Monday, August 29, 2005

The Difference between Dishing It Out and Taking It

"I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think 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. But this man is a terrific danger, and this is in our sphere of influence, so we can't let this happen. We have the Monroe Doctrine, and we have other doctrines that we have announced, and without question, this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil that could hurt us very badly. 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-dollar 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."

I'll take this piece by piece and ignore the fact that Robertson already lied in a so-called apology that no offended party would ever accept.

First, if Robertson doesn't "know about this doctrine of assassination," then he is either ignorant of the darker history of American foreign policy or a liar.
Second, Robertson makes the following argument: "If Chavez thinks we are trying to murder him, then we should murder him." My jaw hangs, bearing in mind that Robertson is a so-called Christian leader. Nuff' said...
Third, if murder is cheaper than choosing to start a war of aggression and will not slow the exploitation of another nations natural resources, Robertson wonders what we are waiting for. Gee, folks, I guess they're finally giving up the pretense and being honest about what they miss about the so-called good old days: namely, racism, nepotism, plunder, hypocrisy, murder, warmongering, corruption, destruction, and empire.
Fourth, Robertson claims that Chavez is a big danger, his and his fellow Venezuelans are mistaken that they are a sovereign people in their own country, and that "we" can't let this happen. Well, so much for not being arrogant. Does this recipe sound familiar to anyone else?
Fifth, Robertson makes a further specious claim---supported by references to past racist, warmongering presidentials policies of genocide and colonial imprimatur for other crimes against humanity---that Chavez, rather than the corporatocracy that has made us so dependent on oil, is a threat, and could "hurt us very badly." Really? Cause it sure seems like faux-Christian fascist bigots like Robertson and their golf partners in the energy industries, arms industries, White House, and rightmost fringe of the Republican party are a threat that already have hurt us very badly. Hmmm...
Sixth, Robertson references his whole idea of murdering the elected leader of another nation in the unmistakable tone of the white man's burden. Suffice it to say that if it is such a burden for Pat Robertson that he feels it necessary to enjoin our leaders to commit the kind of atrocities and other crimes that were once secrets known only to the slave quarters and soulless animals like himself, perhaps he should take a long rest.

Granted, I do not advocate putting a large caliber pistol in Robertson's mouth and suffering a momentary muscle spasm in one's index finger. I only wish to point out that this man could be serving as a spiritual guide to his fellow humans being. Instead he chooses to loll around in arrogant and wishful mimicry of the heartless WASPS of his no doubt beloved Confederacy with people he owned waiting on him hand and foot. It is nothing less than proof of the fact that many, if not most evangelical superchurch leaders are little more than manipulators, frauds, and demagogues with a cynical and severe desire to accrue wealth and power through the enabling of a fascist state where the United States now stand; not a National Socialist state or an empire of the rising sun, but a Christian machine for the despoiling of the rest of the world in the name of Christianity without the principle, democracy without an informed and empowered citizenry, capitalism without competition, and war without just cause.

I strongly suggest reading the list in my next post. I think it will prove eye-opening to most.

In other, more recent news...I wondered how a person like George Bush, Jr., could be so consistenly flippant and uncaring about others who were poorer, less privileged, more married to reality, less ignorant, and/or more recently homeless or childless than himself despite evidence that he was in some way at least partially responsible through either negligence, duplicitousness, or incompetence...listen to his mother!


Blogger Rev. T. Monkey said...

"Granted, I do not advocate putting a large caliber pistol in Robertson's mouth and suffering a momentary muscle spasm in one's index finger."

I have no such qualms. Spasm, spasm, spasm away and make the world a sunnier place!

September 6, 2005 at 9:27 AM  
Blogger Myconfidence said...

I dunno', Rev., I'm pretty anti murdah' and pro use them as a bad example. Besides, there's always the old push them deeper into hiding, which is never good from a show everyone what sinister and hypocritical to the point of outrage kind of people we are talking about here.

September 6, 2005 at 6:59 PM  
Blogger Chachi El Diablo said...

Sheesh, You'd all have us think that Jesus Christ himself wasn't speaking through Pat Robertson. Jesus was (is???) a venture capitalist. You should see his stock portfolio. It's no wonder that he'd speak through the most reverend Dr. Robertson. Although I doubt the academic credentials of Greater Mt. Antioch Central Basement Baptist Seminary for Bibilical and Apologetic Charasmaticism, (I heard it's a party bible school anyway)

September 7, 2005 at 12:46 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home