August (Web-only) 2005

ARTICLE TOOLS

Find similar articles E-mail this page

Pat Robertson's image was all over local television news in Latin America yesterday.

The Virginia-based TV evangelist was shown telling his "700 Club" audience that controversial Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez ought to be assassinated because he is making Venezuela "a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism."

"I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it," Robertson said. "It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war … and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."

Urging the U.S. government to kill Chavez, Robertson continued, "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."

So much for the respect for life and pro-life positions that Robertson has espoused. How inconsistent to fight to protect the life of unborn babies and then call for the assassination of a foreign leader who holds opposing political views.

Not that Robertson or anybody else shouldn't defend the right to life. Robertson should be commended for his strong support of right-to-life issues. But it is difficult for any thinking person not to see the dichotomy between his two positions.

Not that Chavez is a model leader or one that many would like to see continue in office. His fiery revolutionary brand of government has caused concern among political and Christian leaders throughout the Western Hemisphere as he has spread instability throughout the region, initiated an arms buildup with neighboring countries, allegedly aided Colombian guerrillas and anti-government forces other neighboring ...