Senator Bingaman finds Ashcroft too objectionable


New Mexico's Senator Bingaman voted today, February 1, 2000, against the confirmation of John Ashcroft as Attorney General. He apparently could not find anything objectionable in the past eight years of lawlessness under the Clintons and Janet Reno, but found Ashcroft too "extreme" and "right-wing" for his tastes.

In my view, it is time New Mexicans replace Senator Bingaman with someone more in touch with the American mainstream, who listens to the common people of New Mexico, rather than representing the extremists on the Left - cultural Marxists, the environ-mentalists, radical feminists, and other America-haters. We may just be "fly-over country" to the rest of the nation, but I believe most New Mexicans share their same values.

As pointed out elsewhere on this web site, Democrats now have the same values, viewpoints, and moral codes as the Communist Party USA. To them, the Clintons, Janet Reno, Bruce Babbitt and the like are the epitomy of righteousness; while Christians and others who believe in Constitutional protections of equality before the law, property rights, and self-defense are "extremists."

The leftists who call themselves Democrats have been saying, "...how can he be pro-life and yet uphold the law on abortion?" To which I would say, "Janet Reno claimed to be against the death penalty, yet she had no problem torturing Christian women and children for months, shooting at them, gassing them with CS gas (ten times stonger than CN tear gas), and allowing them to be burned to death." The Clintons claimed to be champions for women's rights - to be free from sexual predators and harassment. We all know what a joke that has been to the women with whom Bill has come in contact.

If these are Senator Bingaman's values, shared with his other comrades within the Democratic Party, then it is my opinion that he is "out of the mainstream" of American thought. Most Americans still believe it is wrong to murder innocent women and children, and even men, even if they are Christian fundamentalists (unless they are White folks murdered by minorities - then the mainstream media just tries to ignore them). Most Americans still believe they have the right to defend themselves against criminal predators; they should be allowed to enjoy the benefits of their private property, without interference from government; and that lying under oath, sexual predation of employees, rape, and other Clinton crimes, are indefensible.

After the past eight years of lawlessness, what the Democrats are truely afraid of is an Attorney General who will enforce the law, without regard to ideology, political pressures, and interest groups. Therefore, the Senate vote on Ashcroft's confirmation serves as a good indicator of a Senator's interest in following the rule of law.

Just as in the "Impeachment Trial" of Clinton in the Senate, when Bingaman voted Not Guilty, along with every other Democratic Senator, (despite the fact that not one Senator bothered to look at the evidence), he consistantly votes along party lines, without regard to the interests of his country. He has been described as a Shameless Compromiser, among others in the Senate.

During the confirmation hearings for Gale Norton to head the Interior Department, Bingaman was quoted as saying "...For over 20 years, she has consistently championed the interests of the individual over the public, the states over the federal government, and economic development over environmental protections."

He could not have stated the case in her favor better. Senator Bingaman may not be aware of the fact, but the Constitution itself champions the very same causes... the individual citizen's right to "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness," and the supremacy of citizens and states over the central government. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. (Article X)

"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." (Article XIV, Section 1) (So much for environmental takings without compensation, or "affirmative action" laws)

As for favoring economic development over environmental protections, I'm certain there are many millions of Californians who are today questioning the wisdom of having allowed the environ-mental extremists to determine their priorities for the past twenty years, as they sit in the dark.

Since Senator Bingaman took an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and he is bound by his oath, perhaps he should actually read it. Thus far, he does not seem to have done so, or does not understand what he reads. It can be found here.

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." (Article VI, Clause 3)

Much of the argument against Ashcroft is that he is a Christian, who actually believes and lives according to his faith. If this is not a "religious test" used against him as a qualification for office, then what is?

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress... or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath... to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof." (Article XIV, Section 3)

In my view, any and all Senators who voted against the impeachment of Clinton, after the revelations of his transfers of technology to the Chinese, and their involvement in illegal campaign donations to the Democratic Party, are guilty of "giving aid or comfort to the enemies" of the United States of America. And Janet Reno "...committed treason by failing to appoint an independent counsel to look into the Clinton-Gore campaign cash-for-nuclear-secrets scandal." Yet Democrats object to Ashcroft!!!

Please take the time to let Senator Domenici know how much you appreciate him standing up for common Americans in New Mexico. If you are outraged, as I am, that Senator Bingaman would find John Ashcroft objectionable as Attorney General, email him and let him know. That's what he's there for, to represent us. And he doesn't.


The Senate voted Thursday 58-42 to confirm former Missouri Sen. John Ashcroft as attorney general. All 50 Republicans and eight Democrats voted to confirm. Here is how the members voted.

Akaka, Daniel (D - HI) No
Allard, Wayne (R - CO) Yes
Allen, George (R - VA) Yes

Baucus, Max (D - MT) No
Bayh, Evan (D - IN) No
Bennett, Robert (R - UT) Yes
Biden Jr, Joseph (D - DE) No
Bingaman, Jeff (D - NM) No
Bond, Christopher (R - MO) Yes
Boxer, Barbara (D - CA) No
Breaux, John (D - LA) Yes
Brownback, Sam (R - KS) Yes
Bunning, Jim (R - KY) Yes
Burns, Conrad (R - MT) Yes
Byrd, Robert (D - WV) Yes

Campbell, Ben Nighthorse (R - CO) Yes
Cantwell, Maria (D - WA) No
Carnahan, Jean (D - MO) No
Carper, Thomas (D - DE) No
Chafee, Lincoln (R - RI) Yes
Cleland, Max (D - GA) No
Clinton, Hillary (D - NY) No
Cochran, Thad (R - MS) Yes
Collins, Susan (R - ME) Yes
Conrad, Kent (D - ND) Yes
Corzine, Jon (D - NJ) No
Craig, Larry (R - ID) Yes
Crapo, Mike (R - ID) Yes

Daschle, Thomas (D - SD) No
Dayton, Mark (D - MN) No
DeWine, Mike (R - OH) Yes
Dodd, Christopher (D - CT) Yes
Domenici, Pete (R - NM) Yes
Dorgan, Byron (D - ND) Yes
Durbin, Richard (D - IL) No

Edwards, John (D - NC) No
Ensign, John (R - NV) Yes
Enzi, Mike (R - WY) Yes

Feingold, Russell (D - WI) Yes
Feinstein, Dianne (D - CA) No
Fitzgerald, Peter (R - IL) Yes
Frist, William (R - TN) Yes

Graham, Bob (D - FL) No
Gramm, Phil (R - TX) Yes
Grassley, Chuck (R - IA) Yes
Gregg, Judd (R - NH) Yes

Hagel, Charles (R - NE) Yes
Harkin, Tom (D - IA) No
Hatch, Orrin (R - UT) Yes
Helms, Jesse (R - NC) Yes
Hollings, Ernest (D - SC) No
Hutchinson, Tim (R - AR) Yes
Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R - TX) Yes

Inhofe, James (R - OK) Yes
Inouye, Daniel (D - HI) No

Jeffords, James (R - VT) Yes
Johnson, Tim (D - SD) No

Kennedy, Edward (D - MA) No
Kerry, John (D - MA) No
Kohl, Herb (D - WI) No
Kyl, Jon (R - AZ) Yes

Landrieu, Mary (D - LA) No
Leahy, Patrick (D - VT) No
Levin, Carl (D - MI) No
Lieberman, Joseph (D - CT) No
Lincoln, Blanche (D - AR) No
Lott, Trent (R - MS) Yes
Lugar, Richard (R - IN) Yes

McCain, John (R - AZ) Yes
McConnell, Mitch (R - KY) Yes
Mikulski, Barbara (D - MD) No
Miller, Zell (D - GA) Yes
Murkowski, Frank (R - AK) Yes
Murray, Patty (D - WA)

Nelson, Ben (D - NE) Yes
Nelson, Bill (D - FL) No
Nickles, Don (R - OK) Yes

Reed, Jack (D - RI) No
Reid, Harry (D - NV) No
Roberts, Pat (R - KS) Yes
Rockefeller IV, John (D - WV) No

Santorum, Rick (R - PA) Yes
Sarbanes, Paul (D - MD) No
Schumer, Charles (D - NY) No
Sessions, Jeff (R - AL) Yes
Shelby, Richard (R - AL) Yes
Smith, Bob (R - NH) Yes
Smith, Gordon (R - OR) Yes
Snowe, Olympia (R - ME) Yes
Specter, Arlen (R - PA) Yes
Stabenow, Debbie (D - MI) No
Stevens, Ted (R - AK) Yes

Thomas, Craig (R - WY) Yes
Thompson, Fred (R - TN) Yes
Thurmond, Strom (R - SC) Yes
Torricelli, Robert (D - NJ) No

Voinovich, George (R - OH) Yes

Warner, John (R - VA) Yes
Wellstone, Paul (D - MN) No
Wyden, Ron (D - OR) No