SOMEBODY SHUT THIS GUY UP
Pat Robertson on Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez:
“We have the ability to take him (Chavez) out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability.”
“We don’t need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It’s a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with.”
“You know, I don’t know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ... and I don’t think any oil shipments will stop.”
Chavez may indeed be a skunk, but I find it difficult to stomach when people from our country who are as influential as Robertson say things like this. To Ronald Dumsfeld's credit, he was quick to disassociate himself from Roberston's comments.
21 Comments:
What can you do when the guy owns his own cable network? Stick a bar of soap in this fool's mouth.
When you say shut him up, you mean the way he is advocating shutting up Hugo Chavez? Remember
We have the ability to take him (Robertson) out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability.
Is it legal to advocate Robertson's assassination? I think Paul was posting in his blog how Rumsfeld said that Robertson's comments were legal because he was a civilian with an opinion. So one would assume that if I have an opinion that Robertson should be assassinated, then that is also an opinion, right?
If someone takes out Chavez, does that make Roberston an accessory to murder? Or is it acceptable if we call it an accessory to an assassination?
In other words, if I can con the Chinee government to do in Robertson, would that make it ok because it was an assassination rather than an outright murder?
Just wondering how this works.
You know you are living in CrazyLand when Rumsfeld is put off by what you are saying.
What's interesting to me is that Pat Robertson is a faith healer. He actually closes his eyes during each show and heals people who are watching. That, to me, is an indication of how backwards our country is getting. A guy who magically heals people through the television is getting publicity for his foreign policy statements. He should be given the same amount attention that the crazy guy wearing the tin foil hat screaming about aliens gets. He's a loon, but he's extremely popular amongst Christians. I'll start feeling more optimistic when it's not secularists like me upset by Robertson, but rational, well-meaning Christians. I know they exist. Why aren't they the ones speaking out against this freak?
Matt, I think part of the reason he's getting the publicity for his comments is because it really does sound like some Taliban-type shit. He's a true moron, people have known he was a moron for years, and he finally managed to say something more shocking than Rush Limbaugh. Whenever G. Gordon Liddy agrees with the majority on something against Pat Robertson's position, you know Mr. Robertson f***ed up. The reason the thinking Christians haven't started speaking up is probably because they're just not getting air time. I know many Christians, the majority of whom are conservative. I do live in Alabama after all. I haven't heard any comments other than words to the effect that he's a moron. One young lady talked about the abnormal psychology college course she was taking. I suggested that he would be more likely to be found in a neurology text.
Snave, I really want to go all hellfire-and-brimstone on this topic and start sounding like the kids from South Park, but I respect your desire to keep this a PG-rated blog.
I must retract part of my previous statement. I haven't heard anyone other than very evangelical paleoconservative radio personalities speak out in favor of Pat Robertson.
Sheryl, of course I'd never advocate that Pat Robertson be assassinated (or murdered. I would also not pray for his death, as he apparently was doing re. Supreme Court justices...) I was mostly just too ticked off by what he said to put a good title to the post at that moment. A better title would have been "Somebody Tell This Guy To Shut Up", but that would insinuate that I advocated censoring him, which I don't. The best title might have been "Somebody Tell This Guy To Tone It Down". I could tell you were mostly having fun, but I do tend to get myself in trouble with semantics from time to time!
What I would like to see is people from the Reverend's own end of the political/religious spectrum put some pressure on him, and get him to tone it down the rhetoric. Sure it's legal for Robertson to say what he is saying, because he is a civilian with an opinion. I don't think he is just ANY civilian... that makes his situation slightly different in that he is an influential civilian. Lots of people look up to him, and I see this outburst as one which makes him look irresponsible and unfeeling. Which leads to:
Matt, your points are excellent. It will be interesting to see if any prominent right-wing Christians in the U.S. try and distance themselves from Robertson. It might be tough for some of them because it would put seemingly put them in league with secularists like us, but hey... what price honesty?
Thanks, MC, for keeping it at a PG-13 level or so! But let me tell you, I was tempted to fly off the handle language-wise on this one myself!
If only the most far-right religious talkers are supporting Robertson, maybe his latest expression of opinions will cause more people to pay less attention to him. If he perceives his popularity is falling, we may get to hear more outrageous, sensational things from him... he's a good businessman, and he seems to know what sells.
When grown people, like Pat Robertson, make statements of killing there is something wrong. Oldest people should make statements concerning voting to change the state of things, not buying a gun to resolve it. See it? Selling guns, that is the truly motive of many of these statements. It's a market segment that needs to sell more? (the sniper riffles?)
Hum...I see here the argument to a film... "The Criminalis Circus".
Hey Snave, I knew you weren't advcating doing in Robertson, but it did come to mind when I read what you wrote.
I just like applying the same standards to people that they try to apply to others. If it's ok to publicly advocate the assassination of Chavez, then it should be ok to publicly advocate the assassination of Robertson.
If I were Chavez, I think I would consider getting a good lawyer and filing assault charges. I think if you combine the ideas of assault (the threat of bodily harm) with the philosophy of accessory to murder, then you have a case that Robertson is promoting the illegal act and should probably do time for it.
Never mind that he has gotten by with being quack for years, there may well be legal grounds for at least a civil suit.
Heres one of Pats memorable brain farts,
On Feminism - "It encourages women to leave husbands, kill children, pactice witchcraft and become lesbians"
Dude, Pat Robertson is one of this worlds great morons, why the hell do people listen to his stupid ass.
'Dumsfield' I'll have to steal that one snaver.
Great picture of Pat, Snave. I think his dementia is starting to kick in. I'll just sit back and enjoy it...anything that hurts the Religious Right is a-okay with me.
Well... now Robertson apologizing. If who he's apologizing to includes me, that's great... and I've MOSTLY forgiven him for his remark. He apparently knoweth not that of which he speaketh, so like J. Marquis said, I think I'll just sit back and enjoy, and not get all warped out about what Pat says. After all, as Matt of "Cerulean Blue" (great blog, see links below) suggests, things might be a lot more boring around the U.S. without Pat Robertson here to "entertain" us. Maybe we should adopt that angle, and view his verbal escapades as a sort of low comedy.
Snave, here it goes;
bounding on Damien words, Pat Robertson is suffering from multiple sclerosis (only miss me why he don't finish with an "Th... Th..That... That's all folks!" when he rubbish his axioms).
The things are always changing for worse but, some how, people manage to resolve, in most cases, young people.
Question...
Does anyone else think that Robertson looks suspiciously like Dumbya?
I don't know about you, but when I first saw the pic at the top of the post, I thought it was dumbya for one fleeting minute. It is not the first time I have mistaken these two for one another.
As such, could it be possible they are one and the same? I think there is a consistency in words, wing-nuttery, and policy that makes it a bit more than merely plausible...Don't you?
Good point, Gary! Now that you mention this, I think maybe Robertson could be the actual biological father of the POTUS!
A wack jon with a pipline that goes directly into 96+million American homes and maybe as many outside the US.
It's not a tollerable action.
Missionarys from the US around the world became a whole lot less safe the second the words left this idiots mouth.
The government may not be able to shut him up and maybe they shouldn't but Americans should be filing complaints with the FCC in droves against Trinity Broadcasting Network , Christian Broadcasting Network and any cable company that carrys them.
I have.
GTX,
My mother has multiple sclerosis. Let me assure you that that MS is not what Pat Robertson is suffering from.
Multiple sclerosis is a cruel disease that destroys the myelin in the spinal column, so that those who get it have difficult walking and suffer a great deal for nothing.
What Robertson is suffering from is selfishness, arrogance, hypocrisy, and delusions of grandeur.
I believe I read in the paper that Robertson had advocating nuking the State Department. Why hasn't he been in an orange jumpsuit since then? And don't give me some bullshit about him being a conservative (albeit an extremist) with a Republican White House, because I don't believe he would've been arrested with Clinton in office, or if he were a rabbi or mullah.
Probably not... Not only is Bill Clinton to blame for everything wrong in the world today, he also advocated nuking the State Department. Just kidding, of course.
"And don't give me some bullsh*t about him being a conservative (albeit an extremist) with a Republican White House, because I don't believe he would've been arrested with Clinton in office, or if he were a rabbi or mullah."
He is a conservative, and there is currently a Republican White House, and those are facts, not b.s. He doesn't need to be in an orange jumpsuit. I think a straight jacket would be sufficient.
Snave, involuntary committals to mental health facilities require at least some type of arrest first, or at least, that's my understanding. Besides, if President Chavez chooses to press charges of felony assault, it would be legally proper for him to be arrested.
Yes, you are right about that! For Pat to go to the nuthouse, it would have to be voluntary... sigh...
Post a Comment
<< Home