John Ashcroft....racist or political pawn ??

[jacobnero6918]

I was reading in the paper that John Ashcroft voted yes to 26 of 27 black judges and that only Ronnie White was the one he didn't like. So why is a guy who approved 26 of 27 black judges a rcaist ?

 

[shiner]

Becaause the liberals don't like someone who stands up for their principals. The prefer trailer park trash like the Clintons.

 

[KarsinTheHutt]

Ah... Ashcroft also said that Judge WHite was also to pro-criminal.

White supported 70% of the executions that came under his review.


Ashcroft is just an @$$hole who needed to make himself look tuff on crime. I don't think he's a racist though - Judge White just got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[Russ]

<< So why is a guy who approved 26 of 27 black judges a rcaist ? >>



It is the modern day equivalent of McCarthyism. In the 1950's if you wanted to destroy a man's credibility and ruin his career, all you had to do was label him a communist. It didn't matter if it was true, the desired result was still achieved.

Today, if you want to ruin someone, you simply label them a racist. Again, the truth is irrelevant.

Russ, NCNE

 

[Raspewtin]

As Karsin illustrated, Ashcroft is A-hole, not so much of a racist. People label him falsely b/c he labels others falsely (i.e. the pro-criminal). What goes around, comes around. White himself said he didn't think Ashcroft was a racist.



<< It is the modern day equivalent of McCarthyism. >>



LMAO! Russ I assume that was a joke. If it were serious, I'd have to say that would be laughable to anyone who knows the history of the Red Scare.

 

[Russ]

Raspewtin,

The analogy is exactly on point. Facts are unimportant, it is only the label that matters. Just as there were many falsely labeled by the McCarthy goons, we now have many suffering the same fate at the hands of the liberal goons.

Russ, NCNE

 

[Double Trouble]

Russ is not far off at all. These days all you have to do is label someone a racist or hatemonger or something like that to get the job done. Regardless of whether it's true or not, the name will be smeared because of the ignorant masses's inability to discern lies from the truth.

The label might be different than it was in the 50's, but the idea is definitely the same.

 

[minus1972]

<< John Ashcroft....racist or political pawn ?? >>



both!

 

[Russ]

I would also point out to those who formed their opinions based only on what the press has spoon fed you that eight of your democrat comrades in the Senate voted to confirm his nomination.

I can only assume that they might know a little bit more about the man then you.

Russ, NCNE

 

[Zucchini]

look at the mans stances through out the years.. not so hot.

 

[KarsinTheHutt]

<<<eight of your democrat comrades in the Senate voted to confirm his nomination.>>>

and 42 voted against! <heaps fuel on the fire>

 

[Russ]

KarsinTheHutt,

If he was anything at all like he has been portrayed, he would not have gotten a single democrat vote. Thankfully, we have eight honest ones.

Russ, NCNE

 

[XMan]

<< White supported 70% of the executions that came under his review. >>



Yup, and he recommended that a man who went on a murderous rampage, killing several police officers, not be executed. That was Ashcroft's main point in standing against White (and he was supported by many police groups in Missourri at the time - another thing you don't hear.)

 

[KarsinTheHutt]

I dunno. The impression I got was that he'd do anything to get ahead (just like many others in washington). Its just a big game and I guess he's good at it.


<<<Yup, and he recommended that a man who went on a murderous rampage, killing several police officers, not be executed>>>

But only because he beleived the defendant was mentally ill and did not recieve a fair trial.

 

[Zucchini]

I think a few of the demos voted for ashcroft so they would have someone to kick around A thorn in bushes side, and a tool to rally the demo troops.

 

[Russ]

Zucchini,

That statement was so ignorant, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt and assume it was sarcasm. The democrats who voted for him, did so because they worked with him and know him to be an honorable man.

All of the democrats with whom he served know this. Sadly, only eight had the balls to stand up and do the right thing.

Russ, NCNE

 

[Zucchini]

oh, so my statement had no merit at all? I think not, like it or not, he's someone to rally troops against.

 

[XMan]

<< But only because he beleived the defendant was mentally ill and did not recieve a fair trial. >>



Gosh, Karsin, you're such a considerate soul.



<< When the President fails to work with the Senate, however, the process does not work smoothly. This was the unfortunate case with Judge Ronnie White. The record shows that Judge White is a fine man. However, he has written some questionable opinions on death penalty cases. This record resulted in both Missouri Senators opposing his nomination on the floor. And this record resulted in local and national law enforcement agencies opposing his nomination. Here are just some of the letters expressing concern or opposition to Judge White's nomination:

? The Missouri Federation of Police Chiefs opposed the nomination.

? The National Sheriff's Association opposed the nomination.

? The Mercer County Missouri Prosecutor opposed the nomination.

? The Missouri Sheriffs' Association expressed deep concern over one of Judge White's dissents in a death penalty case involving the murder of one sheriff, two sheriff deputies, and the wife of another sheriff, and asked the Senate to consider that dissent in voting on Judge White's nomination. Indeed, 77 of 114 of Missouri's Sheriffs asked for serious consideration of JudgeWhite's record.

? And the Sheriff of Moniteau County Missouri whose wife was murdered by the criminal for whom Judge White would have reversed the death sentence wrote in opposition to the nomination.

. . .

The same is true for other minority nominees like Victor Marrero, Carlos Murguia, and Adalberto Jordan nominees whose record showed they were qualified and respected the rule of law, who had the support from homestate senators, and who had broad support in the Senate. Thus, the suggestion that the Republicans in this body voted against Judge White on the basis of race is no more true than a parallel accusation that my Democratic colleagues voted against Clarence Thomas because of his race.

>>



Orrin Hatch, October 7, 1999

What Senator Hatch failed to mention in his speech was the unspeakably brutal way in which James Johnson commmitted his crime . . .

From the National Law Enforcement Officer's Memorial Fund (www.nleomf.com) -



<< One of the deadliest incidents in county law enforcement history occurred in December of 1991. A crazed gunman named James Johnson went on a murder spree and killed three officers: Miller County (MO) Deputy Sandra Belle Wilson; Moniteau County (MO) Deputy Leslie Roark; and Cooper County (MO) Sheriff Charles Smith. He also killed Pam Jones, the wife of Moniteau County (MO) Sheriff Kenny Jones, and wounded Moniteau County (MO) Deputy Russell Borts. >>



Sandra Wilson was shot in the back, then in the back of the head while she was lying on the ground. Pam Jones was shot through the window of her home with a high-powered rifle. Was he crazy? I'd say so, but that doesn't change the fact that in the state of Missouri, the punishment for the crime of first-degree murder is the death penalty.



<< Ashcroft, who voted against White twice in committee, cited White's record in death penalty cases. He cited the appeal of James Johnson, convicted of killing a sheriff, 2 sheriff's deputies and another sheriff's wife in Moniteau County in 1991. Johnson appealed his conviction, and the Missouri Supreme Court upheld the death penalty verdict. White dissented, saying Johnson was entitled to a retrial due to the poor performance of his lawyer. In the trial and the appeal, the dispute was not whether Johnson murdered the 4 victims, but whether he was sane at the time. Johnson's attorneys had argued that the former Vietnam War veteran suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder. His lawyers argued that evidence from the scene -- a tin-can-rope perimeter set up around Johnson's garage, among other things -- showed that Johnson was paranoid and having flashbacks that led him to believe he was back in Vietnam. Johnson had set up the rope, they argued, to create a trap that would alert him if the &quot;enemy&quot; approached. But as the trial proceeded, the defense attorneys and the jury learned that a highway patrolman, not Johnson, had set up the rope and the other evidence that Johnson's attorneys used to support their flashback theory. On appeal, Johnson argued that if his attorneys had made the right
inquiries of the prosecutors, they would not have tried to use the evidence in his defense. A 4-judge majority of the Supreme Court said that Johnson's attorneys made some mistakes, but that Johnson did not meet the standard necessary
for reversal: a &quot;reasonable probability&quot; that the result of the trial would have been different if they had known about the source of the tin-can rope and other evidence. White disagreed, writing in a lone dissent that the defense attorneys
were &quot;remarkably cavalier&quot; and destroyed their credibility with the jury. If they had been more rigorous, White argued, the jury might have been &quot;sufficiently receptive&quot; to the mental illness defense. >>



Now - Johnson's attorneys argue something to prove that their client was insane, something Judge White tended to agree with. but Johnson then argued the exact opposite upon appeal.

 

[Balt]

<<oh, so my statement had no merit at all? I think not, like it or not, he's someone to rally troops against.>>

So those democrats are going to risk pissing off their constituency and not getting reelected for the greater good of the democratic party?

The kind of rebellion displayed by those eight only comes from people with true character, who believe in doing what they think is right. Not from people trying to climb up the ladder by not getting re-elected (which makes no sense).

Besides, I doubt there will be any rallying. The American people don't have the type of attention span to care about all the whining about Ashcroft unless he does something extreme.

 

[noproblems]

Look, I'm from Missouri and I'm here to tell you, maybe not racist but definitely whacked way out to the far right. Why do you think he was the first incumbent Senator ever to lose his seat to a dead man.

I think that this whole controversy around his nomination probably is a good thing. At least he will probably be a bit more intensely inspected for each of his decisions. The more microscopes placed on the behavior of the far right, the better. Now if we could just jam one up Bush's anal cavity to see what he has on his mind . . . Hmmmm . . .

 

[Russ]

<< but definitely whacked way out to the far right. >>



Coming from a liberal, I can't think of a better endorsement.



<< the first incumbent Senator ever to lose his seat to a dead man. >>



Doesn't say much for the intellect of tha average voter in the state of misery.

Russ, NCNE

 

[cxim]

<> Now if we could just jam one up Bush's anal cavity to see what he has on his mind . . . Hmmmm . . . <>

I have never been able to understand this 'liberal' fixation with rectums.

 

[Raspewtin]

<< The analogy is exactly on point. Facts are unimportant, it is only the label that matters. Just as there were many falsely labeled by the McCarthy goons, we now have many suffering the same fate at the hands of the liberal goons. >>




Interesting analysis, but the question of degree makes the analogy inappropriate. However I do see what you are saying re: most people branded Communists (during McCarthy era) were not communists, and most political figures branded racists in modern America are most likely not racists. Notwithstanding, this type of labelling comes from all sides. To the extent some group of conservative are branded racists is in number equal to if not smaller than the number of liberals labelled socialists, &quot;pro-criminal&quot;, etc, by conservative &quot;goons.&quot; Basically, if one type of false political labelling can be elevated to the level of McCarthyism, than all types are.

 

[Pocatello]

Ashcroft got a bad rap because he stands up to the liberals, Judge White should not be nominated.

 

[JellyBaby]

My guess is that after his term Ascroft will make Janet Reno look like an elementary school pedestrian walkway cop.