I'm quite disappointed by the gentle reaction the Bush Administration has taken on Robertson's public call for taking out a leader of another country. Isn't one of the primary complaints we have about Muslims is how they allow their leaders to shoot off at the mouth with hateful and threatening statements? Well, when top dogs like Rumsfeld brush off Robertson's hateful words with ho-hum statements like ' he's a private citizen, and private citizens can say what they want'........... we end up being no better than those we oppose.

Where's the leadership on this issue? I want somebody up there to speak out for those like me who are full of disgust for Robertson's violation of the ethics which he has used to prop himself up as a national leader up until now.

I'm quite disappointed by the gentle reaction the Bush Administration has taken on Robertson's public call for taking out a leader of another country. Isn't one of the primary complaints we have about Muslims is how they allow their leaders to shoot off at the mouth with hateful and threatening statements? Well, when top dogs like Rumsfeld brush off Robertson's hateful words with ho-hum statements like ' he's a private citizen, and private citizens can say what they want'........... we end up being no better than those we oppose.

Where's the leadership on this issue? I want somebody up there to speak out for those like me who are full of disgust for Robertson's violation of the ethics which he has used to prop himself up as a national leader up until now.

What do you suggest Bush do? Robertson is a blowhard and a doofus, but he's also a private citizen and we have free speech in this country. He can't be punished for the idiotic things he says. Not by the government anyway. Hopefully, the few people who support him will see him for the nutcase he is and find someone else to send their money to.

Rummy is right...****(shame he couldn't be right about anything else)****

People have a constitutionally mandated right to say stupid things about Venezualans.

Now if he said "I am going to Venezuala and with the strong shot gun of God am going to cap one in him." THAT is administering a terrorist threat.

But just saying, wouldn't it be nice (ala the Beach Boys) if we could kill him (instead of If we were older and we wouldn't have to wait so long), is protected speech.

Politically this is comedy gold for the opposition because he can become the face and new leader of the Republican party like the repubs like to say Michael Moore is for dems.

"But...the States have rights too!!!":rolleyes:

-Were you expecting any :eek:consistency on thisone from the likes of cowboy foreign policy boy?

Why even bother responding to him?

I mean, of course given the state of news reporting in this country today, it is going to get coverage, but doesn't giving a reactionary response to him give him what he wants.

Personally, I am with all of you guys, I think Robertson is evil, evil, spiritually little man, who represents nothing good from a Christian standpoint or American, but he does have a right to his opinion, but it also the right of country, and the present administration to just blow him off.

The problem that I see is that the state of this country now has moved those in power much closer to certain views that Robertson & Co. would support than in the recent past at least.

But that is just my opinion, so don't shoot me.

What do you suggest Bush do?

Have his State Department take the lead, and give a very harsh and public rebuke to Robertson. All Bush has to do is sit back and nod his head in support when questioned, and tell us how unfortunate and sad it is for Robertson to have suggested such a thing.

People have a constitutionally mandated right to say stupid things about Venezualans.

True, but "free speech" is a red herring with this issue and you ought to not bite the bait. At issue is, an arguably prominent American, who once ran for President and whose supporters are now largely supporters of Bush, has recommended an act of terrorism (to use contemporary terminology) upon another sovereign country.

So, the world is now watching..... will America offer assurances that such a scenario would not happen? Or, will America let suspicions about its true global intentions linger and grow?

I want my leader to get his head out of the hole it's in and realize a President of the USA is also seen as a leader around the world--- now start acting like one.

Ironically, if he had advocated for the assassination of Bush, he'd already be incarcerated.

for years now, the right-wingers on this board and elsewhere have been calling for peaceful muslims to stand up and denounce their radical clerics who call for fatwas against american troops and the western world in general. they say that by failing to do so, it means they align themselves with those sentiments, and thus islam as a whole is a religion that promotes terrorism and wholesale killing. as steam says, by not condemning the words or actions, it implicitly means you believe and support them yourself.

now one of their own radical clerics does the same, and his words are met with only silence. by not denouncing them, it means they agree with and support him in his call for violence and terrorism against freely elected leaders of other states.

why are the conservatives supporting, aiding, and abetting terrorism?

I think the difference might be in effect. If a muslim leader of the stature of Robertson were to call for the execution of a public figure, that figure would be in real danger. A lot of Baptist amens aren't much of a threat. The administration has given it the attention it deserves and the media has given it more.
I love to see idiots like Robertson and Dobson hoist themselves up by their own petards. Let em talk. It just shows everyone what fools they really are.

I'm quite disappointed by the gentle reaction the Bush Administration has taken on Robertson's public call for taking out a leader of another country. Isn't one of the primary complaints we have about Muslims is how they allow their leaders to shoot off at the mouth with hateful and threatening statements? Well, when top dogs like Rumsfeld brush off Robertson's hateful words with ho-hum statements like ' he's a private citizen, and private citizens can say what they want'........... we end up being no better than those we oppose.

Where's the leadership on this issue? I want somebody up there to speak out for those like me who are full of disgust for Robertson's violation of the ethics which he has used to prop himself up as a national leader up until now.

I think the difference might be in effect. If a muslim leader of the stature of Robertson were to call for the execution of a public figure, that figure would be in real danger. A lot of Baptist amens aren't much of a threat. The administration has given it the attention it deserves and the media has given it more.

His quote was something to the effect that Chavez has continually said the US is trying to kill him, so Robertson said maybe we should just do it. Isn't that what most of you said we should have done to Saddam? Gee, talk about hypocrites! LOL!!!

I think the difference might be in effect. If a muslim leader of the stature of Robertson were to call for the execution of a public figure, that figure would be in real danger. A lot of Baptist amens aren't much of a threat. The administration has given it the attention it deserves and the media has given it more.

so that excuses it. keep apologizing for the scum that your party represents. it's pretty fun watching all you guys bend over double excusing the inexcusable.

aren't you the same guys who got all blue in the face simply because howard dean said the republican party was made up of old white christian men?

we'd already have troops in the ground.
Once again, here we go folks America defender of freedom getting ready (or already doing so) to pick on A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED LEADER (who happens to be a leftie)
in an OIL RICH nation, what's next deposing him for a US friendly Junta?
Does this sound familiar and once again against our ethos of promoting democracy around the world?

we'd already have troops in the ground.
Once again, here we go folks America defender of freedom getting ready (or already doing so) to pick on A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED LEADER (who happens to be a leftie)
in an OIL RICH nation, what's next deposing him for a US friendly Junta?
Does this sound familiar and once again against our ethos of promoting democracy around the world?
Well they created the Islamic Boogyman for Iraq so all they have to do now is convince the suckers...ahem...citizens that there are lots of Moslems living there building bombs. That should be interesting to see considering that Venezuela is mostly Christian.

I think the difference might be in effect. If a muslim leader of the stature of Robertson were to call for the execution of a public figure, that figure would be in real danger. A lot of Baptist amens aren't much of a threat. The administration has given it the attention it deserves and the media has given it more.

To an American like you are, that's pretty much true unless you're a doctor performing abortions.

But go beyond our borders and your assumption lacks validity to the average Jose in Latin America, to a teenager and potential terrorist recruit in the middle East, or to anyone else, anywhere else.

Statesmanship. Once upon a time the Republicans thought that was their strength. How things have changed.

Communism (after all it's such a global threat)
and then in keeping up with their 'guilt by geographic proximity' methods somehow link them to Columbian, Bolivian and Peruvian Drug Cartels who fund terrorism.

"What do you suggest Bush do? "
.
Have him killed ?

True, but "free speech" is a red herring with this issue and you ought to not bite the bait. At issue is, an arguably prominent American, who once ran for President and whose supporters are now largely supporters of Bush, has recommended an act of terrorism (to use contemporary terminology) upon another sovereign country.

So, the world is now watching..... will America offer assurances that such a scenario would not happen? Or, will America let suspicions about its true global intentions linger and grow?

I want my leader to get his head out of the hole it's in and realize a President of the USA is also seen as a leader around the world--- now start acting like one.

You should watch more Fox, Rumsfeld has already stated that we don't do things like that. It obviously didn't get the wide coverage the original statement did.

so that excuses it. keep apologizing for the scum that your party represents. it's pretty fun watching all you guys bend over double excusing the inexcusable.

aren't you the same guys who got all blue in the face simply because howard dean said the republican party was made up of old white christian men?

You tend to expand on the original text of every message yoiu respond to, don't you? I neither excuse or support that old goofball. What I said was it doesn't have the same effect for Osama Bin Baptist to call for jihad as it does for Osama Bin Laden or one or more of the Ayatohlas. You are getting your panties in a wad over nothing of much consequence. All that is being launched are diatribes from liberals who see an opportunity and there hasn't been much of a bang out of it this time.

Saddam was a tyrant, dictator. Chavez is a democratically elected leader. Isn't that what you Neo Cons want and start wars for?

To an American like you are, that's pretty much true unless you're a doctor performing abortions.

How many dpctors have been murdered and what happened to the killers? Did they get arrested or rewarded?

But go beyond our borders and your assumption lacks validity to the average Jose in Latin America, to a teenager and potential terrorist recruit in the middle East, or to anyone else, anywhere else.

If you are concerned with the impression that people outside Ameica get from the rhetoric here at home, how do you feel about the constant villification of our political leaders in this administration? Does it have any negetive effect on the average Jose or Ahmed?

Statesmanship. Once upon a time the Republicans thought that was their strength. How things have changed.

Pat Robertson is a religious charlatan, not a Stastesman. He holds no elected office in this country and is not involved in our foriegn policy. His statement had far less importance and impact than the all day coverage on CNN would seem to indicate. He has since apologized, a fine example for the religious charlatans in the ME to follow.

You should watch more Fox, Rumsfeld has already stated that we don't do things like that. It obviously didn't get the wide coverage the original statement did.

he said we don't torture too, and we all know the truth about that. he also said the reason we don't have enough armor on the humvees was because production was topped out. we all know that was false, as well. he also said that jessica lynch fought hard till she ran out of ammo, and pat tillman was killed heroically leading a charge against enemy positions. also totally false.

4 out of 5 americans believe the military won't tell them the truth. wonder why?

Pat Robertson is a religious charlatan, not a Stastesman. He holds no elected office in this country and is not involved in our foriegn policy. His statement had far less importance and impact than the all day coverage on CNN would seem to indicate. He has since apologized, a fine example for the religious charlatans in the ME to follow.
Snake-he only 'apologized' while talking to CNN...take a look @ the NYT article I posted; on his show he pretty much retracted that 'apology'

Saddam was a tyrant, dictator. Chavez is a democratically elected leader. Isn't that what you Neo Cons want and start wars for?

Robertson is a mean spirited southern preacher in it for the power, fame and money. He's gotta be semi-stoned on pain killers or heart medicine, with some of that stream of consciousness drivel that spews out of his mouth, hunched over his chair on the set, with that skinny, pasty white woman with the chalked-on makeup, blonde wig, and blue contact lenses, who reads the letters. He makes the pitches. She's the chorus, his valkyrie. 50 years ago, they'd be selling snake oil at traveling carnivals. Today, through the magic of television, they can sell religion to the sheeplike masses, salvation to the poor trailer trash, watching DirectTV from their trailers over six packs of LoneStar beer, sitting on their Lazy-boy recliners next to their pudgy wives munching Krispy Kreme donuts.

Maybe Robertson's time in the political spotlight is over. Let's hope this gaffe will seal his political fate, and end once and for all his country boy pretentions as a national religious and moral leader. But there are so many who think like he does, all those Rush Limbaugh fans, that his followers will continue apologizing for him and carry on in a state of sonambulistic denial.

Robertson's venom falls in line with all the CIA attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro, its engineering of the overthrow of Salvador Allende, Patrice Lumumba and the others, symbolic of the arrogance and hypocrisy of what America says and what it does. The respectable right must distance themselves from this guy publicly, throw him out of their circle of influence, which is what they're trying to do. What a jerk.

Chavez, like Patrice Lumumba, like Salvadore Allende, like Ho Chi Minh, is a charismatic popular leader, who is loved and treasured by the masses, offering an optomistic future. He gives the have-nots hope, of democratic equality, of the end of suffering, in a country owned by a wealthy oligarchy, in bed with US financial interests. American foreign policy driven by corporate interests, hates charismatic leaders. They're going to look after their people, not the corporate interests.

Have his State Department take the lead, and give a very harsh and public rebuke to Robertson. All Bush has to do is sit back and nod his head in support when questioned, and tell us how unfortunate and sad it is for Robertson to have suggested such a thing.

Sure but that's a little different from your opening statement... Not that I don't discourage people from being able to reconsider and change their mind. You know... flip flop. ;)

But on this second point, didn't the State Department do just what you're advocating?
Actually I think this is the second time the SD has had to rebuke one of the doofuses'... I mean Roberston's statements regarding foreign affairs.

What do you suggest Bush do? Robertson is a blowhard and a doofus, but he's also a private citizen and we have free speech in this country. He can't be punished for the idiotic things he says. Not by the government anyway. Hopefully, the few people who support him will see him for the nutcase he is and find someone else to send their money to.

I think you're right on target with this one.

Rummy is right...****(shame he couldn't be right about anything else)****

People have a constitutionally mandated right to say stupid things about Venezualans.

Now if he said "I am going to Venezuala and with the strong shot gun of God am going to cap one in him." THAT is administering a terrorist threat.

But just saying, wouldn't it be nice (ala the Beach Boys) if we could kill him (instead of If we were older and we wouldn't have to wait so long), is protected speech.

Politically this is comedy gold for the opposition because he can become the face and new leader of the Republican party like the repubs like to say Michael Moore is for dems.

Wow... imagine if Brian Wilson got together with Robertson and recorded that version of the song about 22 different times and made a video for VH1. Wouldn't It Be Nice? I know I sound like I found Brian's old drug stash. What can I say? I'm a crazy, devil warshiping, pro-abortion... oops... pro-choice, pro-lesbian, pro-feminist libby. They should assassinate me too while they're at it.

Communism (after all it's such a global threat)
and then in keeping up with their 'guilt by geographic proximity' methods somehow link them to Columbian, Bolivian and Peruvian Drug Cartels who fund terrorism.

You know many people say Reagan won the war on communism but did he or for that matter did we as a country? Last time I checked there are few communist countries around like... I don't know.... hmmmmmm? China.

Last time I checked a few of our finest American capitalist pig corporations like Microsoft were helping the Red Chinese censor the internet and scub out dirty words like democracy so the people of the People's Republic can't get any wise ideas. Who really believes anymore that democracy and capitalism are two peas in a pod or are mutually dependent?

Some may call me a cynic but hasn't this country in many ways become a bit too cynical? Perhaps it always has been and that's why we're in the mess we're in now. I know... I know... love it or leave it.

His quote was something to the effect that Chavez has continually said the US is trying to kill him, so Robertson said maybe we should just do it. Isn't that what most of you said we should have done to Saddam? Gee, talk about hypocrites! LOL!!!


Problem is...now Chavez has his guard up and the CIA is going to have to go back to the drawing board. (If they are doing their job they know just how "regular" he is each morning)

Absolutely it is what we should have done to Saddam and if necessary to Chavez...here is to a quick return to Real Politik...enough of this Wilsonian neo-communism already. A return to Darwinian foreign policy would be very refreshing after this fiasco in Iraq.

No hypocricy here! But I am not a nice liberal.

Snake-he only 'apologized' while talking to CNN...take a look @ the NYT article I posted; on his show he pretty much retracted that 'apology'

I don't want to give the impression I am defending this idiot, I'm just saying he isn't representative of anything that matters and anyone who uses him as an example of anything has simply run out of logic.

I don't want to give the impression I am defending this idiot, I'm just saying he isn't representative of anything that matters and anyone who uses him as an example of anything has simply run out of logic.

Kind of like those who say that Michael Moore is the mouthpiece for the Dems...

he is the leader of the religious right. they made up about half of W's voters and it's because ole Pat said God 'chose' W. (well there goes the argument for ID). he collects millions of dollars in which some he doles out as influence to politicians. He ran for Pres.
he was crucial in rallying primary votes for W in 2000. Sorry ole Pat makes Mr. Moore look like a pop warner player in the nFL.

Michael Moore was an honored guest at the libs, I mean the Dems National Convention. He sat right next to 'Jimme Catta'. I would say that he indeed was and is embraced by the second party :D

the kind of juice that ole Pat and the 700 club posess. Michael Moore doesn't have folks just mailing him money

Michael Moore was an honored guest at the libs, I mean the Dems National Convention. He sat right next to 'Jimme Catta'. I would say that he indeed was and is embraced by the second party :D


more lies from steam. who would have guessed?

I don't know why I am even responding to this, but what about my statement qualifies as a lie?

Michael Moore was an honored guest at the libs, I mean the Dems National Convention. He sat right next to 'Jimme Catta'. I would say that he indeed was and is embraced by the second party :D


STEAM I tells ya I am on your side with this one. (The chavez comments)...but I must tell you that although I find Michael Moore abhorrent and dirty (ie the man looks unclean)...having him sit next to Carter is not the same as allowing Pat Robertson to speak at the Republican National Convention. I am sure you would agree that giving that man a microphone on August 16,1988 and allow him to spew some venom is not the kind of thing a democrat is going to forget. (Although I am all for taxcredits for homemakers).

STEAM I tells ya I am on your side with this one. (The chavez comments)...but I must tell you that although I find Michael Moore abhorrent and dirty (ie the man looks unclean)...having him sit next to Carter is not the same as allowing Pat Robertson to speak at the Republican National Convention. I am sure you would agree that giving that man a microphone on August 16,1988 and allow him to spew some venom is not the kind of thing a democrat is going to forget. (Although I am all for taxcredits for homemakers).

Both of them have used the spoken word to assure themselves of lasting enmity from the opposition. I have always believed that the only microphone Pat Robertson should be allowed is the one someone stuck up his a$$ but I don't see that there was much difference in their influence or treatment by their respective political groups.

I am not actively religious but the thing about this religion thing that bothers me is the intollerance. I miss the public prayer at functions like sporting events where all that is asked for is protection. It seems to me that even if you don't believe, there isn't anything wrong with hedging your bets. Kind of like walking around a ladder even though none of us are superstitious. Pat Robertson doesn't represent religion to me but he obviously does to a huge bloc of voters. Nothing particularly wrong with letting them have a moment of inclusion. When judging his influence on the party platform one must question how much is paralell and how much is actual adoption of his ideas. I believe most of it would be found to be paralell.

That was 20 years ago (almost). So the libs want to make Robertson the whipping boy. I could care less. I wasn't even attempting to defend what he said. I merely pointed out that his statement was in line with what many libs suggested we do with Saddam and others. Let Robertson swing in the wind, for all I care.

Michael Moore is not the leader of a group that garners 50% of his parties vote. Michael Moore may say incindiary things but he usually has documentation to back it up. Nothing Michael Moore has ever said comes near "Hurricanes are due to homosexuality, or 9-11 was God punishing us"

LOL!!! MM backs up his false claims? LOL!!!

are you going to say W's connections to the house of Saud and the Bin Ladens don't exist? are you going to deny some of the same folks have basically underwrote his entire career? are you going to deny that large #'s of them left on 9-12 while most international travel was shut down?
are you going to deny that Saddam had no WMD's or connections to Al Q.

no offense but MM's accuracy has been say 'a tad higher' than ole PR.

it's a lie, because by all accounts, michael moore was not a guest of jimmy carter in his box, nor do i believe carter even knew he was going to be there. from what i understand, Moore was walking around the arena and someone grabbed him and pulled him into the box. now, just how you define "honored guest" versus someone who has applied for and been granted credentials to attend is your problem. by your standard, known homosexual mary cheney was an honored guest at the repubs convention.

LOL!!! So any fat guy could have sat next to a former president of the United States at the DNC, who was an invited dignitary? LOL!!! You are a piece of work :D

LOL!!! So any fat guy could have sat next to a former president of the United States at the DNC, who was an invited dignitary? LOL!!! You are a piece of work :D

Well many say your the real piece but I'm not going to guess what kind.

Keep up with us grasshopper, not any fat guy... I would bet Michael Moore and Jerry Nadler are a few fat guys who could for sure.

LOL!!! So any fat guy could have sat next to a former president of the United States at the DNC, who was an invited dignitary? LOL!!! You are a piece of work :D


Like that was the only debacle during the DNC...not even sure if Carter should have been invited...maybe he should have been our lesbian daughter, we could have used one. Between the salute and the fact that Kerry was sweating like he was a mile from the sun, Crazy Al Sharpton screaming for his mule...what the hell went right?

Well the Springsteen song at the beginning and the Van Halen song at the end was pretty good...

So much for proper planning :)

Harvey Weinstein too ;)

I still haven't got over the RNC's usage of "Born in the USA" which if memory serves me right was the first time I realized the right wing has NO sense of irony.

Harvey Weinstein too ;)

I wonder if Carter would receive the legions of fat Republicans in the spirit of bipartisanship?

Harvey Weinstein too ;)

I wonder if Carter would receive the legions of fat Republicans in the spirit of bipartisanship?

You know I realise I just shouldn't take you too seriously. It's all just a sparring game with you.

It reminds me of when I was a kid. My buddy and I would be down at marina where there was this old security guard. The security guard whould always greet us by saying "hey girls". We would always respond by saying "what's up grandma"

I still haven't got over the RNC's usage of "Born in the USA" which if memory serves me right was the first time I realized the right wing has NO sense of irony.

That's not the only sense they sometimes lack...

LOL!!! So any fat guy could have sat next to a former president of the United States at the DNC, who was an invited dignitary? LOL!!! You are a piece of work :D

no, i'm sure jack germond could have as well. or maybe even dom deluise. or paul prudhomme. or luciano pavarotti. it's celebrity, steam, as you damn well know.