Al Franken tells America that he will not vote for gun control

Al Franken tells America that he will not vote for gun control.

©2009 by Glen C. Davis

The Communist Manifesto and Our American Cousins

The Communist Manifesto and Our American Cousins

In his first televised speech after bullying his way into the Senate, Al Franken said that he will vote against any gun control measures and use his influence to remove all gun laws.  He said that he will not vote for any “Hate speech” legislation.  Of course, most of that hate speech has been issued from the Department of Homeland Security.  He has pledged to stop the President from continuing to use all of those nasty spy system implemented by the evil George. He will use his influence to stop those illegal warrants that the federal courts issue that allow police to ransack your house with impunity.  They will now have to tell the judge where they are going to search and exactly what they are looking for.

I have followed his career since Saturday Night Live.  I always said that of the pair of Franken and Davis, one of them would go on to great, intelligent things.  The other would get into government.  It is nice that we give a guy who couldn’t keep a show on television—even with G. Gordon Liddy appearing regularly—and a failure at talk radio a second chance.  (Actually, I have to add a disclaimer.  I really liked the T.V. show because it was hilarious. If only we could have kept him there.)

You didn’t hear him say that he was not going to vote for gun control measures?  I did.  Here is what he said:

“As most of you know, this is my fifth day in office. That may mean that I am the most junior Senator, but it also means that I am the Senator who has most recently taken the oath of office. Last Tuesday, I swore to ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States’ and to ‘bear true faith and allegiance’ to it. I take this oath very seriously…”

As we know, that means that the Supreme Court decisions to remove prayer from all schools and the “separation of Church and State” (a decision made by a member of the Klu Klux Klan) are wrong according to the Constitution.  The First Amendment, after all, says that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…”  And we read in the Tenth Amendment that, “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.”  Clearly, the First Amendment does not delegate authority to the United States Government—even the Supreme Court because they cannot make legislation from the bench— to make laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion.  Therefore, it is a issue for the State.  More accurately, school prayer is an issue for the school district itself.

He said he will vote against “hate crimes” legislation because it only protects a limited number of Americans.  It does not protect, say, Larry Flint libeling Jerry Fallwell.    We all know that the First Amendment was not put into the Constitution to protect speech that we agree with.  The First Amendment gives the right of the Black Panthers to peaceful speech.  It does not require me to listen.  In fact, his President Kennedy said, “Without debate, without criticism, no administration and no country can succeed and no Republic can survive.  That is why the Athenian law maker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy.  And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment.

He will present legislation against regulating the Internet through “Czars” and prevent sights from being shut down.  Surely he knows that Thomas Jefferson, the poster child for “separation of Church and State,” said, “No experiment can be more interesting than that we are trying, and which we trust will end in establishing the fact, that man may be governed by reason and truth.  Our first objective should therefore be, to leave open to him all the avenues of truth.  The most effectual hitherto found, is the freedom of the press.”

He will not vote for Sonia Sotomyer because he knows that she does not understand the Second Amendment.  She came to a decision that the Second Amendment does not apply to the States.  She obviously has not read the words of William Rawle—a contemporary of Thomas Jefferson who spoke with Jefferson about and wrote letters concerning the Constitution—who wrote (emphasis in brackets added by me), “The prohibition [of the Second Amendment] is general.  No clause in the Constitution [not even the Interstate Commerce Clauses] could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.”  Surely Al Franken is familiar with this.

Though Sotomyer obviously did not read the Federalist Papers, surely Franken read Hamilton’s stirring words, “By thus circumscribing the plan [to organize and train a Militia under state control], it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.”    In the same paper he wrote, “There is something so far-fetched and so extravagant in the idea of danger to liberty from the militia, that one is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or with raillery; whether to consider it as a mere trial of skill, like the paradoxes of rhetoricians; as a disingenuous artifice to instil prejudices at any price; or as the serious offspring of political fanaticism. Where in the name of common-sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow-citizens? What shadow of danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments, habits and interests? What reasonable cause of apprehension can be inferred from a power in the Union to prescribe regulations for the militia, and to command its services when necessary, while the particular States are to have the sole and exclusive appointment of the officers?”

He will support H. R. 17To protect the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms in defense of self, family, or home, and to provide for the enforcement of such right.  He will vote against H. R. 2159 To increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist, because it gives one man the right to deny arms to protect himself simply by putting them on a list without due process. You can read about that in the Fifth Amendment, Mr. Franklin.

He knows that this President has done nothing to stop the evil spying machine that the evil King George put into place.  Indeed, he and the Department of Homeland Security are grateful for it after they complained about it for months.  Now they can get those evil Constitutionalists.  Those people who read the Federalist papers and the Constitution outside the guidance of “free indoctrination.”  So he will craft legislation to stop illegal wiretaps and warrantless searches that violate the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.  He will pull the plug on Echelon which violates the rights of every American to communicate freely.

Yes, he will do all of this and more because—  Oh, wait a minute.  What was the rest of that statement he made? “…as we consider Judge Sotomayor’s nomination.”  Well, since she believes that the Constitution only conditionally applies to the States,  I guess that he will have to vote against her.  If he votes for her, it won’t be Rush Limbaugh that is the big fat liar.

By the way, is it just me or does Sheldon Whitehouse remind you of Steve Martin?

Latest Al Frankin book


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s