|
Wow. I was way off. |
| |
Written By:
Iago
URL:
http://
|
|
Nope, but then again Mr. Pat Roberts doesn’t come up as an answer to any question that I ask myself. Why should I care what he says or thinks? |
| |
Written By:
Mark A. Flacy
URL:
http://
|
|
Pat who? |
| |
Written By:
Sharp as a Marble
URL:
http://sharpmarbles.stufftoread.com
|
Who would Jesus assassinate?
|
| |
Written By:
NJ
URL:
http://
|
Pat Roberts crossed my mind, but I was thinking more along the lines of Trent Lott or Pat Buchanan. Actually, I don’t belive Lott would ever say anything that straight-forward, so I was pretty much banking in Buchanan.
The scary thing is, I don’t necessarily disagree with Roberts ... okay, I need to take a shower now. |
| |
Written By:
MichaelW
URL:
http://
|
BTW, his name is Pat *Robertson*. Never heard of him? He only ran for Pres in 1988 and is one of the leaders of the religious right.
File under - "With friends like this..."
MartyB |
| |
Written By:
MartyB
URL:
http://
|
Iowa caucus results - GOP Presidential Race - 1988 Robert Dole 40,661 37.4%
Pat Robertson 26,761 24.6%
George Bush 20,194 18.6%
Jack Kemp 12,088 11.1%
Pete DuPont 7,999 7.3%
No preference 739 .7%
Alexander Haig 364 .3% There is a great Simpsons episode where Homer gets arrested sometime in the 90’s. In his mugshot, he has a black eye, a hungover look, and he is wearing a t-shirt that says "Haig in ’88."
I liked Al Haig, always thought it would be great to party with him - I bet if you loosened him up, he could tell stories for days.
Kind of liked Jack Kemp too - seemed to be a non-extremist, a practical guy. Even liked GHWB. He nominated Souter, after all. Although the same could not be said of Mr. "I’m in Charge," the quarterback, and 41 seemed like moderate guys.
But the GOP activists in middle of the road 1988 Iowa preferred Pat Robertson over each of them.
And the one thing that hasn’t changed since then? Pat Robertson. He is the same freak he was then.
Stated another way, to those of us who have been watching Robertson, this is not news. Why is it news to you?
|
| |
Written By:
mkultra
URL:
http://
|
|
An ancient Israelite said, "It is better that one man die than a whole nation suffer and perish in unbelief." Utilitarianism sounds really good when you are dealing with a Chavez, Castro, or Kim Jong Il [spelling?]. |
| |
Written By:
True Blue
URL:
http://reformus.org
|
I am SO GLAD that I was wrong.
I guessed it was from the last presidential radio address. |
| |
Written By:
USG
URL:
http://www.tonythejuice.com/projects/automobiles.swf
|
mkultra
You answered your own question. Evidently nobody here pays much attention to Robertson. Why do you? |
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
|
Not paying attention to Robertsons just shows your contempt for mainstream Christianty—the heart and soul of America. I guess you didn’t learn anything last election. |
| |
Written By:
Jim Jones
URL:
http://
|
Can a public figure’s statements be the basis of a mental hygiene warrant that anyone could swear out?
Just sayin’.
TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp |
| |
Written By:
Tom Perkins
URL:
http://
|
Jones: Not paying attention to Robertsons just shows your contempt for mainstream Christianty Cool! So when I pay no further attention to you, you can take home the same message. |
| |
Written By:
Stoop Davy Dave
URL:
http://
|
mkultra
You answered your own question. Evidently nobody here pays much attention to Robertson. Why do you? My point was that Robertson represented a significant portion of the GOP in ’88. And since the GOP has grown only more extremist since then, it stands to reason that Robertson would have even more support today among the GOP.
The American Taliban - alive and well.
|
| |
Written By:
mkultra
URL:
http://
|
|
Don’t you get it, MKUltra? Pat Robertson’s popularity is SOOOOOOOOO 20 years ago. Get with it, man! Half of us weren’t even voting in 1988. Me, I was busy trying to attract the attention of this really cute guy in my class and find cool clothes that my mom would let me be seen in public wearing. |
| |
Written By:
Wacky Hermit
URL:
http://organicbabyfarm.blogspot.com
|
My point was that Robertson represented a significant portion of the GOP in ’88. And since the GOP has grown only more extremist since then, it stands to reason that Robertson would have even more support today among the GOP. Yeah. Well, you might also recall that, after Iowa, Robertson plummeted like a freakin’ rock. I don’t think obscure outlier performances from almost 20 years ago really define the electorate very well. The notion that he’s gotten more popular is belied by everything since that single Iowa primary.
But, so long as we’re on the subject, I’d note that Pat Robertson’s ’87 campaign issues were reducing the debt, "fair trade", propping up dying manufacturing industries, putting a stop to those heathen foreigners who were stealing all our jobs, and rescuing various oppressed people around the world.
So, basically, he wanted to run on the recent Democratic platform, but without all the abortion. |
| |
Written By:
Jon Henke
URL:
http://www.QandO.net
|
You people need to lighten up and stop taking political hackery so damn seriously. What the news media reports mostly means crap. The important stuff is all buried in legal documents—legislation, case briefs, etc.
Quit wasting your time on what some idiot is saying on TV (and ignore the sensationalized news media, too) and focus on stuff that matters. |
| |
Written By:
Paul
URL:
http://crash.neotope.com
|
|
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t the Monroe Doctrine about keeping European colonial powers out of the Americas? It said nothing about local dictatorships. Robertson remains woefully ignorant of history, and in charge of millions of people. Eww. |
| |
Written By:
Josh
URL:
http://www.conjecturer.com/weblog
|
Yeah, the Monroe Doctrine was mostly about keeping them out of our sphere of influence. Robertson’s remarks would follow more closely under the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, which asserted our right to topple destabilizing and threatening regimes.
I don’t think that’s quite what Teddy had in mind, though. |
| |
Written By:
Jon Henke
URL:
http://www.QandO.net
|
Josh, umm...
Who do you think he’s in charge of?
Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp |
| |
Written By:
Tom Perkins
URL:
http://
|
Pat Robertson, S.E.Virginia-home-town-boy made bad, is not "in charge of millions of people." He may live off of thousands of donors, he may have his own university and his own cable network, but he’s definitely either at, or more likely past, the peak of his powers, and especially of his political career. Seditionist asswipe that he is, he somehow cost himself some fiscal and other support when he endorsed Jerry Falwell’s charming interpretation of the events of 9-11-01. Which is his karma.
Pat Robertson and his network is to mainstream American Christianity what ... um, what an inflamed appendix is to a large intestine. There’s got to be a better metaphor for that, but time presses.
|
| |
Written By:
Stoop Davy Dave
URL:
http://
|
That a preacher can draw a crowd at the Iowa caucuses is more an indication of the statistical worthlessness of the Iowa caucuses than the political factions within any political party.
|
| |
Written By:
pouncer
URL:
http://
|
Jim Jones
Oh dear! I am not paying attention to any rabbis, so I must be anti-semitic, too! But I’m sure that, being a good Pat Robertson type Christian, you insulted me in a loving way. |
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
