Posted on 08/24/2005 8:41:01 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
Pat Robertson's suggestion that American agents should kill Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez aggravated tense relations between the two countries even as the Bush administration moved Tuesday to distance itself from the televangelist's comments.
In Caracas, Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said Robertson's words were another sign that the Bush administration is out to get Chavez, a leftist who is wildly popular at home and is an outspoken critic of the U.S. government.
"Before, they were openly calling for Chavez's overthrow. Now, the call is to assassinate him," Rangel said.
The State Department on Tuesday denounced the remarks by Robertson, founder of the conservative Christian Coalition of America and a supporter of President Bush.
"Any allegations that we are planning to take hostile action against the Venezuelan government are completely baseless and without fact," said spokesman Sean McCormack. "Pat Robertson is a private citizen, and his views do not represent the policy of the United States."
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld added that the U.S. military had never considered killing Chavez "to my knowledge, and I think I would have knowledge."
During Monday's broadcast of Robertson's show, The 700 Club , on the Christian Broadcasting Network, the 75-year-old host painted Chavez as a menace intent on spreading communism throughout the hemisphere.
Rather than waging a war, Robertson said, it would be cheaper and easier to assassinate the Venezuelan leader.
"I don't know about this doctrine of assassination. But if (Chavez) thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it," Robertson said.
"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," he said.
Robertson has made incendiary comments before. In 2003, he suggested that the State Department ought to be blown up with a nuclear device.
Still, many Latin Americans take him seriously. The 700 Club is dubbed in Spanish and broadcast around the region. Robertson ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 1988, and his 2 million-member Christian Coalition helped get President Bush elected in 2000 and re-elected last year.
"Mr. Robertson is no ordinary citizen," said Bernardo Alvarez, Venezuela's ambassador to the United States. He "has been one of the president's staunchest allies."
As a result, Robertson is viewed in Latin America as having some degree of support within the Bush White House, said Michael Shifter, vice president of the Inter-American Dialogue think tank in Washington and a Chavez critic.
"The way Robertson's declarations will play in Latin America is that Chavez is right and that the U.S. is out to get him," Shifter said.
Since he was elected in 1998, Chavez has pledged to carry out a leftist revolution on behalf of the poor and has denounced U.S. foreign policy in Latin America, Iraq and elsewhere.
Meanwhile, Chavez has used his country's vast oil wealth as a counterweight to U.S. influence in Latin America. He has forged close ties to communist Cuba.
Bush administration officials claim that Chavez backs "undemocratic" radical movements in Bolivia and have hinted that he may have ties to Marxist guerrillas in Colombia.
In 2002, U.S. officials crowed when Chavez was briefly ousted in a coup. After Chavez returned to power, the U.S. government channeled millions of dollars to opposition political groups in Venezuela.
As he boarded a flight from Cuba to Jamaica on Tuesday afternoon, Chavez said he had no knowledge of the Robertson controversy.
"I don't even know who that person is," he said.
Robertson jumped the shark 20 years ago.
"They voted on one article of impeachment already. And I come back from Africa to stained dresses and cigars and this and impeachment. I am thinking to myself, in other countries they are laughing at us 24 hours a day and I’m thinking to myself, if we were in other countries, we would all right now, all of us together, [starts to shout] all of us together would go down to Washington and we would stone Henry Hyde to death! We would stone him to death! [crowd cheers] Wait! Shut up! Shut up! No shut up! I’m not finished. We would stone Henry Hyde to death and we would go to their homes and we’d kill their wives and their children. We would kill their families. [stands up, yelling] What is happening in this country? What is happening? UGHHH!"
Besides, Chavez is asking for it anyway. The idiot keeps believing in a self-fulfilling prophecy, running around saying we're targeting him, what does he expect? I'm only angry that Robertson apologized. He only emboldened his critics.
Marion Gordon 'Pat' Robertson basically gave that kook Chavez an early birthday present. The only thing that was missing from was a big red bow. And you can bet that Chavez will use the statements to augment his nigh perpetual anti-American (and increasingly popular) rhetoric in his sphere of influence in S.America. Pat Robertson did Chavez a really big favor. And for free.
Remember Craig Kilborn's "Snipers Wanted" image also? Hypocrites, all of them...
"Robertson jumped the shark 20 years ago"
What's he got against South American dictators? He had no problem doing business with African dictators, most famously his diamond mine dealings with Mobuto of Zaire.
Thanks for reminding re this one; but there are many. . .many more that have endured a trial balloon and were never shot down by an indignant 'MSM/Left-stream media.
Perhaps Rush could do a 'montage' of a reminder. . . as brave as O'Reilly cares to be; do not think he would go there. Maybe Sean. . .(?) SOMEone should.
Here's a comment on Robertson from one of my friends who happens to be the Pastor of a church in my hometown community.
"The problem lies with a religious leader proposing cold, calculated, murder--especially one who proposes to represent the Church established by Jesus Christ.
If Mr. Robertson wants to be a politician then he should become one again. If not, then he needs to concentrate on carrying out the work that the bible clearly lays out for Pastor/Teachers.
I've read the book quite extensively, and believe me--neither Mr. Robertson , nor I nor any man of God in between, is called upon to call for political asassinations from either an actual pulpit in a church or from the virtual pulpit provided by broadcast television."
Well, whatever covert operation that was planned against Chavez is going to be scrapped or delayed now.
The story even gave Jesse Jackson a chance to rear his ugly head. (shudder) Now there's an opportunist who never misses an opportunity.
I can see Jesse sitting in front of the TV and thinking at EVERY event of the day, "now how can I make that profitable for me?"
It might be appropriate to label Robertson as a complete idiot, total moron and just plain stupid, uninformed creep. However, to do so would be an insult to complete idiots, total morons and stupid,uninformed creeps.
Hypocrits of the worst kind. . .
Where was the rightous indignation when a leftist said this!?
-----
Exactly. The double standards we find, not only in our daily "news", but even on our own FR, are amazing and frankly disgusting. Yes, the left always gets a free pass -- your example is classic and so typical.
True, Hugo Chavez keeps running about spouting forth nonsense, however what he is trying to do is to continually drum up anti-American sentiment in his strive to become the next Castro. It is all a classic example of a demagogue rousing the rabble, and it has been working quite well. First Chavez used such tactics to win a landslide victory in Venezuela by painting the prior heads as 'puppets for the rich,' and now he has been focussing his attention on the US for the last couple of years. And to do so he has been using the same talking points Castro used to use, trying to portray himself as a 'victim' of 'American oppression.' And now Pat Robertson comes along saying we should take him out. Now Chavez has a soundbite to play over and over and over again. If you think the US MSM is going to go ape with this you should see what the media in Venezuela, Cuba, (and all South America in general) will play this.
Anyways, true or not it wasn't sagacious at all for Pat Robertson to have said what he did. It did absolutely no good, but delivered a myriad of talking points to Chavez. Plus an ad hoc insurance policy in some ways. There was absolutely no good to be gained from that statement, and it only led to the White House having to answer silly questions, plus Robertson looking silly apologizing for what he said. Plus giving Chavez 'proof' to further rouse the rabble.
Just my 2 cents. Although I'd love to know anything positive that would have accrued from Robertson making the statement he made (especially now that he apologized for it). Geez, at least stick for what you said.
Re 15: Exactly.
And I was one of those people back in 88 who went to a caucus in WA state, and enabled him to win the state.
I still don't understand why the author says the Bush admin has to distance itself from Robertson's remarks. It implies he somehow speaks for the admin
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.