A Thinking Reed

Holy tempest in a teapot, Batman!!

Written by

Lee M.

in

I never took Pat Robertson seriously before, and I’m not about to start now.

A question on usage though: somewhere Robertson’s comments were characterized as a “death threat.” Now, it seems to me that it’s only a death threat if he was intending to carry out the killing himself, which is presumably not the case.

Fr. Jim Tucker has some interesting reflections on the idea of political assassination. Why do we regard it as somehow worse than going to war? And why is it more appalling to advocate the killing of one man than thousands (as respectable mainstream pundits and politicians routinely do)?

Comments

7 responses to “Holy tempest in a teapot, Batman!!”

  1. Joshie

    I agree, this is a tempest in a teapot. Robertson has said and done things much worse than this before. His defense of the bloodthirsty terrorist Charles Taylor in Liberia for instance or his prayer campaign for God to kill off supreme court justices (blasphemy against the Holy Spirit?). This is mild in comparison.

    I still can’t really understand what Chavez has done to the U.S. other than insult it, since he has been in office. What exactly makes him a threat to the hemisphere? That he shoots off his mouth? If that were so, Rumsfeld should be number one on the terrorist watch list.

    Annoyingly, CNN in their characterization of Chavez I saw last night called him an anti-democratic strongman, which is ironic since he was democratically elected and the (likely CIA inspired) protests against him a while back were beant on defying the Venezuelan constitution and forcing him out of office before his term expired.

    Reply
  2. Lee

    Don’t you realize that anti-American = anti-democratic, silly?

    I agree – Chavez may or may not be good for Venezuela, but he’s no threat to us.

    I think my favorite Pat remark was when he said God would send a hurricaine to destroy Disney World if they persisted in sponsoring gay pride day or whatever it was.

    Reply
  3. Joshie

    lol yeah that sooooooooo happened

    Reply
  4. Chip Frontz

    Lee, you may win quote of the year with your lead-in. Love it.

    A couple of thoughts regarding assassination: First of all, it is believed to be a lot easier to assassinate than it actually is. The reason that so many U.S. Presidents have been assassinated is that they are so unusually public. Leaders who are in the business of terrorizing their own people understand the dangers of assassination. They never make themselves vulnerable to such attempts, utilizing body doubles and killing off those who are most threatening.

    But it seems also that somehow war is more “honorable” than assassination. It is a public and open challenge, rather than a sneaky surprise. One does wish some days for public duels between world leaders, or maybe boxing matches. But somehow war is how we do it.

    Assassination, finally, may ultimately be unsavory because it will naturally lead to war. And it is too much of a temptation. Put assassination on the table as an answer, and it will ultimately become the only answer. War at least makes you responsible to ask yourself if you can win it.

    Some incomplete thoughts.

    Reply
  5. Lee

    I agree that those are all good reasons not to favor assassination! And, moreover, the relatively low cost of assassination vs. war would tempt rulers to use it in much less dire circumstances than those that traditionally call for war (along the lines of engineering coups in foreign countries in order to allow for a “friendlier” government to come into power).

    Still, one can think of occasions in history when perhaps it might’ve done some good (e.g. Hitler). Plus, I can’t help but find it a bit ironic that assassination is prohibited by U.S. law, while, say, our policy of nuclear deterrence is predicated on the willingness to obliterate entire cities!

    Reply
  6. Lorraine M

    I think part of it has to do with the fact that Venezuela is the 4th or 5th largest exporter of oil to the United States and powers much of the Eastern seaboard. I’m sure many of you know about the US’ policies in Latin America (namely, controlling their economies). Many of these countries have leftist or reformist governments now, but Chavez is one of the few who is backing up his rhetoric with policy…

    I would guess that in some way Chavez is costing Robertson money.

    I do, however, think that this should be taken seriously… If an Islamic cleric with millions of adherents (the 700 Club has millions of viewers worldwide) called for the assassination of Tony Blair, he would be taken very seriously. I’m sure that most viewers of the 700 Club aren’t violent, but there is a radical right-wing fringe that enthusiastically embraces it…

    Reply
  7. 121774

    Cool blog! If you get a chance you may want to visit this penis enlargement reviews website, it is very cool.

    Reply

Leave a reply to Lee Cancel reply

More posts