Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,833 Year: 4,090/9,624 Month: 961/974 Week: 288/286 Day: 9/40 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Pat Robertson shows again why the Christian Right is such a laughingstock
Zhimbo
Member (Idle past 6039 days)
Posts: 571
From: New Hampshire, USA
Joined: 07-28-2001


Message 46 of 232 (236460)
08-24-2005 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Monk
08-24-2005 1:04 PM


Re: Retraction?
He said "...if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, then I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability." I just watched the clip to verify his wording.
Pretty unambiguous.
ABE: The video appears to have an edit between "...starting a war." and "We have the ability...".
This message has been edited by Zhimbo, 08-24-2005 01:41 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Monk, posted 08-24-2005 1:04 PM Monk has not replied

FliesOnly
Member (Idle past 4172 days)
Posts: 797
From: Michigan
Joined: 12-01-2003


Message 47 of 232 (236461)
08-24-2005 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Monk
08-24-2005 1:04 PM


Re: Retraction?
Hi Monk:
Just so you know, Robertson can right out and said that we (the United States) should take him out. There's absolutely no way it was a misquote or a misunderstanding. I watched and listened to it last night on just about every news station.
On a somewhat related note I did notice that this story was also the lead on just about every news program I watched...with the exception of any thing on Fox. Just found that kind of funnny.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Monk, posted 08-24-2005 1:04 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Monk, posted 08-24-2005 2:12 PM FliesOnly has replied

Yaro
Member (Idle past 6523 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 48 of 232 (236463)
08-24-2005 1:41 PM


Transcript
I posted this in reply, but it seems no one noticed it.
Here is the whole transcript:
In a direct transcript of his August 22 The 700 Club broadcast Robertson clearly says:
There was a popular coup that overthrew him [Chavez]. And what did the United States State Department do about it? Virtually nothing. And as a result, within about 48 hours that coup was broken; Chavez was back in power, but we had a chance to move in. He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he's going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent.
You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that 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 the United ... this is in our sphere of influence, so we can't let this happen.
We have the Monroe Doctrine, 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 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 and then get it over with.

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Chiroptera, posted 08-24-2005 1:52 PM Yaro has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 232 (236467)
08-24-2005 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Yaro
08-24-2005 1:41 PM


Re: Transcript
WTF?
There was a popular coup that overthrew him.
A popular coup? The only thing popular about that coup was the resistance that put him back in power.
He won the presidential election; his supporters won the parliamentary elections; the constitution he supported (including the provision that made it possible to recall him) was passed by popular referendum; the recall against him was voted down in a popular election....
Do some people live in some kind of fantasy land?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Yaro, posted 08-24-2005 1:41 PM Yaro has not replied

Monk
Member (Idle past 3951 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 50 of 232 (236470)
08-24-2005 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by vossy
08-24-2005 1:33 PM


Re: Retraction?
Crap, late by about 30 seconds. Just when I had something to add to a thread...
Hey vossy, you weren't late. You did add to the thread. You quoted his exact words regarding his attempted retraction. I was just going by memory from what I heard this morning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by vossy, posted 08-24-2005 1:33 PM vossy has not replied

Monk
Member (Idle past 3951 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 51 of 232 (236472)
08-24-2005 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by FliesOnly
08-24-2005 1:35 PM


Re: Retraction?
Hi FliesOnly
I don't think his comments were ambiguous either. He's going to pay a price for those comments and his attempted retractions are going to dig a deeper hole.
Regarding Fox coverage, its all over their website and I'm sure it will be all over the network coverage tonight if it isn't already there right now.
Looks like Venezuela is responding already to Robertson Here .
Ya gotta love the digital age!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by FliesOnly, posted 08-24-2005 1:35 PM FliesOnly has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by FliesOnly, posted 08-24-2005 2:22 PM Monk has replied
 Message 57 by deerbreh, posted 08-24-2005 2:45 PM Monk has not replied

GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 52 of 232 (236475)
08-24-2005 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by nator
08-24-2005 8:53 AM


Re: I agree..for example where's...
scrafinator writes:
Unthinking Conservative rule #78:
Always remember that you are part of THE TEAM! You must NEVER criticize any other menber of THE TEAM, no matter how crazy they sound or how immorally or criminaly they behave!
I'm just wondering who you see jumping in to support him. Your statement just shows your own bias. Is there anybody of any political leaning on this forum agreeing with him?
I'm a Christian and I'm a Conservative. (At least by Canadian standards. ) The Pat Robertson's, of this world do nothing but make life difficult for us.
This message has been edited by GDR, 08-24-2005 11:27 AM
This message has been edited by GDR, 08-24-2005 11:34 AM

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by nator, posted 08-24-2005 8:53 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by FairWitness, posted 08-24-2005 7:14 PM GDR has replied
 Message 91 by Nuggin, posted 08-25-2005 1:40 AM GDR has not replied
 Message 106 by nator, posted 08-25-2005 8:18 AM GDR has not replied

FliesOnly
Member (Idle past 4172 days)
Posts: 797
From: Michigan
Joined: 12-01-2003


Message 53 of 232 (236477)
08-24-2005 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Monk
08-24-2005 2:12 PM


Re: Retraction?
Monk writes:
I don't think his comments were ambiguous either. He's going to pay a price for those comments and his attempted retractions are going to dig a deeper hole.
You know, Monk, I truly hope you're right. However, personally, I have my doubts that anything will come of this. Not to turn this onto some sort of "right" vs "left" thing, but going on past experiences, I have a feeling that this too will simply blow over. He has, after all, made similar comments in the past, but far right-wingers still love the guy. I just don't get it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Monk, posted 08-24-2005 2:12 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Tal, posted 08-24-2005 2:24 PM FliesOnly has replied
 Message 55 by Monk, posted 08-24-2005 2:42 PM FliesOnly has not replied

Tal
Member (Idle past 5704 days)
Posts: 1140
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Joined: 12-29-2004


Message 54 of 232 (236479)
08-24-2005 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by FliesOnly
08-24-2005 2:22 PM


Re: Retraction?
And it is a far cry from what other Radical Clerics fail to do, retract there statements.

Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by FliesOnly, posted 08-24-2005 2:22 PM FliesOnly has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by FliesOnly, posted 08-24-2005 2:44 PM Tal has replied

Monk
Member (Idle past 3951 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 55 of 232 (236485)
08-24-2005 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by FliesOnly
08-24-2005 2:22 PM


Re: Retraction?
You know, Monk, I truly hope you're right. However, personally, I have my doubts that anything will come of this. Not to turn this onto some sort of "right" vs "left" thing, but going on past experiences, I have a feeling that this too will simply blow over.
It may be a "tempest in a teapot" but what else would you want? Should he be prosecuted as Vice President Rangel has suggested? I don't think so. The left should simply enjoy this little tidbit while it lasts.
I do think you are right in that this will not cost him many of his followers. If they have stuck with him through some of his previous statements, they will continue to do so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by FliesOnly, posted 08-24-2005 2:22 PM FliesOnly has not replied

FliesOnly
Member (Idle past 4172 days)
Posts: 797
From: Michigan
Joined: 12-01-2003


Message 56 of 232 (236486)
08-24-2005 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Tal
08-24-2005 2:24 PM


Re: Retraction?
Tal writes:
And it is a far cry from what other Radical Clerics fail to do, retract there statements.
I'm a bit confused here Tal. Are you saying that Roberton has retracted his statement, which therefore separates him from Radical Clerics? Cuz it really doesn't count as a retarction if your retraction is nothing but a lie about what it was you said to start with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Tal, posted 08-24-2005 2:24 PM Tal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Tal, posted 08-24-2005 2:58 PM FliesOnly has replied

deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2920 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 57 of 232 (236487)
08-24-2005 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Monk
08-24-2005 2:12 PM


Re: Retraction?
Is anybody surprised that Pat would lie when his tail gets caught in a crack? For someone who supposedy promotes Christian values and the Ten Commandments (though I guess it all depends on what the meaning of "false witness" is, Pat is perfectly willing to play fast and loose with the truth when it suits him. And he doesn't even have the excuse of "lying for Jesus" this time. This is lying to save his sorry butt from having to apologize.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Monk, posted 08-24-2005 2:12 PM Monk has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Tal, posted 08-24-2005 2:59 PM deerbreh has not replied

Tal
Member (Idle past 5704 days)
Posts: 1140
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Joined: 12-29-2004


Message 58 of 232 (236491)
08-24-2005 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by FliesOnly
08-24-2005 2:44 PM


Re: Retraction?
Before I answer, tell me where any Mulsim Radical Cleric has ever retracted, corrected, or otherwise attempted to change what they said about killing people.

Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by FliesOnly, posted 08-24-2005 2:44 PM FliesOnly has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by FliesOnly, posted 08-25-2005 7:59 AM Tal has replied

Tal
Member (Idle past 5704 days)
Posts: 1140
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Joined: 12-29-2004


Message 59 of 232 (236492)
08-24-2005 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by deerbreh
08-24-2005 2:45 PM


Re: Retraction?
Is anybody surprised that Pat would lie when his tail gets caught in a crack? For someone who supposedy promotes Christian values and the Ten Commandments (though I guess it all depends on what the meaning of "false witness" is, Pat is perfectly willing to play fast and loose with the truth when it suits him. And he doesn't even have the excuse of "lying for Jesus" this time. This is lying to save his sorry butt from having to apologize.
How about those first stones? Tossing them out rather liberaly?

Tired of the opposite sex? Want to turn your favorite football player into a raging homsexual? Then purchase your Gay-Gene Cattle Prod! One Zap from the GGCP will turn the Gay Gene off or on at your whim. So if you want your wife to get some hot girl on girl action, the Gay-Gene Cattle Prod is for you! *not intended for use on children*

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by deerbreh, posted 08-24-2005 2:45 PM deerbreh has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 60 of 232 (236498)
08-24-2005 3:13 PM


Howard Dean
So the religious right has Pat Robertson and the democrats have Howard Dean.
I'd say it's a wash.

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Yaro, posted 08-24-2005 3:33 PM randman has replied
 Message 73 by jar, posted 08-24-2005 5:28 PM randman has not replied
 Message 92 by Nuggin, posted 08-25-2005 1:44 AM randman has not replied
 Message 107 by nator, posted 08-25-2005 8:24 AM randman has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024