A perfect example of the hypocrisy of the religious right

[pk500]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/23/robert ... index.html

Let me get this straight: Pat Robertson, a TV evangelist, is endorsing the assassination of Venezuelan President Chavez.

Am I the only person who is almost spitting coffee on my computer screen due to the dumb-f*ck hypocrisy of Robertson and his legions of Kool Aid-drinking followers?

This guy is a man of faith, a man of God, yet he's openly endorsing the murder of another human being? And isn't Robertson the wet dream personification of every religious right conservative, the melding of church and state into a tidy, grandfatherly package appearing on your TV every night to tell you all is right about the world?

Robertson is such an idiot it's incredible. But he's more dangerous than stupid, sadly, due to the bobbing-head dolls who hang on his every word and send half of their Social Security payments to his cause monthly from around the nation.

And what a hypocrite. A man of peace, a man of God -- a MINISTER, for Christ's sake! -- encouraging an assassination.

Nice work, Pat.

Take care,
PK

[Leebo33]

They've been showing clips of him on the Daily Show recently praying for Supreme Court vacancies (old clips plus recent clips asking for more). What an asshat.

[TCrouch]

I heard that on the radio this morning and had the same reaction...simply unbelievable.

[F308GTB]

His views are a bit extreme, but how about the Catholic crusdaes? Plenty of murdering going on in that era at the behest of the Popes.

[pk500]

His views are a bit extreme, but how about the Catholic crusdaes? Plenty of murdering going on in that era at the behest of the Popes.

No question. That also was 800 years ago. I think the Catholic Church has progressed in its views of human rights since then.

Robertson and his ilk apparently have not.

Take care,
PK

[OmflShark]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/23/robert ... index.html

And isn't Robertson the wet dream personification of every religious right conservative, the melding of church and state into a tidy, grandfatherly package appearing on your TV every night to tell you all is right about the world?

The answer to that question would be: Absolutley not!

[RobVarak]

Ideally he'd be willing to do it himself, suicide bomber style.

[DChaps]

Why is it so hard for some Christians to actually follow the words of Christ?

John 15:17 (New International Version)
17 This is my command: Love each other.

Luke 6:27,28 (New International Version)
27 But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.

John 13:34 (New International Version)
34 A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

Matthew 5:39 (New International Version)
39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Luke 10:26-28 (New International Version)
26 "What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"
27 He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'
28 "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

Mark 12:30-32 (New International Version)
30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'There is no commandment greater than these."

I am just not sure where calling for someone's assasination and/or war in general fits into these words. Particularly since this is essentially the core of Christ's teaching - Love. It is the most simple concept and religion, but everyone seems to get it wrong, myself included.

[Jackdog]

What a nutjob.

[Brando70]

On top of that, I believe assassination of government officials in other countries is still expressly illegal in the U.S. I don't think that was rolled back after 2001. That was signed into law in the 70s after the Church Commission findings.

He just an aging nutjob living off past glories and wealth. I don't even think he qualifies as "religious right" because he's so far past where any sane conservative would go. He's one of those old Zionist New World Order conspiracy guys, too, I think.

[RobVarak]

On top of that, I believe assassination of government officials in other countries is still expressly illegal in the U.S. I don't think that was rolled back after 2001. That was signed into law in the 70s after the Church Commission findings.

That's an executive order, and may be rescinded at any time. And it should be.

[Brando70]

On top of that, I believe assassination of government officials in other countries is still expressly illegal in the U.S. I don't think that was rolled back after 2001. That was signed into law in the 70s after the Church Commission findings.

That's an executive order, and may be rescinded at any time. And it should be.

I forgot it was an Executive Order. And I gotta disagree with you there, Rob. I found the actual order and it prohibits political assassination -- which, IMHO, is bad policy for a country that supports freedom and democracy. It's just too easy to abuse, and there were serious attempts to abuse it during the 60s and early 70s. We still have the ability to sponsor covert attempts at destabilizing governments we feel are dangerous. I don't think we need to make the full leap to Bourne Identity mode.

Just my two cents.

[blueduke]

Everybody has their nutjobs, PK. PR to us is the "mental" kid we try to hide in the cellar when company visits. This time somebody forgot to lock the cellar door. Oh well.....

[Teal]

Am I the only person who is almost spitting coffee on my computer screen due to the dumb-f*ck hypocrisy of Robertson and his legions of Kool Aid-drinking followers?

Nope, I'm right there with you, thinking, "What the @#$%?!" What a dumbass...folks, for the record, pk calls me a right wing conservative. Please don't attempt to put two and two together on this one...

And isn't Robertson the wet dream personification of every religious right conservative...

HELL NO!!!

Why is it so hard for some Christians to actually follow the words of Christ?
Quote:
John 15:17 (New International Version)
17 This is my command: Love each other.

Luke 6:27,28 (New International Version)
27 But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.

John 13:34 (New International Version)
34 A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

Matthew 5:39 (New International Version)
39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Luke 10:26-28 (New International Version)
26 "What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"
27 He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'
28 "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

Mark 12:30-32 (New International Version)
30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.' The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'There is no commandment greater than these."


I am just not sure where calling for someone's assasination and/or war in general fits into these words.

Simple: it doesn't. Thank you for those not-so-gentle reminders in scripture. Why don't you paste them in an email to Robertson's website? He apparently needs a refresher course...




What Robertson fails to realize, like so many deadbrains who 'follow' him is the same thing Jerry Falwell fails to realize: Conservatism and Christianity are not the same thing. Politics and religion are not incompatible, (provided you know what the devil you're talking about-ie, showing Christ to other people by how you live, not just showing him off as some exclusive property of the Religious Right), but faith and politics are NOT THE SAME THING, AND ARE NOT INTERCHANGEABLE, even though these charlatans seem to think they are.


I'm sick at my stomach over this. How dare Pat Robertson hijack my faith, turn it into a call for murder, and still have the audacity to still call it the faith of Christ, much less sleep soundly in his 'faith' at night. Unbelievable.

Guys, all I can say is that I'm sorry. That moron won't apologize, so once again I feel like I must apologize for him on behalf of real believers everywhere. I know Chavez doesn't frequent DSP, but I'd like him to know that we are not all like Robertson. Some of us actually follow Christ...

[Zlax45]

Isn't this the same guy that prayed for more openings on the Supreme Court after the current opening came up? He was basiclaly asking his almighty god to kill a Supreme Court justice or have them retire from service and there was minimal outrage over that.

[RobVarak]

On top of that, I believe assassination of government officials in other countries is still expressly illegal in the U.S. I don't think that was rolled back after 2001. That was signed into law in the 70s after the Church Commission findings.

That's an executive order, and may be rescinded at any time. And it should be.

I forgot it was an Executive Order. And I gotta disagree with you there, Rob. I found the actual order and it prohibits political assassination -- which, IMHO, is bad policy for a country that supports freedom and democracy. It's just too easy to abuse, and there were serious attempts to abuse it during the 60s and early 70s. We still have the ability to sponsor covert attempts at destabilizing governments we feel are dangerous. I don't think we need to make the full leap to Bourne Identity mode.

Just my two cents.

I agree that there are few if any cases in which government directed political assassination is a good idea. But Realpolitik still rules the day, and I think it's a bit idealistic to take any chips off the table for no particular reason other than squeamishness. But then I believe international law is a 3 ring circus with all the utlility of tits on a bull, so what do I know?

[matthewk]

Well, today he is backpedaling on his comments, saying he never meant "assasinate" when he said they should "take him out". Yeah, I'm sure he meant they should take him out to dinner and a movie.

What's even funnier is that he did state that if he thinks the American government is trying to assasinate him, then we should just do it. At least read you own qoutes before you make up some phony excuse for them.

[blueduke]

Wonder why the press wasn't outraged over these golden nuggets? The media is where the hypocrisy is


http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/c ... addam.html

"Conventional Wisdom," Newsweek, Nov. 17: "Take him down." (next to a photo of Hussein and a downward-plunging arrow)

Thomas Friedman, foreign affairs columnist, New York Times, Nov. 6: "Saddam Hussein is the reason God created cruise missiles. ...So if and when Saddam pushes beyond the brink, and we get that one good shot, let's make sure it's a head shot."

George Stephanopolous, former Clintonite and current ABC News analyst, on ABC'S "This Week," Nov. 9: "This is probably one of those rare cases where assassination is the more moral course...we should kill him."

Sam Donaldson, co-host of "This Week," Nov. 9: We should kill Saddam "under cover of law.... We can do business with his successor."

Bill Kristol, ABC News analyst, "This Week," Nov. 9: "It sounds good to me."

Cokie Roberts, co-host of "This Week," Nov. 9: "Well, now that we've come out for murder on this broadcast, let us move on to fast-track..."

Jonathan Alter, Newsweek, Nov. 17: "It won't be easy to take him out. ...But we need to try, because the only language Saddam has ever understood is force."

Newsweek, Dec. 1: "Why We Should Kill Saddam."

[Brando70]

Blueduke, here is the difference (quote from PK's linked article):

"Last week, the head of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Arlen Specter, asked Rumsfeld to tone down his anti-Chavez rhetoric, warning that the United States needed Venezuelan help to battle the drug trade."

Calling for the assassination of Saddam Hussein, a man we had already gone to war with, is quite a bit different than calling for the assassination of someone who is head of a state we have peaceful (although tense) relations with.

In fact, our attempts to kill Hussein at various times have been responses to violations of peace treaties and/or aggressive military action on his part. I don't think you classify that as political assassination. Whereas with Chavez, Robertson is calling for his head because he's a Castro ally and he has criticized the US.

Robertson's rhetoric plays write into the hands of anti-American propagandists abroad. We have a very checkered history in Latin America, including assassination plots against elected officials, so his comments take on an even greater weight because of that history. That's why he's being so quickly condemned from all over.

[pk500]

Blue:

Pretty simple why no one went nuts over those quotes and they are about Robertson: Your quoted material came from journalists, not those who are leaders of a quasi-religious political movement like Robertson.

Robertson fancies himself as a holy man political leader. Sorry, but political leaders don't openly campaign to use assassination as a diplomatic tactic.

Plus you don't see any conflict at all with a supposed minister espousing the murder of another human being? What's Christ-like about that?

Take care,
PK

[blueduke]

Pretty simple why no one went nuts over those quotes and they are about Robertson: Your quoted material came from journalists, not those who are leaders of a quasi-religious political movement like Robertson.

That makes it look even worse. The media calls for a hit and it's okay but if a "leader of a quasi-religious political movement" does the same thing and it's bad? Come on, man. They're both bad but only one gets alot of coverage

Robertson fancies himself as a holy man political leader

Everybody with half a brain knows different. al Sharton and Jesse Jackson call conservatives nazis. So what?

EDIT: what I mean by "Everybody with half a brain knows different" is everybody knows Pat isn't what he thinks he is. Just didn't want there to be any confusion

[bdunn13]

His comments were over the line. However, I don't see them being any worse than other church organizations, religious people ect saying its okay for two guys to get married, live together and @ss *uck nightly.

[pk500]

That makes it look even worse. The media calls for a hit and it's okay but if a "leader of a quasi-religious political movement" does the same thing and it's bad? Come on, man. They're both bad but only one gets alot of coverage

The media doesn't either make or, in Robertson's case, desire to make political and diplomatic policy for the United States. Big difference. You give the media way more power and authority than it really exerts, especially the lapdog, pack-mentality media that populates Washington these days.

Everybody with half a brain knows different.

Really? What about the thousands who are members of the Christian Coalition or who watch "The 700 Club" nightly? Don't think they believe Pat is a nut job. And unfortunately, the media DOES give nutjobs like Robertson a platform to air his views.

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

His comments were over the line. However, I don't see them being any worse than other church organizations, religious people ect saying its okay for two guys to get married, live together and @ss *uck nightly.

You mean Protestant sects, the members of which comprise about 98 percent of the Christian Coalition?

Talk about ironic.

Take care,
PK

[DChaps]

You mean Protestant sects, the members of which comprise about 98 percent of the Christian Coalition?

I am no fan of the 700 Club or the Christian coalition, but religious hypocrisy isn't trademarked by Protestants. In fact, if anything us Catholics invented it.