**Scroll for Update**
Excellent. This is the sort of condemnation Robertson should face, especially from a White House administration to which Christians in this nation look for some level of political and cultural guidance.
Via the Washington Post:
The White House today criticized television evangelist Pat Robertson’s remarks that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s severe illness was deserved, calling the comments “wholly inappropriate and offensive.”
White House press spokesman Trent Duffy made the comment to reporters traveling on Air Force One with President Bush this morning. He added that Robertson’s comments “don’t have a place in this or any other debate.”
UPDATE 1/7 9pm PT:
More good news. From the Christian Post:
U.S. Evangelical Leaders Criticize Pat Robertson’s Remarks on Sharon
Related Posts:
Pat Robertson is a Menace
A Message to “Palestinian” Terrorists
I hope it isn’t lost on the voting public that you almost never see a democrat denouncing their lunatic fringe when they say something stupid like this. I am glad that the White House is reacting strongly.
I agree with Political_Junkie that it is good to see the White House reacting strongly. I also agree that you almost never see a democrat denouncing stupid statements made by their own. But while reading Michelle Malkin’s “Unhinged” and Tammy Bruce’s “The New American Revolution” is it any wonder why? It would take up all of their time! I mean to say, Pat Robertson says some stupid things and it is covered in the news for a few weeks. People like Howard Dean and Ted Kennedy say some pretty stupid things almost every time they speak, and it almost never gets any attention! Still, wrong is wrong, and I am proud of our President for standing up for what is right.
There is no longer a lunatic fringe to the Democrat Party. They’re now the whole rug.
“There is no longer a lunatic fringe to the Democrat Party. They’re now the whole rug.”
I don’t neccesarily believe that to be completely true, but it is a tragedy what has happened to the Democratic party. They at least used to stand for something, now they are a bunch of pathetic whiners.
Oh how I wish that our choices were between two earnest candidates who differ in ideas but are united in their desire to serve the people who elect them. Sadly the Republican party is only marginally better than the Democrats. There are still good people on both sides, maybe this Abramof scandal will shake out some of the rif-raf and we can get a congress for the people.
When are we going to see a denouncement of that hate monger louis farrahkan?
On the one hand, it’s good of Bush to come out against Pat Robertson’s stupid comments. It shows that Robertson does not speak for most Christians, including the Commander in Chief. Plus, from a political standpoint, it cuts off Bush’s critics, at least temporarily.
However, I keep going back to the question of why people bother to listen to Robertson in the first place. It’s clear he doesn’t speak for Christians because there are more people denouncing him than supporting him.
No matter what he says to the contrary, Robertson thrives on this sort of thing. It’s the only way he can remain in the public eye, which I dare say he deems to be more important than actually living the word of God. And the media will continue to cover him because a) Robertson always gives good sound bites, and b) the media can use those sound bites to advance the anti-Christian agenda.
The best way to handle Robertson, in my opinion, is to acknowledge he exists, but ignore him most of the time.
Sometimes the choice between right and wrong comes down to the lesser of two wrongs.
What is new here? Pat Robertson is not loving. He does not love people and he does not know a God that is about love, peace, and prayer. He does not love Jews, though he does love Israel as it is necessary to fulfill Christian biblical prophecy. That and as a place to possibly construct a Christian Theme Park.
Pat will tell you that God is going to bring hatefilled and bloody judgment and wrath down on all the Feminists, the Homosexuals, the Secularists, all followers of false religions (anything other than the Judeo/Christian tradition)and blashemers everywhere. Oh, he just cannot wait to get that party started. Until then, Pat just feels like we’re kind of in a holding pattern.
Nothing Robertson would do or say should be surprising to anyone. In a book by James Randi, “The Faith Healers” (1987) Randi recounts a story told by Robertson himself in his own book, “Beyond Reason”. The story relates a church service and “resurrection†held in Mount Vernon, New York where Robertson was assistant pastor at the time. According to Randi, Robertson called upon his parishioners to pray for the resurrection of a twelve year old girl as her body lay in the front of the church (open casket). The little girl had the misfortune of being run over by an automobile as she had run out into the street upon leaving the church. Remember, this same person ran who for president in 1988. By the way, the story goes on to say that the girl did not rise and they buried her on Tuesday.
TLINDAMAN, thanks for your insightful and sincere comments. I’ve thought about this quite a bit, and have now come to a different conclusion.
Pat Robertson’s TV show probably has high ratings or it wouldn’t still be on the air. He has a warehouse full of awards. He moves in political campaigns to influence people, some say successfully, as when he did the sleazy phoner vs. John McCain. So therefore, he IS influential, and does speak for probably millions of Christians.
That being the case, media is justified on covering him. There are any number of truly gracious, and impressively insightful theologians who could speak to the press, but they remain in obscure anonymity, satisfied with their work as pastors or theologians at seminaries. No one knocks on their door, because they don’t command the hordes PR does. So I no longer fault media for that. (PR is also a cultural phenomenon.)
I fault the Christians who flock to watch PR’s show, attend his university, and buy his books.
They are the ones ultimately responsible for his high profile, IMHO.
While I agree with a lot of the comments made here, I think it should be noted that the White House denounced the comments of Pat Robertson, and not the person. Robertson was wrong for what he said, and the White House came out strongly to make that clear. Robertson has made a number of statements over the years that are worthy of being denounced by those who disagree, most coming more recently. But disagreeing is not at all the same as disliking, and I think a lot of people recognize that. That’s probably why he has a lot of support in watching his show, attending his university and buying his books. Tammy Bruce stated on her CSPAN appearance that she supported Bush but has a real problem with a lot of his domestic policies. To me, that is keeping perspective. Pat Robertson comes with a very strong biblical worldview, but I do not think he comes with hatred. And I may disagree with his viewpoint, but I can certainly say this: it has challenged me to seek what God thinks about this matter.
To Mighty Mouse: Thought you might be interested in the following. Personally, Robertson has always made me cringe. Actually, Bin Laden and Robertson have very similar views of God as being only on their side and also as violent, punishing and vengeful.
Anyway, those you note that have supported Robertson thus far do seem to be abandoning the leaky ship.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/08/weekinreview/08goodstein.html
VIKKI: Thanks for the link. That was a good, nicely balanced story. And yes, you are right. Islamists, Robertson and Falwell share common territory when they proclaim God is punishing America for its immorality, lack of religion, stance toward Israel…or as Oriana Fallaci would say, because we wear the bikini, sip Martinis by the side of the pool and sleep with whomever we want to.
If we want to curb immorality, where is the FCC censorship in regards to Pat Robertson? Personally, he offends me more than a little cleavage.
All these comments are starting to sound a bit liberal to me. I mean, now there is a suggestion of bringing in the FCC to control our opinions? And comparisons being made that Robertson and Falwell are just like Islamists? Robertson simply shared his biblical worldview about Israel. While I think he is wrong about it, it is still his opinion, and in no way is it a reflection on him being a hateful person. He simply believes that God is active in the lives of His created people, and that He intervenes according to His will. The difference between Robertson and Falwell and Islamists is that Robertson and Falwell believe that there are consequences to actions made, and that God does indeed punish for sins done. Islamists, not all of them, but the ones that I assume you are referring to believe that God punishes, and that it is God’s will that these Islamists are the ones to carry out God’s punishment! It’s a huge difference! I have never heard any report of Robertson or Falwell raping or ordering the rape of anyone. I have yet to hear of either of them murdering anyone. The comment that Robertson made about Chavez was wrong, but even I have to admit to sometimes entertaining those same thoughts. For example, recently in my hometown a woman was raped while walking to her car in a mall parking lot. Yes, I was horrified and angry about it! I even thought to myself that it might be better to not waste time on this thug by applying justice to him that will probably get him only two to five years for something that will stay with this woman forever! I thought in my mind that maybe “a little street justice” on this guy might be better. Now, I did not and would not carry it out. I do not consider myself a hateful person. Actually, I consider myself a loving and compassionate person, and my feelings were based on the concern I had for the victim of the crime. All of that said, I agree with everyone that Robertson’s comments were wrong, even stupid. But I hope that we can keep it in perspective here, and not be like liberals who claim “conspiracies” every time they disagree with something. Robertson is to blame for the comments he made…not the media who covered it, or the many supporters of his program, university, and books. He said it, and he is wrong for it. Let’s follow the example of the White House, and be bigger than this. Denounce the comments made for being wrong.
Artist,
Please don’t say cleavage is offensive, not even a little bit. Cleavage is GOOOOOD!!
POLITICAL_JUNKIE….very good sexual point! I agree!
SHESTHEONE: as far as my reference (there was one by another poster) to Robertson/Falwell/Islamists, I specify that they share common territory in one way: they believe America deserves punishment for its immorality, and that when terribly bad things happen to us, it’s God. This is simply a logical observation. In fact, they may be a conjunction between the views: Robertson/Falwell may believe God is using the Islamists to punish us, since there are biblical stories of God using Israel’s enemies to punish her (with violent attacks) because they were immoral at that moment.
And yes, he does have every right to his opinions, and free speech. However, I believe we need to remember how influential a player he is. He speaks and millions listen – and folks in the Muslim countries believe he speaks in sync with the admin.
As far as FCC – no way. But, I hardly think opposing censorship/government control is a GOP consideration. After all, it’s now a federal crime to annoy someone on the Internet. And that’s courtesy of the Republicans, signed and sealed by the Prez.
MIGHTY MOUSE: Very good points and very well taken…thank you!Mark