Media sources taking quotes out of context? Say it ain’t so!
Even if this is just poorly expressed, suggesting some like getting “enough “oomph” to repeal the Second Amendment” is still saying “guns are the problem.” I don’t think there is a “context” problem here so much as another person who really doesn’t get it. If he’d have stopped at “removing all guns from society” as a mythical hypothetical I’d be fine with what he said. He has basically challenged our enemies to attack the second amendment directly. If this were coming from somebody like Trump it wouldn’t matter because he’s a clown. But Rove is actually a major player and he should know better.
“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.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think that your are also misquoting him or at least not providing the entire quote. I watched the interview a couple of times now and recall him stating that it (repealing the 2nd Amendment) "is not an answer." I did not see anything inflammatory, threatening, or challenging about his remarks. The entire content and context was appropriate given the question that was loaded with assumptions posed by Wallace. Nothing about what he said struck me as controversial until some people with an agenda started selective editing.
This is spot on, not to give the SOB any more attention but if you read the SC shooters manifesto it goes into exactly the bolded part.
“The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them.
One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”
- Ayn Rand
I took the quote as posted by Will. Do you have a more complete quote?
I’m with Sensei on this one.
I did not, in any way shape or form, see him call for a repeal of the second amendment.
I interpreted it as: “If the left wants to solve the gun problem by banning guns, they need to repeal the second amendment first because otherwise it is illegal to do so.”
It is already in post #12 but here it is again in its entirety:
"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."
Notice the last sentence which is omitted by most of the agenda websites. However, I don’t know why people are relying on the doctored transcript when the actual video has been linked at least once in this thread.
I don’t see this story anywhere on The Blaze, correct or with selective editing.
It was there yesterday…perhaps removed.
IF you subscribe to the fallacy that firearms are the problem, then all he’s saying is the logical extension of that. With the current 2nd amendment case law, there is no possible way to put enough restrictions on firearms to even slow down a nutjob like the Charleston shooter because you actually have to follow due process and convict someone or adjudicate them mentally insane in order to strip them of their 2nd amendment rights.
I’ve often said that I have a lot more respect for antis that just come right out and say they’d like to repeal the 2nd Amendment than the one’s who just want to act like it doesn’t exist because at least the former would be following the legal amendment process as written in the Constitution. I would fight that effort tooth and nail but at least we would be operating under the Constitution as intended instead of the “living document” BS.
Which itself is nigh impossible without gutting due process. It’s so hard to adjudicate someone as dangerously insane these days that it’s a waste of time. You have to actually wait till they hurt someone before you can lock them up…
Missed that the first time. Full quote accepted. Works for me.
However Rove meant it…he has proven in the past that he is not our friend.
Rove has a whole PAC that i in place to defeat Tea Party type candidates before they get to a general election. Rove is a big govt neo con and far from a lover of liberty or freedom.
Agreed.
People like Karl Rove are actually part of the problem. The old guard GOP establishment that really does not want to lead or reform a damn thing in America.
He is really no less dangerous than any Democrat/leftist activist when you get down to it.
Thanks for having a clue as to whats going on. The RINOS are doing more damage to us than Obama and his minions due to the fact that their enablers. Karl Rove is part of the problem, not the solution. So aren’t Boehner and McConnell. The Republicans have to clean their house out before they go after Obama and his radicals.
Excuse me - but this is THE Karl Rove - correct?
Master of subterfuge, creator of spin, manipulator of media, teller of tales…leaving room for misinterpretation? Being vague?
Douchebaggery. Plain n simple.
You forgot that he is responsible Hurricane Katrina.