|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
The Senate Judiciary
Committee (SJD) confirmation hearings on John Ashcroft's nomination
for US Attorney General are getting nasty, with Senator Ted Kennedy (D.Mass)
leading the charge as the defender of Americanism and the rights of
our citizens. Teddy of Chappaquiddick? Defender of the
nation and the faith of our founding fathers? I don't know that
Ted Kennedy has demonstrated any faith in anything at all other than
his Kennedy lineage and the money to absolve him from any and all
wrongs, including the infamous Chappaqiddick incident. Yet at the SJD hearings on
Mr. Ashcroft's fitness to serve as the Attorney General in
President-elect George W. Bush's cabinet, it is Teddy of
Chappaquiddick who is most severely and vituperatively questioning the
integrity of a man whose personal and religious convictions he
opposes. Right behind Ted Kennedy's
onslaught is that of the liberal press, followed closely by voters who
are saying Bush's nominees are "out of the mainstream."
Out of what mainstream? The mainstream of slush and
unprincipled conduct that has made America a prosperous sewer where
even broadcast television is unfit to watch? Where people cry
out for protection against moral undermining of their children via the
media and yet demand total moral relativity for themselves? If we are going to accept
the notion that America's mainstream has been Clintonized to where
"no principles" is the underlying concept of freedom, then
America cannot long remain free. Freedom is not the liberty
to do as you please, but the privilege of doing that which is lawful
and proper under the charter of our nation. Upholding the
Constitution of the United States, even where judicial interpretation
has de facto amended it, is a job requiring principles of the highest
caliber. This is truly the meaning of "the rule of
law." This is what one newspaper
cited as fears of John Ashcroft:
"Ashcroft's personal convictions as a deeply religious,
conservative Callers to Phoenix
talk-radio, which is global via its website, have expressed fear that
"the South will rule again." The South once ruled?
Somewhere all known history books seem to have overlooked that little
gem. What's bothering women's
groups is that they want their abortion-on-demand and no one in office
who might oppose it. Women can accept Janet Reno and her gross
violations of human rights via use of federal force, but never
their personal rights to kill their unborn. As to the civil
rights fears, John Ashcroft's religious convictions do not ... repeat
... do not pose a threat to equal protection for all Americans under
the law. Mr. Ashcroft's record indicates he will uphold the law
even when he disagrees with it. This is very similar to those
who detest the IRS but who still pay their taxes in spite of
opposition to the IRS. Americans have been calling
for principle, and now via the media the departure of one of our most
unprincipled presidents is being lamented as though conservatism is
destined to ruin America. We are now beyond being a two-party nation,
we've become a very two-faced one. People have cried for more
integrity during the Clinton years, and now they're shrinking back in
fear when integrity is interpreted to pose a threat to their
individual preferences, special interests or corrupt lifestyles.
The future of America's children and of the nation itself should be
subordinate, in too many minds, to America's hedonism and
virally-infected sense of moral uprightness. Unless the Senate Judiciary
Committee can come up with a better defender of the American morality
than Teddy Kennedy, with his vicious tirades against someone who has
far higher standards than his own, Mr. Ashcroft should be confirmed as
the new Attorney General. And it is quite strange
that over the past thirty-five years, a nation that once upheld the
Judeo-Christian ethic as the standard for personal and public
behavior, including media content, is now scared to death of it! When people want to become
a law unto themselves and bring positions of authority down to the
lowest common denominator, they are the ones subverting the national
interest, the future of the children and the direction of the nation's
future. When the people so disrespect the Constitution as to be
willing to discard it for the sake of personal lifestyle, they are de
facto subversives. And yes, there are people ... voters ... who
have expressed the notion that the Constitution is now out of date! It was against just such
popular whims that our founding fathers created both the Constitution
and a federal republic rather than a strict democracy. The will
of some of the people is simply too fickle and unstable to trust with
the future of the entire nation or the rights of others. And,
perhaps, the founding fathers anticipated such elected officials as
Teddy of Chappaquiddick. © Dorothy Anne Seese, 2001 Today's featured
columns:
Statement of President Bill Clinton in the deal with the Independent
Counsel to avoid criminal charges View expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Political USA.
|
|
