11/2001:
S.AMDT.1901 Motion to table amendment SA 1901 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 89 - 8. Record Vote Number: 301.
10/11/2001:
Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 96 - 1. Record Vote Number: 302. (text of bill as passed Senate: CR S10604-10630)
10/30/2001:
Senate vitiated previous passage.
10/30/2001:
Indefinitely postponed by Senate by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11247)
Note something that's missing? You guessed it - the complete addition of a new section (securing our borders). it was *already there*. Kerry voted *against* the amendments listed.
Here is section IV of the bill *AS SUBMITTED* to the senate:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r107:1:./
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi
You people are incorrigible.
Re:Stalking horse (Score:5, Informative)
Again, HE WROTE IT.
Over 90% of the words in the act are directly from his office and most of that directly from his hand.
Yeah, he also "supported it" by scaremongering congress into enacting it without even reading it.
In any rational examination that makes him PRIMARILY responsible. All the others are just contributory infringers. They may have abrogated their power to him, but he did not turn it down and still brags of his actions today.
Re:Today Ashcroft (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, I want to see Bush-voters who cheered "4 more years" to suffer financial & economical devastation. Nothing against you, but if you wanted a president who has more involvement in Iraq than your own country, you mind as well turn in your U.S. citizenship. Before you mod me down to -100, I am just fighting for the U.S middle class.
Re:Today Ashcroft (Score:5, Insightful)
In Clinton's last year in office, the national debt actually went *down* (when adjusted for inflation) for the first time in ages... probably my lifetime or even longer. Then, during Bush's first term, it has skyrocketed. It has increased by almost 50% (*not* adjusted for inflation... but inflation isn't anywhere *near* 50% per 4 yrs.)!
Every election season, there's a call to reduce the deficit, and it always seems to fall on deaf ears. I think that most Americans have no idea what it really is, but (because they keep hearing politicians mention it so much), tacitly agree that we need to keep it down. However, I think that their level of conviction to that belief ranks right up there with trying to not consume quite so much saturated fat and salt: "Yeah, yeah... I know... I need to cut down one of these days.".
With this latest election, I think I'm finally giving up. So, this is where I agree with you. I think I'm now going to support any legislation or budget that swells the deficit even further. Up until now, I've been telling people that, if the deficit is left unchecked then, someday, the interest on the debt will be more than our total tax revenue... at which point, there will be no way to stop the meltdown. However, they all seem to look at me as though I'm talking about an asteroid hitting the earth. They've never experienced it happening, so they don't really believe that it *can* happen.
Well.... okay. If it can't happen, then I have no qualms about bringing it about as soon as possible. I'll start moving my assets to a country with a sensible fiscal policy, and then we can start doing what we can to make sure that the national debt swells into a runaway freight train as soon as possible.
And.... to be quite honest, I'm sincerely curious to see what *does* happen. Will the gov't default on all of its loans and have the dollar become worthless overseas, or will our own economy (and gov't, too) implode as well? - Joe
Re:Today Ashcroft (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/08/26/census.poverty
"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The number of Americans living in poverty increased by 1.3 million last year, while the ranks of the uninsured swelled by 1.4 million, the Census Bureau reported Thursday."
It was the third straight annual increase in a row under Bush. Just like during Reagan and Bush Sr., the wealthy have been doing very well, and the poor very poorly. And these numbers are actually worse than they sound, because many other expenses have been going up at the same time, largely due to administration policies (college tuitions due to state aid cuts, gas prices due to a tight reserve policy and the weak dollar policy (and that whole "invasion" thing), etc)
A stable Iraq? What, you mean like there was BEFORE we made it a terrorist haven and gave the middle east a rallying cry?
What if we had left Germany and France after World War II? You mean, we shouldn't leave countries that aren't resisting our occupation of them? Good idea! Now what are your ideas for countries that *are* resisting our occupation of them?
Sadly (Score:5, Interesting)
While I am absolutely elated that Ashcroft has resigned, I have no doubt that we will most certainly see four more years of the same foreign policy that has dogged the US since Bush's first inauguration. That, combined with the fact that Ashcroft has already done significant domestic damage viz. the PATRIOT act paints a rather bleak picture for the US in the coming years - even if the inside players are different.
The stage has already been set.
Re:Today Ashcroft (Score:5, Insightful)
does that mean... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:does that mean... (Score:5, Funny)
As most other tinfoil hat wearers are aware, the only reason Ashcroft has resigned is so he can catch a lift up to the mind-reading satellite and read your mind directly! It's all a part of their global domination plan.
(Sadly, that last bit has some truth [zfacts.com] to it. [tinfoil hat securely back on])
I'm Confused! (Score:5, Funny)
I thought that it was the overthrow of Saddam Hussein that did that....
LOL (Score:5, Funny)
And Bush had to have someone read it to him.
He's encouraging criminals. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:He's encouraging criminals. (Score:5, Funny)
eDonkey loading...
bitTorrent whirring...
cds ripping...
dvds burning...
firefox running... oh wait, a couple months too early to call that illegal
Re:He's encouraging criminals. (Score:5, Funny)
I can top that. I'm going to have gay sex just to spite him.
Re:He's encouraging criminals. (Score:5, Funny)
Good, god-fearing Americans abstain from casual sex. That's why information regarding birth control and condoms doesn't need to be taught in school.
Yes, my friend, faggot-sex will be the end of America as we know it. Luckily, George Bush has a plan to save the butt pirates. Through love, Jesus Christ, and make-you-straight boot-camp, we will teach these homos to do what's right for America, Jesus, and themselves.
Or we'll kill them, I guess. That works too. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go watch NASCAR.
We Won! (Score:5, Funny)
Yey we won! Now we can pull out of Iraq. No more airport security lines. I just hope W. can read script.
Re:We Won! (Score:5, Funny)
I voted for that Bush guy because we weren't safe, and less than two weeks later we are?
That was sarcasm. I swear.
Huh? (Score:5, Funny)
Phew! Finally. Guess we don't need a DoJ anymore.
Mission Accomplished (Score:5, Insightful)
At what cost?
Ashcroft (Score:4, Interesting)
It's almost unbelievable that the USA would allow him to work on bills such as the Patriot act.
What I don't understand is why are you guys not protesting?
Have you given up?
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Ashcroft (Score:5, Informative)
Well, according to Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, the members of congress weren't even allowed to read the PATRIOT act before voting on it. [insightmag.com]
From the article:
Paul confirms rumors circulating in Washington that this sweeping new law, with serious implications for each and every American, was not made available to members of Congress for review before the vote. "It's my understanding the bill wasn't printed before the vote -- at least I couldn't get it. They played all kinds of games, kept the House in session all night, and it was a very complicated bill. Maybe a handful of staffers actually read it, but the bill definitely was not available to members before the vote."
Re:Ashcroft (Score:5, Insightful)
If I were offered a drink that was 90% fruit juice and vitamins, and 10% stricnine, I would choose not to drink it.
On the contrary... (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing that Mr. Ashcroft and the rest of the executive branch have forgotten is that we need to be at least as suspicious and limiting of our government as of the people from whom our government is supposedly protecting us. Instead, the executive branch has taken the absurd view that their enemies are "Evil", and thus that their own actions are--definitionally--Good.
This is a dangerous premise. History has taught us that governments very reliably stray from Good. Every single act undertaken by a government must be carefully evaluated with questions like, "Does this make us the bad guys? Is this worse than what we're trying to solve?" And even after such questions have been asked, we need to still assume that they've been answered incorrectly, and place harsh limitations on the fundamental things a government can do.
This is the origin of bans on interdepartmental cooperation, statutes of limitation, limitations on search and siezure, the specificity of of search warrants, and so on. After all, if your government were always the good guys, you wouldn't need any such protections, right?
Will Bush appoint a more conservative replacement? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Will Bush appoint a more conservative replaceme (Score:5, Funny)
*more* conservative? (Score:4, Funny)
In any case, I don't know whether you were intending to but you've alluded to an interesting point. Justice Ashcroft anyone?
Re:*more* conservative? (Score:5, Funny)
His more radically conservative replacement will complete this initiative, furthering American safety, by requiring burkas for all female statues.
Re:*more* conservative? (Score:5, Funny)
Want a Democratic majority in this country? Make all Republicans listen to Mike Savage for a solid 4 hours. 90% of Republicans would think "THIS GUY is on my side?" and switch sides.
(No I'm not kidding. How many Republicans really agree with those talk-radio whack-jobs?)
Of course, I could also make 90% of Democrats become Republicans by making them listen to Air America for a day. You think the ring-wing guys are paraniod tin-foil hatters? Listen to Air America for a while.
That's the beautiful thing about American politics: I can choose either major party and be guaranteed to be in horrible company.
Re:Will Bush appoint a more conservative replaceme (Score:5, Funny)
No, Ashcroft is moving to the bereau of weights and measures to serve as the standard of "Absolute Conservative". As such, it is impossible to appoint a more conservative replacement.
Doubtless, Bush will attempt to redefine the "Absolute Conservative" standard when selecting Ashcroft's replacement, but experts agree that he's likely to appoint a "Facist Extremist" by mistake.
Re:Will Bush appoint a more conservative replaceme (Score:5, Informative)
Take a look at http://www.politicalcompass.org [politicalcompass.org]
your own link disagrees with you (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:your own link disagrees with you (Score:5, Insightful)
Now try to imagine the type of person that reads that definition and says "nope, that's not me at all", or even worse, thinks that word should be used as an insult. And you get an inkling of what's wrong with America.
Re:Will Bush appoint a more conservative replaceme (Score:4, Insightful)
In my opinion, Ashcroft is a fascist
Re:Will Bush appoint a more conservative replaceme (Score:5, Informative)
And now Bush has his first Nominee (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:And now Bush has his first Nominee (Score:5, Funny)
Re:And now Bush has his first Nominee (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:And now Bush has his first Nominee (Score:5, Informative)
IIRC, if you look back at history you will find several ex-state governers were made Supreme Court Justices.
Uncover those breasts! (Score:5, Funny)
Horray! Now he'll be free for his true passion... (Score:5, Funny)
"LET THE EAGLE SOAR, LIKE SHE'S NEVER SOARN BEFORE!"
http://www.cnn.com/video/us/2002/02/25/
Poor Mr. Ashcroft (Score:4, Funny)
I have a new found respect for John Ashcroft, it's pretty respectable that he thinks Bush will read five-pages of his letter.
At least he "still believes"
Self-fulfilling prophecy (Score:5, Funny)
Am I correct in assuming that his resignation is what is bringing this achievement to pass?
As well as secure us from sex, drugs and P2P (Score:5, Interesting)
I am a Christain and a Conservative and I am glad to see him gone. His record on states rights vs federal law proves that the current administration cares nothing about the will of the people and only about the power of Federal law. I dont want the state coming in and telling me what I can and can't put in to my body or who I can have sex with. I could just see this guy dragging homosexuals in if the amendment had passed. I dont want the state to come in to my marrage or a gay marrage anymore than I want the state to come in to my relationship with God.
This guy got his rocks off dragging people in to court over matters that should never have been law in the first place.
See you around John.....
Re:As well as secure us from sex, drugs and P2P (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't have mod points, but you got my respect.
two thoughts spring to mind (Score:5, Funny)
the serious 2- I recall a quote attributed to the then director of the patent office, requesting the patent office be closed, as all concieveable inventions had been made.. both the quote and the historical snip I give seem to have a spooky similarity
A good thing (Score:5, Funny)
Does that mean the Patriot Act can be repealed now?
We're saved! (Score:5, Insightful)
So they figured out how anthrax from US Army labs was mailed to various members of congress and media outlets, and captured those responsible?
Oh...they haven't done that, eh?
Well, at least gays can't marry.
great (Score:5, Funny)
Now Up in the batters box (Score:4, Interesting)
Is Mr. DMCA himself, Orrin Hatch.
You will long for the days of Ashcroft.
Hey does this mean... (Score:5, Funny)
That may be worth a trip to D.C. for that alone!
Successor? (Score:5, Informative)
5 page letter? (Score:5, Funny)
I hope he attached an audio book version to the letter.
Re:5 page letter? (Score:5, Funny)
Actually it's five pages because he had to use a crayon.
I not a religious man, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Five Words for You (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, the US is much safer. (Score:5, Insightful)
In one case the damning evidence was a video of the alleged terrorists spending time in Disneyland.
And the only ones the neo-ayatollahs have any hope of "convicting" of any terrorism related activities they have safely guarded them in Guantanamo or Abu Gharib, were confessions can be conviniently extracted at the pleasure of the torturers and kangoroo courts will sentence in accordance to the public, on record wishes of the reelected Orwellian master overlord.
And the poster of the article still has the indecency to find something good to say about this individual.
Some thoughts on Ashcroft (Score:5, Interesting)
This is too late in the discussion, but I just saw it a little while ago and Ashcroft strikes a nerve. So here goes.
Ashcroft reminds me of Ministers of Interiors in Third World dictatorships. He is a tool for the dictator and the regime, and not there for his main job, that is protect the people.
His argument that he did achieve his objectives in protecting America from crime and terror is much like the guy who sprayed pepper on his front lawn, to ward off elephants. When his neighbor told him there are no elephants here, he says : "See! It works!"
Not a single case in the past 3 years was prosecuted successfully as a terrorism case, with conviction. All of the high profile arrests where Aschroft made press conferences with huge pomp, touting them as major victories in the war on terrorism, are just for show. For example, the Lakawanna Six (Buffalo, NY) Yemeni-Americans all pleaded to lesser charges and were convicted. The case of the African American bunch in Oregon is similar. The same goes for the Holy Land Foundation in Texas, and other Muslim charity cases. Most cases that Ashcroft said to be terrorism end up getting convictions for immigration irregularities or ID fraud (SSN, Driver License, Food Stamps, ...etc.). No terrorism at all, except the constant drumming up of fear in the masses, and no one remembers what happened to the poor souls who got caught and made examples of.
Of course, the Patriot Act, Secret Evidence, and the eroding civil liberties that goes with it, is exactly what is wrong, since terrorists have achieved an objective with these things.
There are other incidents that show his short comings as well, such as making a big deal of a statue with the bare breast, his fundamentalist view, him attacking Islam while in office, and more.
Someone should really make up a web site about Ashcroft Watch or something, lest people forget all this.
Well, his letter of resignation says "I believe that my energies and talents should be directed toward other challenging horizons." What does that mean? Is a Supreme Court Justice position waiting for him (despite the poster above who said that it has to be someone with judge qualifications)?
Ashcroft wasn't always a civil liberties foe (Score:5, Interesting)
5 Page Handwritten Letter? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I Don't follow politics much .. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ashcroft wasn't so bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, he did change the FBI. They no longer need search warrents, and they have no respect of our civil liberties. If you ask me, he damaged the USA. We were a more free people before he came to power. And don't forget, Ashcroft was the guy who lost his senate seat because the people of his state elected a dead guy rather than have 6 more years of him.
Your rights shot to hell (Score:5, Insightful)
We have gone insanely overboard in how we handle terrorism. America is founded on the freedom of the people. So much so that these freedoms are written into our founding document - the Constitution. When someone tells me that we need to "protect America" from something that had a negligible statistical effect by taking away my Constitutional rights, I'll rightly tell them they're stupid, crazy, or very ignorant.
1st amendment - "right of the people peaceably to assemble" - except near the Republican National Convention in 2004.
4th amendment - "no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause" - except when the Patriot Act says it's OK.
5th amendment - "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law" - except if we can find some way to call them enemy combatants, or we declare they can't be tried publicly due to security considerations.
6th amendment - "accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial" - see above.
8th amendment - "nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" - except in Abu Ghraib, or (maybe, how can we know?) Guantanamo.
10th amendment - "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." - this one's been shot to hell for ages
If I tried to live by the Constitution, I'd end up shot by federal agents inside of five years.
Ashcroft was a HORRIBLE Attourney General (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ashcroft wasn't so bad (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Ashcroft wasn't so bad (Score:5, Insightful)
And it all came up empty.
Now Aschroft? Snatched defeat from the claws of victory, and completely let Microsoft walk after it was convicted, fried, toasted by the Reno Justice Department. Dragged his heels on the Enron investigation -- helped Bush run interference as the billions were stolen. Slow-walked the Valerie Plame treason investigation past the election. Didn't investigate massive election interference in both 2000 and now 2004. Let the Pubs walk on using Homeland Security apparatus to interfere in the Texas redistricting. Won't instruct Bush to comply with the Supreme Court's stunning orders to let the concentration camp prisoners have access to a fair trial - they are ignoring the law of the land and performing show trials. He rammed the Patriot act into law, effectively repealing at least three ammendments in the Bill of Rights.
And the FBI was gutted by Freeh, the Clinton appointee who turned for the impeachment elves and committed 50 full time agents to investigating Clinton's sex lives while Al Queda was moving into position. Freeh "reformed" the FBI by eliminating an entire middle level of analysts, and "streamlining" the flow of information from below into the executive offices - ie, him. The warning from field agents were ignored because experienced analysts no longer existed to read the damned reports.
The FBI was "changed around" by Freeh. I doubt much that Ashcroft did didley to restore the analysts back to duty. Waht Bush/Ashcroft are doing, really, is to make every information asset we have responsible to and report to the executive, ie Bush. Not only do we not have the middle level of analysts back, we instead have a pack of political true-believers distilling info for the President's consumption. It's a wreck.
His resignation was rumored for over a year. no surprise. However, his replacement will be much worse.
Re:Ashcroft wasn't so bad (Score:4, Informative)
While I have no strong opinions about Janet Reno (pro or con), I think you're leaving some basic facts out of the equation here. The Branch Davidians (the "fellow citizens" you're referring to here) were in violation of several firearms laws at varying levels. Law enforcement authorities obtained a proper warrant and served it on February 28, 1993. If you're keeping score, that was almost two weeks before Janet Reno was even sworn in as Attorney General on March 12th. In the resulting raid, four federal agents were murdered by these same "fellow citizens" that you are (at least tangentially) defending. These were men with families, and they were just doing their job. I've never understood why it's not okay for the government to enforce the law, but it's all fine and dandy to kill law enforcement officers.
Janet Reno made the best of a bad situation. Even though she had only been in office for a couple of weeks when the final raid happened and had very little to do with its planning and how it was executed, she took full responsibility for it. She was, after all, the Attorney General at the time that it happened. But there's a certain amount of logical inconsistency here; we are told that we cannot blame President Bush for the intelligence failures that led to 9/11 because he had only been in office for eight months before it happened, but we can blame Waco on Reno even though it started before she became AG and she had only been in office for a couple of weeks. (For the record, I don't blame 9/11 on President Bush.)
You know that the FBI/ATF bent over backwards to bring the Waco siege to a peaceful conclusion, don't you? They repeatedly tried to negotiate with Koresh, offering food and other basic supplies if he would just release some of the children from the compound, to which he replied (literally) "kiss my ass." The way that the situation resolved itself was tragic and there will probably always be questions about it, but the basic fact of the matter is that the Branch Davidians had 51 days to end the standoff peacefully and they chose not to. And I've never understood the mindset that can dismiss the murder of law enforcement agents, particularly in the post-9/11 era.
Re:Good Riddance (Score:5, Interesting)
Starting on November 7, 1919, Palmer's men smashed union offices and the headquarters of Communist and Socialist organizations without warrants, concentrating on foreigners. They arrested over 10,000 people (...) In January, 1920, another 6,000 were arrested, mostly members of the anarcho-syndicalist union Industrial Workers of the World. During one of the raids, more than 4,000 Communists were rounded up in a single night. All foreign aliens caught were deported.
The public reaction to these raids was favorable, stirring up a storm of anti-communist sentiment. In a murder eerily similar to the lynching of Germans during World War I, a group of young men in Centralia, Washington hanged a radical from a railway bridge. The coroner's report stated that the communist "jumped off with a rope around his neck and then shot himself full of holes." For most of 1919, the public seemed to side with Palmer.
I don't want to defend Bush & Ashcroft, but it's simply naive to see them as "the worst that happened". No, it's not the worst in American history. When you look on the whole American history it turns out that only the post-WWII period really resembles contemporary understanding of constitutional democracy (and even then there were authoritarian hiccups of McCarthyism or Watergate).
Re:Much ado about nothing (Score:4, Informative)
In this case, I think it to be true. I just saw it on CNN'S site. [cnn.com] It mentions some remarks by President Bush in regards to the resignations of Ashcroft and Evans.