I am so overjoyed at Ashcrofts resignation!

[Selwynn]

Yes, I am aware the odds are whoever replaces him will be as bad. I don't care. One problem at a time.

One of the things that was difficult for me in these last four years was that it felt like Iraq, as serious and gravely important as it is, totally drowned out the equally serious story of the utter assault of justice and rights at home lead by the insane John Ashcroft and his justice department.

Issues of civil rights and justice at home were every bit as important to me as our failing foreign policy, but it seemed so hard to get people to pay as much attention to what was going on here. I personally lothed John Ashcroft and ever single thing he did. He was number three on my list of people who needed to go. Number one was not Bush, either. Number one was Dick.

1. Dick
2. Rove
2. Ashcroft
3. Rumsfeld
4. Rice
5. Bush

If you take away 1-4 Bush is not really all that important. Those are the faces that really dive the evil we see today - Bush is just their witless mouthpiece.

Anyway, I am so happy to see Ashcroft gone. Since we know 1,2 and 5 aren't leaving, I'm hoping 3 is next.

Edit - maybe this is too serious for the lounge... I dunno... if felt more casual when I was typing it.. :)

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

1. why, he is just going on the Supreme Court when Rhenquist

quits over his health.

[JohnnyRingo]

2. STOP IT...

Stop scaring me.
That's a week's worth of bad dreams.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

3. No, that is a lifetime of bad dreams

Him being the AG of Missouri was a week's worth.

[Walt Starr]

11. Look ast it this way, if Bush nominates him, the Dems MUST confirm

Strategically, it would work more to our advantage to allow an Ashcroft appointment to go through than to filibuster it.

[saracat]

4. Yup! Don't know why everybody is so happy about this!

And I am fearful of what the new AG will be!

[BurtWorm]

6. He might not. Apparently he wasn't well liked by the Bushists.

Even they knew he was a grandstanding gasbag, if you believe Elizabeth Bumiller (which, I admit, is asking a lot).

[coloradodem2005]

7. Well. Ashcroft has been getting smacked over Gitmo.

And he has had many contentious dealings with people on both sides. So, Bush may not be so quick to make an appointment to the Supreme court for Ashcroft.

[Crunchy Frog]

8. There's no way he'd be appointed

to the Supreme Court. We should be so lucky. He's way to old and in ill health. Bush's appointees will all be young and healthy so that we will be stuck with them for the next 30 years.

Ashcroft's replacement will probably be at least as bad, but not so overt about it so as not to be the lightning rod that he was. That's not necessarily a good thing. It just means he'll be doing more bad shit without nearly as much scrutiny.

[Selwynn]

10. If you can't be bothered to read the first sentence of my post...

I can't be bothered to deal with you.

[carnie_sf]

5. We can always hope

for a heart attack for 1

[Kellanved]

9. possible

As Coats is getting ready to replace Rummy , it seems likely.
However, after seeing Coats up close for a few years, I believe he actually might be worse. He sure is the most incompetent ambassador in a long time and a Fundy of Ashcroftian quality.