A hearty "Eat shit and die, fascist motherfucker!" to Attorney General John Ashcroft

The BBQ Pit
1

Fuck you, asshole. Fuck you, your friends, your supporters, the worthless piece of shit who nominated you for you your job, your inbred ancestors, the contributors to your political campaigns, every person on your mailing list, and every person who shakes your hand instead of spitting in your uncomprehending face.

In case you can’t tell, I am extraordinarily displeased with the U.S. Attorney general:

Well guess what, shithead? I think you have been openly wiping your ass with the Constitution for the last three months. I think your ideas on military tribunals, the breaching of attorney-client confidentiality, secret detention of anybody you feel like, and questioning people based on nothing more than their national origin are all straight out of some dark corner of the 15th century. I think that you wouldn’t recognize human liberty if it walked up to you in church on Sunday morning and started pounding your reactionary ass while screaming “I am human liberty, you detestable son of a bitch!”

But “Oh!” you say, “I only piss on the Bill of Rights because it is necessary to protect our citizens from terrorists who would kill us all if we gave them even the slightest legal rights.”

To which I say stop lying through your dentures, fuckwad. You don’t honestly believe for a moment that the Constitution has to bend over backwards for terrorism. No, you only believe that the inconvenient portions of the Constitution should give way. Because God forbid that anybody even attempt to infringe in even the most trivial of ways on your personal interpretation of the Second Amendment. Fuck no, the FBI isn’t allowed to look at the records of gun purchases for any of the suspects you’ve secretly detained, because that would invade their right to privacy.

Ya know, maybe I could respect you as at least being intellectually consistent when you say our everyday rights and privileges have to give way when it comes to fighting terrorism. But Goddamn, you are a hypocritical piece of shit useless motherfucker who only gives a rat’s ass about the portions of the constitution you personally agree with. Does Osama bin Laden have the right to walk into Kmart and purchase every fucking weapon in the store without the FBI even inquiring into whether he might be armed? Where’s your “Constitution doesn’t apply to terrorists” argument now, bunghole?

Fuck you, motherfucker. Do not even imply, for one single moment, that I am remotely on the side of the terrorists. Disagreeing with you does not encourage anybody to stay silent in the face of evil, it doesn’t give ammunition to the enemy, and it fucking well doesn’t aid terrorists. You are a disgusting human being, and I wish you nothing but unhappiness for the rest of your miserable existence for claiming I support terrorism when I oppose your trashing of civil liberties.

2

What I loved was “They could use our freedoms to their advantages.”

So that means we lose our freedoms as well, jackass? Huh?

Yeah, I loved the part about the gun purchasing. It’s so OBVIOUS it’s not about terrorism-it’s a total wet dream come true for Ashcroft. He’s using this to further his own agenda and milking it for all it’s worth.

Didn’t he say his personal beliefs would not influence his duty to carry out the law? WHat happened to that, you sorry piece of shit!

I watched it this morning in total disbelief. (And of course awe at the sorry state of poor Senator Thurmond, much as I dislike the guy, he looks like he’s on his last leg).

3

I agree with you, minty green. It’s too damn bad Shrub, the man who would be king, didn’t nominate a corpse to the attorney general’s office. At least, the Constitution would be safer then.

I think it’s time for those who love freedom to start stockpiling guns, ammo and explosives.

4

Can anyone say “McCarthy?”

5

Asscrap is revealing himself to be even worse than we thought.

And to think some people complained about Janet Reno.

:mad:

6

:shrug: I had very good reasons for complaining about Reno. Just for different reasons.
Ashcroft is an asshole, granted. But maybe I’m old and jaded. I don’t see any valid comparison between Ashcroft and Tailgunner Joe. Maybe in a few years. And he’s not really a fascist, either.

7

lenin asks, "Can anyone say “McCarthy?”

I can.

Guinastasia, minty green, The Peyote Coyote, and **lenin ** sound like Joseph McCarthy, demonizing Ashcroft for actions that are appropriate to protect the American people and which you know are fully legal and Constitutional.

8

By all the Kings of Tara, andros, he will do until some necromancer resurrects McCarthy’s moldering body. I didn’t think much of Reno or Ed Meese, but they seem like paragons of virtue compared to Attorney General Asswipe.

9

Excuse me?

december, get bent. Excuse ME if I object to my freedoms being eroded to in the name of “stopping terrorism.”

What about he who gives up most of his liberty for a bit of security deserves neither?

Fuck you, december.

10

Fuck you too, december. I didn’t say one goddamned thing about John Ashcroft, SDMB or IRL, until the motherfucker accused me of giving aid and comfort to the enemy. That is the single most contemptible, disgusting statement I have heard in American politics in a long, long time. I have no problem if somebody disagrees with me. I have big problems if somebody equates me to Mullah Fucking Omar because I disagree with them. So fuck John Ashcroft, and if you don’t understand why I’m pissed off at this useless piece of shit excuse for an attorney general, fuck you too.

11

Eat shit and die for pretending to know my state of mind, motherfucker.

12

Guin, Minty, calm the fuck down. We all know that december is a dumb fuck anyway. I’m fairly sure most people just tune him (her?) out.

13

december wrote

Don’t you mean "…and which might be legal and Constitutional. Gotta get your keyboard checked out. It spells funny.

14

minty it would seem that you are twisting Ashcroft’s words out of context. He did not say that those who criticize his tactics are motivated by a desire to help the terrorists. Only that this is a practical outcome of their actions.

In any event, if these actions are indeed unconstitutional, why would they not be simply struck down by the courts? As I understand it (& I may be wrong) it’s more of a slippery slope that people are worried about, than the actions themselves.

15

It’s so nice to see fine Americans like december and John Ashcroft who laud the Constitution as long as no one actually uses the First Amendment to criticize the government.
Frankly, judging from the Bush Administration’s response to terrorism, bin Laden and his bully boys have already won the war on terrorism because the government is going whole hog to throw the Constitution out the window – eavesdropping on client-attorney conversations, secret trials, a top shyster who thinks he and his compadres are immune to criticism; mailing out invitations to interviews on the flimiest of excuses. Hell, why bother to go through the appearance of a fair trial; just be honest and shoot anyone you don’t like.
And judging by december, who is a total waste of oxygen, too many of the American people are eating it up.
Increasingly, when I watch all this hysteria and willingness to throw away our freedoms, at a time when none of our territory has been invaded and we face contemptible opponents that are not nearly so powerful as our enemies of 1941, I am reminded of Gibbons’ line that no time in history was as happy as the Rome of the Antoine Emperors. I think peoples of the future will look back on the USA of 1945-2001 and sigh to think that a people once had such wonderful freedom and threw it away because of fear.

And december, on a final note, since I am not going to pay $$ to be a member of this board and could care less if the moderators kick me off:
Fuck off, drop dead and burn in hell.

16

Go, Minty! A solid 9.8 on the rant, it had a good beat and oh boy did I dance to it… :smiley:

Molly Ivins put it well in today’s column.

http://chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/oped/chi-0112060151dec06.story

Molly, je t’adore, gal. :smiley:

17

I generally don’t bitch about slippery slopes, Izzy. I oppose the policies for what they are now, not what they might become later. And I really don’t care that Ashcroft might be drawing a distinction in his comments between being a terrorist supporter by opposing his policies and supporting terrorists by opposing his policies. Whether the sense is active or passive, his sentiments are still vile and disgusting.

18

Izzy: I don’t think minty is off base at all. I did a quick check of Ashcroft’s comments on Salon and the SOB admitted he doesn’t even know if all the persons detained – and I would remind you the majority are accused of immigration violations only – have attorneys, and yet he throws a screaming shit fit over the relatively mild criticism he has received to date.

19

But is it or is it not true that if Ashcroft was actually violating the Constitution the courts would overturn his actions? (This does not address whether his actions are the proper thing to do - just whether they are unconstitutional).

Also (minty) I was not distinguishing between active and passive helping terrorists. Rather between desiring to help them, and opposing them but giving unwitting help to their cause.

TPC, I would not call the criticizm that he has received to date “relatively mild” (though maybe it was, relative to this rant :smiley: )

20

The courts wouldn’t overturn his actions until sometime in the year 2007 or thereabouts. That’s the problem.