tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post113662692008290234..comments2024-03-28T03:19:40.014-04:00Comments on The Y Files: Pat may be a loon, but he's our loonCathy Younghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-60975648546304025172011-05-17T23:03:14.667-04:002011-05-17T23:03:14.667-04:00nice share thanks a lot :)
download free pc gam...nice share thanks a lot :) <br /><br /><a href="http://www.ourpcgame.net" rel="nofollow"> download free pc games </a><br /><a href="http://www.affiliatesrating.com" rel="nofollow"> affiliate review</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16217946196345356227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1137257540523585702006-01-14T11:52:00.000-05:002006-01-14T11:52:00.000-05:00And so we've both had our say, Cath. On to other t...And so we've both had our say, Cath. On to other topics. I'm sure we'll revisit this issue in the future, though. Always feel free to ask me direct questions and I'll do my best to respond to them. <BR/><BR/>P.S. - To answer your question regarding whether I think Malkin was being silly when she cited the Randi Rhodes skit as an example of how vicious and unhinged the left has become...<BR/><BR/>1) Again... RESPECTFULLY... may I remind you that I never brought up Malkin or Rhodes???<BR/><BR/>2) Since I'm not familar with the specific writings or sayings of Malkin that you're referring to with regard to criticism of Rhodes...NOR have I actually heard or seen Rhodes' skit (seeing or listening to it would be better than reading toneless text, you'd agree?)... it's hard for me to give my opinion.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps this will suffice: If YOU say it's clear Rhodes' was engaging in black humor rather than serious policy prescription... I gladly and happily take your word for it.<BR/><BR/>Fair enough, Cath?<BR/><BR/>BILLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1137115130575484452006-01-12T20:18:00.000-05:002006-01-12T20:18:00.000-05:00William: so, are you willing to stand up and say t...William: so, are you willing to stand up and say that conservative commentators and bloggers such as Michelle Malkin are being silly when they cite the Randi Rhodes skit as an example of how vicious and unhinged the left has become?<BR/><BR/>I'm sorry about my curt tone, though apparently you simply don't see how insulting (however unintentionally) your post was toward me. Incidentally, "chiding" is something you do to a child or a servant. When you address an adult and an equal, you criticize them.<BR/><BR/>I stand by my claim that you have an egregious double standard toward nasty speech on the right and on the left. Your earlier claim that Julianne Malveaux's crack about how she wishes Justice Thomas's wife would feed him lots of fried foods so he would die early was immeasurably worse than Coulter's "impeach or assassinate" proves that in abundance.Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1137087162794257752006-01-12T12:32:00.000-05:002006-01-12T12:32:00.000-05:00Cathy wrote...And by the way [Bill], while you did...Cathy wrote...<BR/><BR/>And by the way [Bill], while you didn't say anything about Randi Rhodes, I also didn't see you objecting to Mike citing her Bush assassination skit as something that deserved equal attention with Pat Robertson's comments.<BR/><BR/>================================<BR/><BR/>So now I'm under some obligation to "object" to EVERYTHING I don't agree with written by you or anyone else on this blog??? Boy... pretty high standard. (*SMIRK*)<BR/><BR/>But anyhow... since you freely ADMIT that I never mentioned Randy Rhodes and thus logically you had NO cause to unjustly and incorrectly declare (yes... in the form of a "question," but unless I'm mistaken you meant it as more of am assumption/accusation) that I had EVER accused Randi Rhodes of seriously calling for Bush's assasination... all I can do is reiterate my initial chidding of you.<BR/><BR/>And by the way, Cath... I *am* a pretty friendly guy... "cute" is in the eye of the beholder.<BR/><BR/>Regarding your other false claim that I told you what you should and shouldn't write about... <BR/><BR/>Never, Cath! Just the opposite. All I asked was that you didn't falsely accuse me of holding positions I don't hold. I've written time and time again throughout numerous threads words to the effect that "this is Cathy's blog and she's free to focus on whatever she wants to focus on."<BR/><BR/>Finally... as to my freely and forthrightly posted contention that you bend over backwards to try and show a rough equivilency to "bad right" vs. "bad left" with regard to degree and nature... I stick by it. If you feel insulted I'm sorry and it's not my intent to insult you... but I call 'em like I see 'em and as I did with the Rhodes example you're free to "defend" yourself and try to convince me I'm wrong.<BR/><BR/>You see, Cath... I have an open mind. I consider the possibility that I misread you! (*SMILE*) Are you as open-minded?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1137033068673818852006-01-11T21:31:00.000-05:002006-01-11T21:31:00.000-05:00I agree, Rev -- that's hardly "on the same page."I agree, Rev -- that's hardly "on the same page."Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1137032182222768712006-01-11T21:16:00.000-05:002006-01-11T21:16:00.000-05:00I thought I'd point out just how many Americans ar...<I>I thought I'd point out just how many Americans are on the same page as Pat Robertson (despite assertions to the contrary):</I><BR/><BR/>Hold on a minute. If all Pat was saying was that God gave Israel to the Jews and that the new Israel was a sign of the second coming nobody would consider that newsworthy. There's nothing wrong with either belief.<BR/><BR/>Pat is under fire for claiming that God stuck down Sharon for "dividing the land". Is *that* a belief widely held by Americans? I doubt it.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1137027615865271242006-01-11T20:00:00.000-05:002006-01-11T20:00:00.000-05:00Bill: to be honest, I found the tone of your post ...Bill: to be honest, I found the tone of your post to me pretty obnoxious as well. I suggest you re-read this:<BR/><BR/><I>Cath... I'm begg'in ya, kiddo... get off the "Ann Coulter is the devil" bandwagon. (*GRIN*) Seriously... I know she's one of your "go to" gotcha picks... but she's simply not much more than "in your face" and yes, oftentime obnoxious, "entertainment." </I><BR/><BR/>Maybe you think you're being cute and friendly, but it comes off as obnoxious, rude, and condescending. I don't particularly appreciate being told what I should and shouldn't write about. I particularly don't appreciate it in this kind of tone. And if you want to talk about "accusing"... how about this:<BR/><BR/><I>Cathy - while certainly not a liberal or Democrat by ANY stretch of the imagination - makes a habit of going out of her way and really "reaching" in order to try and show a "balance" between the loony-left faction of the Democratic MAINSTREAM and the wacky-right of the MAINSTREM Republican Party. (*SMILE*)<BR/></I><BR/><BR/>And by the way, while you didn't say anything about Randi Rhodes, I also didn't see you objecting to Mike citing her Bush assassination skit as something that deserved equal attention with Pat Robertson's comments.<BR/><BR/>As for Ann Coulter, any self-respecting conservative should consider her an embarrassment.Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1137018019526388272006-01-11T17:20:00.000-05:002006-01-11T17:20:00.000-05:00Cathy Young writes...Mike and Bill: Your double st...Cathy Young writes...<BR/><BR/>Mike and Bill: Your double standard for right-wing and left-wing speech is so obvious, it's not even funny. Of course I know that Ann Coulter is not seriously advocating anyone's assassination or lynching. But you're not willing to make similar excuses for Randi Rhodes' Bush assassination skit, are you? <BR/><BR/>Mike and Bill: Your double standard for right-wing and left-wing speech is so obvious, it's not even funny. Of course I know that Ann Coulter is not seriously advocating anyone's assassination or lynching. But you're not willing to make similar excuses for Randi Rhodes' Bush assassination skit, are you? <BR/><BR/>----------------------------<BR/><BR/>SURE I AM, CATHY!!! I never said, wrote, or indicated anything to the contrary!!!<BR/><BR/>I never frigg'n MENTIONED Randy Rhodes!!!<BR/><BR/>Jeez, Cath... tone down the innuendo and unwarranted attacks. Frankly, you're being really obnoxious and - your blog or not - this type of behavior is absolutely unacceptable, rude, and petty.<BR/><BR/>You weren't actually "questioning" me, Cathy; you were ACCUSING me. <BR/><BR/>Well, in any case, I've answered your question. I look forward to your apology.<BR/><BR/>BILLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1137008392578853542006-01-11T14:39:00.000-05:002006-01-11T14:39:00.000-05:00Too busy to say much, but (hat tip to Andrew Sulli...Too busy to say much, but (hat tip to Andrew Sullivan) I thought I'd point out just how many Americans are on the same page as Pat Robertson (despite assertions to the contrary):<BR/><BR/><I>Fully 44% of Americans believe that God gave the land that is now Israel to the Jewish people while a substantial minority (36%) thinks that "the state of Israel is a fulfillment of the biblical prophecy about the second coming of Jesus." White evangelical Protestants and, to a lesser degree, African-Americans accept both of these propositions. Significantly fewer white Catholics and mainline Protestants believe Israel was granted to the Jews by God or think that Israel represents a fulfillment of the Bible's prophecy of a second coming. </I><BR/><BR/>It is also worth noting that this 2003 Pew poll pointed out how many white evangelicals(83%) vs blacks(64%) oppose gay marraige.<BR/><BR/>link:<BR/>pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=26<BR/><BR/>ZAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136974417629190772006-01-11T05:13:00.000-05:002006-01-11T05:13:00.000-05:00Pat is a corrupt Elmer Gantry who bilks his follow...Pat is a corrupt Elmer Gantry who bilks his followers to line his own pockets. His Christian Zionism bent just happens to include a free lease for 125 acres for a biblical Disneyland-ish park on the Sea of Galillee - on land still considered by many to be 'occupied' territory.<BR/><BR/>He has diamond mines in South Africa, a band in Scotland - is a billionaire and is part of the corrupt lobbying scene in Congress. <BR/>blony@blony.comAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136973298517625272006-01-11T04:54:00.000-05:002006-01-11T04:54:00.000-05:00Mike and Bill: Your double standard for right-wing...Mike and Bill: Your double standard for right-wing and left-wing speech is so obvious, it's not even funny. Of course I know that Ann Coulter is not seriously advocating anyone's assassination or lynching. But you're not willing to make similar excuses for Randi Rhodes' Bush assassination skit, are you?Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136924806784816242006-01-10T15:26:00.000-05:002006-01-10T15:26:00.000-05:00something that has about three quarters of a milli...<I>something that has about three quarters of a million people, as an audience is by no means "obscure".</I><BR/><BR/>I wouldn't say that -- after all, another way of putting it is that 99.7% of Americans don't watch the show. You could easily talk to hundreds of people and not find a single one who watches the show -- especially if you're talking to educated and/or successful people, who are underrepresented in Pat's audience.<BR/><BR/>Personally I suspect that there are more conservative pundits' calls for violence than there are left-wing pundits', if only because the former significantly outnumber the latter. However, at the grass-roots level the calls for bloodshed are much more commonly heard on the left; just about every "peace" rally and anti-WTO protest in the last few years has had no shortage of banners calling for the deaths of American troops and/or Jews.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136868896671958112006-01-09T23:54:00.000-05:002006-01-09T23:54:00.000-05:00Anonymous Mike(to use your formatting)If you REALL...Anonymous Mike<BR/><BR/>(to use your formatting)<BR/><B>If you REALLY wish to state that offensive comments from a now-obscure conservative as a sign that the right-wing has a problem with violent rhetoric, I can post comments from equally obscure left-wing sites and tar the entire left-wing side of the equation.<BR/><BR/>But, I do not.<BR/></B><BR/><BR/>Why not? Please do! Open up a blog, collect all of the quotes and the links, and post here your blogs address. I for one would be very interested in what you find. I can think of no better way to demonstrate the validity of your argument. <BR/><BR/>So far, the only example has been one left wing radio host versus Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and Pat Robertson. If there is more information out there, let's hear about it.<BR/><BR/>I disagree with your definition of "obscure". Depending on the source, the 700 Club's daily audience is between 700,000 and 1,000,000 viewers. While I will not argue with anyone about the relative size of that audience compared to some other show, something that has about three quarters of a million people, as an audience is by no means "obscure".<BR/><BR/><B>It's funny that you seem to have no problem with the Alito parody that was 2 posts down at that site.</B><BR/><BR/>That link, the "parody" you so kindly noticed, was the very point of the question. What trouble should I have had with this parody, from your point of view?Yhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15614458040158495755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136861965143152742006-01-09T21:59:00.000-05:002006-01-09T21:59:00.000-05:00Pat Robertson is necessary to the left.If he didn'...Pat Robertson is necessary to the left.<BR/>If he didn't exist, he'd have to be invented, in order to discredit by association Christian beliefs.<BR/><BR/>Some time back, I was discussing Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton on line and a black woman said, in frustration, what makes you think we like those guys. You [not me, for sure] make those guys out to be our leaders. Isn't so.<BR/><BR/>I guess this is pretty close to the Robertson leader schtick.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136847476315613552006-01-09T17:57:00.000-05:002006-01-09T17:57:00.000-05:00TheCobraNose... (*SMILE*)... I agree with your uns...TheCobraNose... (*SMILE*)... I agree with your unstated feeling (at least as I read them reading "between the lines") that Cathy - while certainly not a liberal or Democrat by ANY stretch of the imagination - makes a habit of going out of her way and really "reaching" in order to try and show a "balance" between the loony-left faction of the Democratic MAINSTREAM and the wacky-right of the MAINSTREM Republican Party. (*SMILE*)<BR/><BR/>Darleen... I'd go with your comparison of Robertson and Jackson... but only to a point. The difference... blacks are politically a much more homogenious voting block than Christians, therefore, black "leaders" don't dilute each other's politically partisan influence (moderate Democrat... liberal Democrat... Left Democrat... Far Left Democrat...) to the extent that mainstream protestantism is liberal Democrat leaning vs. fundamentalist "born again" protestantism which veers Republican. (And then of course we have the tensions in the Catholic Church between "traditionalists" and social activists; the "conservative" nature of the establishment in tension with the social mission.)<BR/><BR/>Lori Heine... good points which I think I've echoed above. The more I actually see and listen to Kasich the less I regret his having left Congress, HOWEVER, while I may not always agree with him or Bill O'Reilly or indeed "WHOEVER," that doesn't mean you shouldn't give them a bit more benefit of the doubt in terms of their having good intentions.<BR/><BR/>C... I don't know what circles you travel in, politically speaking, (*GRIN*)... but I can assure you from the standpoint of a guy with a fair number of years of involvement in a New York suburban/rural county Republican Committee that Pat Robertson and indeed the "religious right" in general plays no appreciable part in local, county, or even state Republican politics that I've ever seen. Hasidic Jews have MUCH MORE INFLUENCE... in BOTH the Republican and Democratic Parties in New York.<BR/><BR/>Cath... I'm begg'in ya, kiddo... get off the "Ann Coulter is the devil" bandwagon. (*GRIN*) Seriously... I know she's one of your "go to" gotcha picks... but she's simply not much more than "in your face" and yes, oftentime obnoxious, "entertainment." I think I can safely assure you, Cathy, (*SMILE*) that Coulter wasn't seriously advocating the assasination of Bill Clinton.<BR/><BR/>BILLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136840665169879032006-01-09T16:04:00.000-05:002006-01-09T16:04:00.000-05:00Mike: I've seen the "impeach or assassinate" quote...<B>Mike: I've seen the "impeach or assassinate" quote in many places. I've never seen Ann Coulter repudiate it.</B><BR/><BR/>And all I'm saying is that I'd like to see the quote in some context as I don't buy the selective quoting. Ann is accused of a lot of things. Some true, quite a bit blatantly false.<BR/><BR/>If I posted a quote from, say, Bill Moyers from MRC.com, would you believe that it was an accurate quote?<BR/><BR/>No, and you'd probably be quite correct in doing so.<BR/><BR/><B>Coulter opens with a paragraph about a minister of transportation being lynched by irate passengers, and then basically says "too bad it wasn't Norman Mineta." Who do you think she's talking about when she says "some people's hopes were dashed"? Just how far are you willing to go to give so-called conservatives a pass when they engage in hateful speech?</B><BR/><BR/>She has never once personally called for violence against him. Just his termination, which is a legitimate desire. There is a massive difference between calling a man incompetent and inept --- a very fair assessment --- and calling for his lynching.<BR/><BR/><B>As for Robertson, I agree that his influence has declined, but I don't think it's true that he's not newsworthy anymore.<BR/><BR/>Has anyone noticed that John Kasich, a former Republican congressman, refers to him as a "great leader"?</B><BR/><BR/>Kasich is a "former" Republican congressman, not a current one. <BR/><BR/><B>It seems as if part of the argument being advanced is it is regular everyday speech to say some one should be bombed or killed, and therefore, perfectly acceptable at the pundit/talking head/spokesperson level. This does not make sense to me.</B><BR/><BR/>Again, conservatives IGNORE Robertson. He is a running joke and has been for the better part of a decade.<BR/><BR/>If you REALLY wish to state that offensive comments from a now-obscure conservative as a sign that the right-wing has a problem with violent rhetoric, I can post comments from equally obscure left-wing sites and tar the entire left-wing side of the equation.<BR/><BR/>But, I do not.<BR/><BR/><B>I am curious about the conservative apologists’ reaction to this attempt at satire. If Randi Rhodes is comparable to Pat Robertson, then is Jesus General comparable to Ann Coulter?</B><BR/><BR/>It's funny that you seem to have no problem with the Alito parody that was 2 posts down at that site.<BR/>-=MikeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136832378824067432006-01-09T13:46:00.000-05:002006-01-09T13:46:00.000-05:00The NEW Testament is the basis of the Christian fa...<I>The NEW Testament is the basis of the Christian faith. The Old Testament is the foundation, but the NEW is the one that is the entire basis of the entire Christian faith.<BR/>-=Mike</I><BR/><BR/>Mike, I think it would be an astonishingly good thing if this were as true as you seem to think it is. I am of the opinion that some substantial portion of those who consider themselves to be conservative Christians in fact pay far more heed to the old testament than the new one. And that's a shame.<BR/><BR/>--BKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136825070979896512006-01-09T11:44:00.000-05:002006-01-09T11:44:00.000-05:00Anonymous Mike, the remark by Mr. Robertson was "Y...Anonymous Mike, the remark by Mr. Robertson was <BR/><B>"You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it."</B><BR/>and then as his clarification a few days later<BR/><B> "I didn't say 'assassination.' I said our special forces should 'take him out.'"</B><BR/><BR/>Pat seems to have a bit of an issue with misquoting himself. <BR/><BR/>It seems as if part of the argument being advanced is it is regular everyday speech to say some one should be bombed or killed, and therefore, perfectly acceptable at the pundit/talking head/spokesperson level. This does not make sense to me.<BR/> <BR/>I am curious about the conservative apologists’ reaction to <A HREF="http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/2006_01_08_patriotboy_archive.html#113675303957407676" REL="nofollow">this</A> attempt at satire. If Randi Rhodes is comparable to Pat Robertson, then is Jesus General comparable to Ann Coulter?Yhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15614458040158495755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136794691943697832006-01-09T03:18:00.000-05:002006-01-09T03:18:00.000-05:00Mike: I've seen the "impeach or assassinate" quote...Mike: I've seen the "impeach or assassinate" quote in many places. I've never seen Ann Coulter repudiate it.<BR/><BR/><I>I read that entire column. I missed any mention of lynching Mineta. Not even in the opening paragraph --- just a comment that some passengers rioted and lynched a Sec. of Transportation and some people's hopes were dashed that Mineta wasn't the one.<BR/><BR/>Not mention of her personal feelings.</I><BR/><BR/>Oh, come on. Are you serious?<BR/><BR/>Coulter opens with a paragraph about a minister of transportation being lynched by irate passengers, and then basically says "too bad it wasn't Norman Mineta." Who do you think she's talking about when she says "some people's hopes were dashed"? Just how far are you willing to go to give so-called conservatives a pass when they engage in hateful speech?<BR/><BR/>As for Robertson, I agree that his influence has declined, but I don't think it's true that he's not newsworthy anymore.<BR/><BR/>Has anyone noticed that John Kasich, a former Republican congressman, refers to him as a "great leader"?Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136759453085941832006-01-08T17:30:00.000-05:002006-01-08T17:30:00.000-05:00Mike: here's the link to the Coulter quote.For goo...<B>Mike: here's the link to the Coulter quote.<BR/><BR/>For good measure, here's Coulter fantasizing about the lynching of Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta.</B><BR/><BR/>1) I'll have to actually look at the book, considering Media Matters fairly long history of EXCEPTIONALLY selective quoting. If they included a page for the quote, it would've been easier. I also checked various left-wing sites and none of them mention a page, either, which indicates that ALL of them have the exact same source.<BR/><BR/>The moment I can actually find that quote, I'll post a comment.<BR/><BR/>2) I read that entire column. I missed any mention of lynching Mineta. Not even in the opening paragraph --- just a comment that some passengers rioted and lynched a Sec. of Transportation and some people's hopes were dashed that Mineta wasn't the one.<BR/><BR/>Not mention of her personal feelings. Her utter disdain of Norm is well-known, but she has never advocated violence. Just that Bush should've turfed him immediately and that he is too inept to have a position of any influence.<BR/><BR/>Just comments on his sheer ineptitude --- a very, very fair comment. Most conservatives want the man gone and feel his policies are the single weakest part of the entire War on Terror.<BR/><BR/><B>I can't say I find Ms. Rhodes humor that funny, but I also find it to be quite a leap to say her skit is as threatening as Mr. Robertson's call for direct action.</B><BR/><BR/>"It's God's will" is a direct call for action? Or was it his call that we should make Huge Chavez' fear of us "eliminating" him come true?<BR/><BR/><B>Mike, you asserted that if Michael Moore had said something similar, that the mass media would ignore it and you have evidence of this. When asked to provide such evidence, you say that you will if and when it happens.</B><BR/><BR/>The press ignored his comment that the 9/11 bombers made a mistake because the people they killed didn't vote for Bush.<BR/><BR/><B>IMHO, Robertson has credibility among the right, but it's kind of a credibility where people respect him and his opinions, but they still seek to distance themselves from him. Kinda like Rush Limbaugh. You hear people parroting Rush, but they still qualify it in some way as to minimize his influence.</B><BR/><BR/>I find it amazing that the people here who openly admit to BEING Republicans who state Robertson has virtually zero influence over the party are disbelieved by non-Republicans who, clearly, cannot and do not know better.<BR/><BR/><B>cobra: I'm certainly not saying that every conservative Christian household, or even most of them, took Pat Robertson seriously or regarded him as a leader. The point is still that he played a pretty major role in organizing the religious conservative base as a voting bloc.</B><BR/><BR/>He WAS once relevant. Those days passed at least 10 years ago.<BR/><BR/>As for Robertson's support of Miers, I believe Nat'l Review, who could not have opposed her more than they did, mentioned it almost as a joke.<BR/>-=MikeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136747050296005612006-01-08T14:04:00.000-05:002006-01-08T14:04:00.000-05:00Pat's influence in the GOP is not at all what it u...<I>Pat's influence in the GOP is not at all what it used to be. Nonetheless, his endorsement of Harriet Miers was treated as news by conservative media.</I><BR/><BR/>It wasn't treated as news by Fox or the WSJ, so far as I can tell. Most of those two sources' coverage of Robertson seems to consist of reporting whatever his most recent nutty statement is, and the criticism from the left and the right that typically follows.<BR/><BR/><I>It is also worth noting that at least as recently as three years ago, Robertson has met with Bush and Karl Rove.</I><BR/><BR/>I don't think anyone is arguing that Pat Robertson is *completely* insignificant. But the President meets with and talks with many thousands of people who don't necessarily have influence over him. Indeed, in the link you provided Robertson claims that he warned Bush that Iraq would be a disaster -- does that sound like a meeting that influenced Bush?<BR/><BR/>He did run the Christian Coalition for many years. But the CC's influence peaked in 1996 (and, given that it failed to meet its goals in that year, may have been sigificantly exaggerated in the first place).Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136745555137386982006-01-08T13:39:00.000-05:002006-01-08T13:39:00.000-05:00C -- thanks.Mike: here's the link to the Coulter q...C -- thanks.<BR/><BR/>Mike: <A HREF="http://mediamatters.org/items/200508230007" REL="nofollow">here's the link</A> to the Coulter quote.<BR/><BR/>For good measure, <A HREF="http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/anncoulter/2002/02/28/162536.html" REL="nofollow">here's Coulter</A> fantasizing about the lynching of Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta.<BR/><BR/>cobra: I'm certainly not saying that every conservative Christian household, or even most of them, took Pat Robertson seriously or regarded him as a leader. The point is still that he played a pretty major role in organizing the religious conservative base as a voting bloc.Cathy Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09688616617444359647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136744700889570192006-01-08T13:25:00.000-05:002006-01-08T13:25:00.000-05:00Great column, Cathy. I love your stuff in Reason,...Great column, Cathy. I love your stuff in Reason, too.<BR/><BR/>IMHO, Robertson has credibility among the right, but it's kind of a credibility where people respect him and his opinions, but they still seek to distance themselves from him. Kinda like Rush Limbaugh. You hear people parroting Rush, but they still qualify it in some way as to minimize his influence.Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10550890769681804219noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136743689888079422006-01-08T13:08:00.000-05:002006-01-08T13:08:00.000-05:00Links? If they ignore the story, links will not be...<I>Links? If they ignore the story, links will not be forthcoming, obviously.</I><BR/><BR/>Mike, you asserted that if Michael Moore had said something similar, that the mass media would ignore it and you have evidence of this. When asked to provide such evidence, you say that you will if and when it happens.<BR/><BR/>The conflict between the Old and New Testaments (or at least, certain interpretations thereof) is exactly what I was getting at. Jesus didn't teach us that we can know that God is picking on our enemies, that God sends hurricanes to kill off sinners, or that if a politician gives lands to the Palestinians, some long time after the land-giving is already underway, God might afflict somebody who disagrees with Pat Robertson's Israel policy.<BR/><BR/>The fact that Robertson had to reach into the book of Joel for flimsy support tells us quite a bit about whether his cries of "Lord, Lord" are genuine.<BR/><BR/>lori, thanks for speaking up, by the way--Robertson et al do not speak for all Christians.mythagohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07138471078836187498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11306845.post-1136741883288682122006-01-08T12:38:00.000-05:002006-01-08T12:38:00.000-05:00Regarding the Bush-Sheehan meeting, of course it i...Regarding the Bush-Sheehan meeting, of course it isn’t directly equivalent to a Bush-Robertson meeting. The point is a major political leader meets with all sorts of people with whom he or she might later come to find distasteful (or vice versa), or who might be detrimental to his or her current public standing. If Hugo Chavez were found dead soon after Robertson mentioned it would be a great idea if he were killed, or if the President quoted the Bible to further the idea that God smote Sharon there might be a point to continue to exaggerate Pat Robertson’s importance to the current Republican scene. <BR/><BR/>I was raised in a majority conservative, Christian, Republican environment and don’t recall hearing a single word of praise for Pat Robertson. There’s an old saying about having no permanent allies, only permanent interests that is applicable here. Why, when few would have any political interest in Robertson is his status as ally so taken for granted? Unless somebody truly takes Robertson as a prophet or a major figure in politics at this point in time—and I don’t think anybody posting here has made that claim—why should his utterances as religious leader be taken that much more seriously than a mainstream entertainer?thecobrasnosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13390729947333440233noreply@blogger.com