Ashcroft resignation offical

Captain Kruger · Post by **Captain Kruger** » 2004-11-10 12:21am

Mrs. CmdrWilkens wrote:Pandering Party?! Puhlease...all politicians pander. Especially Bush...

Yeah, but the Democrats specifically try to convince people that sucking on the welfare nipple forever is a good thing. Dependency on the government for survival = more government power. As a native Californian, I saw too much of that shit growing up.

Captain Kruger · Post by **Captain Kruger** » 2004-11-10 12:23am

Just for the record, I'm not exactly a card-carrying Republican either. I think both parties are royally fucked up. The GOP is just the lesser of two evils...usually...

egyptfrk · Post by **egyptfrk** » 2004-11-10 12:27am

rrrrrright.......

Post by **Beowulf** » 2004-11-10 12:33am

Git your asses back on topic.

The Cleric · Post by **The Cleric** » 2004-11-10 01:04am

Mrs. CmdrWilkens wrote:rrrrrright.......

Would you like to post something constructive?

And this shirt says it all.

That site has some other good shirts too.

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-11-10 01:08am

Before I go fetch the champagne, is there any real word on who might replace John "I lost an election to a dead guy" Ashcroft, or is it all just speculation and rumor?

egyptfrk · Post by **egyptfrk** » 2004-11-10 01:17am

Latest from the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... 4Nov9.html

Administration sources said Ashcroft's successor is likely to be White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales.

Administration sources said other contenders to replace Ashcroft include his former deputy, Larry D. Thompson, who would be the nation's first African American attorney general but has indicated he is not interested, and Marc Racicot, a former Montana governor who was chairman of Bush's reelection effort.

Ashcroft's deputy, James B. Comey; former New York City mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani; and New York Gov. George E. Pataki also are on the handicap lists of administration insiders. Most are considered more moderate than Ashcroft.

Captain Kruger · Post by **Captain Kruger** » 2004-11-10 01:29am

Mrs. CmdrWilkens wrote:rrrrrright.......

Republicans at their worst...
Cram Christianity down our throats.

Democrats at their worst...
Target minorities and women for free handouts and preferential treatment, effectively labeling white males as second-class citizens.
If unchecked, would happily make as much of the US population as possible dependent on government services to survive.

In other words, they both suck. Why do I prefer the G-O-P? Because the support base for their worst qualities is O-L-D. They're getting closer to death's door. The Jesse Helms' and Jerry Falwells of this country are dying out. On the flipside, the support base for the above-mentioned Democratic sore points is young and, it seems to me, getting stronger.

Most Americans under 40 who weren't raised in Hicksville tend to think that cramming religion down the throat of the public is a bad thing. In the long run, it won't be tolerated, no matter how much the Christian Coalition screams from the pulpit. I really don't think we have to worry about being turned into a theocracy.

Now as for the Democrats...their policies of state-sponsored racism and sexism have been warmly received by Young America. Most white males who get passed over for a job because of their skin or gender will never be aware of it. Hence, no backlash from them. If they voice suspicion of such a thing, they get shouted down as racist and "trying to keep (insert your preferred group here) down!" How DARE a white male stand up for himself! I haven't noticed this trend changing. The solution to helping poor and uneducated people, minority or white, is by improving their education and job skills. But don't bother telling the Democrats that. Not when they can guarantee an enormous young voting base by convincing them that a cycle of endless dependency and handouts is a good thing.

[/rant]

Captain Kruger · Post by **Captain Kruger** » 2004-11-10 01:29am

Beowulf wrote:Git your asses back on topic.

*salutes* Yessir.

Captain Kruger · Post by **Captain Kruger** » 2004-11-10 11:11am

closet sci-fi fan wrote:Of course, he's most likely going to get appointed to one of the four Supreme Court positions that will most likely be opening up during these next four years.

Asscroft, a Supreme Court justice? *shivers* *pukes* *tries to purge thought from mind*

acesand8s · Post by **acesand8s** » 2004-11-10 12:12pm

Washington Post wrote:Administration sources said Ashcroft's successor is likely to be White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales.

Oh fuck. Isn't he the one that said Guantanamo Bay is legal?

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2004-11-10 12:22pm

Ashcroft isn't cofirmable as an SC justice after his track record as AG, and Bush knows it. Look for 'moderate' conservatives to be nominated as justices.

BTW, did anyone see that Bush is nominating Alberto Gonzales as Asscroft's replacement?