[Rowdee]

Of course, if he had strong convictions, he'd not have taken the job because he would have know issues like this and abortion would be on the burners during his tenure.

[ctdonath2]

If he had not taken the job we'd be stuck with some jerk who actually BELIEVED such laws ARE Constitutional. I want an AG who will stand before SCOTUS and say "sorry, I know it's my job to defend this crappy unconstitutional law but frankly there is no way to defend it; the defense rests." (Yes, Ashcroft is presenting an actual argument to defend the AWB, but it's really just a veiled way of saying "this is indefensable.") The alternative is an AG who will stand before SCOTUS and say "why yes indeed banning arms and free speech is Constitutional..."

[MarkL]

Of course, if he had strong convictions, he'd not have taken the job because he would have know issues like this and abortion would be on the burners during his tenure.

Again, I disagree. A man of principal will not run away from an oportunity to do good in other areas, where he may be forced to enforce current laws, even though he disagrees with them.

Mark