Walter Williams on Kennedy's Ignorance

TMB2

New member
Walter Williams

January 24, 2001

Constitutional ignorance

During last week's Senate confirmation hearings, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., laid into President Bush's attorney general nominee John Ashcroft about his strong support for the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment. Kennedy demanded that Ashcroft apologize to the American people.

For what did Kennedy think Ashcroft should apologize? In a speech, Ashcroft said that the reason the Framers demanded a constitutional protection for "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" was to provide a measure of protection against tyranny in government.

Kennedy demonstrated gross ignorance about the founding of our nation. To throw such an intemperate, public hissy-fit, he must have counted on -- and correctly so -- the ignorance of his senatorial colleagues, the news media and most Americans.

Ashcroft didn't bother to defend himself. He might have figured that Kennedy and his colleagues were uneducable, and possibly feared that producing facts would have brought on even greater ire.

Let's you and I look at the Framers' words to see whether they gave us the Second Amendment so we could go deer and duck hunting or, as Ashcroft said, to protect against tyranny in government.

Thomas Jefferson said: "No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson made himself even more explicit when he said: "And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. ... The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Writing in the Federalist Paper No.46, James Madison said, "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." In Federalist Paper No. 28, Alexander Hamilton said, "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all forms of positive government."

Richard Henry Lee said, "To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." Tench Coxe said: "Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American. ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."

Noah Webster said, "The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." George Washington said: "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence." George Mason settled the question of militia by asking and answering: "Who are the militia? They consist of the whole people, except a few public officers."

When the history of the 20th century is finally written, one of its key features will be the wanton slaughter of more than 170 million people, not in war, but by their own government. The governments that led in this slaughter are the former USSR (65 million) and the Peoples Republic of China (35-40 million). The point to remember is that these governments were the idols of America's leftists. Part of reason for these and other tyrannical successes was because the people were first disarmed.
 
Well said.

We have more elections coming up in less than two years. We must not slack off. Constant vigilance, work on all elected officials from dogcatcher to senator. We need to sweep a lot more trash out.
 
This is the only part that bugs me: "Ashcroft didn't bother to defend himself. He might have figured that Kennedy and his colleagues were uneducable, and possibly feared that producing facts would have brought on even greater ire."

Hell, idealogues NEVER change their mind. Ashcroft should have gone ahead and educated those who were watching as well as some of those idiot Republicans (Kyl excepted) who didn't say much in response.

If anyone holds back because they fear even greater invective from these people, they might as well quit right now. The liberals have won by default. This is the same kind of tyranny exemplified by Political Correctness.
 
What a great article. Walter Williams continues to be a Knight in Armor for the Constitution and BOR. A true patriot he is.

Bottom line here guys is we can't slack up....Either keep sending contributions to your favorite Pro-Gun organization, or join a new one today. Better to have spent the money now than to moan about the elections after the fact. We all can count on some "CRAZY" happenings in November of 2002 what with the 2000 happenings in Florida. I'm sending $25.00 to the GOA today as a donation.
 
Oatka - I agree; but, hopefully, Ashcroft will feel less constrained once he is approved for office. Better to lose a battle than lose the war!
 
I hope Walter Williams understands that Kennedy did not attack Ashcroft due to "Constitutional ignorance". Kennedy attacked Ashcroft with complete knowledge of the Constitution and with a premeditated disregard for the truth.

Please realize that I said "complete knowledge of" and not "complete understanding of".
 
MrKandiyohi,
I don't completely agree with you.
No doubt Senator Kennedy knows full well that arms were considered essential preservers of liberty in 1789, he just thinks government today is so beneficient and nice and loving and good that arms are no longer necessary to guard against tyranny. He's an idiot, and he needs to get out more.
 
One has to wonder how much of his soul Teddy had to sell in order not to follow in his brothers' footsteps. When I saw him attacking Ashcroft I couldn't help but see an evil man.
 
Oatka, I must, very respectfully, disagree ...

As they say, sometimes, discretion is the better part of valor. Senator Ashcroft gains nothing at this time by going toe to toe [and, breath to breath I'll add ... ;) ] with a scumbag like Ted Kennedy. He has one goal right now ... to be quickly and respectfully confirmed.

Leftists have wormed their way into so many important parts of our society, and they've done great damage. I have no problem with occasionally borrowing their tactics, as long as we don't sell our souls. From what I've seen and read, I don't believe Ashcroft has sold his soul, and I look forward to his leadership for 8 years. And, I pray he is the man HCI fears ...

Regards from AZ
 
Ted Kennedy could only wish that he had one tenth of the integrity of a John Ashcroft. I have followed Ashcroft's whole career and even though I am not in "lock step" with all of his ideas, he is a hell of a lot better than who ever is in 2nd. place.
 
Ted and the rest of his group only understand the provisions that allow them to spout their "Sociocratic ideals". He is so far into the pockets of HIS constituancy that he can't see reality. I really think our best bet is to start taking up a collection to buy one way tickets to China for any of these jerks who spouse anti constitutional verbage. I can't belive it but damn if I am not beginning to really understand the "America, love it or leave it" slogan from the 70's. How far I have come in 20 years and 8000 TFL members! The only difference this time is that I am willing to "pony up" to help those misguided Red Chinese find their home! God, I better stop, I am beginning to hear words from McCartney and MacArthur........ Someone,anyone, help! Hal, let me in Hal..........
 
Back
Top