A chance to support Ashcroft for AG

O

Oatka

New member
At a bare minimum, call your state senators, but it would help if you could also call a couple on the Senate Judiciary Committee. I know, some are useless (Feinstein, Kennedy, et al) but one or two others wouldn't hurt. Where else can you exercise your right as a citizen as cheaply as a phone call?

An email snippet from the Bush campaign people:

"First, let your Senator know you strongly support a fair confirmation process for President-elect George W. Bush's choice for Attorney General -- John Ashcroft.

Go to http://www.senate.gov/senators/senator_by_state.cfm to find the contact information for the Senators from your state.

Second, let the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee know you support John Ashcroft's confirmation. The committee begins its hearings Tuesday.

Its members are: http://www.senate.gov/~judiciary/members.htm

Biden Jr, Joseph, (202) 224-5042, senator@biden.senate.gov

DeWine, Mike, (202) 224-2315,
http://www.senate.gov/~dewine/request_form.html

Feingold, Russell, (202) 224-5323, russell_feingold@feingold.senate.gov

Feinstein, Dianne, (202) 224-3841, senator@feinstein.senate.gov

Grassley, Chuck,, (202) 224-3744, http://grassley.senate.gov/webform.htm

Hatch, Orrin, (202) 224-5251, senator_hatch@hatch.senate.gov

Kennedy, Edward, (202) 224-4543, senator@kennedy.senate.gov

Kohl, Herb, (202) 224-5653, senator_kohl@kohl.senate.gov

Kyl, Jon, (202) 224-4521, info@kyl.senate.gov

Leahy, Patrick, (202) 224-4242, senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov

Schumer, Charles, (202) 224-6542, senator@schumer.senate.gov

Sessions, Jeff, (202) 224-4124, senator@sessions.senate.gov

Smith, Bob, (202) 224-2841, opinion@smith.senate.gov

Specter, Arlen, (202) 224-4254, http://specter.senate.gov/webform.htm

Thurmond, Strom, (202) 224-5972, senator@thurmond.senate.gov

Torricelli, Robert, (202) 224-3224 senator_torricelli@torricelli.senate.gov"
 
Don't overlook sending e-mails ( Yes, I agree a phone call is best, second-best is hard copy, a letter or fax ) to all Senators, all Congressmen ( just to let them know you are watching... ) and a pile of Editors via

http://www.mailblasterdot.com

you do get and answerback, so they can't claim they didn't hear from you!
 
Here's a poll that needs your help that's in the Boston Globe (Pravda East).

"Should the Judiciary Committee approve John Ashcroft's nomination?"
No 61.7%
Yes 33%

Scroll past their hatchet job on him (Vietnam deferment) - it's about 1/3 down the page in the middle.

And another at CNN:
"Should the Judiciary Committee approve John Ashcroft's nomination?"
Yes 54%
No 46%

About 1/2 way down on the left.

And, in general, here's why we get beat into the ground so often: The title of this post is self-explanatory, yet it has received only 40+ hits.

If we don't support people favorable to our side, how can we bitch to the chorus when we lose?
 
With a few exceptions, republicans are political Babes in the Woods

Elker_43 - Thanks for covering my slip-up on the link.

The Republica's are "dismayed" by the vicious Democratic attacks against this man. They're whining about “the politics of division.”. Even when they win elections they screw it up - the country club set against modern-day Brown Shirts.

One bright ray, a snippet from "Ashcroft Plays Defense" by Byron York at the National Review:
FULL STORY

"Although every Republican senator praised Ashcroft, the only one to score substantial points was Arizona’s Jon Kyl, who took a direct shot at Democratic chairman Patrick Leahy. Kyl read from a 1993 Senate proceeding in which Leahy defended the Clinton administration’s nomination of Walter Dellinger to head the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel. “(I) think most Senators will agree that the standard we apply in the case of executive branch appointments is not as stringent as that for judicial nominees,” Leahy said then. “The President should get to pick his own team. Unless the nominee is incompetent or some other major ethical or investigative problem arises in the course of our carrying out our duties, then the President gets the benefit of the doubt.” Hearing his own words read to him by Kyl, Leahy made clear that he was not amused. Leahy explained that at the time he was simply trying to push along a troubled nomination. And besides, he added, the nomination of an attorney general is different."

I think those of us who are interested in this ought to drop Kyl a note of thanks, especially Arizonians, at: info@kyl.senate.gov

or

Washington, D.C.
724 Hart Senate Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4521
Fax: (202) 224-2207

Phoenix
2200 East Camelback, Suite 120
Phoenix, Arizona 85016-3455
Phone: (602) 840-1891
Fax: (602) 957-6838


Tucson
7315 North Oracle Road, Suite 220
Tucson, Arizona 85704
Phone: (520) 575-8633
Fax: (520) 797-3232
 
Although not an Arizona resident, I made a call to his office in Washington DC to thank him. The aide a spoke to indicated that there were many calls coming in. If any of you have time, call his office...

In another front, I also called Kennedy's office and explained to his aide that I felt (as a US citizen) that Mr. Kennedy's dialog was inappropriate. I was met with pretty much silence....Guess my comments went into the trash after I hung up....
 
I am watching the confirmation hearings on FOX right now. Ashcroft just stated to Fienstien that he did not beleive that the 2nd forbids any controls. He did a great tap-dance around the issue but he did say that some gun control was okay under the law. He also said that he would support a continuation of the "assault" rifle ban and its renewal upon its sunsetting.

I wonder how much is needed for confirmation and how much is true?
 
During the primaries and the main campaign, I said that my gut was telling me that GW was more conservative and pro-gun than he was letting on. The last couple of weeks have confirmed to some degree my powers of ESP ;) .

I now have the feeling that Ashcroft is solidly pro-2nd. Why? His voting record is pretty good, and he opposed racial profiling, not on the basis of being PC but because he felt it was a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Which it is.

We've become so accustomed to politicians campaigning _with_ us and then selling us down the river later that perhaps we dismiss the notion that they could campaign _against_ us a bit and join us later.

Just my gut again.

Dick
 
Been doing it all evening. As a loyal Missourian and a member of my county's Sheriffs Dept. I can not think of a better man for the job. I have followed John Ashcroft's career for 3 decades and you will not find a more honorable man for Attorney General!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top