Senator Kyl Stomps Senator Teddy

RickD

Moderator
Recall that Teddy Kennedy accused Ashcroft of being "outside the mainstream" when he claimed the Second Amendment was for fighting government tyranny. "Imagine," I paraphrase Teddy, "*this* government being tyrannical!!"

Today, Arizona's own Senator Jon Kyl spent his alotted time correcting all of the Demo Senators errors, not just Teddy's.

On a special note, to defend Ashcroft against Teddy's 2A statement, good ol' Senator Kyl quoted a famous Madison snippet from Federalist #46. Anybody care to guess which part? The winner may post it here.

Rick
 
Friends, Jon Kyl has grown

into a fine leader, IMHO. He has been overshadowed by John McCain, and that is a real shame. Literally.

McCain has brought shame to himself and his party. Jon Kyl, on the other hand, seems to have matured as a statesman. Years ago, as I recall, he erred in voting for the so-called 'assault weapons ban', but I believe he has indicated that vote was indeed an error on his part. I believe his record has greatly improved.

I'd love to see a transcript as well.

Arizona would do well to clone Kyl ... and send Mr. McCain to CA, NY or Ma where his talents can be better 'appreciated'.

Regards from AZ
 
Found ...

at http://www.foxnews.com/politics/011601/ashcroft_testimony.sml

SEN. EDWARD M. KENNEDY, D-MASS.:

...Deep concerns have been raised about his record on gun control. He has called James Brady the leading enemy of responsible gun owners. Senator Ashcroft is so far out of the mainstream that he has said citizens need to be armed in order to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. Our government, tyrannical? In fact, he relies on an extreme reading of the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment to the Constitution to oppose virtually all gun control laws. ...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/011701/ashcroft_hearing.sml

SEN. JON KYL, R-ARIZ.:

... Fourth, Senator Kennedy said that Senator Ashcroft, and again I'm quoting, "is so far out of the mainstream that he has said that citizens need to be armed in order to protect themselves against a tyrannical government," end of quotation. Now, the way that that charge was made, made it sound very irresponsible for anyone to take such a position and it made it sound like this was something that Senator Ashcroft was very concerned about and, therefore, very much distorted his views.

The charge was obviously out of context. The correct context — and this is something that Senator Ashcroft did not have an opportunity to respond to. If my characterization is inaccurate, I ask him to please to add to what I say. But the remarks that he's referring to, I believe, are those that occurred before a hearing of the Constitution Subcommittee of this committee, which Senator Ashcroft chaired, and during which he observed that the Second Amendment conferred individual rights upon citizens.

And here is his quotation, the full quotation from that hearing — it was a resuscitation of the views of James Madison the father of our Constitution — and here's what Senator Ashcroft remarked: "In Federalist 46, James Madison, who later drafted the Second Amendment, argued that the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possessed over the people of almost every other nation, would deter the new central government from tyranny," end of quotation.

As we know, James Madison was the primary author of much of the Constitution. And I frankly think it's a stretch to consider the founders and James Madison out of the mainstream, but don't take it from me.

Senator Feingold, during his questioning, among other things, said this — and this is a quotation from the transcript: "I listened carefully to every word you," meaning Senator Ashcroft, "said. And I reserve the right to change my mind after the transcript, but I believe I agree with every single word you've just said." Continuing the quotation, "The purposes of the Second Amendment includes self- defense, hunting, sport, and some certainly would say, as would I, the protection of individual rights against a potentially despotic central government. The Second Amendment was clearly intended to counterbalance a distrust of and to protect the right to defend against an oppressive government."

Mr. Chairman, while there is certainly room for us to debate Second Amendment and gun control issues — and we've had robust debates about that — I think it goes too far to characterize a position that was held by President Madison, Senator Ashcroft, Senator Feingold and a lot of other scholars on the issues, as outside the mainstream.


KYL: And, in fact, I suggest it may say more about Senator Kennedy's locus in the spectrum of American public opinion.

Fifth, Senator Kennedy said that Senator Ashcroft, quote, "opposes virtually all gun control laws." And he had some opportunity yesterday to explain his view that that is not true and to further expand in his answer to Senator Feinstein just a moment ago. He supports the Brady law; voted to require mandatory background checks for all gun purchases at gun shows; to prohibit firearms in a school zone; to prohibit those convicted of domestic violence from possessing a firearm; drafted the juvenile assault weapon ban that passed the Senate 92 to 2; and supports President-elect Bush's policies to aggressively prosecute those who buy guns illegally, sell them illegally or commit crimes with guns. ...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/011701/ashcroft_hearing.sml

SEN. EDWARD M. KENNEDY, D-MASS.:

... Now the Senator comes back to the question on guns. The questions on guns, fine. We talk about the questions, the list, on the questions on the guns.

KENNEDY: Now, Senator Ashcroft voted against closing the gun show loophole, said he would have voted to oppose the assault weapons ban. He'll have an opportunity to give this president, whether they want to reauthorize the assault weapons ban. I wish he had, in response to earlier question, to show how interested he is in enforcing it, say, "And I'd be glad to recommend to the president, when it expires, when we're going to recommend that he extend that the next time." I would have given him an opportunity to say that.

He's voted twice against child safety locks. He's voted against the ban on the importation of high ammunition magazines, voted twice to weaken existing laws by removing background checks. And he led the campaign for concealable weapons that even child molesters who've been convicted in Missouri would be able to acquire, that was defeated by the people of Missouri. And you wonder why we bring up the issue?

And, Senator, he used those words that I quoted yesterday. Senator Ashcroft used those words, besides calling James Brady, who was shot in the assassination attempt of President Reagan, a loyal Republican, distinguished citizen whose life has been battling those wounds, and you call him the leading enemy of responsible gun owners.

And then you went on, and I said that Senator Ashcroft is so far out of the mainstream, he has said citizens need to be armed in order to protect themselves against the tyrannical government in our government. Our government tyrannical? If the senator from Arizona doesn't know the difference between the British insurrection at the American Revolution and this government that has been formed under James Madison and the Constitution — there is a significant one.

Now listen to this. Listen to what he said is — indeed — and this is quote. This is Senator Ashcroft. "Indeed, the Second Amendment, like the First, an important individual liberty that in turn promotes good government. A citizenry armed with the right both to possess firearms and to speak freely is less likely to fall victim to a tyrannical central government than a citizenry that is disarmed from criticizing government or defending themselves."

Listen just to what Gary Wills, a Pulitzer Prize winner, wrote about that. Gary Wills, a Pulitzer Prize winner, has written, "Listen, only a madman, one would think, can suppose that militias have a constitutional right to levy war against the United States, which is treason by constitutional definition under this."

I think this nominee owes an apology to the people of the United States for that insinuation, talking about our government now being the source of a tyrannical oppression. That's what I think, Senator. I don't retreat. I don't retreat on any one of those matters. ...

SEN. JON KYL, R-ARIZ.:

... I'm concerned here about mischaracterization, and I would assert that when you just now suggest that Senator Ashcroft was asserting that the United States government is an tyrannical government, that that is not an accurate representation of his views under any reading of what he has said or listening to what he has said.

So, I'll conclude in that. ...

Kennedy made a later retort that he would take some of this up on the floor of the Senate. I do believe that Mr. Kennedy is exactly the kind of naive fool, or potential despot, for whom the Second Amendment was designed. He's obviously never read any of Bovard's works ... ;)


Obviously some of Ashcroft's positions are not the best, but it is a pleasure to see Mr. Kennedy brought up short.

Regards from AZ
 
I just can't figure the guy out.

Dang.

Russ Feingold agreed with Madison's quote from Federalist #46?

Dang.

Now if we can just get him to stop messing with the First amendment (McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance "Reform").

Rick
 
James Madison: "The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
The Federalist #46
 
Doing my small part

I just came to a decision; I am going to write a letter to The PRMA’s favorite Sot. In this brief message, I will explain that every time he opens up is fat, booze reeking yap and makes comments like the ones he did at the Ashcroft hearings, that I will fire off some variation of the following simple missive:

Dear "Senator" Kennedy,

F*** off

Sincerely
Me
My home town USA

I know it's not much, but I want show the fat, drunk, murdering, cowardly, SOB two simple things, that I like many others:
1) Hold him in utter contempt. :barf:
2) Hold him in such utter contempt that he's not even worth a long drawn out rant about his parentage, his hiegene, or his sexual proclivities. All he rates is 2 simple words, F*** off.

Please don't thank me, it's the least I can do ;)
 
This says it all:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/ac20010118.shtml


"Republican presidents need to start sending at least one Potemkin nominee to the Senate for confirmation hearings. If there were just one Cabinet nominee willing to sacrifice his appointment for the opportunity to yell back at that adulterous drunk, Sen. Teddy Kennedy might not be so cavalier before launching his premeditated vituperations.

Whatever else the "Stop (fill in name here)! Task Force" can say about John Ashcroft, they cannot say that he drunkenly plunged a woman to a horrifying watery death and then fled the scene of the accident, relying on his family's connections to paper over the woman's death.

They cannot say that John Ashcroft was thrown out of college for cheating -- or that he got into college on the basis of his family pedigree. (Inasmuch as Ashcroft attended an Ivy League college, it was not much help having a father who was a Pentecostal minister, rather than, say, a bootlegger.)

Poor John Ashcroft couldn't say any of that when Sen. Kennedy erupted in gin-soaked venom. He has higher aspirations than talking back to a dissolute slob for laughs. But surely there is someone out there who would go for laughs. Bush should find that guy."
 
I'd do it. But I'm just a first-year schoolteacher, so it might be hard to talk 'em into it. Still, I think I could hold my own with a few drunk Senators.
Maybe DC?
 
Neal Knox's newsletter is saying that Ashcoft "groveled" before that loathesome troika of Kennedy, Feinstein, and Schumer.

I wouldn't go that far, but in the face of all that vituperation, I was amazed that Ashcroft even tried to explain his position to them. No matter how close he came to backtracking, they still said they didn't believe him.

Why on earth he wasn't in their face (diplomatically of course ;) ). They were NEVER going to vote for him, and in fact used their time to show their faithful what great Defenders of the Cause they were.

In Kennedy's case, I just wish to God Ashcroft, at some point, would have said, "Senator, that's just water under the bridge" or "I'll cross that bridge when I come to it". If the Lush knew that every time he postured like that, someone would bring up a bridge comment, he'd have to clam up.

Ah well, people claim I live in another world.
 
I voted for Kyl in the last election. Sure am glad I made the right choice.
As for the Kennedy. Remember Teddy. There is no statute of limitations on murder. Someday there may be an LEO with the "cojones" to get you.
Paul B.
 
>=Senator Feingold, during his questioning, among other things, said this — and this is a quotation from the transcript: "I listened carefully to every word you," meaning Senator Ashcroft, "said. And I reserve the right to change my mind after the transcript, but I believe I agree with every single word you've just said." Continuing the quotation, "The purposes of the Second Amendment includes self- defense, hunting, sport, and some certainly would say, as would I, the protection of individual rights against a potentially despotic central government. The Second Amendment was clearly intended to counterbalance a distrust of and to protect the right to defend against an oppressive government." <=

Well, well, well. The good Senator Feingold is unfortunately mine, and has voted for every gun control measure proposed. It will be a pleasure to have him square his votes with his interpretation of the Second Amendment.

As for His Bloatedness, he apparently doesn't understand that it was the continentals, and not the British, who were the insurrectionists at the American Revolution.

Dick
 
You just volunteered

Okay, Monkeyleg.

You just issued a challenge to yourself.

The next time Feingold does a townhall meeting in your area, your task is to show up and quote to him his own words, then compare that with his voting record.

I can't imagine more fun without prophylactics.

We at TFL can't wait for your report.

Rick
 
Kennedy kid guilty .

Remember the Kennedy kid ( Kennedy Smith to be exact ) that was accused of rape a few years ago . I think it has been proven he was guilty . He coerced her into having sex . His exact words were " Give me some or my Uncle Ted will drive you home ." <G>
 
Ted Kennedy is a pathetic wretch. How did that state fall so low? As a New Yorker I am truely sorry for Mr. Schumer. what you must realise is that NY City is able to swamp the votes of the rest of the state. Hence idiots like Schumer and Mrs. William Clinton get elected...
 
RickD, yes, I did just volunteer. And I've bookmarked this page and copied the quote. No doubt the good senator will say something to the effect that he didn't mean there could be no restrictions. But Feingold has a history of saying things that come back to haunt him. His victory in 1998 was almost as slim as GW's, because on the Senate floor he said that partial birth abortion was acceptable even after the living baby was outside the womb. He had the congressional record edited when the quote got out, but by then it was too late.

Dick
 
Back
Top