Okay, let’s see how this apparent touch of random madness might actually make some sense.
Whereas… the tight political connection between Robertson and Bush is no secret to anyone paying attention.
Whereas… Bush frequently turns to Robertson (and his ilk) to rally the Idiot Pseudochristian Base by some means or other.
Whereas… Robertson (and his ilk) are the message carriers for nastiness Bush doesn’t want to deliver personally.
Whereas… Bush finds it convenient to distract the population from his domestic misfires, not to mention his systematic dismantling of the progressive social contract, by manufacturing foreign enemies or inflating their importance (q.v. Saddam).
Whereas… a batshit strongman in a militarily insignificant country is a useful resource to have around.
Whereas… one batshit strongman is facing election, and it would be more advantageous for Bush that he win than that he lose.
Therefore… Bush has a fringe flunky issue an outrageous statement about Chavez, knowing it will galvanize Chavez’s support and guarantee he continues in office, and further knowing he can issue a weak-tea demurral later to keep his own hands clean of the outrageousness.
My theory is that they believe their primary audience has the attention span of a lemur and the IQ of a dead cat, so they can say any dumb-ass thing without bothering with troublesome issues such as logic, consistency, or reality.
It sounds to me like he’s giving a speech before going to war. I don’t think I took that out of context at all. Revelations is all about Jesus’ Retribution against those who stood against him. I think that it’s pretty clear what he’s saying about his enemies. I think one of the most common mistakes made interpreting the bible is confusing Wrath and Hate. Just because Jesus is presenting the heart of Love doesn’t mean that he’s not Wrathful, and has nothing to do with the War God of the Old Testament. Remember his people are also being subjugated by the Roman Empire at this point in history. I’d say most of his decisions not to get violent were tactical rather than out of some sort of hippy ethic.
Again: in Virginia, he’s a kingmaker in Republican politics. The Republican state Senate, normally pretty darn moderate, is handing him almost a quarter of a billion dollars in kowtowing pork. So, please, don’t tell me he has no sway.
Yeah well… last time I checked, there wasn’t no digital scanning of media back in 35AD to make sure all those Apostles got their Last Supper book deals down pat with any great degree of editorial accuracy. Until the Big Boss himself comes along again and tells us all, “Hey humans… THIS is what I really wanted to say 'mmmmmkay?” then I’m gonna call “modern interpretation” of any ancienct handwritten religious text for what it is - namely, self serving righteous bullshit.
And that applies to Jews, Christians, Muslims, Bhuddists… you name 'em I’m happy to broad brushstroke 'em. I mean seriously… we live in an era of cinematography, and DNA, and digital texts. How can any rational, intelligent human being honestly believe that Holy Texts passed down through centuries of self-serving human translation and reinterpetation are even REMOTELY close to what originally happened? It’s all bullshit. And it’s all self interest.
Call me a heretic. Big Deal. I just thank my lucky stars I don’t live in Spain in the 1500’s.
“After Herod died, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt and said, ‘Get up, take the child [Jesus] and his mother, and go back to the land of Israel, because those who tried to kill the child are dead.’ So Joseph got up, took the child and his mother, and went back to Israel.”
How could a baby Jesus glock Herod?
…Come to think of it, that’s even more fun to imagine.
In other news, I got some of my pot legalization on your Communism and Muslim extremism. Sorry about that.
Wait a minute. How do we know Pat wasn’t just talking about dinner and a movie?
Seriously, though. I’ve never watched Pat Robertson. I’ve never met anyone who watched him. I’ve never met anyone who has even mentioned him. I don’t even think I know anyone who knows anyone who watches him. As far as I can tell, the man is a religious whackjob.
However, having said that, I think this uproar about his comments is a bit silly. All he did was talk about having someone assassinated. Compare that to, say, JFK who tried for years to “take out” Castro. That action certainly doesn’t cast any kind of shadow over the shining legacy of Camelot, does it?
Robertson was probably stupid to say what he did (or not…maybe donations will go through the roof over this. I don’t know), but I think it’s a bit naive to pretend that there aren’t some bad men out there…bad guys who’s (ahem) elimination would leave the world a much better place.
I like people who are so threatened by people’s interpretations of things that they need to exclaim, “That’s your interpretation/opinion/viewpoint.”
Take it or leave it. I was simply pointing out the flaw in the old “Jesus was a kind and everloving hippy, he didn’t say anything that can be interpreted as violent.”, when in fact he did.
Are you one of the 144,000 to be saved? Or are you part of the other multiple billions that are going to spend an eternity in hell?
I certainly believe in Jesus, but I think he was a little more complex than the liberal hippy douche we live to perceive him as.
Jesus was the Avatar, the manifestation of God on Earth. That essentially makes him Lucifer, because the big difference between God and Lucifer is that Lucifer can only be one place at a time, so the Avatar: Lucifer, would be God’s manifestation on Earth, or the “Casting out of Heaven” of the fallen angel. That would explain why JESUS not God might need tactics.
But, I know I know “THAT’S JUST YOUR INTERPRETATION YOU DON’T SCARE ME LALALALALALA.”
