President Bush's Boy Feels the Sting of His Boss' Mistake

KeepAndBearArms.com ^ | May 8, 2003 | Sam Cohen

[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!")

[cynicom]

There is one thing that creates anger here on FR, that is when one forces the partisan republicans to look in the mirror and see their brethern partisan democrats.

The truth seems to make them want to lash out in a personal attack. There is one difference, you never see the democrats flogging the few conservatives in their ranks.

[Oberon]

The only thing that influences politial operatives like Rove is votes. And you and your ilk ain't got them.

Oooh, smooth; not just this bit, but the whole post. Incorrect, but in a believable way. Did you edit that, or was it really a first draft?

Gun owners who are single-issue voters on gun control (and many of us are) voted for Bush in droves the first time around. Now that we've got our man in the oval office and both houses of congress, it would be nice to actually see some results. For a change. Finally.

If we don't see the result we'd hoped for, well then, why should we stick by the man who won't stick by us?

[Rifleman]

The Republican pod people can't seem to understand the arguments of those of us who are angry about W's position on this. The gun rights folks desparately want to support W as a Republican controlled federal govenment is our last best hope to get some of our freedom back. But when he crosses us on an issue that we see as important for an imperceptable political gain (or more likely a loss) we get upset and start remembering his dad, who seemed to absolutely relish it when he banned the importation of sport utility rifles and later publicly resigned his NRA membership as payback for the NRA's lukewarm support. How many times are we supposed to let the Bushes yank the football away before we catch on?


I voted a straight R ticket in the last two national elections. I would like to again. But I won't vote for someone who scrxws me.

[verity]

director of Gun Owners of New Hampshire, the NRA state affiliate

His ego is perhaps much larger than his reproductive appendage.

[ZULU]

God Bless you Sam Cohen.

Carl Rove is an idiot, not a campaign genius. Bush got those extra seats in Congres, not him. And one of the reasons Bush got them was through the support of Second Amendment People.

"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."

Yeah, Bush DID campaing by saying he would support 'existing gun laws'. As Schumer-Feinstein is due to expire, its hardly an "existing gun law" any more. If Bush signs this bill, he should kiss a second term good-by. The Gun people will NOT be taken for granted and will no longer support him. His posture on Schumer-Feinstein will gather NO new votes from the hard left or the middle of the roaders who have other issues. And, after McCain-Feingold, if Rove REALLY believes Congress will not pass the extension, he's an even bigger idiot than I thought he was. If the President refuses to take the heat, why should anyone else???

When you had that cockerroach Rove by the arm, you should have asked him about Senator Tancredo, another loyal conservative Republicna. Somebody like HIM should be in the White House instead of Bush. Tancredo woould protect gun rights, protect Family Values, and sweep out all the illegal aliens.

[WorkingClassFilth]

"I cannot believe anyone is dumb enough to actually believe this remark---then again, after living over 80 years, I have met a lot of dumb people."

Thanks for the genuine laugh. I struggle with this attitude all the time as well and cannot believe rigid and self-defeating some outlooks are.

To be honest, I'm not a Bush fan myself and I believe he is playing very risky politics with the deception of the 'triangulation' strategy. Furthermore, for patriots looking for honesty and conviction, he does himself, and us, a great disservice. Even so, he is playing politics in the timeless fashion.

For my part, however, the glaring duplicity IS a concern. Granted we, as conservatives, continue to make gains in various areas, but our hold on tenuous ground is transitory and can be lost faster than it has been gained. Enemies abound and true allies are hard to find and precious to hold. Like it or not, the reactionaries here are forecasting a very real potential event in the form of a watershed among the members of our current anti-socialist coalition.

Some here are like barflies that gain insight and courage in proportion to the amount left in their glass. Others are just as dogmatic about the purity and righteousness of the Republicans as the RATS are about their socialist front AKA the Democratic Party. To those, like myself that have worked a long time to see the gains we have made, the extreme danger of fragmenting at this point is clear. However, being tempered by a lifetime of betrayals and setbacks, none with a political history can deny the need for a new vehicle if a present party proves antithetical to freedom and liberty.

For myself, if Bush wants to play a close hand and manages to take the pot - I'll be able to live with that. OTOH, if he is carrying out a further plank of his centrist (read: anti-Constitutional) core vision and actually approves the extension, then I will have a real, live reason to weigh sending a message, and believe me, I know the consequences of a Republican loss in the face of an angered Socialist enemy.

This is the debate. These lines are read and contributed to by thinking people. This is the process of refining change, and like refining anything, there is a good deal of dross.

[WorkingClassFilth]

I see your points, but I think you and others here tend over-generalize and fail grasp that there IS a genuine sub-current in the rank and file that the "pro" (read: insular) Mr. Rove does not see.

I have worked for Conservative causes and candidates as far back as Nixon. I have served in local and state races and ALWAYS voted a Conservative ticket. Originally coming from a Democratic working class background, I have formed an independant view and voted consistently for a long-term, solidly conservative strategy. At times, this has included voting with a clothespin on my nose.

Having said all of that, I would caution you from minimizing the innate distrust that many, many of the grassroots share about the leadership in Washington and at the state levels. These conflicts must not be reduced to caricatures of reactionary emotion versus long-term strategy and political realities. Political analysts of all stripes have long, long track records of being fabulously wrong.

[JeepInMazar]

Bang? bang good? bang bad?

The bang that I typed was a generic bang which was intended merely to get this thread some more attention. So in that context the bang was a good bang.

[Joe Brower]

[JohnnyZ]

WOOHOO! Kerry for President!!!

[nicmarlo]

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.

Good for you! Proud of ya.....playing politics with the Constitution is, and always will be, WRONG!

[Spirited]

"And if Rove wants to get some vote
get Bush to protect our borders
if he did that he could get 50
states!"

You know, I think you have it there!

[Atlas Sneezed]

"Please sit back and wait. Bush and his cabinet know what they are doing. Pick the battles that can be won. This will die this term but will be a hot item in his next term. This is not the time to devide the party."

I disagree. This IS the time to "Divide the party" (I would describe it as trying to help the party grow a spine).

We should not first raise the issue in the heat of the election, just before the AWB vote next fall. We should raise it now, so that Bush has time to find a spine, and realize how serious we are.

And to those who ask which Dem I would prefer, be certain that I will not vote for ANY candidate who desires to infringe my Constutional liberties. I just won't. And since we can rely on a Republican House to protect us from an oath-breaking President, it doesn't matter who the President is, right?

[Atlas Sneezed]

"I hate to say it, but Rove is correct here. First of all, he's right that the renewal bill will never make it out of the House."

So help me understand why Bush couldn't just STFU on the issue?

[Atlas Sneezed]

Thank you for your verification of this. I suspect that Rove may start to regret his advice on this issue.

[AlbionGirl]

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.

Even though I have never owned a gun, and probably never will, I do support the 2AMD and the NRA. But someone has got to get this guy an IQ infusion. Whoever is in charge of 2AMD PR is as good as the Arabs are at their PR.

Good lord, the entire organizational structure supporting the 2AMD is in desperate need of new blood, and I hope they get it.

[nygoose]

He was still better than Gore who believed that there is no individual right at all to own firearms.

If only what you say were true. To date, I have never heard President Bush say that. I know that Attorney General Ashcroft wrote that in a letter, but I have never heard him mention it again. Has the Bush Justice Department ever filed a brief stating that it believes that it is an individual right?

[sandydipper]

If guns kill people - then matches start forest fires.

[AnalogReigns]

I am a fan of the SKS. That's the old Russian design, kind of the "poster child" of so called assault weapons. It's cheap to own and operate, semi-auto, very reliable, and has the accuracy (and actually more punch) of a 30/30. It was built in most of the former commie countries.

A classic old SKS

It's still being sold and imported as a "curio" from some countries (Yogoslavia, Albania)but not from others...(China, Romania, Russia?) Most models are almost of identical design...so the forbidding it from coming from some places, while allowing it from others makes no rational sense. It's an agressive LOOKING military style rifle...particularly if you put on an after-market stock... Compared to modern real assault rifles though, its not impressive.

An evil-looking permutation...(aftermarket stock and accessories...same gun though)

LOOKS seem to be the primary reason why its banned .... (even if only when imported from only some places). Various hunting semi-auto rifles are MUCH more deadly, as the SKS has an effective range of only about 150 to 200 yards. Virtually any (actual) high powered rifle packs more punch (as said above, the SKS is about like a 30/30).

If you put certain "evil" accessories on it (like a folding stock or a bayonet, a flash hider or etc.) it becomes illegal. Unless of course, your gun was originally (legally) imported with those features, where that makes it perfectly legal... (these are called "pre-ban" imported models) Somehow its thought gang members will skewer their rival gangs with the dull bayonet, when they run out of ammunition....

In any event, as you can see--even if you were FOR the madness of gun banning--how Brady affects the SKS makes no rational sense. Just a mess of laws, making politicians look good when they say "I've supported the ban on assault weapons, while my opponent.... After all there is NO earthly reason why anyone NEEDS such a gun...."

Of course the stupid thing is real assault weapons (full auto, i.e. machine guns--which every army or even paramilitary group from Bangladesh to Kurdistan has) have been controlled (not fully banned) since the 1930s. (you can own one now if you want...provided you buy the right license) The scary looking, so-called "assault weapons" affected by the Brady Bill account for something less than 1% of guns used in crimes... What gang member wants to carry a semi-auto rifle, obsolete 50 years ago?

It's lying, feel-good legislation--applied without rational backing. The Brady Bill should be allowed to die of its own accord.

[Mr. Mojo]

So help me understand why Bush couldn't just STFU on the issue?

I also would've liked him to just STFU on the issue. The only reason I can think of that he didn't is political -- he wanted the gun grabbers (and their sympathizers) to think he was on their side on this particular issue. Iow, the almighty Vote rules the day. But the effect of Bush's announcement (through a spokesman) the other week has been to galvanize firearms owners in a big way, and many people are writing congressmen that wouldn't have done so had Bush said nothing. I'm willing to cut the Prez a little slack to play some politics if the net result is the sunsetting of this unconsitutional ban. If it's not, and he ends up signing a rewewal bill that's even more restrictive than its predecessor, then he'll be in big trouble. But, as I've already said more than a few times now, this thing ain't making it off the floor of the House.

No worries, Jack. We'll be able to buy our 20-30 round rifle mags in another 15 months.