Condi Rice on Gun rights.....

Status
Not open for further replies.

hillbilly

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2003
Messages
3,165
Location
Iowa
And the media is absolutely breathless at the news!

My Goodness! How could she EVER say something like THIS???????


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=542&e=6&u=/ap/20050512/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/rice_guns

And here.

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBRQD2AM8E.html



WASHINGTON (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, recalling how her father took up arms to defend fellow blacks from racist whites in the segregated South, said Wednesday the constitutional right of Americans to own guns is as important as their rights to free speech and religion.

In an interview on CNN's "Larry King Live," Rice said she came to that view from personal experience. She said her father, a black minister, and his friends armed themselves to defended the black community in Birmingham, Ala., against the White Knight Riders in 1962 and 1963. She said if local authorities had had lists of registered weapons, she did not think her father and other blacks would have been able to defend themselves.

Birmingham, where Rice was born in 1954, was a focal point of racial tension. Four black girls were killed when a bomb exploded at a Birmingham church in 1963, a galvanizing moment in the fight for civil rights.

Rice said she favored background checks and controls at gun shows. However, she added, "we have to be very careful when we start abridging rights that the Founding Fathers thought very important."

Rice said the Founding Fathers understood "there might be circumstances that people like my father experienced in Birmingham, Ala., when, in fact, the police weren't going to protect you."

"I also don't think we get to pick and choose from the Constitution," she said in the interview, which was taped for airing Wednesday night. "The Second Amendment is as important as the First Amendment."

The First Amendment protects religious, press and speech freedoms as well as the rights to assemble and petition the government. The Second Amendment guarantees "a well-regulated militia" and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." Gun-rights supporters and those who favor gun control disagree over whether the amendment guarantees individual gun ownership.
 
a Democrate at work asked me what do you call the husband of the President of the United States......" the first......?"

.......I said you call him Mr. Rice..............or maybe Mr. Dole :D
 
The first thing that sprung to mind was "Rice in 2008" when I read that. It's actually an old story, but you'd better believe she's getting it on the news wires for a reason. This is the semi-official pre-nomination season for the GOP. Newt is out doing book tours which JUST HAPPEN to be in New Hampshire and Iowa :D

I do take it as a good sign that we're one of the bases of support Rice is looking to first and foremost. Usually GOP hopefulls will make pro-RKBA comments in passing, later in the game. Many of them try to avoid the issue for as long as possible. The fact that she's out there pushing the RKBA THIS EARLY is an excellent sign.
 
Sounds like she's getting ready to run for something in 2008...

As much as I would like to see that some day, the presidency is not a place where you do your learning 'on the job'. If you notice, even very few senators have made it to the top (they have to make too many deals...too much baggage).

It's govenors and big city mayors who get there. People with management experience not legislative, people who have been shown to be electable. As good as Condi is, she's a policy wonk and needs seasoning.

After the Bushies are out maybe she will run for the Governor's seat in Alabama, and for president in 2116....

We should start a thread about who should be the Republican nominee in 2008. Guys from other parts of the country would have a better take on some of the candidates that aren't local to me.

I'm not a McCain fan, and I'm not sure about Jeb. Newt maybe? Hagel is a Rino and I think Romney would be hampered by running Mass. Frist, Santorum, Pataki?

Guilianni would be hot...
 
Guilianni, McCain, any number of other hacks, all the same. Might as well elect Hillary. At least she would galvanize gun owners instead of lull them into a false sense of security.

Also, I'm just not certain where we came to this conclusion a president needs to be a career politician. Personally I'd prefer to see the neighborhood pizza guy elected. Or any other non-politico. Make a rule that nobody who has ever held political office before can be president. I'd rather they learn on the job than be beholden to decades worth of other politicritters.

But barring that I'll take Rice, thanks merry vuch. :)
 
Hillary as a motivator for gun rights people is a neat idea, but I think it would be misguided.

Honestly we need at least another 4 years after Bush of continuing to replace existing federal judges with textualists/originalists. They are the font from which good 2nd amendment rulings will flow. If every circuit turns around on gun rights, it wont matter how long the supremes keep dodging the issue. The first bush term actually accomplished a lot in terms of moving the whole federal judiciary to the right. Another 8 years of the same might actually begin to make some headway vs socialism/gun grabbing/etc.
 
She has said she will not run. Chris Matthews was so scared she might that he had her repeat it several times when she was on his show a few months back. I think she may make a fine president and or vice president.
 
I like how the author refers to the 2nd Amendment...

The Second Amendment guarantees "a well-regulated militia" and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."

Forming it that way splits the amendment into two distinct (but related) aspects, and enforces the concept that it's an individual liberty.
 
No More RINOs

McCain, Hagel, and Giuliani are ALL RINOs -- weak on 2A gun rights.

If the GOP loses any Senate and House seats in '06 and '08, then one of these RINOs (OR Hillary) gets in the White House in '08... we'll see a Clintonista-style assault on guns (re-run) all over again (For The Children/The Common Good, blah-blah, etcetera). California-New Jersey idiotic/confiscatory gun control -- here we come.

"We're going to have to take some things away from you on behalf of the common good."
-- Hillary Clinton, speaking @ Democrat Party fundraiser in San Francisco, April 2004

By their words and votes, there is no indication that the 3 above RINOs have ever taken any exception to Senator Clinton's above statement... as it pertains to the Second Amendment. Beyond that, while McCain/Hagel/Giuliani have certain vote-getting charms, they're also unreconstructed gun-grabbers... especially Rudy.

The thought of Rudy doing some John Kerry style "I'm-an-old-duck-hunter" photo-ops to seduce some moderate/gullible (i.e., "He really doesn't want to take away our hunting guns...") Red-state gun owners is beyond hilarious.

I'll believe ANY such politician is really "pro-gun" when I see him/her shooting a .45 ACP at one of the major self-defense pistol-craft schools. Could you imagine how the MainStream Media would play THAT?

Under a changing-times scenario, are there ANY pro-gun THR liberals here who'll stand up and fight -- really fight -- the Dem-donkey party on this... if/when the Dems are in control?

Gaming out all scenarios, the only option(s) for hard-core pro-gun rights folks is to be total, single-issue voters... or stay home.

Case closed.
 
Dont forget that the 90s saw the fall of the MSM relative to the power it used to hold. It is very hard to do "push" politics anymore, where the people upstairs set the policy and then the MSM sells it to everyone non-stop until they shut up.

Getting another assault weapon ban through will be very hard. I honestly dont see the whole pro-gun direction of things stopping anytime soon, regardless of what RINO gets elected to the presiency. Bush hasnt exactly been a paragon of pro-gun enthusiasm. I doubt Giuliani would be any worse.
 
The GOP better get someone lined up against Hillary. Bush lucked out being pitted against the two biggest smacktards in the democratic party. Hillary won't be nearly the pushover those losers were. They're going to need a top-notch candidate to go against her, and none of the RINOs being considered fit the bill. Rice might.

What they need to do, is have Cheney retire for "health reasons", and put her in. Then she'll run as a VP, and can beat Hillary.
 
If Hillary runs ( which I think she very well might - and as the party candidate) I realy can't think of a better choice at this moment than to run Condi Rice against her.

I'd rather have Condi as our first female president rather than Hillary, and like it or not, Hillary has a lot of support amoung the Democrats and liberals. Who better to challenge her ?
 
As much as I would like to see that some day, the presidency is not a place where you do your learning 'on the job'.

One thing we know about Condi: she's a quick study.

And better to have someone learning than someone who needs to unlearn. We have far, far too many in that second group eager for power.
 
Condi replacing Cheney?

Rebar's scenario (Condi becomes V.P., then runs from that office in '08) makes all the sense in the world. As V.P., she'd have a 2 yr. head-start on the '08 race... with a bunch of free media exposure... and the ink-stained MSM and Hollywood couldn't get away with all the screeching anti-Bush ("dumb & dumber," etcetera) kind of stunts they pulled.

While Hillary's certainly had a ton more boots-in-the-trenches political experience, Condi's smarter, with no baggage. With 2 yrs as V.P. on her resume, on top of Sec. State, Nat'l Security Advisor, and Stanford Univ. provost, that ain't a bad resume. We've had decent presidents with worse.

Still, I'd prefer she go be a governor/exec somewhere, then run. On the other hand, the whole Terrorism threat could boil over -- and make her the Star-of-the Moment. Nevertheless, the Republicans would be very wise to groom/build her up as one of the top '08 options, just in case. With the old "Gender-Gap" apparently sneaking back onto the political stage, a tough "Margaret Thatcher" type woman on the ticket could be a smart chess move.

With a strong V.P., a solid campaign team, and a united GOP family, she could do it. Since there's still really only about a half-dozen states "in play" the issue will be: what candidate could pick-off Ohio, or Wisconsin/Iowa, etc. to swing those electoral votes?
 
Yup - we had a "Who would you like to see in 2008?" thread here a year or so ago; the clear winner was Dr. Rice.

She says she won't run in 2008; I wish the President would convince her otherwise, and it would be fun if they'd use the Cheney maneuver detailed above (Dick steps down, etc.). That might be a bad idea for reasons that are above my level of knowledge (e.g., constant personnel-swapping is bad; Dick's earned his spot; don't put her up for the highest political job in the land until she's built her track record and confidence even further). I like Cheney just fine, but he won't be running for President. 2012 is perhaps the right idea for Condi.

We can vote for her for President when she chooses to run. In the meantime, just let her be a great Secretary of State. There's nobody I'd rather have representing the United States of America to the world than Dr. Rice.
 
Condi Rice is a California resident last time I check. I would like her to run for senator here in california againsts DiFi or Babs Boxer. We hadn't had a good canidate for US Senate For years run up against them.
 
JustSurving, that's an interesting idea: Condi as a CaliSenator.

However, given the Golden State's hard-core Liberal voter base, Condi would really have to change her stripes to get elected. She's not a RINO (as is Ahhnuld), but if she became one (to win there), then she'd lose all appeal to a national Republican constituency.

Maybe Condi as governor -- but she'd face the same problems. Heck, the late-great ex-gov Ronald Reagan (anathema to the libs) couldn't get elected as Dog-Catcher in Santa Monica today.

My deepest sympathies to you as a California gun owner. You're living behind Enemy Lines there (like I once did) and that state's political culture is gonna remain "Blue" -- until Californians discover they cannot afford their brand of politics and eventually require a federal "bail-out" to provide the painful shock therapy required for "change of brain."

When Hollywood starts cranking out movies with anti-Michael Moore/pro-GOP themes, and when conservative speakers at UCLA and Berkely no longer get shouted down, then it'll be possible for a "true" Republican to run for (and win) top political office there. That'll happen when pigs fly, Malibu becomes a military retiree haven, Rob "Meathead" Reiner joins the NRA, and the San Fernando Valley smog turns purple.
 
I have a Rice 2008 sticker on my van..and I hate bumber stickers. It's fun to drive through Ann Arbor with it. :)
 
I have a Rice 2008 sticker on my van..and I hate bumber stickers. It's fun to drive through Ann Arbor with it.
Barbara, that's like diving into a pool of sharks with a chum bag tied around your neck! :D

I'd vote for Condi in a heartbeat. I'm all for not putting another career politician in office.
 
From what I have seen, heard and read of Ms. Rice, she would make a fine president. Or- if one has reservations about her dabbling in politics for the first time in the Big Show- a fine running mate (with the understanding that this is, in and of itself, a setup for her own candidacy in 2012 or 2016.

I like how everyone bemoans career politicians on the one hand, and then on the other hand wants to write off someone with no prior political credentials when the possibility of candidacy is pondered. You cannot really have it both ways.

Mike
 
It's not like being the National Security Advisor and Secretary of State are lightweight jobs or something... :rolleyes:

I would like the Republicans to run someone who a) actually can speak English, b) would make Democrats' heads explode. For those reasons I think Rice would be just plain fun to watch. :evil:

I don't think they'll do it, though. Running Rice as prez or even VP would just be too smart. They'll find another rich white dude who talks like he has the IQ of rubber cement, while "new Hillary" (a la Nixon) pulverizes them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top