Sure, the Bible says, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" (Exodus 20:13, KJV), but the Good Book also says, "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23, KJV) and "For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." (Matthew 6:14-15, KJV) .
Reverend Pat Robertson has apologized for the threatening and offensive remarks he made regarding Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on the Monday, August 22, 2005 edition of The 700 Club.
In an August 24, 2005 press release entitled, Pat Robertson Clarifies His Statement Regarding Hugo Chavez, the Reverend wrote, "Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him."
And, as of right now, 11:55pm on August 25, 2005, the AP and Reuters headlines are:
- Hurricane Katrina Lands in Fla., Killing 2
- Walter Reed Medical Center to Be Closed
- Iraq constitution talks go on, head for referendum
- Library sues over controversial Patriot Act
- CIA Panel: 9/11 Failure Warrants Action
- Paris Apartment Fire Kills at Least 17
I did find a National Review Online column by Byron York entitled, Does Pat Robertson Matter? and a US News and World Report article called, Pat Robertson talks foreign policy, which were both rather interesting. But, for the most part, the Reverend's "on-air, off-the-cuff call for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez" tempest in a teapot is now old news — and it's even older news when you consider the 75 year-old Reverend's already well-established reputation for saying outrageous things on his television program (one might even call Reverend Robertson "the Rush Limbaugh of TV preachers," but his average audience share of 863,000 kind of pales in comparison to Mr. Limbaugh's 20 million loyal listeners).
I posted a rather long article about this controversy on August 24, 2005. I had originally set out to write a brief commentary, but while I was perusing numerous regurgitations of the newswire, checking my facts and quotations (as I slowly came to the realization that I wasn't really all that shocked or outraged), I began to sense this groundswell of massive wrath, judgment and condemnation, so I decided to simply report that instead.
I also posted that article over at Blogcritics where the tedium of a discussion in which almost everyone was in agreement about the offensiveness of Reverend Robertson's latest foot-in-mouth moment was only broken when commenters began drifting off-topic.
Article comments
1 - John Bill
Thats the whole point. Pat and his ilk are always making a big deal over minor things like video games. So I say pay back is a mother.
2 - Margaret Romao Toigo
Indeed, payback is a mother. But it isn't really necessary as the Reverend's credibility (and that of those people and groups with whom he is frequently associated) sinks a little more with every over-the-top remark he makes.
3 - Mark the Sane and Sensible
And your credibility, Ms. Toigo, sinks even further when you continue to attack benign and harmless targets who don't deserve the scruntiny you accord them. An offhand remark on a TV show is blown up into a cause celebre by muckrakers like you who have some twisted agenda against American religious leaders.
4 - Mark the Sane and Sensible
John Bill: Obviously, you aren't a parent, because many current video games are NOT "minor things" in the hands of children. You need to adopt a broader perspective on the impact of sex and violent content in certain video games.