Wednesday, March 15, 2006

Pat Robertson is still a douche

From February 3, courtesy of Media Matters: http://mediamatters.org/items/200602030003
(Yeah, I know, I'm a little late, but fuck that.)

Let's break it down into individual segments of bullshit, shall we?

ROBERTSON: Well, one day [Hugo Chávez is] going to be aiming nuclear weapons; and what's coming across the Gulf isn't going to be Katrina, it's going to be his nukes.

Chávez has been in talks with Argentina on the topic of nuclear development. This is the extent of Venezuela's nuclear capabilities right now. You want to know WHY Chávez is discussing such things with Argentina?

Chávez is serious about pursuing nuclear technology, in particular as a component of a long-range plan for energy cooperation among South American countries. And behind the idea of energy cooperation is energy independence, he adds - which could be a means of building the continent's political independence. (Courtesy Christian Science Monitor)

The fear here seems to be that Chávez is some sort of dictator-in-the-making (which seems to have little to no basis in actual fact) and that the only possible reason he could have for his interest in nuclear technology (the reasons for which I have already stated) is that he wants to blow the fuck out of the United States. All Robertson's rhetoric about nukes (Hannity's as well, for that matter) seems to be is paranoid fearmongering.

ROBERTSON: One day, we're going to have to go to war, I'm afraid, if he continues his policy, you know.

Wow, I thought the reasons for invading Iraq were fucking horrible. Robertson now expects the United States to go to war with Venezuela over policies like South American energy cooporation? Or does he mean Chávez's other policies, such as extending education, healthcare, subsidized food and micro-credits to the country's poor, and bringing "marginalized and excluded people into the political process and democratized power."?

Honestly, that last link, which is to an article called "The Op-Ed Assassination of Hugo Chávez" discusses the media and the right's false characterizations of Chávez, including the issue that he is some sort of authoritarian dictator, far better than I ever could. It's a worthwhile read.

All it really comes down to, it seems, is disinformation as a means to try and protect capitalist interests. Robertson himself mentioned "mobilizing Marxist forces," as though Marxism itself is some inherently evil thing.

Oh, and one last point...

COLMES: He's very popular with his country.

ROBERTSON: Well, yes and no. But he does --

COLMES: He's extremely popular. Eighty-percent of his country --

ROBERTSON: He's also calling for the destruction of George Bush. He calls him a war criminal.

First, what the hell does "Well, yes and no," mean? Second, a lot of people call George Bush a war criminal. Just because the leader of Venezuela opposes Bush and his imperial foreign policy, that is not a reason to want him assassinated.

Ah, what the hell? One last article about what an evil, evil man Chávez is, just for kicks: http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_columns/386659opinion09-03-05.htm

More information about Venezuela:
http://www.zmag.org/venezuela_watch.cfm
http://www.handsoffvenezuela.org/democracy_venezuela_misinformation.htm

posted by Jonathan at 6:52 PM