My ladyfriend wants me to go to this thing, thinks I might get to discuss an issue or ask a question. Does anybody have suggestions on how to best convey our (assumed) collective concern over some of his views?

I have scanned a few of the threads that mention him on this board. It looks like there are a fair number of people who may be able to give me a crash coarse in how to deal with this fella and his minions.

Skipping the deal isn't really an option & I don't want to get arrested either.

Be careful, he has on a few occasions displayed quite a temper with people who ask him questions he doesn't like.

Pretend to be afraid of guns and pitch him an open-ended softball question. His response is more important than the question. Politicians never answer questions, they throw back their talking points, bad jokes, ill humor, or whatever.

Am a DFL contributor of many years standing. I remember getting something in the mail about six weeks ago, but apparently it got tossed out.

Can you tell us the details? I would love to go, meet Mr. Frankin and make our presence known.

The DFL party will make or break our agenda this year...

Why not portray yourself as an Anti? You are more likely to get a true answer if he thinks you are on the same side.

We need all the love we can get, from both sides. Just witness Gov. Tim's help of late...

I really have no idea where Al F. really stands, so it might be interesting to hear what he has to say to a DFL regular from "up Nort..."

Why not ask him if in his Stuart Smalley persona he has a fear of weapons or if it just a sign of his retarded sexual and emotional immaturity.

Guns are way down the list of his personal concerns. He knows gun control doesn't work But he has many friends with big money that are anti's.

Unfortunately the pro-gunners who make the most "noise" are perceived to be ideaological conservatives.

The idealogical conservatives will reject Frankin out of hand and he knows it. So it's unlikely he will respond with a do or die pro-gun message. But he's not really anti-gun, he's got to get elected and remain popular with the Minnesota Democratic elite to do so.

I don't think he'll talk guns. Don't throw him an easy pitch in front of an audience of metro Democrats. But that's just me.

He may be in the crowd early. I've been able to walk up and talk to him privatelyat least once at a DFL function before he spoke. (I didn't talk guns though.)

I would NOT try to match wits with him in public when he has the podium, the last word, and the admiration of his audience, and the ears of big money Democrats.

Let us know how it goes.

I sure will let ya'll know how it goes.

I read the Wikipedia on him and . . . yeah, no way I'd try to match his wit while he is holding a mic and has an audience with pockets.

My uber liberal Ladyfriend has come around on the gun issue, and thinks that Mr. Franken's ideas may be formed on the same lines hers used to be . . . "that previously guns were so foreign and seemed so unnessessary, so why not ban them since so many people seem to get hurt when they are misused" something to the effect that it'd be like banning sewwing thimbles, really, who actually uses one when it is easier to buy a new sock than mend one? The only people in her world that spoke up for the 2nd ammendment, also had biggotry, "redneck values" (bare foot & pregnant is how women should be ... . get me a beer wench, and I might take you to the tractor pull instead of trying to knock up Sally Mae in the Port'O'John), and 8th grade educations . . . consequently, she was an Anti, until she met me and we talked about it. She thinks Mr. Franken may be able to make the same leap of logic.

Replying to this post sepperately:

Thank you Pat. I have come to the conclusion that both parties are no longer friends with the U.S. Constitution. At one point in my life, I swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States and that oath isn't one that goes away for me. Right now it looks like two men swinging their axes on the same tree, two parties chipping away at the Constitution & nobody knows which way it will fall, but there is no question that if they keep chipping it will fall.

Also you bring a good point, is this a recon mission or an opportunity to give him a shot across the bow regarding our issue with him & his political future? What serves gun owners best?

Close, but no cigar. The problem is that too many of the wrong people have guns--and they're not going to gunshops to buy them. That's why we call such people criminals. Passing more restrictive laws will not inconvenience the criminals, who will cheerfully ignore the new laws as blatantly as they disobey existing laws.

Spot on, but how do you sum that idea, so that I can influence a beauracrat tonight? Time is getting short and I seem to be the potential mouth peice of the moment.

"Mr. Franken, we know that no matter how much we'd like it to, gun control laws don't keep guns out of the hands of people who break laws.

"It's pretty clear that had Al Gore left gun control alone, he'd probably be in his second term by now. Do you agree that the Democratic Party should do itself a favor by keeping out of the quagmire of this losing issue?"

I wouldn’t write off Mr. Franken so quickly.

From my experience, Jewish metrocrats (metro Demmycrats…) are far more likely than other metro DFL’ers to be knowledgeable about self defense issues in general and guns in particular. When I was at the U (OK, it’s damn near 30 years ago…) the kid who managed the Hillel House was my shooting buddy at the range on campus (under the Armory). All the Jewish kids I hung out with were on the liberal side, but strangely enough they were all very conversant in all things related to firearms, and were very touchy on this issue to boot.

Would any of our members of the Hebraic persuasion care to comment? I believe there are even a couple regulars who fall into this camp.

I am cool with that Pat.

I expect that there are a great number like my Ladyfriend who are liberal on most points but the Anti-U.S. Constitution stuff, like gun control, are just issues to push votes, rather than something they have acctually thought about. When my beloved thought about it, she came around to our view . .. . and not at the expense of other, actually intelligent liberal views.