Ashcroft Going Too Far?

John Ashcroft's appointment as Attorney General raised serious questions about whether morality and law make the best of bedmates. Citing his fondness for Jesus's--as opposed to America's--law and his penchant for early morning prayer, the Democrats bloodied Ashcroft as a Bible-betraying Jesus freak.

Most conservatives--including myself--regarded such labels as compliments. Very simply, we reasoned that Ashcroft's deep and abiding sense of religion implied a sturdy sense of right and wrong that, in turn, would enable him to act consistently and decisively. With Ashcroft, we had reason to believe that the laws would no longer be subject to relativistic reasoning and emotional whims, as had been the case during the Reno years. On the contrary, laws would now be dispensed with the consistency of someone who regards the world in terms of moral certainties.

Ashcroft's sense of moral certainty was perfectly embodied by his response to the September 11 attacks. Undeterred by political correctness, Ashcroft proceeded to round up several hundred "special interest detainees." He did so without regard to civil rights organizations. Nor did he did not seem overly concerned with that piece of paper, the Bill of Rights. Even more tellingly, Ashcroft made no discernible effort to ease the worries of those Democrats who had so ruthlessly attacked him during the confirmation process. (Often, when a politician undergoes a particularly brutal confirmation, he will feel some subconscious need to pander to his detractors-to prove to them that he's not so bad after all.)

Continued on page 2: »