Awr Hawkins reports:
During a Monday interview with Fox News’ David Webb, Fox News’ contributor Karl Rove walked back his Fathers’ Day comments in which he said “violence involving guns” is not going away “until somebody gets enough oomph to repeal the Second Amendment.”
Oh brother. The full context of the transcript could not have made it clearer. Rove never believed nor advocated for the removal of the Second Amendment.
His exact words, from Sunday:
So, we have 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 would 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 it’s an answer.
Exactly, in that Rove's exact words never suggested "get rid of the right to bear arms." Another issue: even if some of the comments are "His exact words", they are not all of his words. The context has been removed and the points which he had made before and would make afterward have been taken away too.
These quotations are turning into journalistic malpractice.
|Karl Rove affirmed, not walked back, his comments|
Although Rove made these comments during an appearance on Fox News Sunday, a video of the comments was never posted by Fox News. Other videos from that show were posted, but not Rove’s comments on the Second Amendment.
So? Fox News does not broadcast every individual segment of every statement or conversation from the news panel. Can we move on, please?
With the backlash against the comments growing, Rove appeared with Webb the next day to address the situation.
Oh yes, the "backlash". Now media operations are patting themselves on the back every time they force someone, anyone to "explain" or retract their statements. Don't get me wrong. Holding news anchors and reporters accountable for false, misleading, or inaccurate information is essential. Media need a watchdog as much as any other public institution.
Yet media include the more conservative blogs and newspapers, too.
Now, Hawkins claims that Rove "walked back" his comments.
What did he say in response to challenges and concerns about his stance on the second Amendment?
People always in moments like this, some politicians look for magic answers. And I don’t think this is an answer, as I said. I went on to describe what I think we ought to be focused on now, which is, we had warning signs from this young man. He talked to friends about it, he talked to other individuals about it. He went on the internet and openly explained what he was going to do and somehow or another we missed those signs."I don't think this is an answers. . .as I said."
Rove had already said, and affirmed what he has said. Nothing to walk back or retract.
We need more personal responsibility in our society, in my opinion, in which friends and family and community care about each other to take these things seriously. The idea that somehow or another this could have been prevented by some gun control act just simply is not accurate. Take Chicago, it has some of the toughest gun control laws on the books and it’s a murder capital. It’s because when you take away the right to keep and bear arms bad people keep and bear arms and use them.
As I said… On Fox News Sunday, this is not an answer."As I said. . .as I said". This is not walking back, but rather standing your ground (no pun intended).
Honestly, I have more respect for "Establishment" Rove for not caving to media pressure on their misunderstanding
If New Media is going to descend into the same old "Old Media" smears and distortions, I am this close to "Going Establishment". I do not believe that Andrew Breitbart intended for his media efforts to turn into right-wing propaganda or water-carrying for outlier conservatives who have no other interest but to rail against power and authority. These attacks against Rove are becoming unbearable. If the democratization of the media is all about bringing down people in power in an unscrupulous fashion, then what is the point of news reporting? We might as well go back to relying on the neighborhood gossips and their petty, personal spin on issues.
Better yet, why not crack open the ancient fables and legends of Greek Mythology? At least there was no attempt from the poets of antiquity to give a minute-by-minute truthful account of events, as much as to justify communal and cultural ideals.
Right-wing, pro-liberty, anti-liberal bias reporting is a boon, blessing, and yes God-send. Now it's time for reporters to look at reporting the truth, not just trumpeting a right-wing narrative which also flies in the face of the truth.
The New Media should be the True Media, exposing government corruption and collusion, and also exposing media connections with promoting both, as has occurred numerous times. I think that's what Breitbart wanted, and his legacy should reflect that.