By Norman Solomon
We've come a long way in this country since the 19th century -- but not so long that
an admirer of the Confederacy can't be nominated to run the Justice Department of
the United States. The president of the Confederate government, Jefferson Davis,
is a hero to Sen. John Ashcroft, the man selected to become the next attorney general.
Ashcroft told the Southern Partisan quarterly in a 1998 interview: "Your magazine
also helps set the record straight. You've got a heritage of doing that, of defending
Southern patriots like [Robert E.] Lee, [Stonewall] Jackson and Davis. Traditionalists
must do more. I've got to do more. We've all got to stand up and speak in this respect,
or else we'll be taught that these people were giving their lives, subscribing their
sacred fortunes and their honor to some perverted agenda."
Evidently, Ashcroft can't abide the idea that preservation of slavery was a "perverted
agenda."
In the coming days, as Ashcroft prepares for his Senate confirmation hearing, some
of George W. Bush's media spinners will be working overtime to explain away those
comments. They can take comfort from the fact that national news outlets have been
slow to probe the meaning of Ashcroft's interview. Among its most disturbing aspects
is his assertion that Southern Partisan "helps set the record straight."
A year ago, The New Republic reported that Southern Partisan "serves as the
leading journal of the neo-Confederacy movement" -- and, for two decades, has
been publishing "a gumbo of racist apologias." For instance, in 1996, Southern
Partisan said that slave owners "encouraged strong slave families to further
the slaves' peace and happiness." In 1990, the magazine lauded former KKK leader
David Duke as "a Populist spokesperson for a recapturing of the American ideal."
The racial politics of Southern Partisan could not be more clear. Ashcroft's endorsement
of the magazine in 1998 could hardly be more unequivocal. And the need for journalists
to probe this issue could hardly be more pressing.
Overall, a bit of a media stir has begun. Hours after Bush announced his nomination,
a New York Times editorial declared: "Mr. Ashcroft's hard-line ideology and
extreme views and actions on issues like abortion and civil rights require a searching
examination at his confirmation hearing." The next day, a prominent newspaper
in Ashcroft's home state of Missouri disputed his fitness to be U.S. attorney general.
In an editorial that urged the Senate to "investigate Mr. Ashcroft's opposition
to civil rights, women's rights, abortion rights and to judicial nominees with whom
he disagrees," the St. Louis Post-Dispatch recalled that "Mr. Ashcroft
has built a career out of opposing school desegregation in St. Louis and opposing
African-Americans for public office." No wonder Bob Jones University, notorious
for bigotry, gave Ashcroft an honorary degree in 1999 -- and no wonder he was proud
to accept it.
A sampling of daily newspaper editorials published on Dec. 27, five days after Bush
gave Ashcroft the nod, reflects an array of media attitudes. "Mr. Bush deserves
congratulations for the Cabinet assembled thus far," the Christian Science Monitor
proclaimed, downplaying objections
to Ashcroft's appointment. Meanwhile, the Chicago Tribune editorialized: "The
question facing the Senate is whether Ashcroft is committed to fully and fairly enforcing
the laws of the land. From what is known, his critics will have a hard time showing
that he is not."
But on the same day, the San Francisco Chronicle drew very different conclusions
in an editorial that said Ashcroft "faces a Herculean task of reconciling his
new duties with his views on abortion and civil rights, which are completely contrary
to established national standards.... His nomination to head the Justice Department
was widely viewed as a payoff to GOP right-wingers. That hardly squares with Bush's
stated intention to keep politics out of that office."
Several days after the announcement of the Ashcroft pick, information about his reverence
for the Confederacy began to seep into national news accounts. We'll see whether
January brings sustained follow-up.
The Ashcroft nomination could turn out to be the defining issue of the presidential
transition. Will Senate Democrats knuckle under or fight for minimal principles?
How deeply will journalists probe beneath the new administration's rhetoric?
All too often, major news outlets and politicians look to each other for basic cues
rather than going ahead with decent steps, a kind of grim parody of a comedic routine:
"After you, Alfonse. No, after you, Gaston." With the odious nomination
of John Ashcroft, we're at a fateful threshold.
_________________________________________________
Norman Solomon is a syndicated columnist. His latest book is "The Habits of
Highly Deceptive Media."