Karl Rove <accused of> switches sides?

[taliv]

http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/21/k...stop-the-violence-is-to-repeal-2nd-amendment/

I'm not sure he was ever on our side. I think he just used us in his political calculus. But he certainly showed his true colors here, implying we should and could stop gun violence by repealing the 2nd amendment

wow. did anyone watch the segment? how was it portrayed?

I mean, I've often told people that if they want to change gun laws they should just amend the constitution, which would be easy if media surveys were true, that almost everybody was against guns. Watering down the 'interpretation' just opens the door to weakening every other amendment and effectively turns the constitution into "just a piece of paper".

But to imply that a repeal of the 2A would be effective in stopping violence is crazy. it won't even slow down "gun" violence.

So is he supporting any of the dozen republican candidates this year? Knowing that would certainly affect my vote.

 

[hso]

Best to go to the source instead of repeating something without checking it ourselves.

https://youtu.be/K1dSqSRJKWk?t=280

WALLACE: How do we stop the violence?
ROVE: I wish I had an easy answer for that, but I don’t think there’s an easy answer We saw an act of evil. Racist, bigoted evil, and to me the amazing thing is that it was met with grief and love. Think about how far we’ve come since 1963. The whole weight of the government throughout the South was to impede finding and holding and bringing to justice the men who perpetrated the [Birmingham] bombing. And here, we saw an entire state, an entire community, an entire nation come together, grieving as one and united in the belief that this was an evil act, so we’ve come a long way. Now maybe there’s some magic law that will keep us from having more of these. I mean basically the only way to guarantee that we will dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to basically remove guns from society, and until somebody gets enough “oomph” to repeal the Second Amendment, that’s not going to happen. I don't think that's an answer.

Rove's actual answer can be summarized as "to stop acts of violence with guns you'd have to remove guns from society which would require repealing the 2A and that's not going to happen and it isn't the answer".

 

[kcofohio]

I read that earlier! Not sure how much clout he still carries in the GOP, but it makes me wonder how far this spreads into that party.

I agree that anyone affiliated with him won't get my vote.

 

[taliv]

saying it's not going to happen doesn't mean he's not advocating it.

thanks for the link, mike

 

[kcofohio]

saying it's not going to happen doesn't mean he's not advocating it.

thanks for the link, mike

Agree, just trying to link repealing the 2A and that is would reduce the acts of violence is what caught my eye.

 

[hso]

"I don't think that's an answer" does.

Ditch the Daily Caller hyp and listen to the Fox piece without prejudging (and through to the next question).

To me Rove is pointing out the fact that the only way that guns don't get used in acts of violence is repeal the 2nd and remove guns from society. He then points out that repealing the second and removing guns in America isn't going to happen. He then says "I don't think that's an answer." and goes on to point out the warning signs and failures of friends, family and community to identify and act on Dylan Roof's ramp up to this hateful crime that could have stopped him before he acted.

Ya gotta listen to the whole piece and not just the snippet.

 

[HexHead]

Have they considered the violence that might be unleashed if the 2nd was repealed?

 

[Big Willie]

Wow!

I watched Fox News Sunday on our local Fox channel this morning. I did a double take. I asked my wife if she just heard what I thought I did! Mr. "Republican Cheer Leader" just crapped all over our 2nd (no pun intended).

May God forgive and bless our Nation!

Willie

 

[X-Rap]

Can anyone name a longtime beltway politician, elected or appointed that in their hearts wouldn't sleep better at night with the American public disarmed?
I don't think I can.

 

[taliv]

that's better. it didn't sound like that from the transcript.

 

[hso]

The transcript was intended to tell a lie by taking a limited bit out of context and making Rove sound like he said the opposite of what he actually meant. The Daily Caller just cheapened itself for sensationalism to get hits to their site and tried to play all of us for fools by telling this lie expecting we'd be too lazy to get the truth.

Rove's answer to the question was to make the point that the only way that guns don't get used in acts of violence is repeal the 2nd and remove guns from society, but that repealing the second and removing guns in America isn't going to happen and that it isn't the answer,but the warning signs of Roof's slide into racist madness and failures of friends, family and community to identify and act on Dylan Roof's decline and ramp up to this hateful crime were clear and that he could have been stopped before he acted if only one person who was worried about this had done something.

 

[Tommygunn]

saying it's not going to happen doesn't mean he's not advocating it.

thanks for the link, mike

While technically you are right, I also say I did not hear him advocate it -- merely state it would have to happen to forbid gun possession.
I don't believe Rove was advocating it or desiring it to happen. He was "displacing the topic," that is, "objectifying" it.,
Sorta like "hey, I don't care about guns myself but fact is, the second amamndment exists and it prevents gun confiscation."

Rove is a political operator, a guy who has the job of getting people (like Dubya) elected. Not everyone in politics who has an R next to his name is a gun person. We see politics through that lens, but for many 2A concerns are not always foremost in mind.

 

[shrpshn]

Please pay attention to HSO's post. I watched the segment on FOX; and read it the same way as he did.

The 2nd. Amendment has far more dangerous foes than Carl Rove. I have never heard Rove say any thing anti-gun.

 

[Walkalong]

Antis repeating part of a sentence out of context to make it look good for them?

Old news, they do it all the time.

He could have chosen his words a bit more carefully, but he didn't say what they infer.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Sure I'm maybe a bit "bristly" but...

I see my attached portion of the exchange as a challenge to those who hope for, er, change:

"I mean basically the only way to guarantee that we will dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to basically remove guns from society, and until somebody gets enough “oomph” to repeal the Second Amendment, that’s not going to happen. I don't think that's an answer."

Even the last 6 words, I interpret as part of the challenge.

Given the epic shift in society following this leader's call to "... fundamentally transform(ing) The United States of America..." I see these words from a stalwart Republican as a verbal "step-aside" in fighting an attempt to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

Watching the shenanigans of the Republican party in the past month and Rove's very high profile floating of this concept....

I AM QUITE CONCERNED!

Todd.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

Karl Rove has always been a Progressive. Don't let the D and R labels fool you. Progressives always favor the increase of government power; that is always the measure of a person. When I was younger I always believed that Teddy Roosevelt was a conservative until I started reading about his actual beliefs and goals. He was a pure big government progressive. Don't be fooled by the bones he threw to keep people distracted. Teddy is the root cause of WWII.

 

[Ignition Override]

What Rove said really doesn't matter.
Concerned people who can afford a few bucks to the NRA can support the Second Amendment.
Nobody ever claimed that a perfect association exists.

No other pro-Second Amendment organization has such clout in Congress.

If another organization has such clout, please state the name.

 

[OilyPablo]

The way he said it was ackward at best but he's not advocating rewriting the Bill of Rights. And trust me I have no love for Rove. He's a clown who needs to go away.

 

[HOOfan_1]

Guns wouldn't magically self destruct if the Second Amendment was repealed. So to even suggest repealing the amendment would remove guns from society is illogical.

 

[hso]

That was part of Rove's point. The talk about repealing the 2nd and taking guns away heard after Charleston is illogical. The issue isn't guns, but hate and crazy and people not taking action to stop what appears in hindsight to have been clear warning of a coming tragedy.

If you haven't watched the entire Fox piece you're basing your impression of what was said off of nothing more than rumor.

 

[medalguy]

I agree with HOOfan-1 in his assessment that repealing the Second Amendment would not remove guns from Society. All the Second does is make an attempt to guarantee our free right to possess firearms. Absent that amendment, we just might still have enough political "oomph" as Rove put it to keep them.

So it would take a real concerted effort to remove guns from American society, and I, too, don't see that happening any time soon.

 

[rodensouth]

Well, I did watch it and the "architect" Rove slipped and chose words poorly at best.

 

[22-rimfire]

Best to go to the source instead of repeating something without checking it ourselves.

Rove's actual answer can be summarized as "to stop acts of violence with guns you'd have to remove guns from society which would require repealing the 2A and that's not going to happen and it isn't the answer".

Didn't see anything that he said that suggests he advocates repealing the Second Amendment. I guess we all see what we want to see.

What Rove said is basically true. Removing guns from US society would take generations to accomplish and he says that it isn't the answer. It is about people and their inclination to commit murder.

 

[gbw]

Well, I did watch it and the "architect" Rove slipped and chose words poorly at best.

His word choice was just fine, he made a simple point to answer a simple question, the amazing part is how easily people on this forum can mis-hear simple english to see something in his reply that just isn't there. HSO and a couple others seem to have actually listened. eta: See 22-Rimfire above for example, very nicely stated.

Again: Rove said:

1. Probably only way to seriously reduce gun violence is to remove guns from society (all of it, criminal and non-criminal both). True.
2. Only way that can happen is to first repeal 2a. (Simple implication is that confiscation cannot occur 'til 2a is gone). True.
3. Only way 2a gets repealed is if enough political power, nation wide, emerges to repeal it. THEN confiscation can occur. True.
4. He sees a zero chance, realistically, of that happening. True.
5. So that's not an answer. True.

There will be plenty of opinions out there to be concerned over, Rove's isn't one of them and choosing to splinter votes over it is a losers choice.

 

[nathan]

I dont trust any of these traditional R and D voicebox. The country has already been taken down the pits. Only trust those who still have respect for the Constitution which is quite a tiny few.