Pat Robertson's Gift to Liberals

<strong>Written By:</strong> elliotsaunders
<strong>Date:</strong> 2005-10-03 13:02:00
<a href="/article/110220444-pat-robertsons-gift-to-liberals">Article Link</a>

Did Pat Robertson's comments merely suggest that he advocates the assassination of Chavez? Robertson did not say he wanted Chavez assassinated. What Robertson said was that the government can either engage itself in a costly war (like Iraq) which is a financial disaster. Or, it can use its sniper squad to take Chavez out. Therefore, it would a lot cheaper to assassinate Chavez - so Robertson thinks they should go ahead with the cheap method. Liberals, including Hugo Chavez, attacked Robertson for advocating murder but Robertson's comments revealed the very fact that hit squads are ready to go at any moments notice, any place, any target - once they get orders from Washington.

Mr. Robertson publicized this (relatively) hidden factoid and handed liberals a golden opportunity to further publicize governmental/corporate "hit" tactics. To date, Liberals haven't taken advantage of it except to take Mr. Robertson's words out of context.

Let's not drop the ball by killing the messenger instead of exposing the real perpetrator.

Elliot Saunders
Spokesman for Ralph Nader, 2004 Presidential Campaign (<a href="http://www.nader.org">www.nader.org</a>).
Spokesman for The Truth Commission (<a href="http://www.hiddenfromhistory.org">www.hiddenfromhistory.org</a>)
Canadian & U.S. Citizen

[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on October 3, 2005]

"Liberals haven't taken advantage of it except to take Mr. Robertson's words out of context. "

Why should they? GWBs popularity is plummetting without any help from Pat.

I both agree and disagee with Elliot Saunders. I agree that Hugo Chavez is a breath of fresh air and an inspiration to us all. But I disagree that China where I currently live, is the most repressive regime on earth by any measure. It may have been, but there is every sign that this is changing rapidly. I am not suggesting that considerable improvement is not required, only that things are moving in the right direction. (Considerable improvement is also necessary in the USA and for that matter, Canada, as we see ourselves moving in the wrong direction...)

I keep in mind that I am a well-treated guest in this extraordinary country but my eyes are open. I am also well read in Chinese political history. So I observe quietly and respectfully. Without doubt, China is rising to greatness in many spheres. I believe the very intelligent current government understands it would be counter-productive to derail the train by reverting to earlier behaviours.

I talk with educated Chinese all the time and while some are impatient for a faster democratisation, the de facto changes are already rocketing along like an express train that can't be stopped.

More concerning is the the raw frontier capitalism, the growing disparities in incomes and opportunity, and the lack of social programs here amidst the growing wealth; all legacies of the invasion of almost unbridled WTO capitalism here. The Chinese government is aware of the potential social upheaval this can cause and is beginning to address it in a positive way.

The people here have more freedom now than they have seen since the the little glimpse offered by Sun Yet-Sen in the 1920's, and they want more, not less. As is often the case, the people are miles ahead of their politicians on many issues. I sometimes think our politicians are there to stop change, not to make it, except for Hugo Chavez of course. Viva Hugo!

"How are you gonna keep 'em down on the farm, now that they've seen Paree?"

Capitalism is democracy to Americans. At one time I thought they believed the reverse and good democracy included capitalism. Infact it appears that democracy don't have to exist but capitalism does. That is the reason why Americans don't accept Hugo but do China.

Good one boflaade.You can have capitalism without democracy.
Can we have democracy without capitalism?

>>Can we have democracy without capitalism?<< That's the catch 22 isn't it! If the "majority" want's it, can capitalism be kiboshed. Can socialism be considered democratic?