CONSERVATIVES TURN ON ASHCROFT

Drudge Report ^ | 07/23/2002 | Matt Drudge

[Pokey78]

CONSERVATIVES TURN ON ASHCROFT
Tue Jul 23 2002 20:58:38 ET

Many religious conservatives who were instrumental in pressing President Bush to appoint John Ashcroft as attorney general -- now say they have become deeply troubled by his actions, the NEW YORK TIMES is planning to report in a blistering Page One spread on Wednesday.

"His religious base is now quite troubled by what he's done," Grover Norquist tells the TIMES's Neil Lewis.

MORE

Several Bush advisers have begun complaining that Ashcroft has projected himself too often and too forcefully. More significantly, they say privately that he seems to be overstating the evidence of terrorist threats, the paper claims.

Conservtives cite Ashcroft's anti-terrorist positions as enhancing the kind of government power that they instinctively oppose.

Norquist: "If there hadn't been this big government problem, Ashcroft would have been talked about as the Bush successor. Instead, the talk is that 'too bad we pushed for him."'

Ashcroft was also criticized by some in the administration for declaring early on that the case of John Walker Lindh was a major terrorist case, the paper reports. Some officials in the Justice Department believed that the attorney general made needlessly harsh public comments about Lindh. The case came to an abrupt end last week, when Lindh pleaded guilty to two felonies and the department dropped the most severe terrorism-related charges against him, treating him as a far less important figure than depicted by the attorney general.

Developing...

[steve-b]

You don't understand the first thing about the Constitution. It guarantees me life.

This is idiocy (no lesser word will do). Some day you will die, Constitution or no Constitution. The only question is whether, until then, you will choose to be a patriot who supports the Constitution or a traitor who undermines it.

[southern rock]

Perhaps you will show us SPECIFICALLY where the Constitution REQUIRES Congress to declare war.

The federal government is not permitted to do anything it wants absent constitutional prohibition. Quite the opposite. The federal government only has those powers SPECIFICALLY granted in the constitution.

[southern rock]

Oh, gee, it's something about the Congress being given the power to declare wars. It does not say the Congress must declare war before we're allowed to kick the humus outta the rag-heads. (Does that sound intolerant?)

Intolerance doesn't offend me in the least. I have always been a fan of it, actually. However, waging war, without a declaration from congress, still doesn't pass constitutional muster.

[Theodore R.]

I have yet to figure out why conservatives rally to John Ashcroft. What has he done in his 1.5 years in office? I can't think of much of anything. What I do remember is his capitulation to the Carnahans. Also, hasn't he now urged that Roe v. Wade NOT be repealed?

[joyful1]

"Some day you will die, Constitution or no Constitution."

True enought, and your children will die also. But are you willing for them to endure the same horrific death of those poor 9/11 victims in the Trade Center??

I'll tell you this, steve-b, those parents who lost their children on 9/11 would gladly embrace tighter security if it would bring back their kids.

[Yardstick]

Yes, I agree with your point. And this is where it gets weird again: if these guys are really so good, why do they consistently put new powers in place that will inevitably be abused down the road? It's a dissonance that's hard to ignore. Maybe this sort of dissonance is just part and parcel of politics and government -- compromise and all that. I don't know. But it appears to me that the country is drifting and the good guys keep messin' up.

[Protagoras]

I have a severe problem with Ashcroft okaying using private citizens to spy on Americans and spying on places of worship.

How dare you criticize a Republican? You un-american slime! < /sarcasm>

[SerpentDove]

>>Awwww, c'mon. Give TIPS a chance! After all, tyrants from Hitler to Mao to Saddam Hussein all agree that local level informants are the most effective way to gather intelligence on unreliable sorts! And it's fun, too! Rat on that pesty neighbor whose dog craps on your lawn. Make allegations against that creep your daughter's been seeing. See? We'll wonder how we ever got along without TIPS!<<

(Sarcasm duly noted, and continued...)

And won't it be FUN when the "goooood guys" aren't in power any more, and Hillary or some such gets to use all these newfound attacks on liberty and is in charge of investigations and arrests!

WOOHOO!

[palo verde]

Hi Yardstick
perceptive post
I agree with you
Love, Palo

[Marysecretary]

AMEN, Ted. I feel the same way. You can't trust anything the media has to stay about Bush, Ashcroft or anyone else for that matter. I'll keep my money on Ashcroft.

[Hugin]

Well, what I was referring to was the new TIPS program, wherein the government hires people to spy on those in their community.

Nobody is hiring anybody. This is just citizens voluntarily keeping an eye out for suspicious activity.

He seems to constantly feel the need to wage a struggle of some sort and will use any means at his disposal to reach his objective.

Are you being sarcastic? If not, well DUH!

[Marysecretary]

And who knows what the demoncrats will do when they get back into office? And they will, and they will misuse everything Dubya has put into practice in their (all too short) absence. We are heading for Armageddon...strap yourselves in. It's gonna be a helluva ride for the next few years. The Liars will be out in full force, doing and saying anything to get rid of Bush and conservatism.

[Marysecretary]

They just print what fits!

[zerosix]

Gosh yes, we might even start enouraging people to point out to the police who are on their cell phones while driving; aren't wearing seat belts; smack their kids who misbehave and other serious unlawful things like that.

[ellery]

Our current informal tips program encourages all Americans to call or email their local FBI office if they notice anything suspicious -- it's absolutely right and necessary, and we should all be on the lookout. With TIPS, we may discourage the average citizen to be on the lookout, since some of them will believe that the TIPS folks have it under control (similar to the sheeple who are against privately owned guns because hey, they can always call the cops). So while either keeping the same or actually decreasing the number of people on the look-out, TIPS does set up a formal government infrastructure of citizen spies. And yes, the current plans *do* call for conscripting utility workers with access to private homes: "As part of the country's war against terrorism, the Bush administration by next month wants to recruit a million letter carriers, utility workers and others whose jobs allow them access to private homes into a contingent of organized government informants." That's in your home, without a search warrant, informing for the government. http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20020716-75882632.htm

The former, which is what we have now, provides the security of a neighborhood watch without giving the government an official cadre of citizen spies it can comandeer. The second provides no additional security but VASTLY increases the potential for abuse. If future administrations wanted to say, crack down on "right wing militia" types, under the current system they would have to announce to the public at large to be on the watch -- and have the reasons to back it up. With TIPS, all they would need to do is send out a quiet communique to their TIPS corps -- and all of a sudden, people are getting reported for having a buzz cut and a Choose Life bumper sticker. Yes, people can do that now -- but the government has no way of DIRECTING them to do so, outside of a fully public announcement. That's what's scary.

[Yardstick]

...under the current system they would have to announce to the public at large to be on the watch... with TIPS, all they would need to do is send out a quiet communique to their TIPS corps...

Interesting point.

[WASTEMONEY]

And WHO GAVE 43 MILLION to the Tally Tubbies because they had a bridge for sale (remember they said they stopped growing poppies?) that would be US! are we stupid or what? we didn't really believe this did we? just who was in charge of sending that money? The DEA? and we all know who they report to, JOHN! he is so good! and ALL of you who turn a blind eye to this WAKE THE F UP! he sent YOUR MONEY, 43 MIL! you all worry about John Lindh, a punk from Cali, oh I bet he was agreat asset to them! NOT! but 43 MIL in CASH I bet I could buy flying leasons with that and some plane tickets too. Ever hear of smoke and mirriors?

[gracie1]

I was going to post on this thread last night when I got in but it was very late and I was very tired. You've made all the points I was going to argue and then a few more.

It absolutely amazes me how the same group of people swallow the bait hook line and sinker when cast by a republican but would have howled to kingdom come if it had been cast by Gore/Reno.

Ashcroft may be a good christian and all, but who will be his replacement? You wanna bet your freedoms it will be another? Did Mcveigh look like a terrorist? Who will be the next pres after Bush? Funny how the sheeple scurry to the cover of their nanny government.

[jwalsh07]

Excuse me a minute, I have to report you.

Report away dude but after you get done reporting, think about this. Had there been a hotline regarding terrorists any number of people, but mostly the owner of the flight school, probably would have used it.

Of course, being the principled guy you are, you wouldn't have, right?

[jwalsh07]

The federal government is not permitted to do anything it wants absent constitutional prohibition. Quite the opposite. The federal government only has those powers SPECIFICALLY granted in the constitution.

I have better conversations with my dog.