|Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi|
Every lawyer in the state of California takes the following oath upon admission to the state bar:
I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of an attorney and a counsel at law to the best of my knowledge and ability.
Every school board member takes a similar oath once installed in their elected office:
"I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter...."
In both of these oaths, whether for attorney or school board member, the supremacy and integrity of the United States Constitution is unquestioned and upheld.
Muratsuchi took these two oaths. Regardless of whether he lived up to the promises he made in those oaths, he served in two public capacities with the express intention of upholding and defending the United States Constitution.
Where does the Tea Party Movement stand on the United States Constitution?
From the Tea Party Movement Platform:
5. Abide by the Constitution of the United States - The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and must be adhered to without exception at all levels of government. This includes the Bill of Rights and other Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and their provisions designed to protect states’ rights and individual liberties.
The Tea Party Movement respects the Constitution, and recognizes the instrument as the final legal authority, one which must be adhered to. In contrast to a federal government which has overreached into education (Bush), health care (Obama), military interventions (Bush and Obama), as well as aggravated deficit spending and soaring national debt (Bush and Obama), the Tea Party Movement mobilized across the country demanding that politicians in Washington abide by the clearly enumerated powers delegated to the federal government in the United States Constitution, and nothing more.
|Tea Party "Extremist"|
So, on this essential and crucial element, Muratsuchi and the Tea Party are actually in full agreement.
Therefore, Muratsuchi himself is a Tea Party "Extremist", even though he has cast his opponent under a negative pall with Tea Party taunts in mailer after mailer.
How can he attack a movement, and a support of that movement, when by his words and his office he supports the same causes?
Hirabayashi - Tea Party Extremist?
On another note, a well-known Japanese-American dissenter, Gordon Hirabayashi, refused to obey the federal government's curfew during World War II. Acting on his strong beliefs, including his fervent stance in the Constitution, he found that friends and family did not support his decision to resist unjust, prejudiced curfews.
Notwithstanding the setbacks he faced, he claimed a higher authority:
The United States Constitution is supposed to protect us.
He was eventually jailed for violating curfew, and spent time in federal camps. In the decades which followed, Hirabayashi challenged the convictions, which were later vacated, although the federal government never overturned the laws which criminalized individuals for their presence in public places in connection with their ethnic status.
Hirabayashi resisted those laws by appealing to the United States Constitution. He recognized that document as the supreme law of the land.
Would Muratsuchi have branded Hirabayashi a Tea Party "Extremist" as well?
|Peaceful dissenter Gordon Hirabayahi|
Would Assemblyman Muratsuchi consider him an extremist, too?