Mildly Encouraging re: Robertson

[Orrex]

During my commute home yesterday I chanced upon a local WGOD radio station. I occasionally tune in when I want to piss myself off or when I'm craving some far-out quasi-psychotic ranting to end my day. But last night was different.

The topic was Robertson's sermon on the virtue of assassination, which in itself was a shock. Usually, when a right-winger (much less a purported Man Of God) sticks his foot in it, this station avoids the topic religiously. But when Sen. Clinton uses her salad fork out of turn, they rail against her as the sole destructor of American's Godly Culture.

The moderator, a youngish woman who's filling Marty Minto's old slot, surprised me by actually being grounded in reality. She pointed out that Robertson's remarks weren't impromptu or "off the cuff" but instead passed through an editing process before airing, so it's clear that he said what he meant and meant what he said. Honestly, I would have expected a more accomodating stance, but the moderator made the point several times.

On the negative side, she was laughingly dismissive of her ignorance of the Monroe Doctrine, which she then Googled and read--with limited comprehension--on the air. She also kept saying Hugo Chavez with a hard H (Hyoo-go), a soft "Ch" and incorrect stress (ShaVEZ). Also, she and the majority of callers referred to him as "some guy most people never heard of."

*Sigh* Well, one battle a time.

A number of callers supported "Reverend Pat's" straightforward style because "we have to hit them before they hit us," perhaps in anticipation of an impending Venezualan terrorist strike against the United States. But close to half of the call-ins condemned Robertson, and for a range of reasons.

Most rejected his comments as simply being the wrong (i.e., criminal) way to do things. Others pointed out that we, as a nation, lose any claims of moral superiority when we start assassinating inconvenient foreign leaders. Remarkably few criticized him for his history of anti-Christian rhetoric and practice, which I would have thought to be the easiest target.

Bottom line is that I was encouraged to hear Robertson condemned by those I expected to be most supportive of him. It gives me hope that even members of the Righeous Right can recognize malevolence when they see it.

Sometimes, at least.