Hmmm... I didn't know this.

[Joseph]

The guy said we should assassinate Hugo Chavez. Is there a difference between that and beheading?

Robertson has called for the assasination of a head of state who has declared his intent to destroy the United States. I don't support that call, but I would certainly say there is a bit of difference between that and beheading innocent civilians, wouldn't you?

Joseph

[Joseph]

But I think the US has still believed in the policy of the enemy of my enemy is my friend.....

...when in fact, the enemy of my enemy is planning to kill me once our mutual enemy is dead.

Joseph

[Lesbest]

For some interesting reading look at the book Why They Hate by Bridgette Gabriel and she has a website called American Congress for Truth. If it all comes around we are in for a tussell--that'a for sure. Les

[Ira]

Robertson has called for the assasination of a head of state who has declared his intent to destroy the United States. I don't support that call, but I would certainly say there is a bit of difference between that and beheading innocent civilians, wouldn't you?

The brevity that I demanded of your post exposed the intellectual weakness of your argument that I knew was sure to come:

Why is Chavez more "guilty" and deserving of assassination when he's doing his thing in Venezuela and through the media--as opposed to our people in other lands profiteering from this bullshit of a war?

In other words, his words and intent don't matter--since he didn't actually accomplish anything? Sounds a lot like how people spoke about Hitler beofre he had the power.

But I forget--you say you don't SUPPORT THAT CALL.

Get back to the topic of the thread:

I still fear the Christian right, because THIS shmuck actually ran for president, and millions of religious shmucks SUPPORTED and STILL support this nonsensical, biblical, Christian-is-right view of the world.

[Elumia]

Are you afraid the religious right would turn the capitol buildings into churches like Thomas Jefferson did? Here is Something I just discovered today. Man how the parties have changed (Jefferson being a Democrat).

It is no exaggeration to say that on Sundays in Washington during the administrations of Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809) and of James Madison (1809-1817) the state became the church. Within a year of his inauguration, Jefferson began attending church services in the House of Representatives. Madison followed Jefferson's example, although unlike Jefferson, who rode on horseback to church in the Capitol, Madison came in a coach and four. Worship services in the House--a practice that continued until after the Civil War--were acceptable to Jefferson because they were nondiscriminatory and voluntary. Preachers of every Protestant denomination appeared. (Catholic priests began officiating in 1826.) As early as January 1806 a female evangelist, Dorothy Ripley, delivered a camp meeting-style exhortation in the House to Jefferson, Vice President Aaron Burr, and a "crowded audience." Throughout his administration Jefferson permitted church services in executive branch buildings. The Gospel was also preached in the Supreme Court chambers.

From a Library of Congress exhibit...
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06-2.html

What Blasphemy, the Gospel in the supreme court!

Mark

[Joseph]

The brevity that I demanded of your post exposed the intellectual weakness of your argument that I knew was sure to come:
Why is Chavez more "guilty" and deserving of assassination when he's doing his thing in Venezuela and through the media--as opposed to our people in other lands profiteering from this bullshit of a war?

Like a typical liberal, when you lose an argument, you change the subject. You asked:

The guy said we should assassinate Hugo Chavez. Is there a difference between that and beheading?

Beheadings are happening to innocent civilians - reporters and school girls. Are they profiteering? No. Do they pose a threat to anyone? No. OTOH, Chavez is definitely a potential threat. Emphasis on potential - aside from cutting off his oil supply from us (which he won't do because he's as much a profiteer as anyone), there's no teeth to his threats - yet. Which is why I don't support Robertson's call. But like Hitler, we definitely need to keep an eye on the guy.

What I find really disturbing is that left-wingers like you seem to adore Chavez and love to get photo ops with him - a socialist dictator who hates America.

Joseph

[Joseph]

I finished my post before addressing "profiteering," which of course when mentioned with reference to Iraq is the liberal euphemism for Haliburton, the employees of which obviously deserve to be beheaded for rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure.

Ira, you steadfastly refuse to explain why you libs hate Cheney & Halliburton so much when it was President Clinton who awarded them their LOGCAP (often mistakenly referred to as a "no-bid") contract and it was on Clinton's watch that they made the most profits in their corporate history.

Joseph

[angib]

....Chavez.....- a socialist dictator who hates America.

'Socialist', certainly - but then so is almost the whole of Latin America (I think Colombia and Mexico are the only major exceptions).

But 'dictator'? Where did that come from? He's been democratically elected twice, recently by a substantial margin. Do you use 'dictator' to mean someone carrying out policies you don't like?

And 'hating America' doesn't seem that all that unreasonable - the speed with which the US recognised the short-lived military coup that attempted to overthrow him suggests that the US administration at least knew about the coup in advance and was happy to see a democracy replaced by a dictatorship more to its political liking. Given its history in south America, it's hard to be sure that some US agencies didn't actively assist the coup.

You don't believe in 'freedom and democracy' if you don't think that other people should be free to make choices you don't like.

Andrew

[PaulC]

Well said Andrew, if only I was so eloquent

Cheers
Paul

[Laredo]

You don't believe in 'freedom and democracy' if you don't think that other people should be free to make choices you don't like.

Andrew

By Zeus, I think you've got it, Andrew.
Thank you for such a succinct summation.

And some of us over here hate the current administration with its pustulent posturage and its feculent policies, and we're not even Muslims.

[Elumia]

From the BBC - so not a slanted US view....

"Venezuela's National Assembly has given initial approval to a bill granting President Hugo Chavez the power to rule by decree for 18 months"
... Snip..
"The bill allowing him to enact laws by decree is expected to win final approval easily in the assembly next week on its second reading. "
full story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6277379.stm

in another story:
"In the same address, Mr Chavez also announced he would nationalise key businesses, declared himself a Trotskyist and cited the ideas of Marx and Lenin."
Full story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6246219.stm

From Marion Webster dictionary online dictionary

Main Entry: dic·ta·tor·ship
Pronunciation: dik-'tA-t&r-"ship, 'dik-"
Function: noun
1 : the office of dictator
2 : autocratic rule, control, or leadership
3 a : a form of government in which absolute power is concentrated in a dictator or a small clique b : a government organization or group in which absolute power is so concentrated c : a despotic state

If I recall my history, Hitler was also elected by a poor Germany on a platform of national pride and a promise of prosperity. He then concentrated his grip on the power and well, we know the rest of that story.

Wanna bet that it will be longer than 18 months for Mr. Chavez?

Mark

[Joseph]

You don't believe in 'freedom and democracy' if you don't think that other people should be free to make choices you don't like.

So because Hitler was elected he wasn't a dictator? Indeed - perhaps we were wrong to have challenged choice the of the German people.

And Mark has already provided the rest of the story.

Joseph

[angib]

"Venezuela's National Assembly has given initial approval to a bill granting President Hugo Chavez the power to rule by decree for 18 months"

That's sad - I had seen that he was trying to get those powers, but I hadn't seen that he'd succeeded. I had hoped his parliament and/or courts would be able to stand up to him.

So 'dictator' it is. I stand corrected.

Some of the other things he's done have been surprisingly sensible for a man as keen on posturing as he is. For a socialist he must be fairly unique that, despite carrying out several fairly radical (and apparently successful) initiatives on health and education, the private (non-governmental) sector's proportion of the Venezuelan economy has actually grown while he's been in power - not what I would expect from a populist nutter.

Andrew

[Elumia]

It is sad what is happening. I hope Chavez and his people don't regret him getting into bed with Iran just because the both have a common "enemy". Both countries also seem to be engaging with China as well.

Mark

[fornesto]

", the private (non-governmental) sector's proportion of the Venezuelan economy has actually grown while he's been in power - not what I would expect from a populist nutter.

Andrew

Yup, and the unemployment rate is down in the US. The question is: who is this private sector? Is it a handful of selected mega corporations close to the guy? There is a fine line between mega corps and a state industry. Unemployment is down in the US, but try telling that to a displaced auto worker who now works at WalMart. Its a quality/quantity issue on both fronts.