Wrong On All Counts, Jackass

Okay, everybody get set for a giggle. Pat Robertson has endorsed murder. Of foreign leaders, no less.

ROBERTSON: There was a popular coup that overthrew him [Chavez]. And what did the United States State Department do about it? Virtually nothing. And as a result, within about 48 hours that coup was broken; Chavez was back in power, but we had a chance to move in. He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he's going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent.

You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he 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. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop. But this man is a terrific danger and the United ... This is in our sphere of influence, so we can't let this happen. We have the Monroe Doctrine, we have other doctrines that we have announced. And without question, this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil, that could hurt us very badly. 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, you know, 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.

Can't... stop... laughing...

I know that everyone's dying over the irony of an alleged man of God endorsing murder, but why stop there? There's so much more that's wrong with this twit, it deserves a thorough debunking.

First of all, the idea that the US "did nothing" while a Latin American leader was deposed (however briefly) is funny beyond description. Someone should put up a list of American leaders who were deposed without US involvement in the 20th century. I'm pretty sure there's this guy, and that's it. Of course the US was involved in Chavez' aborted removal from office.

Secondly, the idea that Chavez has, by investing in food and education for the poor, "destroyed the Venezuelan economy", is also false and badly so. With high oil prices, the Venezuelan economy has grown 16.8% this year - but that's according to the CIA, that bunch of Leninists. In truth, the people who've done the most damage to the Venezuelan economy have been Chavez's enemies, with their repeated attempts (both legal and not) to remove him from office, and their constant economic unrest.

Thirdly, the idea of Venezuela as a "dangerous enemy to our south" and a "terrific danger" is really just the icing on the cake. Yes, exports of 2 million barrels of oil per day is nothing to sneeze at. But really. What Robertson is talking about is the continuing US idea that America has the right to kill for oil. A supposed believer in Jesus Christ has said that, as a matter of national policy, it's nifty if the US goes and whacks a guy to keep gas prices low.

I don't think I need to ask it, but I will: What would Jesus do?