Robertson Does it Again
Back in May, I suggested that "Reverend" Pat Robertson is "cuckoo for cocoa puffs" - that was after he suggested that Hindus and Muslims shouldn't be allowed to hold government offices and that some nebulous "erosion of our cultural consensus" is more dangerous to America than terrorism. Well, he's gone and added some more evidence for that diagnosis: on his "700 Club" television show Monday, Robertson called for the government-backed assassination of Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez (video there too).
Robertson called Chavez "a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil, that could hurt us badly," before saying "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. ... We have the ability to take him 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 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."
Could someone please explain to me why Pat Robertson retains even a minimal amount of influence in the Republican Party? These tirades are designed explicitly to keep him in the news - which of course they do (he's currently on the front page of all five major US television news outlets) - and they only add to the perception of the GOP as being controlled by right-wing religious crackpots.
Pat Robertson does not speak for me. While I have concerns about some of Chavez' recent outrageous statements, and I'm not sure in the long run his continued grasp on power in Venezuela is in the best interests of the United States, so long as he is the democratically elected leader of that nation we'll just have to deal with him. Political assassinations are outlawed by multiple executive orders, and Robertson's suggestion of one is simply ridiculous.
Robertson has been and is an embarrassment to mainstream Republicans; we must all join now and condemn these latest statements, and relegate Pat Robertson to the loony bin of history where he belongs.
3 Comments:
I was going to ask what specific appropriations make it illegal...I know American's can't threaten such action against our own President.
FoxNews is pretty much backing Robertson...what a disgusting world we live in.
Jessica
Jessica, there were executive orders issued by Presidents Ford and Reagan banning the assassination of foreign leaders ... those have the force of law unless rescinded (which Bush could do, of course).
I'm glad to see that the State Department and the White House are condemning these remarks (both called them "inappropriate"). They are indefensible.
Many have argued that Robertson's comments are innapropiate in that they reveal real intentions...
Just a thought.
Post a Comment
<< Home