I am incensed by Conor Dugan's article, "The Devil Incarnate?" and would like to address some of his opinions. Mr. Dugan, you claim that "liberal groups in fact show how truly out of touch they are with the American mainstream. These critics by and large come from those few counties -- the urban centers and academic havens -- which voted for Al Gore." I will remind you of what you already know; Al Gore did in fact win the majority of votes. "Those liberals," city dwellers and intellectuals do indeed constitute "the mainstream."
As the majority in this country, we want to ensure that we are appropriately represented. John Ashcroft is not the man for this job. And yes, his stance on abortion is a major point of contention. I'm very glad that "the Roman Catholic Church, whose members make up 25 percent of the population" is pro-life. That should make the decision very easy for Roman Catholics not to have abortions -- and it is entirely their decision to make. Mr. Dugan, your binary conclusion that "either a great portion of the population is to be barred from public life because of its pro-life beliefs including faithful Catholics or the pro-life position is not extreme" is absolutely astounding to me. Abortion is a p-e-r-s-o-n-a-l decision; it is not, and should not be, left to the sphere of "public life."
As a man, Mr. Dugan, you are in an interesting position. You are very much without a uterus, and very much of a mind to make statements about the rights of those of us who do have them. Ashcroft meanwhile is in a similar situation, though as Attorney General, he poses an immense threat to the lives and liberty of every American woman.
Furthermore, as we know, neither you Mr. Dugan, nor John Ashcroft will ever be pregnant due to rape or incest. Yet (according to the U.S. Department of Justice) a woman is raped in America every two minutes. A woman is being raped right now. It is all the more astounding then that, as you explain, Mr. Dugan, Ashcroft not only opposes abortion, but also opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest. You later claim that liberals "attempt to impose their beliefs upon the vast majority of Americans." Mr. Dugan, there is no realm in which Ashcroft could be more invasive or presumptuous.
As for your claim that "to be a religiously orthodox believer of whatever stripe is anathema to liberals." Mr. Dugan, Senator Joseph Lieberman is an orthodox Jew. We liberals were pleased to have him, and of course as you know, the majority of Americans voted for him.
With regard to John Ashcroft and the question of whether he is racist, I don't allege this. I would like to suggest however, that your "proof" of the point, Mr. Dugan, leaves much to be desired. Signing a law making Martin Luther King Jr. Day a holiday in Missouri is no great accomplishment; it is after all a national holiday. Furthermore, that he "appointed blacks to the bench in Missouri" is no more impressive than claiming that he once teed off with an African-American. In any case, I do not support an end to affirmative action when our new President, more than anyone, has benefited from the inequities of our educational system. Who else could have gotten into Harvard Business school after pulling straight Cs at Yale?
Finally, we "mainstream Americans" are extremely concerned that George W. Bush selected Ashcroft for the United States Attorney General because he does not represent us, the majority of the American people. The polls plainly demonstrate this fact. It is Bush's obligation to serve, not only those who voted for him, but all Americans. By selecting Ashcroft, Bush is utterly ignoring this responsibility. It is altogether obvious that we, the "American mainstream," can not trust or hope that our "elected representatives" will champion our issues. To have seen the Supreme Court render "justice" on partisan lines and to have seen a buffoon ride his daddy's coat-tails to the White House, yes Mr. Dugan, we have indeed reached a "truly disturbing moment in the American experiment."
