posted on January 24, 2001 11:20:10 AM
Other than that Southern Partisan interview there really isn't anything he's ever said or done that might indicate he's a racist. And even that is subject to interpretation (if you read the context it actualy seems that his "perverted agenda" thing was about the founding fathers and not Jefferson and Lee).
Whoever wrote this article is building up a strawman to "prove" that he's a racist, but makes no case whatsoever. There's a lot of very vaild reasons why Ashcroft shouldn't be AG, but it doesn't do anyone any good to manufacture charges against him.
[ edited by jamesoblivion on Jan 24, 2001 11:21 AM ]
posted on January 24, 2001 11:54:36 AM
"Ashcroft testified that he was not aware of the magazine's controversial positions when he granted Southern Partisan an interview in 1998."
No public political person can cite ignorance of the political bent of any other person or organization they willingly associate with as an excuse. The very act of association, be it a speech, interview or photo-op is an implicit acknowledgement of some kinship with the views of the other party. Unless the last association is in the form of a public disavowal of the other party (such as Carter's decision to announce his withdrawal from the Southern Baptist Convention).
I'm curious as to what Ashcroft said in the interview. Has he merely disavowed giving the interview or has he disavowed whatever he said in the interview that Southern Partisan saw fit to publish?
It appears that our soon to be appointed Attorney General believes that ignorance is an excuse.
posted on January 24, 2001 11:58:13 AM
Apparently Ashcroft would gladly give the Klan directions to its victims' houses, but never soil himself by actually joining.
posted on January 24, 2001 11:59:25 AM
The way reagan got himself out of many a tricky corner was by saying "duhh! I don't remember"....
That seems to be a very rightist commodity: lack of memory, unawareness...
posted on January 24, 2001 12:09:38 PM
I didn't read it that way at all, James. The writer is making the case that the appointment of Ashcroft would be a victory for racists (however couched in a name), but not necessarily that he is one himself. That he is a right wing extrmist, yes; that he is an adroit player in national politics, yes. And what person could afford to be perceived as vehemently racist on the national scene? It didn't carry David Duke in state politics to be so seen, in fact it defeated him.
Still, the points which go to the careful masking of racist perceptions and beliefs is valid, and very likely do describe Ashcroft. He covers, to be sure, yet has let slip, if you will, his sympathetic stance toward those things which are valued in southern partisan politics which necessarily includes acknowledgement, at the least, of those elements of the voter base which attach importance to the issue.
I've been doing deals in property around the country. In one that I considered, a house near Mountain Home, AR, I asked the seller (who was selling his mother's home) about the raccial demographics of the area and the particular town in which the house is located. His answer to me was that 'the blacks do not seem to chose to live here, although they would certainly be welcome'.
I can't relate the conversation in full effect here, but I can tell you that it was the oiliest thing that I've ever heard, and there was no doubt in my mind what he meant.
I posted a link to the actual content of that interview somewhere here, or at least relevant portions of it. Probably in the Ashcroft thread.
edited to add excert as follows:
Senator Ashcroft: "I wish I had another copy: I'd send it to you. I gave it away to a newspaper editor. West virtually disassembles all of these malicious attacks these revisionists have brought against our founders. Your magazine also helps set the record straight. You've got a heritage of doing that, of defending Southern Patriots like Lee, Jackson, and Davis. Traditionalists must do more. I've got to do more. We've all got to stand up and speak in this respect, or else we'll be taught that these people were giving their lives, subcribing their sacred fortunes and their honor to some perverted agenda".
Although this mentions founders, I'm not clear on which founders, and the intent of the statement is clearly in support of the Southern Partisan magazine "tradition" of expounding the validity of the South's purpose in the Civil War.
posted on January 24, 2001 12:39:19 PM
I think the accusation of racism as it pertains to Mr. Ashcrofts views, is not due to so much any ONE thing (such as the Southern Partisan interview), but a conglomeration of MULTIPLE issues, such as Judge Ronnie White, his actions (or lack of them) pertaining to the federal court ordered desegration of Missouri schools, the Southern Partisan interview, and of course the Bob Jones Univ. honorary degree and speech. There are other things involved, such as rumors (unsubstantiated) of "friendships" with certain Klan indviduals. Perhaps the old adage about a person's reputation being colored by the company they keep is true after all.
posted on January 24, 2001 01:13:06 PM
You know, I've got a fairly low tolerance for bigotry, but rumours and things that you have to read into shouldn't be considered as concrete evidence. He's a Conservative Republican, for some that's the ground zero they start from and then interpolate meaning into various things.
I can't place the exact quote in my mind, but the "sacrificing our sacred fortunes and honor" line comes from something one of the Founders of America did say. It seems pretty evident to me that the "perverted agenda" line was referring to them and efforts by some modern historians to taint America's founders as racist, rather then as men of their time -- who were also ahead of their time.
The obssession with the Confederacy is, in my opinion, not only unhealthy but also un-American. That he says considers the rebels who almost destroyed America to be patriots -- that is one reason why he is not fit to serve in the Fed. gov't.
This article compares him to David Duke. Utterly ridiculous. Have you ever looked at David Duke's official web site? Please don't, but if you do anyway you'll see what an authentic racist smells like. Ashcroft? A piece of "evidence" is the Ronnie White thing that even White acknowledges was political and not racist.
You're gonna tell me that Ashcroft shares supporters with David Duke? Well so does Charlton Heston and he marched with Martin Luther King. The racist establishment in this country have a three-fold agenda; their racism, their religion and their politics. Obviously they are going to support condidates that mirror their religous and political worldview.
This guy writing the article invokes David Duke and a German neo-nazi magazine, but how does that apply to Ashcroft? He draws a thread that is supposed to tie it all together, but I think it's all made up. Ashcroft stinks for many reasons so why invent reasons that are not substantiated?
edited to remove redundancy.
[ edited by jamesoblivion on Jan 24, 2001 01:15 PM ]
posted on January 24, 2001 03:48:52 PM
Nevertheless, Ashcroft has not answered, as far as I can find, nor was he asked in the senate hearing why he met, during his campaign for the senate last fall last fall with Thomas Bugel, the president of "the militantly racist Council of Conservative Citizens and a veteran leader of segregationist groups in the St. Louis area".
An answer to that, or a full exposure of campaign contributions made to Ashcroft may reveal more of what his position is, especially considering the timing of the meeting.
That he would say that he considers the leaders of the southern effort, the Civil War to preserve the institution of slavery to be patriots is telling of his general attitude.
I doubt that a direct link between Ashcroft and Duke could be found. That would be a politica kill stroke for him as Duke obviously is much to publically an extremist.
posted on January 24, 2001 06:33:53 PM
Jamesoblivion,
So Ashcroft is claiming that he didn't know the racist leaning of
the Southern Partisan when he granted an interview in 1998.
How can you really believe that? Even I can look at a magazine such
as the Southern Partisan and tell how it
leans politically.
Ashcroft is a lawyer, a governor and will soon be Attorney General.
He is also a lier. Everytime his mouth moves a lie comes forth.
Of course he is a more shrewd racist than David Duke but a racist
nevertheless.
On civil rights, Ashcroft fought a desegregation plan in Missouri.
Even the judge in the case stated that Ashcroft defied the
authority of the court in this case.
posted on January 25, 2001 06:17:53 AM
The concluding sentence of The Declaration of Independence...
"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
I think that in the view of the states which seceded the union slavery was the basis for their fortunes, so his usage in that interview of the paraphrased portion of the Declaration of Independence indicates his support , in context, of both those southern patriots (or true patriots) and of that institution which they strove to preserve.
posted on January 25, 2001 12:09:51 PM
In attempting to define Ashcroft's position on race, a substitution in Gertrude Stein's oft-quoted observation that "A rose is a rose is a rose" serves well: "An ass is an ass is an ass." In other words, if it looks like an ass, acts like an ass, sounds like an ass, and smells like an ass, it's reasonable to assume that it is indeed an ass. One may call it a donkey, but that semantic preference doesn't alter its essential assness.
That he is racially prejudiced is one of the chief accusations that his political foes have levelled against Ashcroft and the accusation can hardly come as a surprise to either him or his political supporters. Why then has no one been able to find parallel examples of his impartially, especially in his roles as an elected official? If indeed he has never let his personal beliefs interfere with his official decision-making, where are all those specific examples that could be used to present a compelling argument against the charges? Knowing the scrutiny to which he would be subjected by both the mainstream press and in the confirmation hearing, one would assume that the arguments would be substantive ones rather than merely rhetorical spinning and his promises (to paraphrase a source with which he is familiar) to "go and sin no more."
As a private citizen Ashcroft may hold whatever personal views he chooses, however repugnant to me or others. But when he ascends to one of the most powerful political positions in the nation, it should be necessary that he, or his supporters, provide compelling evidence to at least counter-balance the evidence to the contrary. If such arguable examples exist, why haven't they surfaced?
posted on January 27, 2001 08:37:32 AM
Right. What deal was struck?
Doesn't it seem convenient that Carnahan's plane crashed? The NTSB investigation is still pending, and on hold, with the preliminary report citing instrument failure.
posted on January 27, 2001 12:58:02 PM
I haven't seen news reports, only the NTSB summary. There probably would be an explosion upon impact in any case, but if someone saw one while the plane was in the air that could indicate something other than instrument failure went wrong. The pilot, his son and a commercially rated pilot reported a failure of his attitude indicator and said that he would try to continue using the copilot indicator. Then he reported that that one didn't work either, and the rest of any tape is unreported by NTSB so far.
posted on January 29, 2001 07:13:44 AM
From the article,
"One wonders if Ashcroft and Norton know anything of America's shameful history of state sovereignty in the service of racist laws and thousands of unpunished lynchings? "
Of course they know. I knew in the sixth
grade. Ashcroft, who is a lawer, a former
senator, governor and now about to be
the attorney general doesn't know the history of the country???
posted on February 1, 2001 02:15:11 PM
The INFAMOUS Democrats who voted for
Ashcroft
John Breaux of Louisiana
Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia
Kent Conrad of North Dakota
Byron Dorgan of North Dakota
Christopher Dodd of Connecticut
Russ Feingold of Wisconsin
Zell Miller of Georgia
Ben Nelson of Nebraska
