Wednesday, August 24, 2005


His pants literally on fire, Pat Robertson now claims his comments about Chavez were misinterpreted:
"I didn't say 'assassination.' I said our special forces should 'take him out.' And 'take him out' can be a number of things, including kidnapping; there are a number of ways to take out a dictator from power besides killing him. I was misinterpreted by the AP [Associated Press], but that happens all the time," Robertson said on "The 700 Club" program.

Ahh, of course. Willfully misinterpreted by the damn liberal media. It's gotten so that a clownish right wing religious demagogue can't even publicly advocate the murder of the democratically elected leader of a country with which we're not at war without those blasted coastal elites pouncing all over him. I tell you, this country is in trouble.

Pat is right about one thing, though. There are a number of ways to take out a dictator. You could take him out for ice cream. You could take him out for umbrella drinks at a tranny bar. You could take him out for karaoke and bowling. You could take him out to the ballgame. You could take him out for a haircut, shave, new shoes and a sailor suit. I have no doubt that our brave U.S. Special Forces are equipped and prepared to do any or all of these things at a moment's notice.

But no, here's lying liar Robertson on Monday:
If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war.

Hmm, I guess Pat did not say 'assassination' after all. He said 'assassinate.'

This Miami Herald editorial sounds reasonable:
The Federal Communications Commission should find this wretched episode of interest, as well. If Janet Jackson's ''wardrobe malfunction'' merits a $550,000 fine, what about an open appeal to commit murder?

Yes, what about it?

No comments: