Three things

I heard this on the radio earlier today and was hoping beyond hope that I had heard wrong. Obviously not. Here is a copy of the article from CBC.CA in its entirety along with the appropriate link. Please read.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/08/23/robertson_chavez_2005_08_23.html


Robertson's call to assassinate Chavez causes storm in Washington, Venezuela
Last Updated Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:05:50 EDT
CBC News

Pat Robertson's call for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has caused an angry reaction in Washington, D.C. and beyond. The conservative U.S. evangelist and founder of the Christian Coalition said Monday night that Chavez represents a "terrific danger" to the United States.

"We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability," Robertson said.

"We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator," he continued. "It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."

Chavez is an outspoken critic of U.S. foreign policy, in particular of Washington's attitude towards Latin America.

He has accused the United States of conspiring to topple his government and possibly backing plots to assassinate him. U.S. officials have said his accusations are ridiculous.

The Bush administration also forcefully distanced itself from Robertson's comments on Tuesday.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said: "Our department doesn't do that kind of thing. It's against the law. He's a private citizen. Private citizens say all kinds of things all the time."
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack called Robertson's remarks "inappropriate." He acknowledged that the U.S. has its differences with the Caracas government.

In Caracas, Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel called on America to do something about Robertson. "The ball is in the U.S. court, after this criminal statement by a citizen of that country," he said.

Former U.S. President Gerald Ford put political assassination off-limits in an executive order in the mid-1970s.

Now for my three things.

1. I am so sick and tired of this moron being the face of Christianity in North America. I don't believe that it is because he truly represents the majority of Christians but rather he has (one of) the loudest voice through his Christian Coalition and 700 Club television shows (others include Jerry Falwell and James Dobson). Also the media in North America for the most part is the laziest institution around (that is saying something given our governments) and pander more to entertainment than the actual reporting of facts and informing the public which is their responsibility. It is easy for them to put Roberston on the news constantly as a pundit, angel, devil because he puts himself out there. They don't have to do much work but rather simply run the sound clip he provides over his tv network.

These people and Robertson in particular, are far to politically motivated and involved. I was recently watching an episode of The Daily Show when they reported on Robertson's 'prayer' for an 'opening' in the U.S. Supreme Court two years ago. Of course the only way for their to be an opening is for one to retire or die. Nice. Now he is apparently taking credit for Sandra Day-O'Connor's decision to step down and is again 'praying' for another opening. Now he is openly calling for the assassination of a foreign leader. Tell me this guy is not a moron. But what sickens me most (on this point) is the fact that many in North America and around the world will put Robertson's words into the hearts of Christians simply because they have been told that he represents Christianity, when he does not.

Robertson is so far from Christianity in his recent remarks and actions that I wish to publicly disavow any association with this man. What happened to 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you' or 'the meek shall inherit the earth' or 'love your neighbor as yourself' or 'these three remain: faith, hope and love. The greatest of thes is love.' Christians are called to love others, not call for their assassination. We are called to respect others and our governments not pray for the death of a supposed 'activist' judiciary.

Robertson today showed that he is less a Christian leader and more a politician. A Wolf in Sheep's clothing if you will. So I urge any who read this don't give any credence to Robertson and please don't think ill of a whole religion simply because of the ravings of one lunatic.

2. Now for something a little more political. For a while now Chavez has been talking about America's actions in Latin America. They have been active their for decades going back to the earliest parts of the 20th century. They have installed and removed numerous dictators and are seemingly bent on having Latin America under its 'sphere of influence' (political ese for 'under our thumb'). It seems that Chavez is acting preemptively by calling attention to potential U.S. interference in his country as a means of perhaps heading off any such action.

It is no secret that Chavez and a few other Latin American leaders are trying to consolidate their position with each other so as to shore up strength to throw off the cloak of American influence. In fact one of the strongest supporters of Chavez and this movement is Fidel Castro that old friend of the U.S. It is no secret that the U.S. seeks the position of world leader, especially if one reads anything written by The Project For The New American Century. Its the dawn of the 20th century all over again. Instead of Teddy Roosevelt calling for American Empire we have Daniel Pearl and Paul Wolfowitz calling for 'sphere's of American influence'.

Now that one of the sphere's is calling a spade a spade and saying that they want for themselves exactly what Amerca fought and died for (see American Revolution and the desire for self determination) everything is wrong and political figures (yes Robertson is a political figure - he tried running for President in 1988) that be want them squashed like a bug. It is amazing what can change in 229 years. It was wrong for Britain to control oversees territories but 229 years later it is okay because its the U.S. that is doing it. Some call it pogressive foreign policy, I call it hypocrisy.

3. Now for a little more politics. I remember following the lead up to the 2004 U.S. presidential election and was amazed at the amount of 'faith based' issues on the ballots. Everything it seemed revolved around Christianity. It was a smart move on the part of the Republicans. One needs to motivate those 'faith-based' voters. So thay talked and talked about gay marriage and abortion. They talked about the 10 Commandments on courthouse steps and the need to get back to their Christian roots. The Christian Coalition, headed by Pat Robertson, was a huge backer of the Bush team and a huge disseminator of their oversimplified talking points. After a while the election seemed to be more about gay marriage than it did about foreign policy, domestic policy and economics (the three main pillars of politics).

But now look at how things have changed. When was the last time you heard about Bush's supposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage? What was the outcome of the court cases involving the 10 Commandments? Is abortion still legal in the U.S.? Once the election was over the administration that used 'faith-based' voters dropped their facade of moralism and went back to arrogance as usual. They had no intention of doing these things, they simply needed the votes and they knew that if they could distract enough people with issues that mattered little they could squeek out a win. And they did.

Now with Robertson's latest outburst (the consequence of his believing that he has more political influence than he does - it almost seems as if he thinks he is using the government rather than the reality of the government using him) the Bush administration, that friend to the faithful, has categorically denied any association with Robertson or his remarks. Oh how the mighty have fallen.

The Religious Right in the U.S. traded the perverbial cow for some magic beans. They believe(d) that it was the government that was to bring about moral change in America, not God. They believe(d) that they needed to have America conform to them rather than they to God. They believe(d) that they needed to bring about paradise on earth rather than God. Of course I am always a little confused on such matters. If one reads the Bible and takes it seriously (as I am to assume that the Religious Right does) then one would know that the world isn't going to get better but much, much worse. I believe the Bible talks about something called the Tribulation not the Restoration. And now we have Christian's across America saying that they are being persecuted while living in one of the most Christianized countries in the world. They need a reality check. Persecution was being thrown to the lions or being burned alive. Persecution occurs but it's happening in places such as China not America.

It's time that Christian's in North America place their faith in God once more rather than upon politics in which it has been misplaced for some time now.