Right you are, sir. The "not a dime's worth of difference" argument is used by the intellectually lazy.
You should love it
Way more than you hate it
What? You mad?
I thought that you'd be happy I made it...
Posted on 05/08/2003 7:53:15 PM PDT by Atlas Sneezed
The New Hampshire State Republican Committee is sponsoring a series of in-state visits from party bigwigs. Last night, Karl Rove, advisor to the President, and a friend of George W. Bush for 30 years, spoke at a lecture hall at Southern New Hampshire University, in Manchester. The hall was full, with several hundred people there, including a state senator, a recent Congressional candidate, and a number of other people I knew. (New Hampshire's a small state.) I sat in the front row, and after Rove's speech, was the last of a half-dozen people to be recognized for questions.
I introduced myself as a director of Gun Owners of New Hampshire, the NRA state affiliate, noting -- for the benefit of the audience -- that even Bill Clinton admitted that the country's 83 million gun owners, and the NRA, delivered the electoral votes of Arkansas, Tennessee, and West Virginia in the 2000 election. I then told of assistant White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan's statement a couple of weeks ago that President Bush had joined Democrat senators Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer in calling for renewal of the so-called Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, due to sunset after ten years in 2004.
My question was whether President Bush was aware that many thousands of gun-rights activists around the country felt so strongly about this that we had drawn a line in the sand (my exact words), and would not support ANY politician -- even President Bush himself -- who supported this atrocious legislation.
Rove began his answer by referring to the tremendous amount of email that the White House had received on this subject, but then he shot back the question of whether we supported Bush in the 2000 elections.
I said "absolutely." His follow-up was that Bush had publicly campaigned on his position of "enforcing existing gun laws," and his position hasn't changed; he was just being consistent. Rove then closed the session and walked off the stage.
Just a few minutes later, I approached him to continue in private as he was leaving the building; I was the last to do so before he got into his car. This is where it got interesting: Rove took my arm and literally got in my face, using the old drill sergeant intimidation trick of speaking through clenched teeth with his nose an inch from mine. It didn't work, because I'm taller (and older, and uglier) than he is, and I took HIS arm in turn. He told me that Bush was sticking to his position, but that Congress would never pass the legislation. I told him that there were a lot of us, that we were dead serious, and that if Bush let the ban get renewed he'd lose the election, because freedom is more important than politics. He looked at me -- still with clenched teeth -- turned, and walked to his car, obviously angry.
GOOD! First, his anger told me that he knew that the hypocritical strategy was dangerous. More importantly, it tells me he'll remember the exchange.
Molon Labe!
Sam Cohen http://www.thespiritof76.com/rkba.html
* RKBA! (...the exclamation point means "shall not be infringed!")
Speak for yourself, pal. If the ballot says Bush (R) and Kerry (D), you can be damn sure I vote check the box for Bush. Unlike you (apparently), I remember the damage that 8 years of Clinton did to this nation. The Assault weapons ban cannot match up against the innumberable other freedoms which will be sacficied if the Democrats gain power again.
Baloney!
I asked simply, what is your alternative?
I'm all ears. You got a better idea, I'd love to hear it.
Don't waste your time...they prefer winning on "principle" even if the Socialists gain full power.
That'll go over well with the NASCAR crowd.
You whiners have a good night. Bwahahahahahahahaha
For the THIRD time....What is your solution
I'm all ears!
Yeah...that's what they believe...really. With this attitude why bother having an election at all? Let's just put Hillary in for 8 years, at the end of which they will be lucky to have the right to own a slingshot...and the SCOTUS she packs will vote with her step-by-step.
Take an extra tablespoon of Metamucil.
You just proved Rove's point. Most of the people who feel strongly on this issue did not vote for Bush or Gore either.
What Rove was saying to the author of this diatribe is that he knows you are liars. You did not and will not vote for Bush because you did not and don't see a dimes worth of difference between Bush and Gore. The end result of your position on elections, is your vote does not make a dimes worth of difference in the outcome of an election. Between elections you try to convince politicians that if they just adopted your view you would vote for them. Politicians know that to pick up one vote from people like you, costs 50 other votes. Therefore no politician even needs to be nice to you. He can even pick up a few votes by being very rude to you. Rove was not nice to the author becuase the author of this diatribe will have no effect on the 2004 election.
You are absolutely clueless. You think bluster can influence a pro like Rove. The positions taken by all politicians are designed to get the most votes. If most voters agreed with you, there would be no need to talk to any politian. They would all support and pass into law what you want passed. Since the public does not agree with you, politicians tell you to go hump a tree.
The only thing that influences politial operatives like Rove is votes. And you and your ilk ain't got them.
Right you are, sir. The "not a dime's worth of difference" argument is used by the intellectually lazy.
You should love it
Way more than you hate it
What? You mad?
I thought that you'd be happy I made it...
Cynical has no solution. He's just a bellyacher. Gripe, complain, bitch, piss-and-moan.
He will NEVER tell you who he supports as an alternative, because he doesn't have one.
He just shoots at anybody who's out there.
IOW, he's not a serious person.
No way in hell do I want to go back to a Democrat president over just this one issue important as it is.
We already know the Dems are anti gun.
Actually, he didn't. Bush didn't tell Rove about the DUI, which was a truly stupid move on his part.
Rove is responsible for the GOP controlling everything.
Rove's going nowhere, and shouldn't.
Frankly I hope the AWB never reaches his desk, but I'll tell any hard-right type if we insist on purity we will be back where we were in '92 and for me that is not an option.
The 2004 expiration of the 1994 "assault weapon ban" is part of the "existing gun laws".
No one's faulting Bush for enforcing the present ten-year ban, they're faulting him for saying that he would enact a *NEW* ban (presumably a permanent one) when the old one expires.
Rove is either an idiot, or a bad bald-faced liar, and neither option inspires confidence.
I notice for all your BS you don't ping the OWNER OF THIS FORUM to get HIS take on your definition of HIS FORUM.
I've seen JimR expound on this subject often. He understands that we need to do everything possible to VOTE OUT THE DEMS.
He understands that the GOP is the only party that stands a chance of turning things around in this country.
He understands that a vote for a third party candidate on a national level is a vote for the Dems.
If I have misrepresented his opinions here, as I have read them in the past, I hope he will correct my perception....AND YOURS, cynicom.
We can do NOTHING without the power in the Senate and the House. That is the #1 goal at this point, imo. This handwringing and 'sky is falling' is NOT productive. You want a President Hillary? Or a President Lieberman....or Kerry...or Edwards?
You honestly think that they wouldn't have your guns locked up, your cars declared illegal, your taxes thru the roof, the federal budget 3 times what it is now, all illegals declared legal, have us as a signatory on the Kyoto Treaty, have us join the International Criminal Court, further the influence of the U.N. on our foreign policy, cut the military, rescind the PBA legislation, establish Universal Health care and further pack the courts with liberal judges?
Yeah.....there's NO difference between the two parties. Right.
Based on the utter failure of all political operatives who've gone toe-to-toe against Rove, Sam Cohen will probably regret it if Rove remembers their exchange.
Cohen comes up far short of Rove's political savvy, talent, and genius. Whereas Cohen has one narrow pet issue that matters the most to him, Rove knows of all issues that matter the most to the success of his clients.
The smart money is on Rove in this battle. Cohen has no chance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.