I saw the whole thing last night, including the very selectively reported pseudo-news piece that preceded Rev. Pat's call to murder Hugo Chavez, and, if the old scuzzball of a 'reporter' or Rev. Robertson, Esq., were on a witness stand under oath and said what they did, perjury charges would have been called for.
As it stands, Rev. Robertson, if he had not already done so with his non-denially denied 9/11 comments, lost all moral authority as a claimant to be a man of God -- or even a believer in the right to life -- in calling for the murder of Chavez.
Further, he's an attorney and it's just not okay for officers of the court to call for the murder of a person, much less the murder of the head of a sovereign nation (with whom Rev. Robertson's government has diplomatic relations, no less.)
And he did it on the public airwaves, meaning that every channel that broadcast it ought to be getting lots of letters for their FCC license renewal files, disclaimers notwithstanding.
And let's not discount the damage the good reverend did to his country -- one that he claims a deep patriotic concern for.
This isn't, after all, his usual threat of hurricaning those he considers lacking in the righteousness department or his usual wierd "healing" of non-existent ailments people didn't know they didn't have -- but, with his recent exhortation to pray for the death or serious disability of Supreme Court justices, is more indicative that he's gone over the megalomaniacal deep end -- or has he?
I thought, "His son has been taking over his duties more and more. Perhaps Robertson the Younger might want to limit his aging father to only pre-recorded broadcast opportunities so that such major embarassments can be edited out before they do any further damage to an already deeply wounded ministry."
Then I thought some more...
I enjoyed watching the gummint give the appearance of 'trying to deal with it' today -- and hearing the Venezuelan ambassador in D.C. say that everyone BUT someone from the executive branch of our government has gotten in touch with them. He said that he doesn't think the statements ShrubCo did make, which look to me like they've donned gloves and are holding the stinky old Robertson fishy at arm's length or are all but ignoring the ravings of the Robertson child as one should ignore the ravings of a silly thing, are emphatically condemnatory enough. I understand how he feels and think he's right regarding the possibility of a seemingly rogue, unaffiliated terrorist taking matters into his/her own hands, or by accident, maybe even a real such whacko. Lou Dobbs pointed straight to the heart of it, rightfully labeling Robertson's call to murder an "evangelical fatwa" and saying flat out that ShrubCo has refused to condemn it.
I got some comic relief: My fav related news bit of the day was a story from Robertson's past about how he takes advantage of the world current affairs ignorance of his viewing public, many of whom get all their news from his and other KKKristian sources. It seems that, in the middle of the civil war in Lebanon, Robertson, with his usual dramatic flair, put up a big map of the Middle East, pointed to Lebanon, and "predicted" that there would "soon be a conflict" there, never bothering to inform his audience that there was, in fact, already one.
Rev. Pat Robertson, Esq., is, indeed, his own personal Twilight Zone.
True, many of the same, well-meaning sheeple who thought it okay to conduct a pre-emptive war in Iraq that was little more than an excuse for political assassination attempts have been shocked. I'm hardly reassured. The radio talks have also been full of hawkish neocons cheering Robertson on.
This administration has largely functionally ignored Latin America except to promote an economic policy that we mislabel democracy -- a policy that ends up increasing the region's ever problematic gap between rich and poor.
We have historically meddled in their affairs of state to the point of supporting coups and brutal totalitarian and oligarchical regimes.
We have, in Iraq, now officially crossed the line of pre-emptive war -- that was, if anything, a ham-handed attempt at pre-emptive murder -- and now are crossing into openly pre-emptive murder -- or at least putting up a trial balloon of it with the one-two punch of first sending Rummy, with his newly enhanced military CIA as an ever-present threat, into the region trashing Chavez then following through with Robertson.
Think I, too, have gone over the edge with that claim? If ShrubCo wasn't doing precisely that, they'd have more emphatically condemned Robertson when they first had the chance. They did not. They winked and tap danced instead.
Robertson was clearly wrong to do what he did but he is not the biggest villain in the mix.
What's worse than advocating murder? Obvious -- actually attempting it, including authorizing in an official capacity the attempting of it, which the government of the United States has previously done in Venezuela and is still surely contemplating doing, along with prepping our people for another try at a full-scale coup.
In the game are the same political players who orchestrated the coup in Chile and tried to assassinate (with really big guns) the leader of Iraq, who have a history of thumbing their noses at the law when it comes to trying to effect regime change or shore up regimes friendly to U.S. corporate interests in Central and South America -- remember Iran/Contra, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Bolivia...the list is a long and sorry one and the people responsible are once again pulling the strings in D.C. -- and/or Crawford or whatever bunkers they have Shrub/Cheney/Rummy/Rice stashed in these days.
ShrubCo has succeeded in getting the American people diverted from the administration's failures in Iraq and Afghanistan and North Korea and their treason in PlameGate to pay attention to their concerns about Chavez, cleverly directing the ire of the populous not at ShrubCo but at Robertson in the process. I'd say ShrubCo did a really good job, by Rove!
Wake up and smell the oil.