Regretful of Robertson

Pat Robertson made some stupid comments this week. The kind of comments that folks might agree with in their heads or during a movie plot, but would never actually be advocated as official policy.

If [Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez] 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...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 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. [watch the video]

Let's all agree that this was a dumb thing to say. Very tactless, and completely counter-productive, considering Chavez already had a paranoia about a U.S.-led assassination attempt. If anything, Robertson's gaffe will increase support among the Venezuelans for their president. And in an attempt to extricate himself from the controversy, Robertson simply made himself look all the more an idiot.

"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.

Sorry, Pat. Not buying it. I believe the exact quote is "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it." Doesn't get much simpler than that.

Yet, aside from the substance of Robertson's comments, the reactions by authorities in both countries illustrate something important--how different ideologies react to disagreeable citizens. When someone publicly speaks out against their leader, the Venezuelans' first thought is to punish the outcry as "criminal."

Venezuela's Vice President Vicente Rangel accused Robertson of inciting violence and challenged the White House to take action against Robertson. "What is the U.S. government going to do about this criminal statement made by one of its citizens?"

Interestingly enough, Chavez is buddy-buddy with Fidel Castro of Cuba, the Chinese, and the Iranians--not exactly nations that have a democratic process for fairly treating lawbreakers. Now he cries for criminal justice...

So, how do the Americans react to Robertson?

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Tuesday that Robertson has the right of any private citizen to say whatever he wants, but added that the broadcaster's remarks "do not represent the views of the United States...His comments are inappropriate," he said. "Allegations that we are planning to take hostile action against the Venezuelan government are completely baseless and without fact." But Venezuela's ambassador to the United States, Bernardo Alvarez, said Robertson was "no ordinary private citizen" and demanded the White House strongly condemn the remarks.

And what about all the virulent, hateful anti-Bush mud slung during last year's election? Books full of lies and half-truths, a book on how to assassinate the president (only a smidgen tongue-in-cheek), not to mention forged documents. How did the Bush campaign react? Censorship? No. How did the Kerry campaign react to the Swift Boat Vets? They tried to stop their book from being published. They tried to keep their ads from running. They did everything but answer the charges made.

Sure, Americans make some statements or media that can be pretty stupid or ugly. But I'm still glad we all have the right to do so.