Scott's Reply on my John Ashcroft piece

It's interesting how easy it is these days to find a way to entertain Mr. Ashcroft's personality disorders. And, unlike the members of the Weasels, most people will act genuinely surprised by it all, as if they were caught in the middle of some surprisingly new discovery process of "The Ashcroft Revelations" or something similar. They might also even claim to have never known what this guy was really like before, as well as after the confirmation  process. 

This has a name. Apathy.

Keeping track of Ashcroft is almost like keeping score, or more appropriately, a hospital chart, on a mental defective whose prior history left nothing else for us to think, other than knowing that more of the same was coming regardless of what steps we took from our place in the political cosmic order to stop it. Following the habits of sick people is not a surprise. Confirming them as Attorney general of the United States of America is another matter. 

Or maybe voter apathy and spineless politicians was the real issue all  along; the subliminal, yet equally devious purpose of Zepp's terrific think  piece.

Short of locking him up in a rubber room for both his and our own protection (my 
preference), what did we really have to think as an alternative to this charade? Russ Feingold came up with his naive and equally delusional "olive branch" conclusion in committee, while another 16% of the Senate Democrats conveniently looked the other way during "show time." for god's little messenger

In a nutshell, we know what they did. But, in retrospect, what did the American public do to themselves, in a collective sense, to contribute to this enabling of a clearly unqualified candidate by some equally suspect Democrats?  

The people simply elected -- no surprise -- some very irresponsible and politically disconnected people to represent them. And, after the fact of confirming an obvious screwball Attorney General nominee, and with all the excuses given for same, the bottom line remains. The people went away, and with that, gave away the same free passes to their so-called "leaders," as those very same people gave to Ashcroft.  

As a result, all poor Zepp is left to work with is not another Ashcroft debacle at all; but instead a quiet and ongoing obituary of the Democratic Party's fall from grace. And as ironic as it is interesting, the piece was written in a metaphorical parlance about -- of all things -- someone else's sins. 

And THAT, my friends, is what's wrong with the Democratic party.

The truth is, we never let Ashcroft get into the game to begin with. He came begging, like the rest of them, with the same patronizing lies that we already knew the script provided from contemporary history dating back maybe thirty years hence. Or was it the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee and their like-minded counterparts in the general elective body that were complicit in giving him the free pass too? That issue is debatable, but the "why's" are not

If the voters of Missouri stated, clearly and unequivocally, that they would prefer a dead man as their Senator, rather than someone as unsavory and clearly as pathologically deviant, as is Ashcroft, then just one simple question remains to be asked of them. Who gave this domestic "Osama the Religious Predator" the magic carpet to traverse our legal landscape, and along with it the right to degrade, distort and marginalize our basic moral 
values into an insidious theocratic ink blot driven patriotism test? 

Basically, and indirectly, we did. Or... if that's too harsh, an alternative might be that the people we chose to represent us lied to us when they wanted something from us, and in no less measure than Ashcroft lied to them when he also wanted something from them. 

Take your pick. 

The election results in Missouri say a lot for the collective common sense and values of ordinary rank and file citizens, as well as the opposite for our present family of Democratic politicians; whose seduction from virtue and duty to their very own electors as demonstrated, and again, at the expense of the same people who picked the "dead man" over god's Crisco Kid. 

What's wrong with that picture? Maybe the simple fact that political debauchery isn't as partisan as we might think, or maybe in our choosing, out of political correctness, guilt or tribalism, that we imagine the real gravity of the result that "it" is anything but an ongoing reality. 

I would never discount the necessity of writing creative material about Ashcroft. And none better then you, Zepp, to do it. As with any sickness, symptoms need to be treated as well as the root causes. Unfortunately, for us, those symptoms existed long before Ashcroft received his flashy new carpet. He was, at best, a sitting duck that the Democrats forgot to shoot when they had more than ample opportunity. And the question is still begging. 

Why?

I think the answers will be found in creating an unavoidable acute awareness of impending political mortality and / or doom for both the Leahy types and the rest of the elected Democrats up on the Hill. Ergo, they simply are not doing their jobs as requested, or as they promised. Period. If they campaigned on grounds of religious freedom, then why were 16% of them complicit in confirming this psychotic? If they campaigned on gun control, then why did they allow a man who gives rent free tenant space at the Department of Justice to the paranoids of the NRA, and who are still there to this day? 

Why didn't they, instead, simply borrow from Nancy's dyslexicon and simply say "No"? "No Ashcroft......no nothing." That's all they had to say. And it's those very things that we don't address, or at least question, except maybe on election day, that I see the real damage being done......the slow death of us as a viable political presence. 

Ashcroft isn't there because he deserved to be. He lied through his teeth, and on top of his bible, during confirmation. And our own reps let him get away with it. It can also be said that neither were Negroponte and all the rest of the recycled Reagan political and criminal scum required to tell the truth, that we know they knew. Miraculously, as well as through the grace of Ashcroft's God, they evaded prison terms and instead, got even more in the 
free passes from Leahy and the rest of the bent over Democrats of the post Jeffords Senate crowd gave them to do more of the same their history suggests. But..."we have control now," they tell us. My question is the control of who, and was it a fact or rather a pretense based upon the reality of their dismal performances? 

I believe our most important issues are with our very own Senators and Congressman; OUR Democrats; and not the psychopaths that they approve to ruin this country in our name. 

If this religious pervert wasn't confirmed in the first place, "Osama bin Ashcroft" could have been a potential work of fiction in Zepp's imagination, or, maybe not written at all. But, in no way would those circumstances make the work any less compelling than the stark reality the truth of this fine article has conveyed to everyone. If Zepp can see that, and can cogently write about it; then why couldn't Leahy and company see and do the very same thing when they had the same opportunities? 

And......the bigger question is......why didn't they?

Scott A.